The Toyota Corolla, the best-selling nameplate in automotive history, is gearing up for a major evolution for its 13th generation. This next iteration of the compact is expected to merge a more futuristic design with a broad range of powertrain options, including hybrid and, for the first time, fully electric. If all goes according to plan, this will be the most ambitious overhaul in the model’s six-decade run.

More: You Won’t Be Seeing These Stretched 2026 Corollas Over Here

Toyota offered a taste of that future with the radical concept unveiled at the 2025 Japan Mobility Show. While visually striking, the concept’s design leaned heavily into the avant-garde, raising doubts about how much of it would survive into production.

Is This What It’ll Really Look Like?

In response, digital artist Theophilus Chin stepped in with speculative renderings that balance the bold with the believable. His vision softens the extremes, wrapping forward-thinking design in a more grounded four-door sedan shape.

Theottle

The illustrations are actually based on the Lexus IS, implementing elements from the Toyota Crown Sedan before adding the signature styling features of the Corolla concept.

At the front, the design retains the hammerhead-style headlights introduced on the concept, now joined by additional daytime running lights integrated into the bumper. Below that sits a slim air intake, nestled under a full-width LED bar.

More: We Think We Know What Toyota Teased, And It Could Carry A Familiar Name

According to Toyota’s own designers, combustion-powered variants would require certain functional tweaks. This likely explains some of the more pragmatic adjustments in Chin’s version.

In line with that approach, several of the concept’s more dramatic features have been reined in. The low-slung hood and ultra-modern glasshouse have been scaled back to better suit a road-going car. Wheel sizes are more modest, and the flush door handles have given way to conventional ones. Even so, the side profile keeps its complexity, with angular character lines.

The biggest change is at the rear, where the concept’s futuristic tail has been swapped for a more conventional sedan layout, likely to align with mainstream Corolla tastes. Even so, the clean roofline, slim full-width LED taillights, subtle spoiler, and sharp surface work give it a more contemporary look than the current generation of the sedan

Did The Concept Take It Too Far?

Toyota Corolla Concept

The original concept was developed by Toyota’s European design center in France, signalling a radical shift for the popular nameplate. However, while the prospect of big changes sounds exciting, history suggests automakers tend to proceed cautiously with high-volume, globally popular models.

It wouldn’t be surprising if Toyota tempers the wildest aspects of the concept for the production version. Still, there’s always the chance they’ll take a bigger leap than expected.

What remains unknown is whether the new generation will follow the current model’s multi-body format. At present, the Corolla is sold globally as a sedan, hatchback, and estate, offering broad appeal across markets and use cases.

Toyota Corolla Concept

Besides the futuristic exterior, the concept came with a completely reimagined interior combining the latest technology with more premium materials and added space. Toyota’s messaging suggests they’re looking to elevate the segment, but production models are likely to tone things down for cost, practicality, and manufacturing scale.

Under The Skin

Toyota has not yet released technical specifications for the next-generation Corolla, but it did confirm the model will continue under its “multi-pathway” strategy, supporting multiple types of propulsion.

More: MR2 Is That You? GR Boss Confirms New Mid-Engine Sports Car

The lineup will offer both hybrid and fully electric powertrains to suit a wide range of global markets. Likely options for the hybrid system include new 1.5-liter and 2.0-liter four-cylinder gasoline engines currently in development, aimed at delivering more power with improved efficiency.

Designers have also stated that interior space will remain consistent across all variants, regardless of the drivetrain.

Given the driver-oriented nature of the current TNGA platform and Toyota’s steady evolution in chassis tuning, the next Corolla could offer a more rewarding experience behind the wheel. Comfort and usability remain priorities, but added sharpness wouldn’t come as a surprise.

A performance version from Gazoo Racing is also a strong possibility, serving as a spiritual successor to the rally-ready GR Corolla.

When Are We Going To See It?

The current 12th-generation Toyota Corolla debuted in 2018, with a mild mid-cycle update arriving in 2022. That timeline suggests the next generation could appear in 2026 or 2027, though Toyota has not yet confirmed a launch date.

Cars spend a lot of time outside and that presents a big opportunity for electric vehicles equipped with solar panels. A number of automakers have explored the idea and Nissan is revisiting it with an Ariya concept.

Designed to celebrate Clean Energy Day, the crossover has photovoltaic panels on the hood, roof, and liftgate. These span a combined area of 40.9 square feet (3.8 square meters) and convert sunlight into DC power.

More: Nissan Turns Sunlight Into Free Miles With Its Smart EV Upgrade

This energy is fed into the Ariya’s battery pack and Nissan said real-world testing showed the panels can add up to 14.3 miles (23 km) of range on a sunny day. That might not sound like much, but the average American travels less than 40 miles (64 km) per day.

However, location matters a lot and the range can vary significantly. Nissan says year‑round averages could range from as little as 6.3 miles (10.2 km) per day in London to 13.2 miles (21.2 km) per day in Dubai. Even if you park in a garage, a two-hour drive on a sunny day could add up to 1.9 miles (3 km) of range.

While these aren’t life altering numbers, the automaker said the added range could enable drivers to reduce their charging frequency between 35 and 65 percent. The solar panels also help out in areas where charging infrastructure is limited.

The concept was created in partnership with Lightyear and Nissan’s Shunsuke Shigemoto said, “By exploring how vehicles can generate their own renewable energy, we are opening the door to new opportunities for customers – greater freedom, reduced charging dependency, and a cleaner future. This concept is not just a technical milestone; it’s a vision of how Nissan intends to lead the next phase of electric mobility.”

Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly speaks with reporters in the Mansfield Room of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Monday, Dec. 1, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly’s lawyers on Monday urged a federal judge to block the Defense Department from downgrading his retirement rank as a Navy captain and his pay for telling U.S. troops they aren’t required to follow illegal orders. 

Paul J. Fishman wrote in a 35-page filing that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s attempt to punish Kelly for appearing in the video alongside other members of Congress violates several constitutional rights.  

“As a decorated combat veteran and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Kelly is deeply committed to the necessity of good order and discipline in the armed forces,” Fishman wrote. “He asks this Court to reinforce, not degrade, those principles. 

“His speech—simply reminding servicemembers of their fundamental obligation not to follow unlawful orders— promotes good order. And discipline does not demand silence —particularly from those no longer serving on active duty.”

Fishman firmly rejected the Department of Justice’s assertion in a brief filed last week that the federal court system has no authority over the Defense Department’s actions in this instance. 

“Defendants begin from the premise that questions of ‘military discipline’ lie beyond judicial review,” Fishman wrote. “Their claim that this Court is ‘not permitted to address’ Senator Kelly’s challenge disregards reams of precedent reviewing military disciplinary actions and demands an untenable level of deference.”

Senior Judge Richard J. Leon, who was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush, had scheduled a hearing on the issue for Wednesday, but postponed that until Feb. 3 due to the snowstorm. 

Hegseth pursues penalties

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced earlier this month that he had started the process to downgrade Kelly’s retirement rank and pay, writing in a social media post that his “status as a sitting United States Senator does not exempt him from accountability, and further violations could result in further action.”

