Sen. Todd Young (R-IN) will oppose Sen. Tim Kaine’s (D-VA) war powers resolution blocking the U.S. from taking further military action against Iran, he revealed to Jewish Insider ahead of Friday’s vote.

The position is a shift for Young, who partnered with Kaine in early 2023 to successfully pass legislation repealing the 1991 and 2002 Authorizations of Military Force to formally end the Gulf and Iraq wars. The two introduced their first joint war powers repeal bill in 2019, and Young voted for an amended version of Kaine’s 2020 war powers resolution following President Donald Trump’s decision to assassinate Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani after initially opposing the Virginia Democrat’s original language. 

The Indiana senator, who has been a leader on the GOP side in efforts to update and enforce Congress’ war-making powers, told JI on Friday that he will vote no on Kaine’s latest resolution, citing his belief that Iran’s nuclear program was a direct threat to the U.S. meriting a targeted response. 

“Following recent briefings, I feel confident that Iran was prepared to pose a significant threat to the security of the United States and Israel, making the president’s decision to pursue limited, targeted action necessary and based on the appropriate legal foundation. America and the world are safer because of the skill and determination of our military personnel who acted last Saturday,” Young said in a statement.

Young also said that given President Donald Trump’s push for a ceasefire rather than an escalation of U.S. military action in Iran, he did not view the resolution as needed. Still, he cautioned that the Trump administration should engage with Congress on any future military actions.

“Based on President Trump’s stated goal of no further military action against Iran and conversations with senior national security officials regarding the administration’s future intentions, I do not believe this resolution is necessary at this time,” Young said.

“Should the administration’s posture change or events dictate the consideration of additional American military action, Congress should be consulted so we can best support those efforts and weigh in on behalf of our constituents. I am prepared to work with the Trump administration to advance a targeted authorization for the use of military force against Iran should the situation require it,” he continued. 

A Senate war powers resolution aiming to block further U.S. military action against Iran appears to be building and solidifying support among Democrats ahead of an anticipated vote later this week.

Sens. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Andy Kim (D-NJ) and Tim Kaine (D-VA) announced on Tuesday they planned to introduce an amendment to Kaine’s resolution to specifically ensure that the U.S. can continue to share intelligence with Israel and to assist Israel’s defense and provide it with defensive equipment to counter attacks by Iran and its proxies.

A House resolution on the issue had prompted private divisions among Democrats earlier this week over a similar issue, with many lawmakers concerned that the resolution would prevent the U.S. from continuing to support Israeli missile defense, a Democratic staffer not authorized to speak publicly told JI.

The senators said in a statement they expect the full Senate will vote on the amendment prior to a final vote on Kaine’s resolution. They argued that the amendment makes clear to Iran that the U.S. will continue to defend Israel.

Kaine said that the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran announced Monday night doesn’t change the necessity of the vote, and “actually gives you the space to actually have a decision about, prospectively, should we be at war with Iran without a vote of Congress.”

Asked by Jewish Insider whether he still anticipates that most or all other Democrats will still support the resolution, Kaine said, “They believe we should not be at war without a vote of Congress. They may have different points where a war would be the right thing to do, but that should not happen without a vote of Congress.”

He said he still expects to have multiple Republicans supporting the resolution, but the number is unknown. Only Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has publicly voiced support.

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), asked about the resolution, said that there was not a “clear and imminent threat to the United States, to our citizens” and the administration “should have come to us and talked about this,” as it did prior to Operation Desert Storm, in which he served.

“You’ve got a goal, you talk to Congress about it. You get the force ready to do this. You talk to the adversary and you say, ‘Here are our options: Get out of Kuwait or we’re going to kick you out,’” Kelly said. “That occurred with a full, transparent discussion with the United States Congress, per the Constitution.”

Kelly reviewed a classified Defense Intelligence Agency assessment indicating the U.S. strikes had a limited effect on Iran’s nuclear program, and said that the situation shows the “recklessness of just rushing forward when you don’t have the follow-on plan, and you don’t really consider the consequence.”

