Politics & Current Events

How U.S. Immigration Policies Could Impact the 2026 FIFA World Cup

By: Yaseen Ahmed

The International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) World Cup is the major international soccer tournament for national teams, typically held every four years during the summer. It is significant because it determines the men’s world champions of soccer. For many countries it represents national pride and honor; it also helps unite nations and people around the world through their shared love of soccer.

On June 13th, 2018, FIFA announced that the joint World Cup bid from the USA, Canada, and Mexico had won the right to host the 2026 World Cup. Although all three nations will host matches, the vast majority will take place in the USA—78 of the 104 games including all matches from the quarter-finals onward. As of October 2025, 27 of the 48 of the participating teams have qualified: Iran, Japan, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Brazil, and many others. As a result, players and supporters from these nations will need to travel to the United States next summer.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the U.S. government agency responsible for detaining and deporting unauthorized immigrants. Under the Trump Administration, ICE has conducted mass deportations and has received an increased budget and manpower. In June 2025, the administration signed off on Proclamation 10949, which restricts entry into the U.S. for individuals from certain countries who were outside the U.S. and did not have a valid visa on the effective date of June 9, 2025. One of these countries is Iran, a team that has already qualified for the World Cup. While the policy excludes athletes and fans attending sporting events, many fans are concerned about whether they will be allowed into the country. 

As a result of such fears, it is likely that fewer fans will attend the competition. Additional concerns have arisen following President Trump’s statement that he would remove World Cup games from cities he deems unsafe, including Seattle, Boston, and San Francisco. Some argue that these cities are labeled unsafe due to their resistance to ICE’s mass deportation efforts. This has led some to believe that the president prefers hosting games in cities where ICE can operate freely, raising fears of harassment or deportation for certain attendees..

In response, FIFA has stated that they are actively working with authorities in the host nations to ensure a smooth and safe immigration process for all. FIFA President Gianni Infantino has assured fans that everyone will be welcome to attend the event. When it comes to moving World Cup games out of deemed unsafe cities, FIFA representatives emphasized, “It’s FIFA’s tournament, FIFA’s jurisdiction, and FIFA makes those decisions.” Furthermore, Victor Montagliani, the president of the Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football, affirmed that the sport is bigger than any political debate.

Overall, the current U.S. administration has raised many concerns about whether fans will truly feel welcomed and safe at the event. This is unfortunate, as the World Cup is meant to unite people across borders—but next year’s edition risks doing the opposite.

Silencing of Women In Afghanistan

By: Ripudaman Kaur

After two decades of fighting the Taliban with the help of a U.S.-backed Republic of Afghanistan, the return of the Taliban has brought drastic changes to the country. These changes were led by the Taliban’s leader Hibatullah Akhundzada, who addressed social, political, and religious matters by implementing oppressive and harmful policies. The rights of men, women, and children have been stripped away under the regime. Afghan women are currently facing one of history’s most severe threats to women’s rights. 

Before the regime returned, women had greater access to education, rights, and opportunities, allowing them to pursue professional careers without being discriminated against or deemed as “less than”.  Although the events happening to women in Afghanistan today may seem exaggerated, they are real occurrences that happen daily.

One example of the many ways women are oppressed under the Taliban, is the lack of access to healthcare. As mentioned on the UN Women (the United Nations Program for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women) website, the Taliban has completely restricted women’s access to education beyond grade six—prohibiting them from pursuing higher education. Moreover, women are also forbidden from receiving healthcare from men in most provinces. The provinces that still allow healthcare from male providers remain inaccessible to women.

Despite the Taliban’s numerous policies excluding women from government affairs and participation in politics, women continue to fight for their rights by navigating ways of life in the tyrannical environment that they live in.  One of the most recent protests, called the Purple Saturdays Movement, was led by several women in Takhar Province and Balkh Province, where they demonstrated incredible courage by holding powerful signs such as “Rights, Justice, Freedom” and “Stop the Taliban”. Despite the women’s marvelous bravery, the Taliban continue to exercise their power over them. For instance, women who were captured during earlier protests continue to face torture to this day. Yet, fear does not stop these women, who embrace bittersweet progress and continue to inspire and encourage women to speak up and fight for their rights.

