DHS Secretary Noem says airline carry-on liquids limit could be changed soon
"The liquids I'm questioning, so that may be the next big announcement is what size your liquids need to be," DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said at an event in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. "We're looking at our scanners, what we have put in place in TSA, multi-layered screening process that allows us to change some of how we do security and screening so it still is safe."
Noem didn't indicate when the updated policy announcement might be made.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in 2006 implemented a policy limiting liquids, gels and aerosols in passenger carry-on luggage to 3.4-ounce containers or smaller, to lessen the chances of liquid explosives being brought onboard commercial aircraft.
MORE: Homeland Security ends mandatory shoe removal at airport screening
Noem announced on July 8 that DHS was ending the nearly 20-year requirement that passengers remove their shoes for inspection before boarding commercial aircraft. The policy was implemented in 2006 after the so-called "shoe bomber," Richard Reid, unsuccessfully attempted to detonate plastic explosives concealed in his shoes onboard a flight from Paris, France to Miami, Fla. On Dec. 22, 2001.
Noem said during last week's announcement that DHS was able to terminate the shoe removal policy due to the 'layered security' by the TSA now place. These layers include additional officers at security checkpoints, new scanners and technology and the recently enforced REAL ID requirement, Noem said.
Secretary Noem was also asked about the current threat environment in the United States.
"We have the threat from terrorists that are in our country today that we need to remove," she said. "We also have the crimes that are happening on our streets by those individuals that are murderers and rapists that affect families immediately."
Noem said the U.S. critical infrastructure is also vulnerable to attack and pointed to various cyber incidents that have occurred in the past year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal Budget Cuts That Disproportionately Affect Blue States
In May, the White House released its budget proposal for fiscal year 2026, which included $163 billion in cuts to non-defense spending. Consider This: Read More: Critics contend that the cuts disproportionately affect blue states that typically vote Democrat. Keep an eye on the following proposed cuts, which could particularly bludgeon blue states. Also find out how some federal budget cuts could disproportionately affect red states. Infrastructure Funding The budget proposal includes cutting $19.3 billion from the Department of Energy, specifically by slashing funding from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The states currently collecting the most funds for renewable energy include California, Michigan, New York, Washington, and Georgia. But the changes to infrastructure spending don't end there. The Administration has reshuffled federal funds for flooding and water construction budgets from blue to red states. The two biggest losers included California and Washington, which stand to lose a combined $606 million, according to a report by CNN. Meanwhile, Texas stands to gain an extra $206 million. The budget proposal shifts civil works projects so that blue states receive just 33% of the funds, compared to 64% for red states. Find Out: Medicaid Cuts The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) proposed over $600 billion in cuts to Medicaid, which could rise to $900 billion in the Senate version of the bill. The bill was signed into law on Jul. 4. 'Shifting Medicaid benefits over to the states will put a burden on their budgets that many cannot handle,' explains Tasha Preisner, tax law specialist with DeMar Consulting Group. For example, California tops the list for total Medicaid spending at $124.1 billion, per U.S. News and World Report. Following on their heels is New York, with $97.9 billion. SNAP (Food Stamp) Cuts The OBBBA cuts funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by nearly $300 billion through 2034. The program provides food benefits for one in five children in the U.S., and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that over 2 million children will lose some or all of their food benefits. Aaron Razon, consumer budgeting expert with CouponSnake, expects many blue states to struggle with the cuts. 'Blue states like Massachusetts and California have a high cost of living and many residents who rely on social services,' Razon noted. 