HONOLULU — The U.S. Geological Survey said Friday that a magnitude 5.7 earthquake struck just south of the Big Island of Hawaii.

The earthquake, which the USGS initially reported as magnitude 6.3 before downgrading it, was centered 11 miles south of Naalehu, Hawaii, at a depth of 6 miles. The Pacific Tsunami Warning Center said no tsunami was expected.

Some shaking could be felt in Honolulu on the island of Oahu, which is about 200 miles to the north.

“Many areas may have experienced strong shaking,” from the earthquake that occurred shortly after 10 a.m. local time, the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency posted on X. It also reiterated that there was no threat of a tsunami.

Big Island Mayor Mitch Roth was in Honolulu at a cardiologist appointment. “All of a sudden I felt like I was getting dizzy,” he said, thinking at first that it was the procedure and then realizing it was an earthquake. He immediately got on the phone with his emergency management officials.

“We’ll probably start hearing about damage in the next hour to an hour,” Roth said, pointing out that it was “a good sized earthquake” and that from what he’s heard, there is no tsunami threat.

Roth said he was headed to the Honolulu airport to try to get an earlier flight back to the Big Island.

Julia Neal, the owner of Pahala Plantation Cottages, said a mirror and brass lamp fell down during some forceful shaking. “We have a lot of the old wooden plantations homes and so they were rattling pretty loudly.”

Derek Nelson, the manager of the Kona Canoe Club restaurant in the Kona Inn Shopping Village in the oceanside community of Kona, on the island’s western side, said everyone felt it “big time,” but that there was no damage.

“I mean, it shook us bad to where it wobbled some knees a little bit. It shook all the windows in the village,” he said.

More foods are being recalled in the wake of a deadly outbreak of listeria food poisoning, including snack foods that may be part of Super Bowl Sunday party menus.

Seven-layer bean dip, chicken enchiladas, cilantro salad dressing and taco kits sold at stores like Costco, Trader Joe’s and Albertson’s are part of the growing recalls of products made by Rizo Lopez Foods, Inc., of Modesto, California, federal health officials said.

Dairy products made by Rizo Lopez Foods are the source of the listeria outbreak that has killed two people and sickened more than two dozen since 2014, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Health officials investigated illnesses in 2017 and 2021, but were only able to confirm the source based on new laboratory and inspection information when more people fell ill in December, officials said.

RELATED: Listeria outbreak: What to know and how to protect yourself

Rizo Lopez Foods recalled more than 60 soft cheeses, yogurt and sour cream on Monday that are sold under the brands Tio Francisco, Don Francisco, Rizo Bros, Rio Grande, Food City, El Huache, La Ordena, San Carlos, Campesino, Santa Maria, Dos Ranchitos, Casa Cardenas, and 365 Whole Foods Market.

The recalled foods were sold to food service providers, retailers and at deli counters nationwide.

The federal government said consumers should consult the Food and Drug Administration’s table of recalled products for updated information about descriptions, sizes and best-by dates. The U.S. Department of Agriculture also issued a public health alert for certain Amazon kitchen burritos that contain ingredients made by Rizo Lopez Foods.

About 1,600 people are sickened by listeria food poisoning every year, according to the CDC. Listeria infections can cause serious illness and, in rare cases, death. People who are pregnant, older than 65 or have weakened immune systems are particularly vulnerable. Symptoms — like muscle aches, fever and tiredness — usually start within two weeks after eating contaminated foods, but can start earlier or later.

The CDC said consumers who have the recalled products should throw them away and thoroughly clean the refrigerator, counters and other contact sites. Listeria can survive in the refrigerator and easily contaminate other foods and surfaces.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

The Florida Supreme Court is hearing arguments Wednesday on whether a ballot measure to enshrine the right to abortion in the state constitution should go before voters in November.

It’s one of several states where abortion might be on the ballot this year.

There has been a major push across the country to put abortion rights questions to voters since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and removed the nationwide right to abortion.

Since that 2022 decision, most Republican-controlled states have new abortion restrictions in effect, including 14 that ban it at every stage of pregnancy. Most Democrat-dominated states have laws or executive orders to protect access.

Additionally, voters in seven states — California, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Ohio and Vermont — have sided with abortion rights supporters on ballot measures.

It’s not clear yet how many states will vote on measures to enshrine abortion access in November. In some, the question is whether amendment supporters can get enough valid signatures. In others, it’s up to the legislature. In Florida, there’s legal wrangling on the details.

WHAT’S SECURELY ON 2024 BALLOTS?

MARYLAND

Maryland voters this year will also be asked whether to enshrine the right for women to end their pregnancies in the state’s constitution in a ballot question put before them by lawmakers last year. The state already protects the right to abortion under state law and Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-1. Abortion is allowed in Maryland until viability.

