Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Who Is David Huerta, the Labor Leader Arrested in Los Angeles?

      by

      A well-known figure in the California labor movement for decades, he is now the president of the Service Employees International Union of California. The arrest of the prominent California union leader David Huerta on Friday as he protested an immigration raid in Los Angeles quickly drew condemnation from national labor activists and Democrats.Mr. Huerta — the president of the Service Employees International Union of California — was released on Monday but is still facing charges. He has become a symbol for those protesting the Trump administration’s immigration raids. The protests were further inflamed by the president’s decision on Saturday to send 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles to quell demonstrations, followed by his decision on Monday to more than double that deployment.Here’s what we know.Why was Mr. Huerta arrested?On Friday, Mr. Huerta was detained by federal agents while protesting an immigration raid at a work site in downtown Los Angeles. He was charged with one count of conspiracy to impede an officer. According to a criminal complaint, federal agents conducted search warrants at four businesses suspected of employing undocumented immigrants and falsifying employment records. Mr. Huerta arrived at the work site in the early afternoon, with protesters already gathered. Mr. Huerta and others were accused of “communicating with each other in a concerted effort to disrupt the law enforcement operations,” according to the criminal complaint.The complaint also accused Mr. Huerta of yelling at officers and sitting cross-legged in front of a vehicular gate, as well as urging demonstrators to “stop the vehicles,” and continue protesting.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

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      New York Moves to Allow Terminally Ill People to Die on Their Own Terms

      by

      A bill permitting so-called medical aid in dying passed the State Legislature and will now head to Gov. Kathy Hochul for her signature.The New York State Senate approved a bill on Monday that would allow people facing terminal diagnoses to end their lives on their own terms, which the bill’s proponents say would grant a measure of autonomy to New Yorkers in their final days.The bill, which passed the State Assembly earlier this year, will now head to the desk of Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, for her signature. It is unclear whether she plans to sign it; a spokesman for her office said she would review it.Eleven states and the District of Columbia have passed laws permitting so-called medical aid in dying. The practice is also available in several European countries and in Canada, which recently broadened its criteria to extend the option to people with incurable chronic illnesses and disabilities.The bill in New York is written more narrowly and would apply only to people who have an incurable and irreversible illness, with six months or less to live. Proponents say that distinction is key.“It isn’t about ending a person’s life, but shortening their death,” said State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Manhattan Democrat and one of the sponsors of the bill. It passed on Monday night by a vote of 35 to 27, mostly along partisan lines.He framed the measure as a statement of New York’s values, citing efforts by Republicans to increase governmental control over people’s bodies, including by restricting gender-affirming care and abortion.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 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Defying Trump’s Firing, Smithsonian Says It Controls Personnel Decisions

      by

      The Smithsonian is challenging the president’s authority to dismiss the leader of the National Portrait Gallery but says it will look into his complaints.In a challenge to President Trump, the Smithsonian said on Monday that the president did not have the right to fire Kim Sajet, the director of the National Portrait Gallery, despite his recent announcement that she had been terminated.“All personnel decisions are made by and subject to the direction of the secretary, with oversight by the board,” said a statement from the Smithsonian, which oversees that museum and 20 others, as well as libraries, research centers and the National Zoo. “Lonnie G. Bunch, the secretary, has the support of the Board of Regents in his authority and management of the Smithsonian.”The statement came hours after the Board of Regents, including Vice President JD Vance, discussed the president’s announcement at a quarterly meeting. When Mr. Trump said 10 days ago that he had fired Ms. Sajet, he called her “a highly partisan person, and a strong supporter of DEI, which is totally inappropriate for her position.”The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Ms. Sajet was not mentioned in the Smithsonian’s statement. But the board said it was asking Mr. Bunch to take steps to ensure the institution’s nonpartisan nature.“The Smithsonian must be a welcoming place of knowledge and discovery for all Americans,” the statement said. “The Board of Regents is committed to ensuring that the Smithsonian is a beacon of scholarship free from political or partisan influence, and we recognize that our institution can and must do more to further these foundational values.”The statement said the board had directed Mr. Bunch to articulate expectations to museum directors about what is displayed in their institutions and to give them time to make any changes needed “to ensure unbiased content.”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