He said the strikes were risky because Iran may now take its program completely covert and race to a nuclear weapon. “This has been my concern since the second this happened. Does this push them forward?” Kelly said.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) said he hadn’t looked at the resolution but said “it seems like we had lots of time to be consulted.” 

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) said she’s still examining the resolution but emphasized that she led legislation in 2020 to block military action against Iran following the killing of Quds Force head Gen. Qassem Soleimani.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on Tuesday proposed another amendment to Kaine’s resolution, commending President Donald Trump for a “successful mission” in damaging the regime’s nuclear program. 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on Tuesday proposed an amendment to Sen. Tim Kaine’s (D-VA) war powers resolution, which would block the U.S. from taking further military action against Iran, commending President Donald Trump for a “successful mission” in damaging the regime’s nuclear program. 

Cruz introduced the amendment in anticipation of a vote later this week on the resolution, which would curtail the president’s ability to take any additional action targeting Iran without congressional approval. The amendment, if adopted, would attach language to the resolution celebrating the very actions it seeks to block.

“Members of the United States Armed Forces and intelligence community, and all those involved in the planning and successful execution of Operation Midnight Hammer on June 21, 2025, including President Donald J. Trump, should be commended for their efforts in a successful mission,” the amendment reads.

The Texas senator offered an identical amendment praising the president’s actions when Kaine introduced a war powers act in 2020 in response to Trump’s decision to assassinate Quds Force head Gen. Qassem Soleimani. That amendment, which said that those involved in the operation “should be commended for their efforts in a successful mission,” passed 64-34. 

“The Senate routinely passes this language to applaud presidents for operations like these, which make all Americans immeasurably safer. We came together to congratulate President Obama for liquidating Osama bin Laden, and the Senate voted to applaud President Trump for doing the same to Soleimani. I intend to ensure we do the same for this weekend’s crucial operation, which eliminated the existential threat to America of a nuclear-armed Iran,” Cruz told Jewish Insider in a statement. 

Kaine told reporters on Monday that his resolution was likely to come up for a vote on Thursday or Friday.

House and Senate Democrats are pushing ahead with efforts to bring forward votes this week in both chambers on resolutions that aim to constrain the administration from taking any further military action against Iran in spite of President Donald Trump’s surprise announcement of a ceasefire between Israel and Iran.

Trump’s diplomatic breakthrough is creating some political awkwardness for Democrats who had insisted the president would escalate the war, but many are still likely to support the resolutions, which reflect their dissatisfaction with the president’s decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities without congressional authorization. 

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), the lead sponsor of one war powers resolution in the House, said he no longer plans to force a vote on it, explaining, “if we’re not engaged in hostilities, I think it’s a moot point.” He said he had told House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) that he would not attempt to bring the resolution to the floor.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Massie’s lead co-sponsor, said, “The anti-war advocacy of the left and right broke through. I am glad cooler heads prevailed and Trump seems committed to stopping this war. I spoke with Rep. Massie this evening and we are taking a wait and see approach about whether a vote will be needed now on our War Powers Resolution.”

But a group of senior House Democrats introduced a separate resolution on Monday evening, which they are expected to continue to advance.

The U.S. strike, Massie’s resolution and broader questions about the situation in Iran have been causing heartburn for many House Democrats, particularly supporters of Israel, Democratic staff sources told Jewish Insider earlier Tuesday.

Democratic staffers not authorized to speak publicly explained that, behind the scenes, the largely unified public Democratic opposition to the strikes has been driven by several factors, including the perceived lack of political support for the strikes, concerns about an escalating war and frustration with the Trump administration.

“I think a lot of members support the strike privately but see this as a politically vulnerable issue for [Trump],” one Democratic staffer said.

Another staffer said that Democrats are afraid of echoes of the Iraq war: If the U.S. ends up in a full-scale, protracted, politically unpopular war with Iran, they don’t want to be on record as having supported it.