NEW YORK

New York lawmakers agreed to ask voters to bar discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, pregnancy outcome and reproductive healthcare as part of a broader equal protection amendment. It would also bar discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin and disability. The language of the constitutional amendment does not mention abortion specifically. Abortion is allowed in New York law until viability.

WHERE ELSE COULD ABORTION BE ON THE BALLOT IN 2024?

ARIZONA

A signature drive is underway to add a constitutional right to abortion in Arizona. Under the measure, the state would not be able to ban abortion until the fetus is viable, with later abortions allowed to protect a woman’s physical or mental health. Supporters must gather nearly 384,000 valid signatures by July 4. Current law bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

ARKANSAS

Proponents of an amendment to allow abortion in many cases have until July 5 to gather nearly 91,000 valid signatures to get it on the Nov. 5 ballot. The measure would bar laws banning abortion in the first 20 weeks of gestation and allow abortion later in pregnancy in cases of rape, incest, threats to the woman’s health or life, or if the fetus would be unlikely to survive birth. Because it allows limits as soon as 20 weeks, the proposal does not have the support of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, which includes Arkansas. The state has a ban on abortion at all stages of pregnancy with narrow exceptions.

COLORADO

There are dueling efforts on abortion in Colorado. One measure would create a voter-initiated law to ban access throughout pregnancy and the other would amend the state constitution to protect it. The abortion rights amendment would also require Medicaid and private health insurance to cover abortion.

Supporters on each side have until Aug. 5 to submit more than 124,000 signatures to get a measure on the ballot. Amending the constitution in Colorado requires the support of 55% of voters. But the ban could be passed with a simple majority. Abortion is legal at all stages of pregnancy in Colorado.

FLORIDA

Advocates collected nearly a million signatures to put a state constitutional amendment to legalize abortion until viability on the ballot, surpassing the nearly 892,000 required. State Attorney General Ashley Moody has asked the state Supreme Court to keep the measure off the ballot, saying there are differing views on the meaning of “viability” and that some key terms in the proposed measure are not properly defined.

If the measure goes before voters, 60% of them would have to vote yes for it to take effect.

Abortion is legal in Florida through the first 15 weeks of pregnancy. But a 2023 law would drop that to six weeks — often before women know they’re pregnant — if the 15-week ban survives a court challenge.

MISSOURI

Pushes are underway to get dueling abortion-related ballot measures before Missouri voters in 2024. Abortion rights advocates in Missourians for Constitutional Freedom are pushing for one that would guarantee abortion is legal until viability.

A group of moderate Republicans are taking a different approach and calling for an amendment that would allow abortion up to 12 weeks, and after that only under limited exceptions.

Abortion is currently banned at all stages of pregnancy with limited exceptions in Missouri.

MONTANA

Abortion rights proponents have proposed a constitutional amendment in Montana that would bar the government from denying the right to abortion before viability or when it’s necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person. But Attorney General Austin Knudsen ruled that the measure is legally insufficient. Advocates are appealing to the state’s top court. If the court allows it to move ahead, supporters would need to gather more than 60,000 signatures by June 21 to get it on the ballot. Abortion is currently legal until viability in Montana.

NEBRASKA

Advocates are trying to collect about 125,000 signatures needed by July 5 to put a constitutional amendment before voters to protect abortion rights until fetal viability. Under a law adopted last year, abortion is banned after 12 weeks, with some exceptions.

NEVADA

Signatures are being gathered to place an abortion access amendment on Nevada’s ballot in November. Under the amendment, abortion access for the first 24 weeks of pregnancy or later to protect the health of the pregnant person, which is already assured under a 1990 law, would be enshrined in the constitution. It requires more than 102,000 valid signatures by June 26 to place the measure on the ballot. Voters would need to approve it in both 2024 and 2026 to change the constitution.

The measure is one of several attempts by Nevada abortion rights groups to get a ballot question before voters in 2024 or 2026.

SOUTH DAKOTA

South Dakota advocates are attempting to gather more than 17,500 signatures by May 7 to get a measure on the ballot that would loosen restrictions but does not go as far as many abortion rights advocates would like. It would ban any restrictions on abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy, allow restrictions in the second trimester with an exception for the woman’s physical health and allow abortion bans in the third trimester. Planned Parenthood is not supporting the measure.

Abortion in the state is now banned at all stages of pregnancy with narrow exceptions.

WHICH STATES CAN BUT LIKELY WON’T PUT ABORTION ON THE BALLOT?

There are some states where the balance of power or other circumstances make abortion-related measures — most of them seeking bans or limits — unlikely to reach voters in 2024.