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      NYT Crossword Answers for June 10, 2025

      by

      Zachary David Levy dials it up.Jump to: Today’s Theme | Tricky CluesTUESDAY PUZZLE — A few years ago, The New York Times reported on teens who had started a “Luddite Club” in the hopes of wresting their generation from the clutches of smartphones. Now in college, the group is holding strong. And the more I struggle with my own tech devices, the more I envy their lifestyle.Maybe that’s why I couldn’t help but feel that today’s crossword, constructed by Zachary David Levy, was a Luddite manifesto. The theme centers on a positive aspect of personal tech, but solving it reminded me only of the countless times my devices have failed me. Once you’ve completed the puzzle, share your reactions in the comments: Where do you stand on digital dependency?Today’s ThemeAltogether, the ends of 18-, 24-, 48- and 57-Across yield an interpretation of the revealer phrase at 38-Across, which is clued as [“You predicted that correctly”]. Here’s a review of what we’re seeing: [Places where nonprofessionals sing] are KARAOKE BARS (18A). [Netflix or Hulu] is a STREAMING SERVICE (24A). An [Occasion for toasts] is a WEDDING RECEPTION (48A). And if you’re [Nodding yes while saying no, e.g.], then you’re giving a MIXED SIGNAL (57A).If you have bars, service, reception and a signal, you’re quite likely to have a GOOD CALL (38A). One could argue that these terms are synonyms, but I’m inclined to drop it — the argument, that is, not the call.Tricky Clues30A. You don’t need a degree in astronomy to solve a crossword puzzle, but celestial terms are popular entries, so you may want to familiarize yourself with those that show up again and again. The name of this [Altar constellation] has appeared over 200 times in Times puzzles: ARA, meaning “altar” in Latin.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

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      700 Marines Are Deploying to LA Protests to Join Federal Response

      by

      The Pentagon mobilized 700 Marines and 2,000 more National Guard troops even as the president said the situation was “under control.” Gov. Gavin Newsom condemned the escalating response.The Pentagon significantly escalated the federal response to the immigration enforcement protests in Los Angeles on Monday, mobilizing a battalion of 700 Marines and doubling the number of California National Guard troops in what officials described as a limited mission to protect federal property and agents, even as President Trump described the situation as “very well under control.”Earlier Monday, Mr. Trump labeled the demonstrators “insurrectionists,” but he stopped short of saying he would invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act, which would allow him to call up the military to intervene directly in putting down the protests.In an announcement, the Pentagon did not make clear why it would need an additional 2,000 National Guard troops. But more worrying to state and city officials, legal experts and Democrats in Congress was the use of active-duty Marines. By tradition and law, American military troops are supposed to be used inside the United States only in the rarest and most extreme situations.The mystery was deepened by the fact that the president said the unrest was calming down thanks to his decision to federalize the California National Guard and send its troops into the streets, over the objections of Gov. Gavin Newsom. On Monday evening, the state filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s move and calling president’s actions illegal.In a statement on Monday night, Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesman, said the decision to send the additional National Guard troops was made “at the order of the president.”The mixed messages — Mr. Trump’s flexing of additional military power in response to the protests, even while claiming early success — came after several days in which the president and his allies have appeared to relish the immigration standoff with local and state officials.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

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s Crackdown on LA Protests Contrasts With His Jan. 6 Response

      by

      The president often expresses an open desire for aggressive law enforcement and harsh tactics when protests originate from the political left.When violent protests originate from the right — such as those in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017, or at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 — President Trump has chosen to downplay the violence or suggest the protesters have a noble cause and have been treated unfairly.But when protests originate from what he views as the political left, Mr. Trump often expresses an open desire for law enforcement and the military to harshly crack down on them.Over the weekend, Mr. Trump ordered that 2,000 National Guard troops be deployed on the streets of downtown Los Angeles to quell protests against his administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. That was followed by orders on Monday to send 700 Marines to join them, and then later in the day, with an order for 2,000 additional National Guard troops.Even though the demonstrations have been largely contained to specific areas and mostly peaceful, Mr. Trump claimed on social media that the protesters were “insurrectionist mobs” and that Los Angeles had been “invaded and occupied by Illegal Aliens and Criminals.”In endorsing harsh law enforcement tactics against immigration protests, Mr. Trump is picking a political fight on ground that Republicans believe is advantageous terrain. Stephen K. Bannon, a former adviser to Mr. Trump, said on his podcast on Monday that the president’s response was “quite smart.”“He just won a massive national election on this very topic,” Mr. Bannon said, magnifying Mr. Trump’s showing in a race he won by less than 2.3 million popular votes. Mr. Bannon accused Democratic-led jurisdictions of inviting in undocumented immigrants and refusing to arrest violent protesters. “This is why President Trump has to bring in the National Guard and federalize them,” he said.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