The Defense Department letter of censure to Kelly alleged that his participation in the video undermined the military chain of command, counseled disobedience, created confusion about duty, brought discredit upon the Armed Forces and included conduct unbecoming of an officer. 

The video at the center of the debate featured Kelly, Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, Pennsylvania Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan, and New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander, all Democrats with backgrounds in the military or intelligence community.

They said that Americans in those institutions “can” and “must refuse illegal orders.”

“No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it’s a difficult time to be a public servant,” they said. “But whether you’re serving in the CIA, in the Army, or Navy, or the Air Force, your vigilance is critical.”

Kelly lawyer’s arguments

Fishman wrote in his brief that the Trump administration is asking the court to “embrace a novel rule” regarding the First Amendment: “that retired military veterans have no constitutional protection for their speech whenever the Secretary of Defense—in his sole discretion and without even identifying all of the speech at issue—concludes that it ‘risks undermining military discipline and good order.’” 

The Justice Department’s brief from last week, he wrote, erroneously argued that retired military officers can legally face punishment for speaking out against Defense Department policies they oppose.

“From Alexander Hamilton denouncing President Adams’s fitness to command during the Quasi-War, to modern episodes in which retired generals publicly called for Secretary Rumsfeld’s resignation over the Iraq War, retired officers have long participated forcefully in public debate over military policy,” Fishman wrote. 

“The same is true today: retired servicemembers, including Members of Congress, have openly criticized presidential decisions ranging from the Afghanistan withdrawal to vaccination requirements,” he added. “Many continue to serve with distinction as legislators, governors, and federal judges. Yet against that backdrop, Defendants assert the power to limit the First Amendment rights of more than two million retired servicemembers, all without judicial review.”

Breaking into the electric performance space is a delicate task for a brand like BMW M, which has spent decades building its reputation on combustion-powered icons. But that’s exactly what it’s attempting with the Neue Klasse-based electric M3, or, as it may end up being called, the i3M.

The upcoming high-performance EV won’t replace the traditional ICE-powered model, though. Instead, it’s designed to sit alongside it, borrowing cues from BMW M’s most celebrated models to bridge the old and the new. Or at least that’s the promise.

Read: BMW’s Electric M3 Tries To Simulate Everything It Just Replaced

BMW M released the latest chapter in its video series detailing the development of the new super sedan, previewing the distinctive soundscape it plans to offer. Taking a page from Hyundai N’s playbook, BMW aims to replicate the sounds of some of its most iconic models, blending them with the unique tone of a high-performance EV.

Chasing the Sound of the Past

Rather than relying solely on software to mimic engine sounds, BMW assembled an M3 GTS with a 4.4-liter V8, an M4 GTS with its 3.0-liter twin-turbo inline-six, and a classic BMW M6 featuring the brand’s iconic 5.0-liter naturally aspirated V10. Their engine notes were recorded on a dyno, then layered into the soundtrack of the electric prototype.

The clip only demonstrates the soundtrack of the electric M3 for a brief moment while being put through its paces on BMW’s test track. As the driver hits the throttle, it begins to sound like a turbocharged engine building boost as the revs climb. There are also some notable turbo whistles, mixed in together with some of the high-pitched whine expected of an EV.

Performance to Match the Drama

Like the Hyundai Ioniq 5 N and Ioniq 6 N, BMW’s electric M3 will also include simulated gear shifts to match the synthetic engine notes. For drivers who prefer their EV experience unfiltered, these features are expected to be optional and easily switched off.

Of course, the electric M3 will need to be more than just good-looking to convince shoppers. BMW has confirmed it’ll be fitted with four electric motors and a 100 kWh battery pack that’s up to the task of track use.

While BMW hasn’t revealed any final power figures, we know that each wheel will be controlled individually, allowing for advanced torque vectoring for better performance and handling. There will also be an optional rear-wheel drive-only mode.

U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly, an Arizona Democrat, speaks with attendees of Kamala Harris for President campaign event in Phoenix in November 2024. (Photo by Gage Skidmore | Flickr/CC BY-SA 2.0)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Thursday asked a federal judge to deny Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly’s request to halt efforts within the Defense Department to punish him for appearing in a video where he urged members of the military not to follow illegal orders.

Attorneys for the Department of Justice asserted in a 52-page brief that the administration doesn’t believe federal courts hold jurisdiction over the matter, writing “the Judiciary does not superintend military personnel decisions.”

Kelly, a retired U.S. Navy captain, “is not a private citizen and does not enjoy the First Amendment freedom of speech as if he were one when being assessed by the military in military proceedings to determine whether his conduct comports with his obligations as a retired servicemember,” the brief states. 

Kelly’s lawsuit asked a federal judge for an emergency ruling declaring the Defense Department’s attempts to demote him and reduce his military retirement pay are “unlawful and unconstitutional.”

The lawsuit alleges the Pentagon’s actions against Kelly “trample on protections the Constitution singles out as essential to legislative independence.” 

“It appears that never in our nation’s history has the Executive Branch imposed military sanctions on a Member of Congress for engaging in disfavored political speech,” the lawsuit states. ”Allowing that unprecedented step here would invert the constitutional structure by subordinating the Legislative Branch to executive discipline and chilling congressional oversight of the armed forces.”

Video rankled Pentagon

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced earlier this month that he had started the process to downgrade Kelly’s retirement rank and pay, writing in a social media post that his “status as a sitting United States Senator does not exempt him from accountability, and further violations could result in further action.”

The Defense Department letter of censure to Kelly alleged that his participation in the video undermined the military chain of command, counseled disobedience, created confusion about duty, brought discredit upon the Armed Forces and included conduct unbecoming of an officer. 

The video at the center of the debate featured Kelly, Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, Pennsylvania Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan, and New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander, all Democrats with backgrounds in the military or intelligence community.

They said that Americans in those institutions “can” and “must refuse illegal orders.”

“No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it’s a difficult time to be a public servant,” they said. “But whether you’re serving in the CIA, in the Army, or Navy, or the Air Force, your vigilance is critical.”

First Amendment doesn’t apply, DOJ says

Attorneys at the Justice Department, representing DOD in the case, argued in the brief they filed Thursday that no emergency relief is warranted, in part, because they believe Kelly’s First Amendment rights have not been violated. 

“Plaintiff is unlikely to succeed on his First Amendment claim because, as a retired servicemember, he has no First Amendment right to encourage other servicemembers to question the legitimacy of their military orders or to impugn their superior officers when such conduct violates his ongoing duties and obligations to the military,” the DOJ brief states. “The First Amendment is not a shield against the consequences of such violations in military personnel matters.”

Kelly’s constitutional protections as a member of the U.S. Senate under the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution also don’t apply in this instance, the DOJ legal team wrote. 

“A legislator’s public statements in interviews and on social media are not legislative acts protected by the Speech or Debate Clause,” DOJ wrote. 

The judge doesn’t need to issue emergency relief, the DOJ brief states, because there isn’t a separation-of-powers issue between the Executive Branch, where the Defense Department exists, and Kelly’s role as a senator in the Legislative Branch, which are considered separate but equal under the Constitution. 

Senior Judge Richard J. Leon, who was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush, has scheduled a hearing on the issue for Wednesday. 