And, the staffer said, there’s a deep level of distrust for the Trump administration, which acted largely unilaterally in the strikes, did not make efforts to keep congressional leaders informed about the strikes and hasn’t yet presented any evidence to Congress of the need for the strikes or their success.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, who worked with other top Democrats on an alternative war powers resolution, said the resolution effort should continue “if United States forces remain engaged.”

Himes, along with Reps. Greg Meeks (D-NY) and Adam Smith (D-WA), the top Democrats on the Foreign Affairs and Armed Services committees, introduced their own war powers resolution Monday evening, after the ceasefire was announced.

Whether that resolution will come to the floor remains an open question. The House speaker was reportedly working on a procedural plan that would strip the Massie resolution of its privileged status, sidestepping a vote on the House floor, and could potentially use the same tactic to defuse the new Democratic resolution.

On the Senate side, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) said he also plans to push forward with his efforts, and said that Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) is working with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to facilitate a vote.

“Whether or not a ceasefire between Israel and Iran comes to fruition — and I hope it does — I will move forward to force a vote on my resolution to require Congress to debate and vote on whether or not the United States should engage in a war with Iran,” Kaine said in a statement to JI. “Americans don’t want matters of war and peace, bombing and ceasefire, to rest upon the daily whims of any one person.” 

“That’s why the Framers of our Constitution decided that war should only be declared following a public debate and congressional vote,” Kaine continued. “Congress must affirm its commitment to that principle and send a clear message: no more endless wars.”

Other Democrats agreed that a war powers resolution should still receive a vote in spite of the ceasefire.

Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told JI, “At the end of the day, I think that a war powers resolution makes good sense to vote on and for Congress to finally reassert what is in black-and-white letters in the Constitution, which is that only Congress and the consent of the American people can start a war.”

Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY), a former Army intelligence officer, argued that the uncertainty of the situation necessitated that Congress step in.

“It’s a very volatile situation, which, to me, makes it even more urgent that we make clear and reassert what the Constitution of the United States says, which is that it is the Congress that has the authority to declare war or authorize the use of [force],” Ryan told JI.

He added that it “should be concerning to every American that multiple days after doing — not even a preemptive strike — a preventive strike, there’s still no legal justification, there’s still no clarity about the effectiveness.”

A memo sent by Trump to the Senate cited presidential foreign relations authorities enshrined in the U.S. constitution as the legal backing for the strike.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), among the few House Democrats who supported the strikes, told JI that he wants to see Congress reclaim its power but that the administration also has the ability to take defensive action without consulting Congress. He said that the war powers resolution push is likely no longer relevant if the ceasefire continues.

“Based on the ceasefire that was announced, it if holds, it appears that the issue in this current climate is moot, but overall, still important,” Moskowitz said. “[The war powers resolution] is no longer relevant to this particular purpose. It would be more of a general ‘us reasserting our authority as Congress.’”

Kaine told reporters earlier in the day that his resolution in the Senate would come up for a vote on Thursday or Friday.

Kaine said that the vote was “fluid” but he expected to see Republican support, and that he expected nearly all Democrats, with the exception of Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), to support it.

“I think the fluidity and change is something that I think warrants — this is why you get a congressional discussion, because these things can escalate,” Kaine said. “They can move in ways that are hard to predict, and that’s why a discussion and a vote is a good idea.”

He said that, “my colleagues on the Democratic side, regardless of whatever they feel about Iran, [believe] wars without Congress, wars that bypass us, are a bad idea.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) confirmed he planned to support the resolution as well, arguing that the Constitution is clear that war powers are vested in Congress and that his position on the issue has been consistent across administrations.

“There have always been people who argue the president can do whatever he wants,” Paul said. “The problem is, that’s a recipe for chronic intervention. It’s a recipe for endless war.”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a pro-Israel Democrat, also said he supported the resolution.

Ahead of the ceasefire, some specific concerns with the wording of the Massie resolution had split Democrats, one Democratic staffer said. That prompted the separate resolution from Meeks, Himes and Smith. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) claimed at a press conference on Monday that he hadn’t reviewed the Massie resolution yet, indicating that he would not be supporting it. 