IOWA

To put a constitutional amendment on the ballot, Iowa lawmakers have to approve it in two consecutive sessions. In 2021, both chambers advanced a resolution to find there is no constitutional right to abortion in the state. Republicans control the Legislature and governor’s office, but the amendment has not emerged as a priority this year and Gov. Kim Reynolds has said she’ll let the issue move through the courts rather than pushing for a vote. Abortion is currently banned 20 weeks into pregnancy. A stricter ban, which would kick in when cardiac activity can be detected, around six weeks, has been adopted but put on hold by a court.

MAINE

Democrats are calling for a measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution. But they would not have the required two-thirds majority of lawmakers in each legislative chamber to adopt it and send it to voters without the support of several Republican lawmakers. Abortion is already allowed throughout pregnancy.

PENNSYLVANIA

Pennsylvania has a similar process as Iowa with a similar amendment to find no constitutional right to abortion up for consideration. Lawmakers passed it in 2022. But Democrats have since taken control of the state House, making it unlikely to pass, which is required before it can go to a statewide referendum. Abortion is now legal in Pennsylvania for up to 24 weeks of pregnancy.

WISCONSIN

The Wisconsin Assembly in January approved calling for a binding statewide referendum for a law to ban abortions after 14 weeks of pregnancy. Even if the state Senate approves, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has promised to veto it. Abortion is legal within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.

The king’s older son, Prince William, is next in line for the throne. The crown does not pass from reigning monarchs to their spouses, so Queen Camilla is not in the line of succession.

Here is the order of succession:

1. Prince William, the older son of Charles and the late Princess Diana. He is known as the Prince of Wales and is married to Kate, Princess of Wales.

2. Prince George, older son of William and Kate, born in July 2013.

3. Princess Charlotte, daughter of William and Kate, born in May 2015.

4. Prince Louis, younger son of William and Kate, born in April 2018.

5. Prince Harry, the younger son of Charles and Diana, who has relinquished his royal duties but retains his place in line.

6. Prince Archie, born to Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, in May 2019.

7. Princess Lilibet, born to Harry and Meghan in June 2021.

8. Prince Andrew, Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip’s second-oldest son.

9. Princess Beatrice, older daughter of Andrew and his former wife, Sarah Ferguson.

10. Sienna Mapelli Mozzi, daughter of Beatrice and Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi, born in September 2021.

11. Princess Eugenie, Andrew and Ferguson’s younger daughter.

12. August Brooksbank, born to Eugenie and James Brooksbank in Feb. 2021.

13. Ernest Brooksbank, born to Eugenie and James Brooksbank in May 2023.

14. Prince Edward, the queen and Philip’s youngest child.

15. James, Earl of Wessex, son of Edward and his wife, Sophie, Duchess of Edinburgh.

16. Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, daughter of Edward and Sophie.

17. Princess Anne, second child and only daughter of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip. She’s older than brothers Andrew and Edward, but lower down due to rules that for centuries favored sons over daughters. The rules were changed in 2015 – too late for Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, who remains behind her younger brother James.

18. Peter Phillips, son of Anne and her ex-husband, Mark Phillips.

19. Savannah Phillips, older daughter of Peter Phillips and his ex-wife, Autumn Kelly.

20. Isla Phillips, younger daughter of Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly.

21. Zara Tindall, daughter of Princess Anne and Mark Phillips.

22. Mia Tindall, older daughter of Zara and her husband, Mike Tindall.

23. Lena Tindall, younger daughter of Zara and Mike Tindall.

24. Lucas Tindall, son of Zara and Mike Tindall.

___

A previous version of this story referred to James, Earl of Wessex by his previous title.

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday said he has ordered the military to prepare a plan to evacuate civilians from Rafah ahead of an expected Israeli invasion of the densely populated southern Gaza city.

Israel says that Rafah is the last remaining Hamas stronghold in Gaza after more than four months of war. Hamas has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, Canada and the European Union.

“It is impossible to achieve the goal of the war of eliminating Hamas by leaving four Hamas battalions in Rafah,” Netanyahu’s office said. “On the contrary, it is clear that intense activity in Rafah requires that civilians evacuate the areas of combat.”

It said he had ordered the military and security officials to come up with a “combined plan” that includes both a mass evacuation of civilians and the destruction of Hamas’ forces in the town.

Israel declared war after several thousand Hamas terrorists burst across the border into southern Israel on Oct. 7, killing 1,200 people and taking 250 others hostage. An Israeli air and ground offensive has killed roughly 28,000 Palestinians, most of them women and minors, according to local health officials. Roughly 80% of Gaza’s 2.3 million people have been displaced, and the territory has plunged into a humanitarian crisis with shortages of food and medical services.