Leon could rule from the bench during those proceedings or issue a written order anytime afterward. 

Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly speaks with reporters in the Mansfield Room of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Monday, Dec. 1, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly sued Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the department on Monday for trying to demote Kelly’s retirement rank and pay after he appeared in a video where he and other lawmakers told service members they didn’t need to follow illegal orders. 

Kelly’s suit, filed in the federal district court for the District of Columbia, says attempts by the Trump administration to punish him violate the First Amendment, the separation of powers, due process protections and the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution.

“Pete Hegseth is coming after what I earned through my twenty-five years of military service, in violation of my rights as an American, as a retired veteran, and as a United States Senator whose job is to hold him—and this or any administration—accountable,” Kelly wrote in a statement. “His unconstitutional crusade against me sends a chilling message to every retired member of the military: if you speak out and say something that the President or Secretary of Defense doesn’t like, you will be censured, threatened with demotion, or even prosecuted.”

Kelly appeared in the video alongside Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, Pennsylvania Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan and New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander — all of whom are former members of the military or intelligence agencies, though none of the others are still subject to the military’s legal system.

President Donald Trump was irate after seeing the video, posting on social media that he believed it represented “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

DOD investigation

The Defense Department announced in late November that it was looking into “serious allegations of misconduct” against Kelly, a retired Navy captain, for participating in the video. 

Kelly said during a press conference on Capitol Hill in December the Defense Department investigation into him, along with one by the FBI into all of the lawmakers in the video, marked “a dangerous moment for the United States of America when the president and his loyalists use every lever of power to silence United States senators for speaking up.”

Hegseth, who originally threatened to court-martial Kelly, said in early January the Defense Department would instead downgrade his retirement rank and pay. 

“Captain Kelly has been provided notice of the basis for this action and has thirty days to submit a response,” Hegseth wrote in a social media post. “The retirement grade determination process directed by Secretary Hegseth will be completed within forty five days.”

Kelly said at the time he would challenge Hegseth’s course of action. 

First Amendment cited

The 46-page lawsuit marks the next step in the months-long saga, with Kelly asking a federal judge to declare the effort to demote him “unlawful and unconstitutional.”

“The First Amendment forbids the government and its officials from punishing disfavored expression or retaliating against protected speech,” the lawsuit states. “That prohibition applies with particular force to legislators speaking on matters of public policy. As the Supreme Court held 60 years ago, the Constitution ‘requires that legislators be given the widest latitude to express their views on issues of policy,’ and the government may not recharacterize protected speech as supposed incitement in order to punish it.”

The lawsuit alleges that the Pentagon’s actions against Kelly “also trample on protections the Constitution singles out as essential to legislative independence.” 

“It appears that never in our nation’s history has the Executive Branch imposed military sanctions on a Member of Congress for engaging in disfavored political speech,” the lawsuit states. ”Allowing that unprecedented step here would invert the constitutional structure by subordinating the Legislative Branch to executive discipline and chilling congressional oversight of the armed forces.”

Kelly’s legal team asked the judge to grant “emergency relief” in their favor by Friday, Jan. 16.

The case was assigned to Senior Judge Richard J. Leon, who was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush.

Tesla owners aren’t strangers to modifying their vehicles. Sometimes, that action comes out of a desire for additional safety. Other times, it’s because Tesla itself didn’t deliver on a previous promise. And occasionally, those two aspects of design come into fierce opposition. That’s what happened here.

A father of four needed space for his entire family, and when it became clear that Tesla wouldn’t offer a six-seat Cybertruck, he took matters into his own hands. He commissioned a custom version and later shared the results in a Tesla group on Facebook.

More: Cybertruck’s $16K Range Booster Is Dead And Tesla Isn’t Saying Why

The custom setup removes the center console of the truck and replaces it with a narrow upright seat wedged between the original pair. It comes complete with a seatbelt, but that might be where safety ends. We’ll come back to that, though. Let’s focus first on the design itself.

It’s a far cry from the angular unit Tesla once teased, but at least the upholstery matches. Some folks might not even realize that it’s an aftermarket addition because of that.

What Killed Tesla’s Center Seat Plans?

At the same time, it’s tough to call this a big win for now. While Tesla originally showed renders of a similar setup, it never came to pass. Many believe that’s because of safety regulations regarding the center seat.

Some observers have noted that the truck includes a driver’s side inboard airbag, which could strike anyone seated in the center. There’s also no airbag directly in front of that position. And beyond the lack of protection, there’s always a chance the seat may not be anchored to mounting points strong enough to hold up in a crash.

To be clear, this isn’t a knock on the owner’s intentions. Wanting to carry your entire family with you is obviously normal and easy to understand. But it does highlight a recurring Tesla theme. The brand and CEO often make bold promises, offer flashy renderings, and then production vehicles quietly walk things back a bit.

Tesla once showed a front bench. That version never reached production, and now an owner has stepped in to fill the gap with a custom modification. In doing so, he’s taking on a level of risk that some might find concerning in a six-figure vehicle. Maybe the solution here is to just get the Model X since it actually has room for the whole family.

Negative YouTube reviews of cars have earned a certain reputation over the years. Some are so brutal they’re blamed, rightly or not, for helping to sink entire automakers, like the high-profile case of Fisker about a year ago. This time, though, a critical video sparked something different. A public takedown led not to fallout, but to potential fixes, and not just for one frustrated owner.

Jason Fenske of Engineering Explained leased a Lucid Air, ended up having issues with it, and has now been in direct contact with the brand. The result is going to benefit countless Lucid owners in the future.

A Critical Eye Meets a Willing Ear

When Jason Fenske published a blunt video detailing his disappointment with a newly leased Lucid Air Touring, it wasn’t a rage-bait takedown or a viral stunt. It was a long, technical breakdown of how a mechanically brilliant EV was being kneecapped by frustrating software, clumsy UX decisions, and some puzzling hardware quirks.

Read: Lucid Promised Luxury But All This Owner Got Was Regret And Nightmares

Rather than simply ignoring it and continuing on with its plans, the EV maker reached out. According to Fenske, what followed was a constructive discussion with engineers and even the SVP of engineering, Imad Dlala.

Evidently, the team at Lucid provided insider details and previews of upcoming changes. That’s where this story really takes its biggest turn. Lucid owners have a lot to look forward to if Fenske’s information proves reliable.

Lucid Plots a UX Overhaul

The biggest news is software. Lucid confirmed it’s actively improving phone-as-key reliability, door handle behavior, mirror positioning in reverse, percentage-versus-miles range inconsistencies, and Tesla Supercharger Plug & Charge support.

More significantly, a full UX 3.0 overhaul is planned for early fall 2026, bringing multitasking, faster profile switching, improved CarPlay stability, better voice commands, and a more intuitive interface. Owners with newer hardware, or those willing to pay to upgrade, will get access.

Lucid also confirmed vehicle-to-home power capability is coming in the first half of 2026, promising up to 17 kW peak output without requiring a separate home inverter, an area where Lucid’s hardware advantages could genuinely shine.

Fenske estimates that his Lucid could power his home for four days if they lost power, and that’s without changing any of the behavior his family is accustomed to.

