Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Shares Brand Name With Small-Business Owner

      by

      The founder of a New York clothing brand learned that he had something in common with the Duchess of Sussex this week: a business called As Ever.Mark Kolski was sitting at his home in the Stuyvesant Heights neighborhood of Brooklyn, drinking a cup of coffee by his sewing machine, when the messages started to pour in.On Tuesday, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, had released the name for her new cooking and lifestyle brand, As Ever. But Mr. Kolski’s morning was thrown into tumult because the vintage-inspired workwear brand he started a decade ago is also named, as it happens, As Ever.“I started getting messages from friends and family and people that know my brand,” Mr. Kolski, 58, said. “And they were saying, ‘Have you seen this?’ There was just a lot of confusion, and I didn’t really know what to do.”Mr. Kolski’s life has been upended in the days since, his phone ringing incessantly, as he’s found himself thrown into a flurry of speculative tabloid coverage about Meghan’s use of his label’s name. In an interview this week, he said he had been reading up on trademark law and had consulted with a lawyer. His brand also has been discovered by new fans, his Instagram account netting thousands of followers.Mark Kolski started his vintage-inspired workwear brand a decade ago.Astrid DahlFor Meghan, the incident is the latest snarl in her efforts to create a lifestyle brand. Last year she announced that she was starting one called American Riviera Orchard, but her trademark application faced setbacks, including questions over the use of a geographic place name and the potential trademark’s similarity to Harry & David’s Royal Riviera products.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Pete Hegseth Fires Adm. Lisa Franchetti, Navy’s Top Officer

      by

      Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Friday that he was firing Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the first female officer to rise to the Navy’s top job of Chief of Naval Operations, and would be looking for her replacement.The announcement came in a statement emailed to reporters Friday night, shortly after President Trump said he was firing Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.Mr. Hegseth said in his statement that he would also replace Gen. James C. Slife, the Air Force’s vice chief of staff, as well as the top uniformed lawyers for the Army, Navy and Air Force.Both Admiral Franchetti and General Slife “have had distinguished careers,” Mr. Hegseth said, adding “We thank them for their service and dedication to our country.”“Under President Trump, we are putting in place new leadership that will focus our military on its core mission of deterring, fighting and winning wars,” he added.According to her official biography, Admiral Franchetti received her commission in 1985 through the Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps program at Northwestern University, just seven years after the Navy ended its prohibition on women serving on ships at sea.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Colorado Snowboarder Becomes Fourth Avalanche Victim in a Week

      by

      The victim was traveling on a terrain feature known as The Nose near Silverton, Colo., when the avalanche occurred on Thursday, officials said.A backcountry snowboarder was killed in an avalanche on Thursday in a remote part of southwestern Colorado, the fourth person to die in a mountain slide this week in the western United States following several winter storms.The Colorado Avalanche Information Center said that the victim was traversing a terrain feature known as The Nose, near Silverton, Colo., when the person got caught in the avalanche.A skier who was with the snowboarder escaped the avalanche, the authorities said.Emergency responders used a helicopter to try to rescue the snowboarder, but the person did not survive, the center said. Rescuers were alerted about the avalanche by the staff from a nearby backcountry hut.The avalanche added to what has been a deadly week in the West.On Monday, two skiers were caught in an avalanche in the Cascade Mountains in Oregon, one that occurred at a height of 6,700 feet on a south-facing slope. Their bodies were recovered on Tuesday.Also on Monday, an avalanche claimed the life of a backcountry skier in California near Lake Tahoe.The Sierra Avalanche Center said that the skier was traveling alone when he triggered the avalanche, which carried him downslope over rocks and through trees. The victim was buried beneath more than four feet of snow against a tree, the center said. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Prison Officials Detail Treatment of Trans Inmates Under Trump Gender Order

