Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 163 Shares78 Views

    in US Politics

    Outcry after Boston teen arrested by Ice agents on way to volleyball practice

    Trump administration officials sparked a huge protest on Sunday in a Boston suburb after immigration agents detained a high school student on his way to volleyball practice while they were seeking his father.The high schooler in question, 18-year-old Marcelo Gomes Da Silva, entered the United States on a student visa, according to a lawsuit filed on his behalf after his arrest. While his student visa status has lapsed, he is eligible for and intends to apply for asylum.Nonetheless, the head of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) on Monday defended his agency’s actions, saying the teen in question was “in this country illegally and we’re not going to walk away from anybody”.Gomes was arrested on Saturday in Milford, Massachusetts, where he lives.Ice’s acting director, Todd Lyons, and Patricia Hyde – who directs the agency’s enforcement and removal operations in Boston – acknowledged Gomes was not the target of the immigration investigation that led to his arrest and that authorities instead were seeking his father, who remains at large.But the Milford high school student had been driving his father’s vehicle when he was arrested following a traffic stop, Lyons said. Lyons said that when authorities encounter someone in the country illegally, “we will take action on that”.“We’re doing the job that Ice should have been doing all along,” he said. “We enforce all immigration laws.”The state’s Democratic governor, Maura Healey, said she was “disturbed and outraged” by Gomes’s arrest. And hundreds rallied in Milford on Sunday to protest against Gomes’s detention.A federal judge issued an emergency order on Sunday preventing authorities from transferring Gomes out of Massachusetts for at least 72 hours in response to his lawsuit arguing that he was unlawfully detained.Reuters contributed to this report More

  • 250 Shares92 Views

    in US Politics

    The Guardian view on UK military strategy: prepare for a US retreat – or be left gravely exposed | Editorial

    With the prime minister’s Churchillian claims that “the front line is here”, the public might expect a military posture that meets the drama of the moment. Yet the promised rise in defence spending – from 2.3% to 2.5% of gross domestic product by 2027 – suggests something less than full-scale mobilisation. The strategic defence review is systematic and detailed, but it remains an exercise in tightly bounded ambition. It speaks of daily cyber-attacks and undersea sabotage, but proposes no systemic institutional overhaul or acute surge in resilience. Given the developing dangers, it is surprising not to spell out a robust home-front framework.Instead, it is a cautious budget hike in the costume of crisis – signalling emergency while deferring real commitment for military financing. The review suggests that the more ambitious spending target of 3% of GDP, still shy of Nato’s 3.5% goal, is delayed to the next parliament. The plan is not to revive Keynesianism in fatigues. It is a post-austerity military modernisation that is technocratic and geopolitically anxious. It borrows the urgency of the past without inheriting its economic boldness.The review marks a real shift: it warns of “multiple, direct threats” for the first time since the cold war and vows to reverse the “hollowing out” of Britain’s armed forces. But in an age of climate emergencies and democratic drift, UK leadership should rest on multilateralism, not pure militarism. Declaring Russian “nuclear coercion” the central challenge, and that the “future of strategic arms control … does not look promising”, while sinking £15bn into warheads, risks fuelling escalation instead of pursuing arms control.Given the war in Ukraine, there is an ominous warning about changing US “security priorities”. This calls into question the wisdom of being overly reliant on America, which is now internally unstable and dismantling global public goods – such as the atmospheric data that drones rely on for navigation. Left unsaid but clearly underlying the report is the idea that the old defence model is no longer sufficient – for example, when maritime adversaries can weaponise infrastructure by sabotaging undersea cables, or where critical data systems are in commercial hands. It cannot be right that Ukraine’s sovereignty depends on the goodwill of the world’s richest man. But the private satellite network Starlink keeps Ukrainian hospitals, bases and drones online, leaving Kyiv hostage to the whims of its volatile owner, Elon Musk.The menace of hybrid warfare – including disinformation, cyber-attacks, economic pressure, deployment of irregular armed groups and use of regular forces – intensified in the last decade. This should see Britain forge deeper institutional ties with European partners, not just military but in infrastructure and information technologies. This would allow for a sovereign digital strategy for European nations to free them from dependency on mercurial actors.Though the review gestures toward greater societal involvement, it stops short of articulating a whole-of-society doctrine like Norway’s. This, when some analysts say the third world war has already begun with a slow, global breakdown of the post-1945 institutional order. The defence review should be about more than missiles and missions. It must also be about whether the country can keep the lights on, the gas flowing, the internet up and the truth intact. This review sees the threats, but not yet the system needed to confront them. In that gap lies the peril. More