Not All Feedback Gets a Reply

At the same time, he remains cautious, and rightly so. Promises aren’t fixes, and the Lucid Air still struggles with daily usability today. But admitting problems, engaging with informed criticism, and outlining concrete changes is more than many automakers manage.

In addition, this isn’t how most customers get treated. Fenske runs Engineering Explained, has a massive audience, and speaks the same technical language as Lucid’s engineering team. That context matters. Still, what Lucid outlined is meaningful. Especially for current and future owners.

Screenshot Jason Fenske

SUVs may have flooded European streets, but compact, affordable hatchbacks haven’t packed up and left just yet. Stellantis seems to have taken note, quietly repositioning the Citroen C3 into a value-focused crossover-style hatchback and offering Fiat the same platform to build the new Grande Panda. We recently drove both, back to back, curious to see whether the distinctions ran deeper than design.

More: We Imagined Stellantis’ Tiny EV As Jeep, Dodge, And Chrysler Oddballs

Citroen and Fiat play a specific role within the Stellantis portfolio. They’re the budget-conscious brands, tasked with delivering the most affordable cars in each segment. That’s why the new C3 and Grande Panda are built on the cost-effective Smart Car platform, rather than the more sophisticated CMP architecture underpinning their Opel Corsa, Peugeot 208, and Lancia Ypsilon cousins.

Despite the lower-cost foundations, Stellantis didn’t skimp on drivetrains. Buyers get the same menu of internal combustion, mild hybrid, and full electric powertrains.

Quick Facts

Predictably, the two hatchbacks share a wheelbase and sit within millimetres of each other in length and width. The Citroen measures 16 mm (0.6 inches) longer, while the Fiat is 5 mm (0.2 inches) wider. On paper, these are rounding errors, but the styling does help differentiate them more than the tape measure might suggest.

Different Shells

Photos Thanos Pappas for CarScoops

Most would agree that Citroen and Fiat’s designers did well to set their cars apart. Although the two models inevitably share core proportions, roof structure, and key hardpoints, every body panel is unique. That gave each brand the freedom to apply its own design language across the entire exterior.

More: You’re Not Wrong, The New Mercedes GLB Looks Suspiciously Like A Smart

The Citroen looks chunky and aggressive with sculpted details, while the Fiat is boxier and retro-futuristic with many Easter Eggs doubling as references to its Italian origins. Both hatchbacks sit higher than usual and carry crossover styling cues, but the slightly thicker plastic cladding and taller roof rails of the Grande Panda make it look a bit more adventurous than the C3.

Examples that highlight the fine line between cost-cutting and design statement include the combinations of the identical mirror caps with different indicators (from the Stellantis parts bin), the shared door handles with bespoke door stampings, and the common greenhouse with slightly different window lines.

Two Interiors, Two Moods

Photos Thanos Pappas for CarScoops

The unique character of each model is even more pronounced inside the cabin. The Citroen has a modern and minimalist approach, with horizontal lines on the dashboard. Highlights include the small two-spoke steering wheel, the tiny digital instrument cluster that resembles a head-up display, and the fabric trim that disguises the hard plastics.

Review: We Drove The New C5 Aircross And Lost Our Jeep’s Compass To Citroen’s Comfort

The Fiat is far more playful and colorful. It has an oval shaped digital cockpit with a miniature Panda trapped in the transparent perimeter, a Bamboo-like cover for the glovebox, vintage emblems and glossy black surfaces.

Of course, many of the core components are shared. The climate controls remain mercifully physical, the infotainment screen is a 10.25-inch unit across the board, and most of the switchgear and door handles are the same. It’s what you’d expect from two cars built from the same parts bin.

Comfort and Practicality

Cabin space feels identical, with both cars offering enough legroom and headroom for four adults to travel comfortably. The seats are plush and equally stylish in their own regard, leaving Citroen’s “Advanced Comfort” marketing claim mostly symbolic. The boot also looks the same to the naked eye, despite the notable difference on paper in favor of the Fiat.

Overall, the Fiat has the most unique interior ambiance that will make passengers smile. On the other hand, the Citroen might age better and has a narrow lead in perceived quality – most likely due to the darker trim.

Trim levels mirror each other from the base models to the range-toppers we tested. In Greece, the Fiat is the more affordable choice across the range. But in other markets like Germany and the UK, the Citroen often comes in cheaper, at least for the electric versions.

Driving Impressions

Behind the wheel, the similarities are immediately obvious. Contrary to what some reviews suggest, both models share identical suspension geometry and a soft overall tune. The Citroen does have a slight advantage over rough surfaces, thanks to its “Progressive Hydraulic Cushions” that take the edge off full damper extension.

Both small hatchbacks are very easy to drive and proved to be agile in Athens’ narrow streets. Of course, performance is identical across the range, which includes electric and turbocharged 1.2-liter engines in regular and mild-hybrid forms. The Grande Panda may eventually offer an all-wheel-drive version, potentially reviving the spirit of the Panda 4×4.

The steering feel is also very similar, but at least it gave me something to write about. In the Grande Panda I got the sense of the ultra-light City mode of older Fiats – but only when stationary. The Citroen’s steering adds a barely perceptible touch of extra weight, likely a result of the smaller steering wheel diameter.

Verdict

Photos Thanos Pappas for CarScoops

In the end, the Citroen C3 and Fiat Grande Panda are two interpretations of the same idea, delivered in French and Italian dialects. Both target the value end of the subcompact market and use a shared platform to keep costs down, while still managing to carve out distinct personalities through design.

They don’t face much direct competition beyond the Dacia Sandero Stepway, though small SUVs and traditional hatchbacks are always hovering nearby. Beneath the styling, they’re mechanically identical, with only slight differences in ride and agility. The C3 feels a bit more composed when the suspension hits its limits, while the Grande Panda comes across as slightly more nimble. These nuances only really emerge if you drive them one after the other.

For car enthusiasts and romantics, a little more character in the driving dynamics wouldn’t have gone amiss, but for most buyers, design is what matters. On that front, the fraternal twins deliver more than enough distinction to stand on their own.

The final verdict ends in a clear draw, with each car bringing its own strengths to the table and appealing to slightly different sensibilities. The Grande Panda leans into playful energy and quirky charm, while the C3 carries itself with a more restrained, minimalist poise. If it came down to styling alone, which one would you take home?

Photos and Video: Thanos Pappas for CarScoops

Vice President JD Vance speaks during a news briefing in the White House briefing room on January 8, 2026. Vance joined White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt to address several topics including the Jan. 7, 2026, fatal shooting of a woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer during a confrontation in Minneapolis. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Vice President JD Vance said Thursday the Trump administration would stand by the federal immigration officer who shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis the day prior. 

Vance defended the immigration officer’s actions as “self-defense” and berated journalists for covering the story, including by reporting that on-the-scene videos contradicted claims from the Trump administration that 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good used her vehicle to harm the immigration officer who fired three shots into her windshield. 

“I would appreciate everybody saying a prayer for that agent,” Vance said. “I think the media prejudging and talking about this guy as if he’s a murderer is one of the most disgraceful things I’ve ever seen from the American media.”

The Minnesota Star Tribune identified the federal immigration officer as Jonathan Ross, who Vance said was hit by a vehicle during an immigration operation six months ago.