Netanyahu has largely rebuffed international criticism of the civilian death toll, saying that Hamas is responsible for endangering civilians by operating and hiding in residential areas. But that criticism has grown in recent days as Netanyahu and other leaders vow to move into Rafah.

U.S. President Joe Biden said Thursday that Israel’s conduct in the war is “over the top,” the harshest U.S. criticism yet of its close ally. The State Department said an invasion of Rafah in the current circumstances “would be a disaster.”

The operation will be a challenge on many levels. It remains unclear where civilians can go. The Israeli offensive has caused widespread destruction, especially in northern Gaza, and hundreds of thousands of people do not have homes to return to.

In addition, Egypt has warned that any movement of Palestinians across the border into Egypt would threaten the four-decade-old peace treaty between Israel and Egypt. The border crossing between Gaza and Egypt, which is mostly closed, serves as the main entry point for humanitarian aid.

Israel already has begun to strike Rafah from the air. Airstrikes overnight and into Friday hit two residential buildings in Rafah, while two other sites were bombed in central Gaza, including one that damaged a kindergarten-turned-shelter for displaced Palestinians. Twenty-two people were killed, according to AP journalists who saw the bodies arriving at hospitals.

GROWING FRICTION

Comments from top U.S. officials about Rafah have signaled growing friction with Netanyahu after a visit to the region by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

Blinken, who has been working with Egypt and Qatar on trying to mediate a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, left the region Thursday without an agreement. But he said he believed it was still possible to strike a deal that would include an extended pause in fighting in exchange for the release of many of the more than 100 hostages held by Hamas.

Netanyahu appeared to snub Blinken, saying he will settle for nothing short of “total victory.” The Israeli leader has said the war seeks to destroy Hamas’ military and governing capabilities and return all hostages home. With Blinken still in town, Netanyahu said achieving those goals would require an operation in Rafah. Vedant Patel, a State Department spokesman, said Thursday that going ahead with such an offensive “with no planning and little thought in an area where there is sheltering of a million people would be a disaster.”

John Kirby, the White House’s national security spokesman, said an Israel ground offensive in Rafah is “not something we would support.”

Aid agency officials have also sounded warnings over the prospect of a Rafah offensive. “We need Gaza’s last remaining hospitals, shelters, markets and water systems to stay functional,” said Catherine Russell, head of the U.N. children’s agency UNICEF. “Without them, hunger and disease will skyrocket, taking more child lives.”

With the war now in its fifth month, Israeli ground forces are still focusing on the city of Khan Younis, just north of Rafah, but Netanyahu has repeatedly said Rafah will be next, creating panic among hundreds of thousands of displaced people.

AIRSTRIKES OVERNIGHT

Shortly after midnight Friday, a residential building was struck near Rafah’s Kuwaiti Hospital, killing five people from the al-Sayed family, including three children and a woman. A second Rafah strike killed three more people.

Another overnight strike, in the central town of Deir al-Balah, claimed nine lives. Also in central Gaza, a strike hit near a kindergarten-turned-shelter, damaging the building. It killed five and wounded several more people. Witnesses said shelter residents were asleep at the time.

A woman, carrying a small girl in her arms, shouted as she arrived at the local Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Hospital: “What can we do? This is the work of the coward Zionist enemy that chooses innocent civilians. This girl is firing rockets at the Jews? May God help us.”

Some of the wounded children were treated while lying on the floor.

WORKING FOR A CEASE-FIRE

Israel’s 4-month-old air and ground offensive — among the most destructive in recent history — has killed 27,947 Palestinians and wounded more than 67,000, local health officials said Friday. The war has driven most people from their homes and pushed a quarter of the population toward starvation, according to the U.N.

Biden has said said he continues to work “tirelessly” to press Israel and Hamas to agree on an extended pause in fighting.

Netanyahu has rejected Hamas’ demands for a hostage deal, which includes an end to the war and the release of hundreds of veteran Palestinian prisoners serving long sentences in Israel for deadly attacks carried out as part of the long-running conflict. Netanyahu dismissed Hamas’ demands as delusional, even as Blinken said he believes continued negotiations, through mediators Egypt and Qatar, are possible.

Israel’s war goals appear increasingly elusive, as Hamas reemerges in parts of northern Gaza, which was the first target of the offensive and has seen widespread destruction. Israel has only rescued one hostage, while Hamas says several have been killed in airstrikes or failed rescue missions.

Jobain reported from Rafah, Gaza Strip, and Mroue reported from Beirut.