A Democratic staffer explained that there were fairly widespread concerns that Massie’s resolution could block the U.S. from continuing to support Israel’s defense.

The Democrat-led resolution includes a specific exception allowing the U.S. to defend itself or any ally or partner from “imminent attack,” whereas Massie’s resolution only allowed for continued defense of the United States and intelligence sharing with allies. The Democrats leading the resolution emphasized in a statement that it would allow U.S. forces defending Israel to continue their activities.

“What we’re trying to get clarity on is to ensure that there’s no ambiguity or doubt about our ability to fully support the defense of Israel and the Israeli people, that we can continue … intelligence sharing and information sharing, cyber,” Ryan said earlier, of the Massie resolution. “There are key dimensions where we have to continue to be very closely aligned.”

“My concern is less about the language of the resolution and more about who introduced it, frankly,” Ryan continued. Massie has a history of comments that colleagues on both sides of the aisle have condemned as antisemitic.

Jeffries, at his press conference, largely focused on the fact that the Trump administration had failed to inform Congress about the strikes in the normal manner and had still not provided a proper justification for the strikes or accounted for Iran’s nuclear material.

He also argued that the administration’s claims to have destroyed Iran’s nuclear program completely couldn’t be trusted.

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), a former House majority leader and perhaps the most prominent Democratic supporter of the strikes, told JI that his support for the strikes was consistent with unilateral action taken by administrations dating back to President Bill Clinton. 

He added that it would be “hypocritical” not to support the strikes now, when administrations have said for decades that they will not permit a nuclear Iran, and said that the recent International Atomic Energy Agency report showed that Iran was “too close” to a nuclear weapon and “stopping them was the right thing to do.”

Hoyer also noted that Congress moves more slowly than the executive branch and that a slow public debate over a potential strike in Congress over strikes would have “incentivized [Iran] to move ahead as quickly as possible.”

He said that as a general matter, however, he believes that it is important for Congress to be able to put a check on the administration’s ability to go to war, though he said that the decision to strike Iran was a long time coming.

Fetterman, the only Senate Democrat who has announced he plans to oppose the war powers resolution, blasted some colleagues who have called the strikes unconstitutional. He said he would have opposed the Kaine resolution before the strikes.

He noted that previous Democratic administrations had conducted similar “one-off” strikes and argued that congressional approval would only be needed if the U.S. was going to start a broader, protracted war.

Fetterman also blasted Democrats for joining Massie’s effort calling him, “that weirdo from Kentucky.”

Among Republicans, Massie’s resolution may have seen some additional support from a handful of isolationist Republicans, but likely not many. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), the Republican who, alongside Massie, has been most outspoken against the U.S. strike, told Punchbowl News she would not support the effort.

But she also said she wanted to push to cut off U.S. aid to Israel, and has previously condemned Israel’s military action against Iran. 

Last Thursday, Sam Heller went to sleep at a Tel Aviv hotel, thinking that any potential military action between Israel and Iran wouldn’t start until after his flight back to the U.S., scheduled for Saturday night. 

He was wrong.

When Home Front Command alerts woke Heller at 3 a.m. on Friday, informing the nation that Israel had launched a preemptive attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, he quickly booked the first flight out to Paris from Ben Gurion Airport.

“I went straight to the airport, and they locked the doors to Ben-Gurion, and they stopped letting people in,” Heller told Jewish Insider on Tuesday, safely back home in Cleveland. “They’re like, ‘We’re closing our airspace indefinitely. Your flight’s been canceled. All flights are canceled. You can’t get out.’”

Like some 38,000 other foreign visitors stranded in Israel after the country’s preemptive strikes on Iran prompted days of Iranian ballistic missile attacks on Israel, Heller began to try to think of creative ways to leave the country. First he called an Israeli shipping company and asked if he could travel as a stowaway on a cargo ship heading to Cyprus. They told him yes, at a cost of 87,000 Euros for 12 people. He said no.