  • 213 Shares88 Views

    in US Politics

    How ‘a man with a blow torch’ turned a rally in Colorado into a scene of horror

    The first 911 calls reporting the Colorado flamethrower attack were as horrific as they were unbelievable.“There is a male with a blow torch setting people on fire,” a dispatcher advised the city’s police department, passing on the account of an eyewitness. Another official reported: “Multiple burns, potential terror attack.”What had been a peaceful rally at the Boulder’s Pearl Street Mall on Sunday in solidarity with hostages still held by Hamas in Gaza quickly turned into a scene of horror, with medical crews arriving to find victims lying or sitting on the ground with their legs and bodies burned – and police holding a suspect face down with a gun at his back.Members of the public raced from local restaurants with buckets and jugs of water to pour over those who were injured.The attack by a man hurling molotov cocktails and shouting “Free Palestine” struck at the heart of one of Colorado’s largest Jewish communities, just 10 days after two Israeli embassy staffers were shot dead in Washington DC by a man yelling the same statement. It also came weeks after an arson attack on the home of Josh Shapiro, the Jewish governor of Pennsylvania, by a pro-Palestinian activist.“Make no mistake: if and when Jews are targeted to protest Israel’s actions, it should clearly and unequivocally be understood and condemned as antisemitism,” Amy Spitalnick, chief executive of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, said in a statement.“These attacks come alongside a broader rise in antisemitism, from hate crimes targeting Jews walking down the street, to efforts to marginalize, isolate, and discriminate against Jews, to antisemitic and white supremacist mass violence targeting synagogues and other spaces.”Boulder county, where Sunday’s attack took place, had long been considered a safe, “dream community” for Jewish families drawn there over the last decade. Numbers have doubled to represent more than 10% of the county’s 330,000 population.The eight victims – four men and four women, including an 88-year-old Holocaust survivor, and a mother and daughter – represented a cross-section of a vibrant diaspora in a city with numerous Jewish community centers, schools and businesses.“What happened here in our local community in Boulder is shameful, and I think people really need to have a sense of accountability,” Fred Greene, rabbi of Boulder’s Har HaShem congregation, told CNN on Monday.“If we want peace, if we want dignity for people, there have to be other ways than this kind of violence.”Another expert, University of Boulder Hillel executive director Elyana Funk, told the network that the assault was especially shocking because it targeted a “quiet and respectful” assembly of residents who were taking part in a solidarity walk, which has become popular in numerous Jewish communities around the world since the Hamas terror attack on Israel and taking of hostages on 7 October 2023.“This wasn’t a pro-Israel rally or some sort of political statement on the war,” she said. “These are peaceful people who’ve been walking for nearly 20 months weekly to bring awareness for the hostages.”The attack came on the same day as the start of Shavuot, a two-day Jewish festival to celebrate the 50th day after the Passover holiday. Several events were postponed or canceled after the attack, but Funk said resilience would shine through.“The antidote for antisemitism can be Jewish joy, and Jewish community and Jewish connection,” she said.Meanwhile, the Boulder police chief, Stephen Redfearn, recalled the community reaction to the 2021 mass shooting at a supermarket in the city that left 10 people dead.“Boulder is not immune to tragedy sadly and I know a lot of people are scared right now and questioning how this happened and why,” he said at a press conference on Sunday night.“Boulder has recovered from acts of violence before and we will again recover. I urge this community to come together. Now is not the time to be divisive.”The attack took place on Pearl Street Mall, a popular pedestrian area of downtown Boulder laced with stores and restaurants, overlooked by the University of Colorado, and a regular venue for the event supporting Run for Their Lives, an organization calling for the immediate release of the Gaza hostages.Eyewitnesses said the suspect, 45-year-old Mohamed Sabry Soliman, appeared out of nowhere and seemingly singled out individuals taking part in the rally.“It was easily the most horrific thing I’ve ever seen in my life,” Brian Horowitz, 37, told CNN.The Denver resident said he was in a cafe with his family when he heard screams and raced to confront the suspect, who was shouting profanities at his victims.“‘Fuck you Zionists,” Horowitz said the man yelled. “‘You’re killing my people so I kill you.’”Horowitz added: “There’s someone who is outraged enough to go and attack these elderly people who are doing absolutely nothing to provoke it other than walk in silence and meet in a courtyard peacefully. It’s unbelievable.” More