      by

      The federal Bureau of Prisons is banning the use of preferred pronouns, stopping special pat-down procedures and rejecting underwear requests from transgender prisoners.The Bureau of Prisons on Friday laid out strict new guidelines for the treatment of transgender inmates to comply with President Trump’s executive order on gender recognition, including ending special procedures for pat-down searches and barring prisoners from purchasing the underwear of their choice.The guidelines, dated Feb. 21 and obtained by The New York Times, show the extraordinary steps that the federal government will have to take to comply with the president’s edict that there are only two sexes, established at conception, and that men who “self-identify as women” pose a threat to the safety of women.The prison memo was issued on the same day that a new group of transgender women rushed to court to try to stop their transfer from all-female prisons to all-male facilities, saying that the move would place them at an elevated risk of physical and sexual violence. Already, a preliminary injunction issued Feb. 18 had blocked the transfer of three transgender women to male prisons.But the new lawsuit said the bureau informed the trans women not participating in earlier suits that they were to be transferred to male prisons “imminently.”The Bureau of Prison’s two-page memo details the treatment expected of transgender inmates at length. The guidelines require prison staff to refer to inmates by “their legal name or pronouns corresponding to their biological sex.”It said that transgender women would no longer be shielded from pat-down searches by male guards and that they would no longer be permitted to buy bras and other women’s clothing at the commissary. Public funds would no longer be used to purchase items that bind breasts, remove hair or allow trans men to use urinals.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Yankees Part With Tradition: Beards Are Now Allowed

      by

      The team is ending its longstanding policy on facial hair and will allow “well-groomed beards moving forward,” Hal Steinbrenner said.Mariano Rivera and Bernie Williams had to shave. So did Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez.But now Aaron Judge, Giancarlo Stanton and the rest of the current Yankee roster can grow “well-groomed beards” if they so choose, after the club announced a change to its longstanding grooming policy.“After great consideration, we will be amending our expectations to allow our players and uniformed personnel to have well-groomed beards moving forward,” the team’s managing general partner, Hal Steinbrenner, said in a statement on Friday. “It is the appropriate time to move beyond the familiar comfort of our former policy.”Since the 1970s, the Yankees have barred their players from having beards or long hair. The policy was started by then-owner George Steinbrenner, Hal Steinbrenner’s father, who believed that neater appearance would increase professionalism and discipline among his players.While some other teams in major North American sports have policies regarding dress or appearance, the Yankees’ beard policy was among the strictest, and certainly the most famous.Hal Steinbrenner said he had consulted with “a large number of former and current Yankees, spanning several eras” before changing the policy.The policy has occasionally rankled members of the team. In one of the most remembered incidents, Don Mattingly, the team’s best player and captain in 1991, was pulled from the lineup because he declined to cut his hair.“I’m overwhelmed by the pettiness of it,” Mattingly told reporters then. He relented soon afterward.Don Mattingly, who was once pulled from the team’s lineup for his refusal to cut his hair, at Yankee Stadium in 1991.Focus on Sport/GettyIn recent years, speculation increased that the policy was hurting the Yankees’ chances of attracting quality players.“You’d be surprised how much more attractive the Yankees would be if they got rid of that facial hair rule,” Cameron Maybin, a former Yankee, said in 2023. More

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Coinbase Says S.E.C. Will Drop Crypto Lawsuit

      by

      The end of a court fight with the largest U.S. crypto company would be a big win for an industry that financially backed President Trump.The cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase said on Friday that the Securities and Exchange Commission had agreed to drop its lawsuit against the company, lifting a legal cloud over the global crypto industry and signaling a broader retreat by federal regulators.Coinbase, in a post on its website and in a regulatory filing, said it had reached an agreement in principle with the S.E.C. to have the lawsuit withdrawn without any financial penalty. If the S.E.C. confirms the proposed settlement, it would be a remarkable reversal by the agency after years of legal battles against crypto firms.The S.E.C. sued Coinbase, the largest U.S. crypto company, in 2023 on the grounds that the digital currencies sold on its platform constituted unregistered securities that put consumers at risk of financial harm.Any settlement that results in a dismissal of the lawsuit would require S.E.C. approval. A spokesperson for the S.E.C. declined to comment on Coinbase’s announcement.The lawsuit was the most significant of several that the S.E.C. had filed against major crypto companies, arguing that they were operating outside the law. A victory for the government could have threatened the continued operation of Coinbase, a publicly traded company worth about $65 billion, and decimated the broader crypto market.The dismissal would be biggest victory for the crypto industry since President Trump took office last month, promising to end the Biden administration’s regulatory crackdown on crypto under the previous S.E.C. chair, Gary Gensler. And it illustrates the growing influence in Washington of billionaire technology executives, who wrote enormous checks to support Mr. Trump’s campaign, hoping to secure softer regulation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      One Month into the Trump Presidency