WASHINGTON — Overcoming a week of setbacks, the Senate on Thursday voted to begin work on a package of wartime funding for Ukraine, Israel and other U.S. allies. But doubts remained about support from Republicans who earlier rejected a carefully negotiated compromise that also included border enforcement policies.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called the latest vote a “good first step” and pledged that the Senate would “keep working on this bill — until the job is done.”

The 67-32 vote was the first meaningful step Congress has taken in months to approve Ukraine aid, but it still faces a difficult path through Congress. Support from GOP senators for final passage is not guaranteed, and even if the legislation passes the Senate, it is expected to be more difficult to win approval in the Republican-controlled House, where Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has been noncommittal on the aid.

The Senate prepared for a days-long slog to reach a final vote, and leaders had not agreed to a process to limit the debate time for the bill as Republicans remained divided on how to approach the legislation.

The $95 billion package is intended to show American strength at a time when U.S. military troops have been attacked and killed in Jordan, allies like Ukraine and Israel are deep in war and unrest threatens to shake the global order. It is also the best chance for Congress to replenish completely depleted military aid for Ukraine — a goal shared by President Joe Biden, Schumer and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

After the collapse this week of a bipartisan agreement to include border policy changes in the package, Schumer salvaged $60 billion in aid for Ukraine, as well as roughly $35 billion for Israel, other allies and national security priorities in the current legislation.

But Senate Republicans were fractured and frustrated as they huddled Thursday morning to discuss their approach to the legislation and struggled to coalesce behind a plan to assert their priorities. Still, Schumer forged ahead to the noon-hour vote, essentially daring the Ukraine supporters within the GOP to vote against the aid.

Schumer’s push worked as the vote to begin debate on the new package cleared with 17 Republicans along with Democrats voting to move forward. Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who opposes much of the aid for Israel, voted against it.

Some in the Senate vowed to do everything they could to delay final action.

“I’ll object to anything speeding up this rotten foreign spending bill’s passage,” said Sen. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, on X.

The U.S. is already out of money to send missiles and ammunition to Kyiv, just as the nearly two-year-old war reaches a crucial juncture. Ukraine supporters say the drop-off in U.S. support is already being felt on the battlefield and by civilians. Russia has renewed its commitment to the invasion with relentless attacks.

“There are people in Ukraine right now, in the height of their winter, in trenches, being bombed and being killed,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C.

While military support for Ukraine once enjoyed wide bipartisan support in Congress, an increasing number of Republicans in the House and Senate have expressed serious reservations about supporting a new round of funding for Ukraine. Following the lead of Donald Trump, the likely GOP presidential nominee, they see the funding as wasteful and argue that an end to the conflict should be negotiated.

Biden has made halting Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion a top foreign policy priority and last year requested a sweeping funding proposal to replenish aid for Ukraine and Israel, as well as to invest more in domestic defense manufacturing, humanitarian assistance and managing the influx of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The $95 billion package package proposed by Democrats this week would send $14 billion in military aid to Israel, provide further funding for allies in Asia, and allot $10 billion for humanitarian efforts in Ukraine, Israel, Gaza and other places.

The revamped package includes legislation to authorize sanctions and anti-money laundering tools against criminal enterprises that traffic fentanyl into the U.S.

Supporters of the national security package have cast it as a history-turning initiative that would rebuff both Russia’s incursion in Europe and Chinese president Xi Jinping’s ambitions in Taiwan and Asia.

“Failure to pass this bill would only embolden autocrats like Putin and Xi who want nothing more than America’s decline,” Schumer said.

Republicans had initially demanded that the package also include border policy changes, arguing that they would not support other countries’ security when the U.S. border was seeing rampant illegal crossings. But after months of round-the-clock negotiations on a bipartisan compromise intended to overhaul the asylum system with faster and tougher enforcement, Republicans rejected it as insufficient.

Still, some senators said they would continue to insist on tying border measures — this time even more strict — to the foreign aid.

“My priority is border security. It’s always been border security. I think we need a new bill,” said Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan.

Christian Bale broke ground Wednesday on a project he’s been pursuing for 16 years — the building of a dozen homes and a community center in Palmdale intended to keep siblings in foster care together.

The Oscar winner stood with a grin and a shovel full of dirt alongside local politicians and donors in the decidedly non-Hollywood city of Palmdale, 60 miles north and across the San Gabriel Mountains from Los Angeles.

But Bale, who was Batman in director Christopher Nolan ‘s “Dark Knight” trilogy, wasn’t just playing Bruce Wayne and lending his name and money to a charitable cause.

The project was his brainchild and one he’s long lent his labor to, getting his hands dirty and on Wednesday standing in actual mud after a historic storm on a hard-won site he’d visited many times before.

“I would have done it all if it was just me by myself here,” Bale told The Associated Press in an interview on the large vacant lot between a public park and a bowling alley.