  • 238 Shares55 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump’s tax bill helps the rich, hurts the poor and adds trillions to the deficit | Katrina vanden Heuvel

    The blush is off the rose, or, rather, the orange. The erstwhile “First Buddy” and born-again fiscal hawk Elon Musk recently said he was “disappointed” by Donald Trump’s spendthrift budget currently under debate in the US Senate. Squeaking through the House of Representatives thanks to the capitulation of several Republican deficit hardliners, this “big, beautiful bill” certainly increases the federal debt bigly – by nearly $4tn over the next decade.Equally disappointed are those who have been busy burnishing Trump’s populist veneer. Steve Bannon had repeatedly promised higher taxes for millionaires, but he has confessed he’s “very upset”. That’s because the bill would cut taxes by over $600bn for the top 1% of wage-earners, also known as millionaires. It amounts to the largest upward transfer of wealth in American history.Yet this double betrayal will do nothing to impede the sundry Maga apparatchiks’ breathless support for their dear leader. Musk has already tweeted his gratitude to the president for the opportunity to lead Doge (that is, slash funding for cancer research). So this bill has once again proven Republicans’ willingness to relinquish their convictions as long as they can keep their grasp on power. And for Trump, it has reaffirmed that his pledged golden age is really just a windfall for the uber-wealthy like him. Now there can be no mistaking that Republicans’ governing philosophy is neither conservatism nor populism but unabashed hypocrisy.Expecting the self-proclaimed King of Debt to balance the budget – or hoping workers would be protected by the billionaire whose personal motto is “You’re fired” – was always imaginative thinking at best. In his first term, Trump added $8tn to the national deficit. Even excluding Covid relief spending, that’s twice as much debt as Joe Biden racked up during his four years in the White House. Almost $2tn of that tab came from Trump’s vaunted tax cut, which delivered three times more wealth to the top 5% of wage earners than it did to the bottom 60%. Nor did its benefits trickle down, with incomes remaining flat for workers who earn less than $114,000.Trump’s disingenuousness on the deficit continues a hallowed Republican tradition. All four Republican presidents since 1980 have increased the federal debt. By combining reckless militarism with rampant corporatism, George W Bush managed to balloon it by 1,204%. When Bush’s treasury secretary Paul O’Neill expressed concern about that spending, Dick Cheney, the then-vice president, reportedly retorted: “Deficits don’t matter.”Except, of course, when a Democrat occupies the Oval Office. During his campaign for the US Senate in 2022, JD Vance derided Biden’s signature $1tn infrastructure package as a “huge mistake” that would waste money on “really crazy stuff”. Like improving almost 200,000 miles of roads and repairing over 11,000 bridges across the country.Apparently less crazy, but certainly more callous, are the vertiginous cuts to the social safety net proposed in Trump’s current budget bill. Its $1tn evisceration of Medicaid and Snap would leave 8 million Americans uninsured and potentially end food assistance for 11 million people, including 4 million children. When the Democratic Representative Ro Khanna introduced an amendment to maintain coverage for the 38 million kids who receive their healthcare through Medicaid, Republicans blocked it from even receiving a vote.But for all the budget’s austerity, it also provides $20bn in tax credits to establish a national school voucher program. And equally outrageous are its provisions that have nothing to do with the pecuniary, from easing regulations on gun silencers to hamstringing the power of courts to enforce injunctions.Perhaps most breathtaking of all, though, is how shamelessly the bill enriches the already mega-rich. In its first year, its tax breaks will grace Americans in the top 0.1% of the income bracket with an additional $400,000, while decreasing the earnings of people in the bottom 25% by $1,000. In other words, those who can least afford it are financing relief for those who least need it.When the 50% of working class Americans who broke for Trump in last year’s election realize they voted for a pay cut, they might begin to feel a bit disillusioned with the crypto trader-in-chief. They might even feel pulled to the authentically populist vision outlined by the progressives Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on their nationwide Fighting Oligarchy Tour.In the meantime, it is almost an inevitability that Republican senators will wring their hands before pressing the green button to vote “yea.” Josh Hawley has called the budget bill “morally wrong and politically suicidal”, criticism which Trump has previously mocked as “grandstanding”. The insult contains a typically Trumpian flash of psychological insight, because Hawley and his colleagues will no doubt do exactly what their counterparts in the House have already done – cave.Once Trump has scribbled his oversized signature onto the bill, his vision for the US will have become unmistakable. Try as they might, not even the spinmeisters at Fox News will be able to deny that he runs this country the way he ran his Atlantic City casinos, leading working Americans to financial ruin while he emerges all the richer for it.