An analysis from The New York Times of videos from three different angles show Good turning her SUV away from Ross and that he was not in the path of her vehicle when he fired three shots at close range into her windshield. 

“That ICE officer nearly had his life ended, dragged by a car six months ago, 33 stitches in his leg so you think maybe he’s a little bit sensitive about somebody ramming him with an automobile,” Vance said. 

Vance also accused Good of impeding a law enforcement operation.

“I’m not happy that this woman was there at a protest violating the law by interfering with the law enforcement action,” he said. “I think that we can all recognize that the best way to turn down the temperature is to tell people to take their concerns about immigration policy to the ballot box, stop assaulting and stop inciting violence against our law enforcement officers.”

DHS operation to continue

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem also defended the immigration agent during a Thursday press conference.

“This is an experienced officer who followed his training,” she said.

The federal immigration operation in Minneapolis began last month but intensified this week after a right-wing influencer reported day care centers run by members of the Somali community as fraudulent. 

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during the briefing that the aggressive immigration enforcement in Minnesota would continue. 

“The Department of Homeland Security will continue to operate on the ground in Minnesota, not only to remove criminal illegal aliens, but also to continue conducting door-to-door investigations of the rampant fraud that has taken place in the state under the failed and corrupt leadership of Democrat Gov. Tim Walz,” Leavitt said. 

‘Absolute immunity’

The FBI has refused to allow the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension from the investigation to have access to evidence or other case materials in order to investigate the shooting.  

When reporters in the White House briefing room pressed Vance on why the FBI is refusing to cooperate with local law enforcement officials, Vance said it was a federal issue.

“The idea that Tim Walz and a bunch of radicals in Minneapolis are going to go after and make this guy’s life miserable because he was doing the job that he was asked to do is preposterous,” Vance said. “The unprecedented thing is the idea that a local official can actually prosecute a federal official with absolute immunity.”

A federal officer can be prosecuted by local and state authorities if a federal official violates state criminal laws. 

Absolute immunity is applied to civil liability, and extended to certain positions such as the president, judges and legislatures acting in their official duty. Qualified immunity is usually applied to the conduct of law enforcement and grants them immunity from certain legal actions.

Congressional Democrats have decried the shooting and have called for a criminal investigation. 

Lucid, Nuro, and Uber have used CES to unveil their production-intent robotaxi as well as the model’s in-cabin rider experience. The companies also announced on-road testing began in December, ahead of a scheduled launch in the San Francisco Bay Area later this year.

Based on the Gravity SUV, the Level 4 robotaxi features a next-generation sensor array that consists of high-resolution cameras, solid-state lidar sensors, and radar sensors. These provide a 360° view of the vehicle’s surroundings and the equipment is integrated into the Gravity’s body as well as a roof-mounted halo.

More: Uber And Lucid Partner For Thousands Of Robotaxis

Information is fed to the Nuro Driver, which is a Level 4 autonomous driving system. It’s supported by Nvidia’s Drive AGX Thor, which allows for “high-performance” computing and real-time AI processing.

Uber’s role is to own and operate the robotaxis – along with third-party fleet partners – and allow for rides using the company’s popular ride-hailing platform.

An Intuitive User Experience

While the companies are still being coy on specifics, they revealed a handful of details about the user experience. This begins as soon as the robotaxi approaches as the ‘halo’ has multiple displays that show the rider’s initials, ensuring people get into the right vehicle.

Riders are envisioned to hop in the second-row, where they’ll be greeted by a screen that says their name and where they’re going. There’s also a digital button that enables them to open the liftgate and store luggage in the back.

Once riders are ready to go, they can tap “Start Drive.” The screen will then display their estimated drop off time and animations showing what the vehicle is doing. This includes “maneuvers such as yielding to pedestrians, slowing at traffic lights, changing lanes, and dropping off a passenger.”

Riders will be able to access a handful of vehicle controls including settings for the climate control system, heated seats, and audio system. They can also contact support and tell the vehicle to pull over to the side of the road. Users can also view a traditional Uber-style map, which isn’t much of a surprise considering the ride-hailing giant developed the experience.

While a number of riders will likely be traveling solo, the companies said the robotaxi is also great for groups. It can accommodate up to six passengers and their luggage at a time.

We’ll likely learn more about the robotaxi in the coming months, but Lucid is expected to begin production later this year in Arizona. The vehicles will then be deployed in the Bay Area.

If everything goes according to plan, Uber will deploy at least 20,000 Lucid robotaxis over six years in dozens of markets around the world.

EV startup Sony Honda Mobility has returned to CES in Las Vegas this year with a fresh glimpse into its future, unveiling both a nearly production-ready version of the Afeela 01 sedan and a new crossover concept. The taller, more upright newcomer is called the Afeela Prototype 2026 and is set to arrive on American roads in 2028.

More: This $90K Sony Honda Lets You Play Gran Turismo Instead Of Just Living It

The two vehicles share a common mechanical platform and clearly draw from the same design playbook with broad LED light strips front and rear, a display panel built into the front fascia, and smooth, bi-tone bodywork.

Both wear their tech ambitions on their sleeves, though their overall shape leans more conventional than provocative. Still, they mark a visual step forward from the earlier Sony Vision-S 01 and Vision-S 02 prototypes that premiered at CES in 2020 and 2022.

A Cabin Built Around Screens

Inside, the crossover closely mirrors the sedan, with a dashboard lined in multiple displays and two additional screens in the rear, where passengers can dive into PlayStation games. The tech backbone is Qualcomm Technologies’ Snapdragon Digital Chassis, paired with an advanced AI agent developed in collaboration with Microsoft.

The added height should translate into better interior packaging, especially for families or anyone regularly hauling passengers. With LiDAR modules and cameras mounted to the roof, both Afeela EVs aim for Level 2+ autonomy at launch, with built-in capability to support Level 4 once regulations and software catch up.

Technical details on the crossover remain mostly under wraps, though it’s expected to closely track the sedan in terms of performance and equipment.

More: Honda And Sony’s New EV Has Lost Over $360M Before Even Launching

The Afeela 01 has dual electric motors generating 483 hp (360 kW / 489 PS), , fed by a 91 kWh battery. That setup delivers an estimated 300 miles (483 km) of EPA range. Those numbers don’t sound that exciting for 2028 standards, especially when the new BMW iX3 already offers a 400-mile (644 km) range.

How Much Will it Cost?

Sony Honda Mobility has yet to reveal pricing for the crossover variant that will hit the roads in 2028. However, the prices of the closely-related sedan are a good indication of what to expect.

The Afeela 01 sedan will debut in a high-spec Signature launch trim at $102,900, arriving in late 2026. A more affordable Origin base model, priced at $89,900, will follow in 2027. Interestingly, even though production is based in the US, the first customer deliveries are slated for Japan in the first half of that same year.

Sony Honda Mobility

Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly speaks with reporters in the Mansfield Room of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Monday, Dec. 1, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The Defense Department will attempt to downgrade Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly’s retirement rank and pay, seeking to punish him for making a video along with other Democrats in Congress, who told members of the military they didn’t need to follow illegal orders. 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth originally threatened to recall Kelly from military retirement and court-martial him for his participation in the video, but announced Monday that the department would instead try to downgrade his rank of captain as well as his retirement pay. 

