US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Giorgia Meloni whispers soothing words to Trump on ‘western nationalism’

      by

      She had been welcomed to the White House with open arms as few other foreign visitors had been since Donald Trump’s return, and Giorgia Meloni wanted to assure her host that – at least when it came to their political worldview – they spoke a common language.Italy’s prime minister, whose Brothers of Italy party has roots in neo-fascism, was keen to stress that she shared many things with the man who had just hailed her as a “friend” who “everybody loves … and respects”.Tariffs were a bit of problem. But between friends? Hey, we can work it out.Even if Italy boasted one of Europe’s biggest trade surpluses with the US, such disagreements could be bridged with recourse to the previously uncoined creed of “western nationalism”, argued Meloni, speaking in confident, lightly accented English, although she admitted she did not know if it was “the right word”.“I know that when I speak about west mainly, I don’t speak about geographical space. I speak about the civilization, and I want to make that civilization stronger,” she said, in terms that the president and his attendant cabinet members-cum-courtiers surely lapped up.“So I think even if we have some problems between the two shores of the Atlantic, it is the time that we try to sit down and find solutions.”After all, Meloni pointed out, they were on the same side when it came to one existential struggle, “the fight against the woke and ADI [sic] ideology that would like to erase our history.”The acronym was a bit confusing. Did she mean DEI? But no matter, her audience got the general gist.Meloni, 48, has been labelled “Europe’s Trump whisperer” – deemed capable of awakening the concealed angels of his nature that other Euro-leaders cannot reach. She has spent time at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida home, and was the only European leader invited to his inauguration in January.Here, in the Oval Office, the whispering was having a soothing effect. The president smiled indulgently, before going off on several “weaves” during which he attacked Joe Biden, the federal reserve chair, Jerome Powell, for not cutting interest rates, Biden again, “activist judges” who were blocking his deportation agenda, then Powell once again.But it was standard Trump. The man who had publicly browbeaten Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukraine’s president, and barely tolerated Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer on their White House visits was the very picture of a gracious host.Even JD Vance – whose boorish interventions blew up the Zelenskyy visit and nearly did the same to Starmer’s – kept his trap shut, proof indeed that all was going swimmingly.Then disaster threatened.An Italian journalist insisted on asking the prime minister a question in her native Italian. Mama mia!Meloni looked disgusted. Weren’t they all supposed to be western nationalists here, defenders of the same civilization. Why emphasize differences?She played along reluctantly, her features relaxing slightly as she embarked on an extended discourse, but her body language betraying her as she lifted both feet off the ground, one crossed leg folding behind the other. Trump watched her intently all the while.When she finished, an American journalist tried to ask another question but Trump interjected: “No, wait, I want to hear what you said.”It was over to Meloni’s female interpreter, sitting nearby, who revealed: “Prime Minister Meloni was asked … what she thinks about the fact that President Trump holds Zelenskyy responsible for the war in Ukraine.”It was a discordant, yet key, moment – and the prime minister knew it. As the interpreter tried to continue, Meloni – perhaps sensing this was unsafe territory, not least because she has, for the most part, stuck with the western support for Ukraine that Trump is on the brink of abandoning – took over interpreting her own answer.She limited her explanation to vowing to raise Italy’s contributions to Nato, currently at below 1.5% – well below the 2% minimum agreed, and far short of the 5% Trump has lately demanded.Then it was the president’s turn. “I don’t hold Zelenskyy responsible,” he said, a retreat from his previous false accusations that Ukraine started the war. “But I’m not exactly thrilled with the fact that that war started. I’m not happy with anybody involved.”If anybody was to blame, he went on, it was Biden – the default scapegoat for every wrong – because, after all, everyone knew the war would never have started if Trump had still been president.No blame was attached to “President Putin”, the man who actually was responsible for starting the war. “Now I’m trying to get him to stop,” said Trump.For the unfortunate Zelenskyy, widely praised across the west for standing steadfast in defense of his country when it was under attack, there was little charity.“I’m not blaming him. But what I’m saying is that I don’t think he’s done the greatest job, OK? I’m not a big fan, I’m really not.”It was a telling moment of just how far the west’s center of gravity had shifted in the few short weeks since Trump’s return to power. And an uncomfortable one, even for Meloni.Then the conversation moved on to to the common ground of combatting migration – and it was back to the whispering again. More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump administration moves to narrow protections for endangered species