    Katrina vanden Heuvel is editorial director and publisher of the Nation, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a contributor to the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times More

  • 175 Shares96 Views

    in US Politics

    White House insists Trump tariffs to stay despite court ruling – US politics live

    Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog. I’m Tom Ambrose and I will be bringing you the latest news lines over the next few hours.We start with news that president Trump’s top economic advisers have said they would not be deterred by a court ruling that declared many of the administration’s tariffs illegal.They cited other legal options the White House could use to pressure China and other countries into trade talks.They also indicated that Trump had no plans to extend a 90-day pause on some of the highest tariffs, making it more likely those duties will take effect in July.“Rest assured, tariffs are not going away,” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Fox News Sunday.Asked about the future of the suspended reciprocal tariffs first announced in April, Lutnick added: “I don’t see today that an extension is coming.”It comes as China accused the US of “seriously violating” the fragile US-China detente that has been in place for less than a month since the two countries agreed to pause the trade war that risked upending the global economy.China and the US agreed on 12 May to pause for 90 days the skyrocketing “reciprocal” tariffs that both countries had placed on the others goods in a frenzied trade war that started a few weeks earlier.Tariffs had reached 125% on each side, which officials feared amounted to virtual embargo on trade between the world’s two biggest economies.In other news:

    The US veterans agency has ordered scientists not to publish in journals without clearance. The edict, laid down in emails on Friday by Curt Cashour, the VA’s assistant secretary for public and intergovernmental affairs, and John Bartrum, a senior adviser to VA secretary Doug Collins, came hours after the article published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

    Russell Vought, the director of the office of management and budget (OMB), on Sunday cast doubt on the constitutional obligation of the White House to ask Congress to sign off on Donald Trump’s massive cuts to the federal workforce spearheaded by Elon Musk. Vought indicated the White House preferred to rely on “executive tools” for all but a “necessary” fraction of the cuts instead of submitting the whole package of jobs and agency slashing that took place via the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), to the congressional branch for its official approval.

    The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) removed a list of “sanctuary” states, cities and counties from its website following sharp criticism from a sheriffs’ association that said a list of “noncompliant” sheriffs could severely damage the relationship between the Trump administration and law enforcement.

    The White House budget director Russ Vought on Sunday dismissed as “totally ridiculous” fears expressed by voters that cuts to benefits in the huge spending bill passed by the House will lead to premature deaths in America. Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, now awaiting debate in the US Senate, will slash two major federal safety net programs, Medicaid, which provides healthcare to poor and disabled Americans, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), which helps people afford groceries, which will affect millions of people if it becomes law. More

  • 150 Shares80 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump news at a glance: veterans affairs department muzzled after critical article