“Captain Kelly has been provided notice of the basis for this action and has thirty days to submit a response,” Hegseth wrote in a social media post. “The retirement grade determination process directed by Secretary Hegseth will be completed within forty five days.”

Hegseth added that Kelly’s “status as a sitting United States Senator does not exempt him from accountability, and further violations could result in further action.”

Kelly wrote in a social media post that he planned to challenge Hegseth’s attempt to alter his retirement rank and pay, arguing it’s an attempt to punish him for challenging the Trump administration. 

“My rank and retirement are things that I earned through my service and sacrifice for this country. I got shot at. I missed holidays and birthdays. I commanded a space shuttle mission while my wife Gabby recovered from a gunshot wound to the head– all while proudly wearing the American flag on my shoulder,” Kelly wrote. “Generations of servicemembers have made these same patriotic sacrifices for this country, earning the respect, appreciation, and rank they deserve.”

Kelly added that Hegseth’s goal with the process is to “send the message to every single retired servicemember that if they say something he or Donald Trump doesn’t like, they will come after them the same way. It’s outrageous and it is wrong. There is nothing more un-American than that.”

Constitutional protection

Members of Congress are generally protected under the speech and debate clause of the U.S. Constitution, which states that unless a lawmaker is involved in treason, felony and breach of the peace, they are “privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”

The Defense Department letter of censure to Kelly alleged that his participation in the video undermined the military chain of command, counseled disobedience, created confusion about duty, brought discredit upon the Armed Forces and included conduct unbecoming of an officer. 

Hegseth wrote in that letter that if Kelly continues “to engage in conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, you may subject yourself to criminal prosecution or further administrative action.”

Allegations of misconduct

The Department of Defense posted in late November that officials were looking into “serious allegations of misconduct” against Kelly for appearing in the video. 

It didn’t detail how Kelly might have violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice but stated that “a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.” 

Hegseth referred the issue to Navy Secretary John Phelan for any “review, consideration, and disposition” he deemed appropriate. Hegseth then asked for a briefing on the outcome of the review “by no later than December 10.”

Kelly said during a press conference in early December the military’s investigation and a separate one by the FBI were designed to intimidate the six lawmakers in the video from speaking out against Trump. 

The lawmakers in the video, who have backgrounds in the military or intelligence agencies, told members of those communities they “can” and “must refuse illegal orders.”

“No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it’s a difficult time to be a public servant,” they said. “But whether you’re serving in the CIA, in the Army, or Navy, or the Air Force, your vigilance is critical.”

The other Democrats in the video — Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, Pennsylvania Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan, and New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander — are not subject to the military justice system. 

Trump railed against the video a couple of days after it posted, saying the statements represented “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

A new report has put the spotlight on a troubling pattern of fatal crashes in the US involving Teslas, where passengers were unable to open the doors, trapping them inside. As the brand’s EVs grow more common on American roads, so too does scrutiny over their safety features, or in this case, the lack of physical fail-safes in the event of a crash.

Read: Tesla Sued Again After Doors Wouldn’t Open As Car Burned

The investigation zeroes in on Tesla’s electronic door handles, a signature design feature that has since been adopted by several other automakers, raising concerns about an industry-wide trend toward software-dependent safety mechanisms.

During an ongoing investigation into safety concerns about these door handles, Bloomberg found evidence that at least 15 people have died in the past decade in incidents involving Teslas where locked or inoperable doors were cited as a potential factor in the victims’ inability to escape.

More than half of those deaths occurred within the past year, suggesting the issue may be becoming more common, or at least more visible, as awareness grows.

Behind the Numbers

The report acknowledges a critical limitation. There is no publicly maintained federal database that tracks fatalities specifically linked to electronic door handle malfunctions. As a result, the findings aren’t meant to represent a definitive or exhaustive total.

Instead, Bloomberg built its list by reviewing every known fatal electric vehicle crash involving fire in the US, then analyzing whether evidence suggested that the doors could not be opened either by occupants or emergency responders.

In each of the 15 cases they flagged, nonfunctional door handles were cited as having “impeded either the occupants’ efforts to escape or rescuers’ attempts to save those inside the vehicle.”

One such incident happened in Virginia, where a Tesla Model 3 skidded off a snowy highway, hit a tree, and caught fire. Footage from inside the patrol car shows that the officer was unable to open the Model 3’s door, forcing him to bash open one of the windows and pull out the driver.

Audio from the Wreckage

One fatal crash occurred in Wisconsin last year, killing five people inside a Tesla Model S. Audio from three 911 calls was later obtained, including one placed automatically by an occupant’s Apple Watch.

At least two of the occupants can be heard screaming and crying for help in the recordings, with one clearly saying, “I’m stuck” as the fire spread through the vehicle, ultimately claiming their lives. It remains unclear whether the other three victims survived the initial impact before the blaze took over.

Tesla Responds to Design Concerns

Tesla, for its part, appears to have quietly acknowledged the concerns in part. In September, reports surfaced that the company was exploring revisions to its door handle system. Future models may include a combination of electronic and manual release mechanisms, something already standard in brands like Audi and Lexus.

Perhaps eager to reassure shoppers about the safety of its vehicles, Tesla recently launched a new page on its website focused purely on safety. There, the company explains that its vehicles are designed to automatically activate hazard lights and unlock doors in the event of a serious collision. It also notes that the vehicle can contact emergency services autonomously.

However, Tesla also includes a key disclaimer: these features “may not be available in all regions or for all vehicles based on build date.”

While Tesla appears to be making some moves to address the issue in the future, questions still remain, not just about the company’s design choices, but also about the regulatory landscape and the lack of clear oversight. The analysis doesn’t claim that electronic door handles are inherently unsafe, but it does point to the need for more reliable fail-safes in situations where delays can be deadly.

Renault wrapped up 2025 with an impressive achievement, pushing the outer limits of electric vehicle efficiency. Its ultra-aerodynamic single-seater prototype managed to cover 626 miles (1,008 km) on a single charge. Even more striking, it did so in less than 10 hours, maintaining an average speed of 102 km/h (63 mph) throughout.

More: French Carmaker Unlocks Its Secret Design Vault And The Scale Models You Can Buy Are Wild

After the run, the EV still had 11 percent of its battery charge remaining. According to the company, that would have been enough for another 75 miles (120 km) at the same average speed, potentially extending the total range to 673 miles (1,083 km).

A Prototype With Unexpected Stamina

The car in question is the Filante Record 2025, a purpose-built concept that made its first appearance back in January. Originally, Renault aimed to attempt the record in July, but meeting the aerodynamic targets proved trickier than expected.

By October, the prototype was ready. Then weather in France got in the way, delaying things again. Eventually, the team relocated to Morocco and ran the test on December 18 at the UTAC high-speed proving ground, where conditions finally cooperated.

The Renault Filante Record 2025 (above) compared to the original prototype (below).

The design draws inspiration from Renault’s past record-setters, notably the 1925 40 CV and the 1956 L’Étoile Filante. Even so, several elements from the original prototype had to be reworked in the wind tunnel to meet the strict aerodynamic targets.