      by

      The Trump administration is planning to narrow protections for endangered species, in a move that environmentalists say would accelerate extinction by opening up critical habitats for development, logging, mining and other uses.The proposal is the latest deregulatory effort by Donald Trump, who has made it a priority to dismantle endangered species protections as part of a broader quest to boost energy extraction and industrial access, even in the US’s most sensitive and vulnerable natural areas.The new proposal from the US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service offers a new interpretation of the of the 1973 Endangered Species Act, which would strike habitat destruction from regulations.At issue is a long-standing definition of two terms in the Endangered Species Act: “harm” and “take”. “Harm” has meant altering or destroying the places those species live. “Take”, meanwhile, is a term used in regulations to denote any actions that include hunting, capturing, wounding or killing a protected species, which has included altering or destroying the places those species live.The US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service said in a proposed rule, issued on Wednesday, that habitat modification and destruction should not be considered “harm” because it is not the same as intentionally targeting a species, which is defined as “take”.“The existing regulatory definition of ‘harm,’ which includes habitat modification, runs contrary to the best meaning of the statutory term ‘take,’” the proposal says.Challenges to the legalese could enable a much more limited application of the regulations, which would free industry to continue or begin activities that would impact habitat.But habitat loss is considered the strongest driver of species loss. Striking the word or changing these definitions could cause catastrophic damage to species already close to the brink.“If [you] say harm doesn’t mean significant habitat degradation or modification, then it really leaves endangered species out in the cold,” Noah Greenwald, endangered species director at the Center for Biological Diversity said, adding that the proposal “cuts the heart out of the Endangered Species Act”.Environmentalists argue that the definition of “take” has always included actions that harm species, and the definition of “harm” has been upheld by the US supreme court.Spotted owls and Florida panthers both are protected because the current rule forbids habitat destruction, Greenwald said. The legislation has helped safeguard more than 1,700 species and their habitats, preventing 99% of those listed from going extinct, most famously the bald eagle.But if the new rule is adopted, someone who logs in a forest or builds a development would be unimpeded as long as they could say they didn’t intend to harm an endangered species.The proposed rule was expected to be published in the Federal Register on Thursday, kicking off a 30-day public comment period. Environmental groups are already planning to challenge the rule in court if it’s adopted. Questions remain about whether the Trump administration is legally able to repeal a rule already upheld by the supreme court.The proposal “threatens a half-century of progress in protecting and restoring endangered species”, said Drew Caputo, an attorney at Earthjustice. He added that the law currently “recognizes the common-sense concept that destroying a forest, beach, river, or wetland that a species relies on for survival constitutes harm to that species”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIt’s not the first attempt by the administration to undermine protections. One of Trump’s first executive orders after returning to the White House in January, declared a national energy emergency even amid a record glut of oil and gas drilling, and calls for the endangered species committee, a group nicknamed the “God squad”, to meet at least quarterly.This committee, which would be led by US interior secretary Doug Burgum, five other senior officials from different government agencies and a representative from an affected state, has rarely been used but has the power to override the Endangered Species Act even if it results in the extinction of a species, hence its existential nickname.Changing the rule could prove an easier strategy to override protections. It could also threaten conservation areas kept safe because of the species that call them home.The issue is of particular concern in Hawaii. The islands have more endangered species than any other state – 40% of the nation’s federally listed threatened and endangered species – even though Hawaii has less than 1% of the land area of the US, according to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.Maxx Philips, Hawaii and Pacific Islands director for the Center for Biological Diversity, said removing these safeguards will accelerate Hawaii’s extinction crisis and erode the biological and cultural heritage of the islands.She pointed to the example of tiny native bees that forage on and pollinate coastal dune plants. Very little oceanfront property remains undeveloped and what is left tends to be fragmented pockets. Other listed species living on the shoreline – like green sea turtles – could also lose their homes if protections are removed.“Habitat is life, right?” she said. “And without it, there is no recovery and without recovery, there is only extinction.”Oliver Milman and the Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      What is a ‘criminal’ immigrant? The word is an American rhetorical trap | Jonathan Ben-Menachem