Then Heller, who was visiting Israel as the last leg of a monthlong trip after graduating from the University of Michigan in May, called a sailing company from which he had rented a boat two years ago. They told him the only boat suitable for travel to Cyprus was out of commission. Another no. Next, a phone call to a company that offers helicopter tours of Israel, thinking helicopters might not be included in the ban on flying. Nope. 

Finally, he tracked down a company that offers private security details in the Middle East. There, he identified a circuitous route out of Israel that took him 36 hours: departing Israel through the Taba border crossing to Egypt, being driven three-and-a-half hours to Sharm el-Sheikh and taking a flight from the Sinai resort town to Istanbul. He left Israel Saturday night after Shabbat and landed in Cleveland at 11 p.m. the next day. That’s a relatively fast trip compared to others who have made it out.

In the days since the Iran-Israel war started, a cottage industry has emerged to help ferry people from Israel to other destinations around the globe. 

Israeli airspace was closed for five days and the U.S. Embassy said it was unable to assist Americans seeking to evacuate. After the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, several State Department-led charter flights brought Americans to Athens — but charter flights were not an option following Israel’s attack on Iran and the ensuing war between the two countries. A State Department spokesperson declined to comment on Tuesday.

El Al canceled all flights out of the country through at least June 23, and foreign carriers pulled out of Israel for longer. Israeli carriers El Al, Arkia and Israir announced on Tuesday that they received permission from the Israeli government to organize repatriation flights to bring back Israelis stranded abroad. The first two flights from Larnaca, Cyprus, landed at Ben Gurion Airport on Wednesday morning. 

The Israeli Tourism Ministry launched an effort on Tuesday to facilitate the departure of tourists from the country, distributing a digital registration form for departure flights from the country. 

But until those flights begin, in WhatsApp threads, Facebook groups and private messages, Americans stuck in Israel are passing along any information they can find to try to help get themselves and their loved ones home. The details are hard to verify. The costs range from expensive to astronomical. 

One graphic shared widely on WhatsApp advertises an emergency evacuation flight from Israel to New York, promising a Wednesday afternoon departure to Eilat and a bus transfer to Sharm el-Sheikh, followed by a charter flight to Milan and then a connection to JFK — “lavish meals included” and “security escorted” — for $2,200 a person. According to the travel company’s website, though, it was already sold out by the time the graphic circulated. Another message advertised a chartered flight from Aqaba, Jordan — near Eilat — to Paris, for $3,000 a person. Abraham Tours, a travel company best known for its hostels in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, advertised a cross-border transfer to Amman for $438. 

Adir Fischer is the vice president of marketing at Magnus Safety, a global search-and-rescue company based in Israel that is arranging boats to take people between Haifa and Larnaca, Cyprus. He can fit about 25 people on a tugboat for a 17-hour journey, costing between 1,000 and 2,000 Euros a person. 

“If you have three kids and a husband, it’s around 7,000 Euros a trip. Not everyone has it liquid, and it’s prepaid,” Fischer told JI on Tuesday. That’s before adding in the cost of flights from Cyprus back to the U.S. Still, he has turned away over 100 people because there isn’t enough room on the boats. 

One American woman who lives in Israel plans to depart on Wednesday on a small boat privately arranged by her husband’s company. They will be traveling with their six-month-old baby and two friends, at a cost of $15,000 for the five people. 

“Either I’m brave, crazy or an idiot. I’m not quite sure yet. But we really want to get out,” she said, requesting anonymity to speak about sensitive travel details. 

Early Sunday morning, Shira Raviv Schwartz woke up to a red alert. She was in Israel visiting her cousin, a trip she takes most summers. Soon after, her apartment building in Tel Aviv shook violently. In the morning, Schwartz saw that the next block had sustained a direct hit from an Iranian ballistic missile. She decided she needed to leave with her husband, their young adult son and her 84-year-old father-in-law. 

“I can’t take another night anxious in the safe room,” Schwartz said from Amman, where the family awaits a flight to Cairo, then another to Athens and finally a flight home to Chicago. 