Although Afghan women show great courage each time they take a step to fight against the Taliban, it is important to note the work of humanitarian organizations. For example, UN Women continues to allocate over 200 humanitarian programs across Afghanistan by providing food and healthcare resources. It’s not just large organizations—women around the world continue to contribute to the fight for the rights of Afghan women by making donations that help get the resources to provide safety to these women. Afghan women are not alone—they are part of a global sisterhood where women continue to stand and fight for one another.

The NYS Cell Phone and Electronic Device Policy

By: Amelia Shivdayal

On May 6th, 2025, Governor Kathy Hochul announced a new policy called the “Distraction-Free Schools, bell-to-bell restriction” on smartphones in K–12 schools.  This new policy applies to all New York State public and charter schools and took effect at the beginning of the 2025-2026 school year. Students are not  allowed to use personal internet-enabled electronic devices on school grounds during the school day, except for those with medical conditions, those who need translation services, or those with IEPs who are permitted by school personnel.

The goal of the Department of Education and the Governor’s office is to create distraction-free schools that ensure safety and foster a focused learning environment. The NYC Public Schools Cell Phone and Electronic Device Policy Chancellor’s Regulation A-413 says, “students are not permitted to use personal internet enabled electronic devices during the school day”, including cell phones, smartwatches, iPads, gaming consoles, tablets or personal laptop computers. The Department of Education wants each school to come up with a plan that best suits the students and staff on how to store and return devices to students each day. At Bayside High School, each student received an individual cell phone pouch for storage. 

Should a student violate this new policy on the use of electronic devices during school hours, they will be subject to discipline by the principal according to NYCPS Discipline Code, which can range from calling your parents to your devices being confiscated.  One of the most important questions asked by parents is “How do I reach my child in case of an emergency?” The answer is to contact the school directly—staff will reach out to the student, who will then be permitted to use their phone. 

The presence of phones in the classroom is a distraction to students and teachers as it takes focus away from the lesson being taught. The new policy helps students focus, concentrate and engage in classroom discussion, complete assignments, and improve academic performance and social interaction in person rather than online . 

Bayside High School students have mixed feelings about the cell phone ban. . Bayside High School junior Aishwarya Andolini commented, “I think the phone ban helps people to connect & engage more & be a little more creative academically. However, for me personally, I don’t think my grades will drastically improve, but I do think my focus has improved and I talk more with other students because we're not all on our phones.” 

Similarly, Bayside High School sophomore Anna Espinola commented, “My opinion on the phone ban is subjective to the specific situation. In class, it is great for engagement. However, I do think that it hinders communication in general.”

Phones are used for communication, entertainment, education, and academic tasks. Students argue that internet-enabled devices support schoolwork through research, messaging teachers and classmates, and accessing online resources. They also help build technological skills essential for future careers in a digital world. Texting is faster than calling, and instant communication with friends and family is crucial during emergencies. 

 Like Andolini and Espinola, other Bayside High School students also have mixed feelings about the cell phone ban.  Junior Helen Melina Cruz commented that “Phone bans have boosted engagement and academic performance by getting rid of distractions, but it also limits interaction if you have friends from other schools or parents trying to contact you in case of an emergency.” 

Sophomore Samara Jahid commented,  “The phone ban has both negative and positive effects. Students are participating and focusing more on their academics, more engaged in the conversations in and outside of school. However, in case of an emergency they can’t reach out without asking permission. This leads to students feeling tense and experiencing unnecessary stress.” 

As schools adapt to this new policy, the debate between distraction and digital access continues. Whether students embrace or resist the change will become clearer as the 2025-2026 academic year unfolds.