      by

      The president has moved swiftly to remake Washington. But for business leaders, that volatility has often been hard to navigate. In his first month back in office, President Trump has rapidly begun to remake Washington. But with that has come big questions about what’s next.Al Drago for The New York TimesThe good, bad and puzzlingCorporate leaders and investors expected a bit of volatility to accompany President Trump’s second term. In many ways, that’s exactly what has happened one month in, with the radical cutting of the federal government, threats of trade wars and more.But amid a flurry of unexpected announcements — talks over a possible Ukraine peace plan that exclude Kyiv, the retention of tough Biden-era deal guidelines and a potential Elon Musk-enabled stimulus plan, for starters — and a lack of clarity over where Trump stands on a host of issues, many executives are asking themselves: How do we navigate this?Trump has made good on some of his campaign promises. He has vowed to impose tariffs to bolster American manufacturing. He has waged war on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, and more and more companies have fallen into line.And most notably, he has unleashed subordinates and Musk to raze huge portions of the Washington bureaucracy, with some courts refusing to stand in the way. The latest on that: The I.R.S. fired 6,700 workers on the eve of tax-filing season; Trump claimed the power to dismiss administrative law judges at will; and he reportedly plans to take control of the U.S. Postal Service, according to The Washington Post.But there’s a lot that business leaders and others are trying to figure out:Where does Trump actually stand on tariffs? He has spoken of a potential wide-ranging trade deal with China, even as he threatens Europe with huge levies.Trump’s position on Ukraine is increasingly unclear, as he publicly embraces Russia and castigates Kyiv and Europe. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is said to have pressured President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to hand over billions’ worth of Ukrainian mineral resources, according to The Wall Street Journal, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio privately told European leaders that Washington wasn’t looking to disrupt the diplomatic status quo.The administration’s antitrust cops have kept in place Biden era merger rules, dampening hopes for a deal resurgence. And despite efforts by tech companies like Meta to forge closer ties to Trump, the Federal Trade Commission’s new chief is weighing a scrutiny of Big Tech over censorship concerns.Trump’s efforts to gain more control over independent agencies may reach further into the Fed, with Musk vaguely promising an audit of the central bank.The president’s floating of potentially inflationary taxpayer payouts, funded by Musk’s government cost-cutting (whose true extent appears to change frequently), is drawing lukewarm support from congressional Republicans.Trump’s legislative agenda is in limbo, with the president splitting Republican lawmakers over matters like the budget.For now, corporate America appears to be along for the ride. A new survey by the Conference Board found that C.E.O. confidence recently reached a three-year peak, reflecting “confident optimism.”Whether that will persist — Americans appear increasingly worried about rising inflation and the Musk cost-cutting — remains to be seen. Stay tuned.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Senate G.O.P. Passes Budget Resolution, and Punts on Tough Questions

      by

      The budget plan that Republicans pushed through the Senate early Friday was a necessary first step toward enacting President Trump’s ambitious domestic goals, but it punted the most difficult and divisive questions about how Congress will do so.On a largely party-line vote, 52-48, Senate Republicans won adoption of a blueprint that calls for a $150 billion increase in military spending and $175 billion more for border security over the next decade.How will they pay for it? That’s a question for another day. What about the huge tax cuts they and Mr. Trump have promised? We’ll figure that out later, senators say.Over in the House, Republicans have been agonizing to come up with at least $2 trillion in spending cuts to pay for Mr. Trump’s fiscal agenda and placate their most conservative members. Their plan, which G.O.P. leaders hope to put to a vote as early as next week, loads vast tax cuts and policy changes into one huge package and calls for slashing government programs deeply to finance it all. But it faces a perilous road through the closely divided House, where Republicans hold a razor-thin majority.Republicans in the Senate have essentially delayed any decision on those thorny details, focusing instead on delivering an early win to Mr. Trump in the form of money for his hard-line anti-immigration agenda. They said they would address questions of spending and tax cuts later in a separate bill.“We’ve decided to front-end load security,” said Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, the chairman of the Budget Committee. “We want to make the tax cuts permanent. We’re going to work with our House colleagues to do that. They expire at the end of the year, but we have time to do that. It is the view of the Republican Senate that when it comes to border security, we need not fail. We should have the money now to keep that momentum going.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More