The British-born Bale has lived in California since the early 1990s and sought to build the community after hearing about the huge number of foster children in LA County, and learning how many brothers and sisters had to be separated in the system.

That was around 2008, the time of “The Dark Knight,” when his now college-age daughter was 3 years old.

“I didn’t think it was going to take that long,” he said. “I had a very naive idea about kind of getting a piece of land and then, bringing kids in and the brothers and sisters living together and sort of singing songs like the Von Trapp family in ‘The Sound of Music’. ”

But he then learned “it’s way more complex. These are people’s lives. And we need to be able to have them land on their feet when they age out. There’s so much involved in this.”

Bale visited Chicago, spent several days in children and family services meetings. From there, he recruited Tim McCormick, who had set up a similar program, to head the organization that became known as Together California, a group Bale would co-found with UCLA doctor Eric Esrailian, a producer on one of his films.

“He said we’ve got to do this in California,” McCormick said. “To his credit, through all sorts of challenges, COVID and everything else, he never gave up.”

The men eventually found a sympathetic leader in LA County Supervisor Kathryn Barger, and in Palmdale, a semi-rural city of about 165,000 people, found a city with both a need and a willingness to take part.

The 12 homes, anchored by the community center, are set to be finished in April of 2025.

“It’s something that is incredibly satisfying for me, and I want to be involved every step of the way,” Bale said. “Maybe this is the first one, and maybe this is the only one, and that would be great. But I’m quietly hoping that there’ll be many of these.”

The 50-year-old Bale, who began acting as a child in films including Steven Spielberg’s “Empire of the Sun” and the Disney musical “Newsies,” won an Oscar for best supporting actor for 2010’s “The Fighter.” He’s also starred in “American Psycho,” “Vice” and “Ford v Ferrari.”

NEW YORK — The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday outlawed robocalls that contain voices generated by artificial intelligence, a decision that sends a clear message that exploiting the technology to scam people and mislead voters won’t be tolerated.

The unanimous ruling targets robocalls made with AI voice-cloning tools under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a 1991 law restricting junk calls that use artificial and prerecorded voice messages.

The announcement comes as New Hampshire authorities are advancing their investigation into AI-generated robocalls that mimicked President Joe Biden’s voice to discourage people from voting in the state’s first-in-the-nation primary last month.

Effective immediately, the regulation empowers the FCC to fine companies that use AI voices in their calls or block the service providers that carry them. It also opens the door for call recipients to file lawsuits and gives state attorneys general a new mechanism to crack down on violators, according to the FCC.

The agency’s chairwoman, Jessica Rosenworcel, said bad actors have been using AI-generated voices in robocalls to misinform voters, impersonate celebrities and extort family members.

RELATED: Fake Biden robocalls in New Hampshire traced to Texas company, criminal investigation underway

“It seems like something from the far-off future, but this threat is already here,” Rosenworcel told The Associated Press on Wednesday as the commission was considering the regulations. “All of us could be on the receiving end of these faked calls, so that’s why we felt the time to act was now.”

Under the consumer protection law, telemarketers generally cannot use automated dialers or artificial or prerecorded voice messages to call cellphones, and they cannot make such calls to landlines without prior written consent from the call recipient.

The new ruling classifies AI-generated voices in robocalls as “artificial” and thus enforceable by the same standards, the FCC said.

Those who break the law can face steep fines, with a maximum of more than $23,000 per call, the FCC said. The agency has previously used the consumer law to clamp down on robocallers interfering in elections, including imposing a $5 million fine on two conservative hoaxers for falsely warning people in predominantly Black areas that voting by mail could heighten their risk of arrest, debt collection and forced vaccination.

The law also gives call recipients the right to take legal action and potentially recover up to $1,500 in damages for each unwanted call.

Josh Lawson, director of AI and democracy at the Aspen Institute, said even with the FCC’s ruling, voters should prepare themselves for personalized spam to target them by phone, text and social media.

“The true dark hats tend to disregard the stakes and they know what they’re doing is unlawful,” he said. “We have to understand that bad actors are going to continue to rattle the cages and push the limits.”

Kathleen Carley, a Carnegie Mellon professor who specializes in computational disinformation, said that in order to detect AI abuse of voice technology, one needs to be able to clearly identify that the audio was AI generated.

That is possible now, she said, “because the technology for generating these calls has existed for awhile. It’s well understood and it makes standard mistakes. But that technology will get better.”

Sophisticated generative AI tools, from voice-cloning software to image generators, already are in use in elections in the U.S. and around the world.

Last year, as the U.S. presidential race got underway, several campaign advertisements used AI-generated audio or imagery, and some candidates experimented with using AI chatbots to communicate with voters.