More: This Renault Prototype Launches Drones And Could Save Your Life

Changes involved removing the futuristic LED lighting, reducing the number of air intakes, and refining the fender shapes. Still, key features remained intact: the extended hood, transparent canopy, aircraft-style tail, F1-style driving position, and the ultraviolet-blue paint finish all carried through to the final version.

The engineering effort went beyond just slicing through air. Renault also aimed to reduce rolling resistance and weight. To do this, the team used carbon fiber, aluminum alloys, and 3D-printed Scalmalloy components.

Michelin provided a bespoke set of low-drag tires, while the car’s steering and braking systems operated entirely by wire.

French firm Ligier handled the platform, chassis, and carbon tub, integrating an 87 kWh battery pack. For comparison, that’s the same capacity as the battery in the Scenic E-Tech, Renault’s midsize electric crossover.

The Impressive Record

On record day, three drivers rotated in and out of the single seat, covering 239 laps of the 2.6-mile (4.2 km) Moroccan circuit over 10 hours. There were no charging stops, just brief halts for technical checks and driver changes. That consistency helped maintain the 102 km/h (63 mph) average.

More: One Of Renault’s Hottest Badges May Be Coming Back Sooner Than You Think

The car posted an energy consumption figure of 7.8 kWh/100 km. That’s nearly half the official WLTP figure for the Scenic E-Tech, which uses the same battery and consumes 14.1 kWh/100 km under standard testing. And unlike those lab figures, this test was run at real-world highway speeds.

Renault developed the Filante Record 2025 not only to celebrate its legacy of record-breaking prototypes, but also to explore ways of improving efficiency in production EVs, particularly for long-distance driving.

The hope is that insights from the project will carry over to future Renault models, helping drivers spend more time on the road as advances in battery and motor technology continue to evolve.

Renault

It’s always a shame when something rare goes up in smoke. That’s evidently what just happened in Uganda. According to circulating reports, a Tesla Cybertruck rolled while tearing around a local dirt race track, leaving it in a mangled state with little hope for recovery.

If the accounts are accurate, this electric pickup isn’t just rare in the African nation. It was the country’s only Cybertruck, privately imported and likely the pride of its owner until now.

More: Cybertruck Nails Crash Tests Until The Lights Go Out

Footage of the incident popped up on social media late last week, and while details are sparse, we can see the crash and the aftermath.

The video shows the truck approaching a left-hand turn, possibly cutting the corner a little too hard. Whether it was a berm on the inner side of the bend or just the weight of a huge vehicle trying to navigate a tight turn at high speed, the result is the same.

The Cybertruck rolls hard to the right, onto its side, then onto its roof, and finally it comes to rest on the driver’s side. So far, no confirmed details about the owner have been released.

Reddit

Previous reports suggest the truck was privately imported by a wealthy individual, but no local authorities, event organizers, or the owner themselves have stepped forward publicly.

Based on photos and videos of the aftermath, it’s clear that the truck will need significant repairs if it’s ever going to get back on the road. Just about every piece of glass is broken. The roof is crumpled to a degree and plenty of the plastic bits are damaged beyond repair.

Since Uganda doesn’t have any Tesla dealers, it’ll be interesting to see if there’s any route to salvaging the truck. It might end up being cheaper to just import another one.

The site of the crash, Garuga Race Track, located near Lake Victoria, is often used for casual motorsport events and recreational driving rather than professional racing. While most photos available of the track online show motorcycles, it’s clear that some vehicles, mostly rally-focused ones, have used the course.

Surface conditions, speed, and driver inputs remain unknown, and there has been no official statement explaining exactly what caused the rollover. Hopefully, everyone walked away without significant injury.

Credit: ClaudeVille1

Rewind a few years and Ford, like most of its rivals, charged full speed into the electric future. The goal was clear: catch up to Tesla and help turn the U.S. into a thriving hub for EV innovation. Fast forward to today, and the future looks very different.

Read: Jim Farley Warns Europe It’s Selling Its Future To Chinese Carmakers

Much of Ford’s early EV effort hinged on the F-150 Lightning. Promoted by some as a cornerstone of the brand’s future, and initially the most affordable electric pickup in the States, the Lightning carried a lot of weight on its metaphorical bed.

But just three years after it launched, Ford has pulled the plug. CEO Jim Farley recently confirmed that part of the reason comes down to simple economics: buyers aren’t lining up for EVs priced north of $50,000.

Are Expensive EVs the Problem?

During an interview with CNBC, Farley addressed Ford’s announcement that it will take a $19.5 billion charge in 2026, tied to its decision to pivot away from EVs and refocus on internal combustion models. According to him, the company’s electric lineup simply wasn’t aligned with what buyers actually want.

“More importantly, the very high-end EVs, the $50,000, $60,000, $70,000, and $80,000 vehicles, they just weren’t selling,” Farley said.

Back in 2021, when the F-150 Lightning was first revealed, the base price came in at a relatively digestible $39,974. But that didn’t last for long, as the Blue Oval made a series of price hikes. By 2025, the base model had swollen to $54,780, an increase of nearly 37 percent, pushing it out of reach for many of the truck buyers it was originally meant to appeal to.

Hybrids In Focus

While Ford is now shifting its focus away from EVs, that doesn’t mean it’s done with electric motors and battery packs. During the same interview, Farley said that the company is committed to “following customers to where the market is, not where people thought it was going to be, but to where it is today.”

As such, Ford will start to prioritize hybrid and extended-range EV models. There will be a “whole lineup” of new hybrid models, including a hybrid Bronco. Farley also pointed out that Ford has quietly secured the number three spot in U.S. hybrid sales, and dominates the hybrid truck space with an estimated 80 percent market share.

Farley added that the company expects its electric Model E division to reach profitability in 2029, three years later than initially expected. By 2030, he still expects half of Ford’s global sales to be electrified vehicles. But most of those, he clarified, will be hybrids and extended-range electrics, not pure battery EVs.

U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired U.S. Navy captain, speaks to veterans at a town hall in Raleigh, North Carolina, on Aug. 31, 2025. (Photo by Brandon Kingdollar/NC Newsline)

WASHINGTON — The Defense Department says it has upgraded its investigation into Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly over a video where he and other members of Congress told members of the military they didn’t need to follow illegal orders. 

“The Office of the Secretary of War, in conjunction with the Department of War’s Office of the General Counsel, is escalating the preliminary review of Captain Mark Kelly, USN (Ret.), to an official Command Investigation,” a spokesperson for the department wrote in an email Monday night. 

“Retired Captain Kelly is currently under investigation for serious allegations of misconduct,” the spokesperson continued. “Further official comments will be limited to preserve the integrity of the proceedings.”

Paul J. Fishman, an attorney at the Arnold & Porter law firm who is representing Kelly, wrote in a Monday letter to the secretary of the Navy that “there is no legitimate basis for any type of proceeding against Senator Kelly, and any such effort would be unconstitutional and an extraordinary abuse of power.”