Large tour groups have been luckier than individuals or families, who have to sort through the options themselves. Birthright Israel arranged for a private luxury cruise ship to bring 1,500 American young adults to Cyprus, where they boarded four planes back to the U.S. chartered by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. 

Jonathan Schanzer, who was leading a delegation hosted by his think tank, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, worked with the organization’s staff to get the group to Amman via the Allenby Bridge, the only border crossing between the West Bank and Jordan. (This is not an option for Israelis, who are not permitted to pass there.) He considered whether driving to Allenby amid the threat of incoming Iranian missiles was too dangerous but decided to risk it.

“Every security specialist warned me that the time in the war away from a shelter was the dangerous period, and I understood that,” Schanzer told JI. “But we were running out of programming for our participants and they were all sleep-deprived, as was I, from the incessant sirens every night. They didn’t sign up for this.” 

Jerusalem travel agent Mark Feldman said the key is not to tell clients what to do, but to give them options.

“Let him or her make the choice. I would never want to be responsible for somebody taking a 24-hour boat to Cyprus, throwing up the whole way, and emailing me saying it was the worst time of their life,” Feldman, the CEO of Ziontours, told JI. 

His business is at capacity simply trying to get existing clients into and out of Israel. His advice to those without a connection to a travel agent is to stick to trusted sources and avoid the “incredible amount of rumor-mongering.” Mostly, he is advising people to be patient, particularly those who do not have the appetite for a dayslong odyssey through multiple countries. 

But those who are waiting until the airspace reopens are not going to have an easy time leaving, Feldman warned. 

“Hard as it is just calming people down and relaxing them, the problem will come when the airport is open, and the thousands of people that are stuck here won’t have flights to get out,” said Feldman. If the airspace opens on June 23, the flights departing that day will be the ones that were initially scheduled for June 23 — meaning anyone with a June 23 ticket will have a confirmed seat. Everyone who has been stuck in Israel for days will be competing with each other for the empty seats.

“Many people assume, ‘Because I was bumped, I get first priority,’” said Feldman. “You don’t.”

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) introduced a war powers resolution on Monday that aims to block the U.S. from taking military action against Iran in support of Israel’s ongoing operation against the regime.

The resolution would bar military action against Iran unless directly authorized by a congressional vote, or in order to defend the United States from an “imminent attack.”

The legislation comes as Israeli leaders are reportedly pushing the United States to support Israel’s military operations, particularly to target the deeply entrenched nuclear site at Fordow that Israel is believed to lack the capabilities to destroy on its own.

War powers resolutions are privileged under congressional procedures, meaning that Kaine can force a vote on the legislation. Kaine told Jewish Insider on Monday that the resolution could be called up, at earliest, late next week, depending on other timing issues.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) announced that he plans to introduce a similar war powers resolution in the House.

“The question of whether United States forces should be engaged in hostilities against Iran should be answered following a full briefing to Congress and the American public of the issues at stake, a public debate in Congress, and a congressional vote as contemplated by the Constitution,” the resolution reads.

Kaine warned in a statement that the Israeli-Iranian conflict “could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict.”

“It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States,” Kaine said. “The American people have no interest in sending servicemembers to fight another forever war in the Middle East. This resolution will ensure that if we decide to place our nation’s men and women in uniform into harm’s way, we will have a debate and vote on it in Congress.”

President Donald Trump has indicated that the U.S. does not intend to get directly involved in the conflict.

Lawmakers, led by Kaine, pursued similar efforts during Trump’s first administration following the killing of Quds Force leader Gen. Qassem Soleimani. That legislation passed Congress in 2020 with the support of then-Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), as well as Sens. Todd Young (R-IN), Mike Lee (R-UT), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Susan Collins (R-ME), Rand Paul (R-KY), Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Jerry Moran (R-KS), but was vetoed by Trump.

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Peter Welch (D-VT), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR) Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Ed Markey (D-MA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Tina Smith (D-MN) introduced a separate bill on Monday to block funding for any use of force against Iran except if authorized by Congress or in self-defense.