    Senior officials at the US Department of Veterans Affairs have ordered VA physicians and scientists not to publish in medical journals or speak with the public without first seeking clearance from political appointees of Donald Trump.Veterans advocates say the decision fits into a pattern of censorship by the Trump administration, and came hours after the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a perspective co-authored by two pulmonologists who work for the VA in Texas.The article warned that cancelled contracts, layoffs and a planned staff reduction of 80,000 employees in the nation’s largest integrated healthcare system jeopardizes the health of a million veterans who served in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.Here are the key stories at a glance:Exclusive: US veterans agency orders scientists not to publish in journals without clearanceThe edict, laid down in emails on Friday by Curt Cashour, the VA’s assistant secretary for public and intergovernmental affairs, and John Bartrum, a senior adviser to VA secretary Doug Collins, came hours after the article published in the New England Journal of Medicine.“We have guidance for this,” wrote Cashour, a former Republican congressional aide and campaign consultant, attaching the journal article. “These people did not follow it.”Read the full storyVought says Trump may not need Congress’s approval to cut federal workforceRussell Vought, the director of the office of management and budget (OMB), on Sunday cast doubt on the constitutional obligation of the White House to ask Congress to sign off on Donald Trump’s massive cuts to the federal workforce spearheaded by Elon Musk.Vought indicated the White House preferred to rely on “executive tools” for all but a “necessary” fraction of the cuts instead of submitting the whole package of jobs and agency slashing that took place via the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), to the congressional branch for its official approval.Read the full storyUS homeland security removes list of ‘sanctuary’ cities after sheriffs’ criticismThe US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) removed a list of “sanctuary” states, cities and counties from its website following sharp criticism from a sheriffs’ association that said a list of “noncompliant” sheriffs could severely damage the relationship between the Trump administration and law enforcement.Read the full storyTeen trans athlete at center of rightwing attacks wins track events in CaliforniaA teenage transgender athlete in California, who has been at the center of widespread political attacks by rightwing pundits and the Trump administration, won in two track events over the weekend. The 16-year-old athlete, AB Hernandez, tied for first place alongside two other athletes in the high jump, and tied for first place in the triple jump.This comes as the Trump administration threatened to withhold federal funding from California for allowing trans athletes to compete in girls’ sports.Read the full storyUS budget chief calls fears that cuts to benefits will lead to deaths ‘totally ridiculous’The White House budget director Russ Vought on Sunday dismissed as “totally ridiculous” fears expressed by voters that cuts to benefits in the huge spending bill passed by the House will lead to premature deaths in America.Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, now awaiting debate in the US Senate, will slash two major federal safety net programs, Medicaid, which provides healthcare to poor and disabled Americans, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), which helps people afford groceries, which will affect millions of people if it becomes law.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

    The is FBI investigating a multiple-injury attack in downtown Boulder, Colorado.

    One person died and 11 other were injured after 80 shots fired at North Carolina house party.

    A British businessman was accused of plotting to smuggle US military technology to China.
    Catching up? Here’s what happened on Saturday 31 May. More

  • 163 Shares85 Views

    in US Politics

    Exclusive: US veterans agency orders scientists not to publish in journals without clearance

    Senior officials at the US Department of Veterans Affairs have ordered that VA physicians and scientists not publish in medical journals or speak with the public without first seeking clearance from political appointees of Donald Trump, the Guardian has learned.The edict, laid down in emails on Friday by Curt Cashour, the VA’s assistant secretary for public and intergovernmental affairs, and John Bartrum, a senior adviser to VA secretary Doug Collins, came hours after the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a perspective co-authored by two pulmonologists who work for the VA in Texas.“We have guidance for this,” wrote Cashour, a former Republican congressional aide and campaign consultant, attaching the journal article. “These people did not follow it.”The article warned that cancelled contracts, layoffs and a planned staff reduction of 80,000 employees in the nation’s largest integrated healthcare system jeopardizes the health of a million veterans seeking help for conditions linked to toxic exposure – ranging from Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange to veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan who developed cancer after being exposed to smoke from piles of flaming toxic waste.“As pulmonologists in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), we have been seeing increasing numbers of veterans with chronic bronchitis, pulmonary fibrosis, asthma, and other respiratory conditions,” doctors Pavan Ganapathiraju and Rebecca Traylor wrote.The authors, who practice at the VA in Austin, Texas, noted that in 2022 Congress dramatically expanded the number of medical conditions presumed to be linked to military service. “But legislation doesn’t care for patients, people do,” they wrote.The article sparked an immediate rebuke from Trump’s political appointees, according to internal emails obtained by the Guardian. “We have noticed a number of academic articles and press articles recently,” Bartrum wrote, attaching a copy of the journal article. “Please remind the field and academic community that they need to follow the VA policy.”Cashour, the assistant secretary, wrote that approval for publication in national media was delegated to his office. Local and regional directors were to inform Washington “as soon as possible” when situations exist “that have the potential for negative national exposure”.In an email statement, the VA press secretary Peter Kasperowicz said the agency’s policy on publications and public comments “simply requires VA employees to properly coordinate with public affairs staff prior to speaking with the media. Virtually every organization both inside and outside government has similar policies.”The policy “has been in place for several years across both Democrat and Republican administrations”, he said.Ganapathiraju told the Guardian that the article was in full compliance with the VA regulations, which state that employees are encouraged to publish in “peer-reviewed, professional or scholarly journals”. Coordination with public affairs officers is encouraged, but not required, when sharing personal or academic opinions, the rules say.Ganapathiraju said neither he nor his co-author had yet faced punishment. “We have received emails and messages from other VAs across the country (including doctors, department chiefs, chief of medicines, and chief of staff) supporting our article,” he wrote in an email. “No communication from our local VA or from National.”Still, VA workers and veterans advocates say Friday’s warnings fit a pattern of censorship by the Trump administration, which critics say is waging a “war on science”. Since taking office, Trump administration officials have cancelled billions of dollars in grants funding medical research at the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. Nearly 2,000 leading scientists, including dozens of Nobel Prize winners, signed an open letter released in April saying science was being “decimated” by cuts to research and a growing “climate of fear” that put independent research at risk.In his statement, the VA’s Kasperowicz said it is “absurd” to suggest that enforcing the agency’s media policy is part of a “war on science”.Trump issued an executive order on 23 May titled “Restoring Gold Standard Science”. It accused his predecessor, Joe Biden, of misusing scientific evidence when crafting policies on climate change, public health during the Covid-19 pandemic and other issues. Thousands of academics signed a new open letter that protested the move, arguing it opens the door to political interference.On 28 May, the secretary of health and human services, Robert F Kennedy Jr, said he was considering barring government scientists from publishing in top journals, including the Journal of the American Medical Association, the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, calling these publications “corrupt”.The Department of Veterans Affairs has long been one of the nation’s most important centers of medical research. Funded by Congress with nearly $1bn annually, VA scientists operate at 102 research sites and are engaged in 7,300 ongoing projects, while publishing more than 10,000 papers in scientific journals last year.VA scientists invented the nicotine patch and the pacemaker and developed the CT scan. The agency runs the National Center for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which has pioneered mental health treatments that benefit not only veterans but also rape victims and survivors of natural disasters and other violent crimes.Harold Kudler, a psychiatrist and researcher who served as the national mental health policy lead for the VA under the Obama and first Trump administrations, said the rebuke to the pulmonologists’ article was “powerful in its impact and frightening in the threat it represents”.It was “another attack on freedom of speech”, he said. “Veterans will suffer because of it. Plus, all research programs will take note.” More