'SNAP and other social support cuts would hit them hard, and potentially lead to greater food insecurity, poverty putting further strain on these states' resources and social safety nets.' Science and Health Research Cuts Under the White House budget proposal, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) would lose $18 billion, or 41% of its funding. The numbers look even worse for the National Science Foundation (NSF), which stands to lose 57% of its annual funding ($5.2 billion). Guess which states receive the most research funding from the NIH and NSF? California ($6.2 billion), New York ($4.1 billion) and Massachusetts ($4 billion) round out the top three, according to Axios, with Maryland not far behind. Education Cuts Originally, the Trump administration called for dismantling the Department of Education entirely. On Jul. 14, the Supreme Court allowed the administration to continue laying off DOE workers, leaving the department's fate in limbo, per CNN. The proposed White House budget cuts $12 billion in funding for the DOE. The administration particularly called for cuts to student aid and a new limit on Pell Grants, which provide subsidies to low-income students. The budget eliminates the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (FSEOG), along with all $910 million in funding. The TRIO programs and Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) programs also get the axe, and the Federal Work-Study (FWS) program loses $980 million in funding. It proves another blow to blue states like Maryland whose economies largely run on 'eds, meds, and feds.' Editor's note on political coverage: GOBankingRates is nonpartisan and strives to cover all aspects of the economy objectively and present balanced reports on politically focused finance stories. You can find more coverage of this topic on More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 10 Unreliable SUVs To Stay Away From Buying 5 Types of Cars Retirees Should Stay Away From Buying This article originally appeared on Federal Budget Cuts That Disproportionately Affect Blue States
New York Times
7 minutes ago
- New York Times
She Exposed Epstein, and Shares MAGA's Anger
Julie K. Brown thinks Jeffrey Epstein didn't act alone. On this episode of 'Interesting Times,' Ross talks to Brown, the investigative reporter whose work ultimately led to Epstein's re-arrest, about what the government could release that it hasn't and how the story is bigger than Epstein. This conversation was taped before President Trump authorized the Justice Department to seek the release of grand jury testimony in Epstein's case. Below is an edited transcript of an episode of 'Interesting Times.' We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on the NYT audio app, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. Ross Douthat: Julie K. Brown, welcome to 'Interesting Times.' Julie K. Brown: Thank you. Douthat: So for the last couple of weeks, ever since the Trump administration decided it was a good idea to tell the world that there was nothing more to say about the Jeffrey Epstein story, which has not been true, I feel like we've had a lot of these metaconversations about the case, conversations about Trump administration politics, MAGA infighting, theories about conspiracy theories. I just keep coming back to the man himself and all of the weird questions that, to me as a journalist and news consumer, still hang over this whole story. So I'm really hoping that together we can walk through the story — the actual story of how Jeffrey Epstein the man became Jeffrey Epstein the mythic villain of the early 21st century. I want to start in the middle for him or maybe near the end for him but at the beginning for you. How did you first get drawn into this story? What prompted you as a journalist to start looking into Jeffrey Epstein and his crimes? Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
7 minutes ago
- New York Times
MAGA's New Target: Trump
People often become what they scorn. Donald Trump has become the deep state. He is the keeper of the secrets. He is the one stealing away people's liberties. He is the one weaponizing government and protecting the ruling class. With ICE and DOGE, Trump deputized wolf packs to root around in Americans' personal information. He got Republicans to give Stephen Miller his own army. Trump manipulates government to hurt his perceived enemies. He obscures rather than reveals, pushing aside reporters who ask penetrating questions in favor of Pravda-like partisans who take his side. Trump's supporters thought he would shed light on shady elites protecting their own money and power. Now MAGA is reckoning with the fact that Trump is the shady elite, shielding information about Jeffrey Epstein. 'So the guy who spent his lifetime saying the deep state hides things from you and represses you is now saying 'We've got nothing to hide, trust me,'' said the Trump biographer Tim O'Brien. 'And the people who follow him don't. They think he's just as bad as the people he criticized before he became president.' It's mythic, being devoured by the forces you unleashed. Trump has trafficked in conspiracy theories since the despicable 'birther' one about Barack Obama. Now that whirlpool of dark innuendo has sucked him down. He can no longer control the Epstein conspiracy madness inflamed by his top officials. Trump always reminded me of Lonesome Rhodes, the charismatic, populist entertainer whose 'candid' patter with plain folks garners him enormous power in Elia Kazan's 1957 movie 'A Face in the Crowd.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