Bipartisan efforts in Congress have sought to regulate AI in political campaigns, but no federal legislation has passed, with the general election nine months away.

Rep. Yvette Clarke, who introduced legislation to regulate AI in politics, lauded the FCC for its ruling but said now Congress needs to act.

“I believe Democrats and Republicans can agree that AI-generated content used to deceive people is a bad thing, and we need to work together to help folks have the tools necessary to help discern what’s real and what isn’t,” said Clarke, D-N.Y.

The AI-generated robocalls that sought to influence New Hampshire’s Jan. 23 primary election used a voice similar to Biden’s, employed his often-used phrase, “What a bunch of malarkey” and falsely suggested that voting in the primary would preclude voters from casting a ballot in November.

“New Hampshire had a taste of how AI can be used inappropriately in the election process,” New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan said. “It is certainly appropriate to try and get our arms around the use and the enforcement so that we’re not misleading the voting population in a way that could harm our elections.”

The state’s attorney general, John Formella, said Tuesday that investigators had identified the Texas-based Life Corp. and its owner, Walter Monk as the source of the calls, which went to thousands of state residents, mostly registered Democrats. He said the calls were transmitted by another Texas-based company, Lingo Telecom.

According to the FCC, both Lingo Telecom and Life Corp. have been investigated for illegal robocalls in the past.

Lingo Telecom said in a statement Tuesday that it “acted immediately” to help with the investigation into the robocalls impersonating Biden. The company said it “had no involvement whatsoever in the production of the call content.”

A man who answered the business line for Life Corp. declined to comment Thursday.

Associated Press writers Christina A. Cassidy in Washington and Frank Bajak in Boston contributed to this report.

The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

LAS VEGAS (AP) — Former President Donald Trump won Nevada’s Republican presidential caucuses Thursday after he was the only major candidate to compete, winning his third straight state as he tries to secure his party’s nomination.

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, his last major rival still in the race, skipped the caucuses even though they are the only contest in Nevada that counts toward the GOP nomination. Haley cited what she considered an unfair process favoring Trump and instead ran in Nevada’s symbolic state-run presidential primary on Tuesday, when she finished behind the “none of these candidates” option.

Trump’s win in Nevada gives him all 26 of the state’s delegates. He needs to accrue 1,215 delegates to formally clinch the party’s nomination and could reach that number in March.

From Nevada, the GOP contest pivots to the South Carolina primary in Haley’s home state on Feb. 24. Trump remains popular in the deeply conservative state but Haley, who won two elections as South Carolina’s governor, is hoping her local roots give her an edge. Trump is eyeing a massive delegate haul during the March 5 Super Tuesday contests, which would move him closer to becoming the GOP’s presumptive nominee.

Though Trump has been the front-runner, Nevada’s caucuses were seen as especially skewed in his favor due to the intense grassroots support caucuses require candidates to harness around a state in order to win. Nevada’s state party gave him a greater edge last year when it barred candidates from running both in the primary and caucuses and also restricted the role of super PACs like the groups that were key to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ campaign before he dropped out.

Caucuses typically require voters to show up for an in-person meeting at a certain day or time, while elections can offer more flexibility to participate, with polls open for most of the day on Election Day along with absentee or early voting. Nevada Republicans said they wanted certain rules in place like a requirement that participants show a government-issued ID.

Trump’s supporters waited in long lines Thursday. At one caucus site at a Reno-area elementary school, a line of nearly 1,000 people stretched around the corner and down the street 20 minutes after the caucuses opened.

Voters in line, some of whom were wearing Trump hats and shirts, said they came out to back the former president in a contest that would give him a third straight win in the Republican presidential race.

“I think it’s about backing Trump up and giving him the support that he needs. And to let people know that we’re supporting him,” said Heather Kirkwood, 47.

Trump has long been immensely popular among Nevada Republicans, but he had other perceived advantages among the party’s key figures. Nevada GOP Party Chair Michael McDonald and the state’s Republican National Committeeman Jim DeGraffenreid were among six Republicans in the state indicted on felony charges that they were so-called fake electors who sent certificates to Congress falsely claiming Trump won Nevada in 2020. The chairman of the Republican Party in Clark County — the largest county, which is home to Las Vegas — was another of the six so-called fake electors.

Republicans are increasingly converging behind Trump while he faces a deluge of legal problems, including 91 criminal charges in four separate cases. Trump is flexing his influence both in Congress — where Republicans rejected a border security deal after he pushed against it — and at the Republican National Committee, as chairwoman Ronna McDaniel could resign in the coming weeks after he publicly questioned whether she should stay in the job.