  • 138 Shares101 Views

    in US Politics

    US homeland security removes list of ‘sanctuary’ cities after sheriffs’ criticism

    The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) removed a list of “sanctuary” states, cities and counties from its website following sharp criticism from a sheriffs’ association that said a list of “noncompliant” sheriffs could severely damage the relationship between the Trump administration and law enforcement.DHS on Thursday published a list of what it called sanctuary jurisdictions that it deemed were included in areas that have a policy of limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. The list prompted a response from the National Sheriffs’ Association, which represents more than 3,000 elected sheriffs across the country and generally supports federal immigration enforcement.Sheriff Kieran Donahue, president of the association, said in a statement on Saturday that DHS published “a list of alleged noncompliant sheriffs in a manner that lacks transparency and accountability”. Donahue said the list was created without input from sheriffs and “violated the core principles of trust, cooperation, and partnership with fellow law enforcement”.Donald Trump had called for his administration to tally apparent sanctuary jurisdictions, in a late April executive order, saying the lack of cooperation amounted to “a lawless insurrection”.The DHS website listing the jurisdictions was offline on Sunday, an issue that Fox News host Maria Bartiromo raised with the homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, on the talk show Sunday Morning Futures.“I saw that there was a list produced,” Bartiromo said. “Now, the list I don’t see anymore in the media. Do you have a list of the sanctuary cities that are actually hiding illegals right now?”Noem did not acknowledge the list being taken offline but said some localities had bristled.“Some of the cities have pushed back,” Noem said. “They think because they don’t have one law or another on the books that they don’t qualify, but they do qualify. They are giving sanctuary to criminals.”Leaders of some cities publicly questioned the sanctuary label this week, including jurisdictions in southern California, Colorado and Massachusetts.San Diego city attorney Heather Ferbert told local outlets that San Diego – named on the DHS list – had never adopted a sanctuary policy and that the move appeared to be politically motivated.“We suspect this is going to be used as additional threats and fear tactics to threaten federal funding that the city relies on,” she said.Immigrant advocates and some Democrats say sanctuary policies help build trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement so that residents will be more likely to report crimes.At a hearing before a US House of Representatives committee in March, mayors from Boston, Chicago, Denver and New York City, which vote majority Democrat, said sanctuary policies made their cities safer and that they would always honor criminal arrest warrants.Noem, who shares Trump’s hardline anti-immigration views, said the department would continue to use the sanctuary tally. DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The internet archive website Wayback Machine showed the list still online on Saturday. More