“If the Executive Branch were to move forward in any forum—criminal, disciplinary, or administrative—we will take all appropriate legal action on Senator Kelly’s behalf to halt the Administration’s unprecedented and dangerous overreach,” Fishman wrote. 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had set Dec. 10 as the deadline for the secretary of the Navy to recommend what to do about Kelly’s appearance in the video, but that came and went without any public announcements.

Hegseth also remained silent on the matter after rebuking Kelly weeks ago for posting the video where he and five other Democrats warned against illegal orders.

Kelly said on Dec. 9, one day before the deadline, he hadn’t received any information from the Navy or other administration officials. 

“Forget about an update. I haven’t heard anything from the guy,” Kelly told reporters. “That’s a good question for you guys to ask the Navy.”

The secretary of the Navy’s office did not respond to multiple requests for comment from States Newsroom. 

The Department of Defense posted in late November that officials were looking into “serious allegations of misconduct” against Kelly for appearing in the video. 

It didn’t detail how Kelly might have violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice but stated that “a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.” 

Hegseth referred the issue to Navy Secretary John Phelan for any “review, consideration, and disposition” he deemed appropriate. Hegseth then asked for a briefing on the outcome of the review “by no later than December 10.”

Kelly said during a press conference in early December the military’s investigation and a separate one by the FBI were designed to intimidate the six lawmakers in the video from speaking out against President Donald Trump. 

The lawmakers in the video, who have backgrounds in the military or intelligence agencies, told members of those communities they “can” and “must refuse illegal orders.”

“No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it’s a difficult time to be a public servant,” they said. “But whether you’re serving in the CIA, in the Army, or Navy, or the Air Force, your vigilance is critical.”

The other Democrats in the video — Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, Pennsylvania Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan, and New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander — are not subject to the military justice system. 

Trump railed against the video a couple days after it posted, saying the statements represented “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

Volkswagen has released a slew of details about the ID. Polo, ahead of its launch next year. The company has a lot riding on its success, as it’s the first of four compact electric models that VW believes will reshape its small car lineup.

Since we’ve already seen camouflaged prototypes at the Munich Motor Show, we’ll simply note the car has a “Pure Positive” design that promises to offer space worthy of the “next higher class of vehicle.”

More: VW Revives Polo Name For EV Era And Teases First Ever Electric GTI

In this case, the car measures 159.6 inches (4,053 mm) long, 71.5 inches (1,816 mm) wide, and 60.2 inches (1,530 mm) tall with a wheelbase spanning 102.4 inches (2,600 mm). Volkswagen noted this is roughly the same size as the MQB-based Polo, but the interior is 0.7 inches (19 mm) longer with a lot of that helping to improve rear seat legroom. There’s also more headroom as well as extra interior width.

Practicality gets a noticeable lift in the boot as well. The ID. Polo offers more cargo room than the ICE-powered model. It holds 15.4 cubic feet (435 liters) of luggage, but that can be expanded to 43.9 cubic feet (1,243 liters) by folding the rear seats down.

Three Powertrains at Launch

When the ID. Polo debuts next spring, it will be offered with three front-mounted motors. They’ll have outputs of 114 hp (85 kW / 116 PS), 133 hp (99 kW / 135 PS), and 208 hp (155 kW / 211 PS). The ID. Polo GTI will arrive one year later with 223 hp (166 kW / 226 PS).

The 114 hp (85 kW / 116 PS) and 133 hp (99 kW / 135 PS) variants will come equipped with a small 37 kWh lithium iron phosphate battery. These versions will also have an underwhelming DC fast charging capacity of 90 kW.

The two range-topping variants up the ante with a larger 52 kWh nickel manganese cobalt battery, which promises to deliver up to 280 miles (450 km) of range.

Volkswagen went on to say the battery uses cell-to-pack technology, which “eliminates the intermediate step via module housings and combines the cells directly into a battery pack – reducing price, installation space, and weight while increasing energy density by about 10 percent.”

It’s also worth mentioning buyers will find an upgraded DC fast charging capability of 130 kW.

New Platform and Tech

The ID. Polo rides on the new MEB+ platform, which is described as a “further developed” version of the existing architecture. It benefits from reduced complexity, higher efficiency, and less weight.

Volkswagen also said we can expect next-generation driver assistance systems including a “significantly enhanced” version of Travel Assist. It provides “assisted lateral and longitudinal guidance” as well as automated lane changes on highways. The system also has traffic light and stop sign recognition.

According to Volkswagen brand CEO Thomas Schäfer, “The ID. Polo marks the beginning of a new generation of Volkswagen: with fresh design, intuitive operation, top quality and first-class driving characteristics – and finally with a proper name again.” He added the company will launch six new electric vehicles next year and the ID. Polo’s €25,000 ($29,388) starting price will make “electric mobility accessible to many people in Europe.”

After plenty of waiting, the new Toyota GR GT is here, and so is the return of the Lexus LFA. These two new Japanese supercars might not have shown up in all the ways we expected but one thing is clear: while they’re linked, they’ll have very different personalities from behind the wheel.

Now, a new in-depth video shows us just how Toyota and Lexus made each of their respective cars stand out from the other.

More: Toyota GR GT Looks Like A Batmobile And Hits Like A Supercar

Many might consider the GR GT to be a more faithful successor to the LFA. That’s due heavily to its hybrid V8 engine that makes some 641 horsepower (477 kW). That said, it’s clear that Toyota wasn’t trying to steal the LFA’s thunder when you take a quick look at the finer details.

That’s exactly what Top Gear just offered, with a detailed breakdown of both cars from nose to tail. The GR GT, in particular, leans hard into its driver-first philosophy. Its design is dominated by functional aero, from oversized intercooler openings to a rally-style hood vent that channels air up and over the windshield.

Much like the AMG GT or if we go further back in time, the Dodge Viper SRT and its derivatives, the GR GT has a lengthy hood, a small but highly functional cabin, and a squat, wide stance.

Presenter Tom Ford highlights how the driving position communicates intention. The seat height, digital gauge cluster, and steering wheel are all set up for optimal visibility. That’s key because the car has shift lights and vital information there.

The car only has four drive modes, custom, normal, sport, and track. The center control stack features physical buttons and switches. The cupholders are behind the occupants and in the middle because they’re not the focus here.

Of course, the track-only FIA-compliant GT3 race car version is even more extreme. It gets every bit of roll cage one might expect and then some. The cabin features almost zero creature comforts but what it lacks there it makes up for in naked carbon and switchgear. The spoiler at the rear is as wide as the car itself.

Then, there’s the LFA, and when we say it’s different, it’s not just because the V10 is gone in favor of all-electric propulsion. Ford points out that Lexus took full advantage of the EV powerplant, going as far as to design the exterior with it in mind. As such, the LFA gets almost none of the same venting and aero from the GR GT. It simply doesn’t need it.

The lines are more elegant. Take, for example, the hood where long strakes run from the top of the lights to the windshield. Instead of hard edges everywhere, the design is smoother with more compound curves.

That approach carries into the interior, which leans heavily on refinement. The split-cabin layout gives the driver their own space, while the controls are smaller and more delicate, matching the car’s calmer energy.

In short, these two sport models might have a lot of shared DNA, but there’s no doubt that they’ll drive quite differently. In fact, there’s little question that they’ll feel different for occupants even when they’re powered down.