Trump still faces unprecedented jeopardy for a major candidate. A federal appeals panel ruled this week that Trump can face trial on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election, rejecting his claims that he is immune from prosecution. The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday heard arguments in a case trying to keep Trump from the 2024 presidential ballot over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss. The justices sounded broadly skeptical of the effort.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court sounds broadly skeptical of efforts to kick former President Donald Trump off the 2024 ballot.

In arguments ticking past 90 minutes Thursday, both conservative and liberal justices raised questions of whether Trump can be disqualified from being president again because of his efforts to undo his loss in the 2020 election, ending with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Concerns included whether Congress must act before states can invoke a constitutional provision that was adopted after the Civil War to prevent former officeholders who “engaged in insurrection” from holding office again. There also were questions about whether the president is covered by the provision.

Without such congressional legislation, Justice Elena Kagan was among several justices who wanted to know “why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States.”

Eight of the nine justices suggested that they were open to at least some of the arguments made by Jonathan Mitchell, Trump’s lawyer at the Supreme Court. Trump could win his case if the court finds just one of those arguments persuasive.

Only Justice Sonia Sotomayor sounded like she might vote to uphold the Colorado Supreme Court ruling that found that Trump “engaged in insurrection” and is ineligible to be president. The state court ruled Trump should not be on the ballot for the state’s Republican primary on March 5.

There was little talk of whether Trump actually “engaged in insurrection” following the 2020 election, though Mitchell argued that the Capitol riot was not an insurrection and, even if it was, Trump did not participate.

The case marks the first time the justices are considering Section 3 of the 14th amendment.

It sets up precisely the kind of case that the court likes to avoid, one in which it is the final arbiter of a political dispute.

Chief Justice John Roberts worried that a ruling against Trump would prompt efforts to disqualify other candidates, “and surely some of those will succeed.”

Trump’s lawyers argue that the amendment can’t be used to keep Trump off the ballot for several reasons.

For one thing, they contend the Jan. 6 riot wasn’t an insurrection, and even if it was, Trump did not participate. The wording of the amendment also excludes the presidency and candidates running for president, they say. Even if they’re wrong about all of that, they argue that Congress must pass legislation to reinvigorate Section 3.

The lawyers for Republican and independent voters who sued to remove Trump’s name from the Colorado ballot counter that there is ample evidence that the events of Jan. 6 constituted an insurrection and that Trump incited it. They say it would be absurd to apply Section 3 to everything but the presidency or that Trump is somehow exempt. And the provision needs no enabling legislation, they argue.

A definitive ruling for Trump would largely end efforts in Colorado, Maine and elsewhere to prevent his name from appearing on the ballot.

A decision upholding the Colorado decision would amount to a declaration from the Supreme Court that Trump did engage in insurrection and is barred by the 14th Amendment from holding office again. That would allow states to keep him off the ballot and imperil his campaign.

The justices could opt for a less conclusive outcome, but with the knowledge that the issue could return to them, perhaps after the general election in November and in the midst of a full-blown constitutional crisis.

Trump is separately appealing to state court a ruling by Maine’s Democratic secretary of state, Shenna Bellows, that he was ineligible to appear on that state’s ballot over his role in the Capitol attack. Both the Colorado Supreme Court and the Maine secretary of state’s rulings are on hold until the appeals play out.

The court has signaled it will try to act quickly, dramatically shortening the period in which it receives written briefing and holds arguments in the courtroom.

People began lining up outside the court on Wednesday hoping to snag one of the few seats allotted to the public. “This is a landmark decision and I want to be in the room where it happened, to quote ‘Hamilton,’” said Susan Acker of Cincinnati, Ohio, who was in line with two friends.

The issues may be novel, but Trump is no stranger to the justices, three of whom Trump appointed when he was president. They have considered many Trump-related cases in recent years, declining to embrace his claims of fraud in the 2020 election and refusing to shield tax records from Congress and prosecutors in New York.

Before the Supreme Court is even finished deciding this case, the justices almost certainly will be dealing with another appeal from Trump, who is expected to seek an emergency order to keep his election subversion trial on hold so he can appeal lower-court rulings that he is not immune from criminal charges.

In April, the court also will hear an appeal from one of the more than 1,200 people charged in the Capitol riot. The case could upend a charge prosecutors have brought against more than 300 people, including Trump.

The court last played so central a role in presidential politics in its 5-4 decision that effectively ended the disputed 2000 election in favor of George W. Bush.

Justice Clarence Thomas is the only member of the court who also took part in Bush v. Gore. Thomas has ignored calls by some Democratic lawmakers to step aside from the case because his wife, Ginni, supported Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election results and attended the rally that preceded the storming of the Capitol by Trump supporters.