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Two Are Charged With Stalking an Artist Who Criticized Xi Jinping

      by

      The two men also unsuccessfully tried to illegally export sensitive U.S. military technology to China, prosecutors said.Two men have been charged with plotting to silence a Los Angeles artist critical of the Chinese government and trying to illegally export sensitive U.S. military technology to China, according to federal prosecutors.The defendants, Cui Guanghai, 43, of China, and John Miller, 63, a British national who is a permanent U.S. resident, orchestrated a harassment campaign against a U.S.-based dissident artist whom the authorities did not name, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. The two men also tried to smuggle restricted technology into China, the office said.The target of the harassment plot, the authorities say, was a Los Angeles-based artist who had publicly criticized President Xi Jinping of China. The artist planned to protest against President Xi during the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in November 2023 in San Francisco. The artist had also created sculptures of President Xi and his wife that, according to a federal complaint, depicted them kneeling, bare-chested, with their hands tied behind their backs.Mr. Cui and Mr. Miller, who unknowingly hired two F.B.I. agents working undercover, arranged to place a tracking device on the artist’s car and have its tires slashed, prosecutors said in court documents. The two also planned to destroy the artist’s sculptures, though they were unsuccessful, the authorities said.Mr. Cui and Mr. Miller are currently in custody in Serbia, according to federal prosecutors. It is unclear whether either man has legal representation.“The United States will seek extradition of Cui and Miller and looks forward to working in partnership with the Republic of Serbia’s Prosecutor’s Office and the Ministry of Justice,” prosecutors said in a statement.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      This Is What Autocracy Looks Like

      by

      Since Donald Trump was elected again, I’ve feared one scenario above all others: that he’d call out the military against people protesting his mass deportations, putting America on the road to martial law. Even in my more outlandish imaginings, however, I thought that he’d need more of a pretext to put troops on the streets of an American city — against the wishes of its mayor and governor — than the relatively small protests that broke out in Los Angeles last week.In a post-reality environment, it turns out, the president didn’t need to wait for a crisis to launch an authoritarian crackdown. Instead, he can simply invent one.It’s true that some of those protesting Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Los Angeles have been violent; on Sunday one man was arrested for allegedly tossing a Molotov cocktail at a police officer, and another was accused of driving a motorcycle into a line of cops. Such violence should be condemned both because it’s immoral and because it’s wildly counterproductive; each burning Waymo or smashed storefront is an in-kind gift to the administration.But the idea that Trump needed to put soldiers on the streets of the city because riots were spinning out of control is pure fantasy. “Today, demonstrations across the city of Los Angeles remained peaceful, and we commend all those who exercised their First Amendment rights responsibly,” said a statement issued by the Los Angeles Police Department on Saturday evening. That was the same day Trump overrode Gov. Gavin Newsom and federalized California’s National Guard, under a rarely used law meant to deal with “rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States.”Then, on Monday, with thousands of National Guard troops already deployed to the city, the administration said it was also sending 700 Marines. The Los Angeles police don’t seem to want the Marines there; in a statement, the police chief, Jim McDonnell, said, “The arrival of federal military forces in Los Angeles — absent clear coordination — presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us charged with safeguarding this city.” But for Trump, safeguarding the city was never the point.It’s important to understand that for this administration, protests needn’t be violent to be considered an illegitimate uprising. The presidential memorandum calling out the National Guard refers to both violent acts and any protests that “inhibit” law enforcement. That definition would seem to include peaceful demonstrations around the site of ICE raids. In May, for example, armed federal agents stormed two popular Italian restaurants in San Diego looking for undocumented workers; they handcuffed staff members and took four people into custody. As they did so, an outraged crowd gathered outside, chanting “shame” and for a time blocking the agents from leaving. Under Trump’s order, the military could target these people as insurrectionists.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