      by

      Last month, the Trump administration flew 238 Venezuelan immigrants to a brutal prison in El Salvador. Federal officials alleged that the detainees were members of the Tren de Aragua gang, calling them “heinous monsters” ,“criminal aliens”, “the worst of the worst”. The federal government has also revoked visas for a thousand international students over their alleged participation in protests against Israel’s genocide in Palestine. Some were abducted, like Mahmoud Khalil, who has spent more than a month incarcerated in one of the worst jails in the US. Officials alleged that Mahmoud “sided with terrorists … who have killed innocent men, women, and children”.Media reports quickly revealed that the Trump administration is lying about “innocent” people to justify abducting them. But this raises a more important question: if Trump’s victims weren’t “innocent”, does that make them disposable? I worry that emphasizing the innocence of victims creates a rhetorical trap. It’s like carefully digging a pit that the fascists can shove us into.Instead, we should interrogate the fact that the Trump administration chose to target “gang members” and “terrorist supporters” in the first step of its ethnic cleansing project. Criminals and terrorists are the bogeymen animating bipartisan racism against Black, Latino and Arab people, and Trump is weaponizing these myths because many liberals have already written them off as less than human. The political context that enabled US residents to be shipped to El Salvador’s Cecot facility is a bipartisan project more than 50 years in the making, largely unquestioned by people who are rightfully horrified by recent escalations.Allegations of criminality have long been an effective pretext for anti-Black violence in the US – this is the “war on crime”. So long as there are “criminals” to fight, vicious police brutality becomes politically palatable. This is true in blue and red states alike. The gang member is the latest symbol used to dehumanize Black and Latino people, replacing the “superpredator”. In practice, police and prosecutors invoke the specter of monstrous gangs to continue targeting entire neighborhoods while evading allegations of explicit discrimination.You can be added to a gang database because of your tattoos, the color of the clothing you wear or even for using certain emojis on social media. These lists are riddled with errors, sometimes naming toddlers and elders. More commonly, gang databases index the thousands of people – often children – swept up by police because of where they live or whom they socialize with. The consequences of gang policing are devastating: it can lead to federal prosecution or potential deportation, not to mention a lifetime of state harassment.Gang membership isn’t the only tool the Trump administration can use to portray its victims as guilty. When the “war on crime” morphed into the “war on terror”, Arab and Muslim residents suffered from discriminatory surveillance and repression – the “terrorist” category matches the “gang member” category in that it justifies racist dragnet policing practices. The “counter-terrorism” net has already widened, targeting Stop Cop City activists in Atlanta. This problem is not limited to Republicans – liberal politicians and university stakeholders laid the groundwork for Trump’s deportation efforts. Last year, the Anti-Defamation League’s CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, called student Palestine activists proxies for Iran, and New York City’s mayor, Eric Adams, smeared us as terrorist supporters to justify an incredibly violent police raid.The widening net of who is considered a criminal not only chills dissent among immigrants and activists. It further dehumanizes and renders disposable people who have genuinely committed harm.We must defend the rights of people who do have criminal records. No one deserves to be whisked away to a brutal prison that deprives them of basic human rights – no matter if it’s in El Salvador, Louisiana, California, Pennsylvania or New York. Criminal records and bona fide gang membership don’t turn human beings into monsters. If Trump goes through with his plan of sending citizens to El Salvador, he could initially target people convicted of heinous crimes. This would allow federal officials to ask: “Why do liberals care about pedophiles and murderers?”We should be prepared to defend the basic rights of all of Trump’s targets with our full strength. If a single person becomes disposable, anyone could become the next target. Last week, Trump said he “loved” the idea of sending American “criminals” to El Salvador, and law professors are sounding the alarm about citizen student activists being subjected to terrorism prosecutions. First it will be the “migrant gang member” or “terrorist on a student visa” sent to Cecot. Next it will be the domestic gang member and the terrorist-supporting citizen. Eventually, perhaps any political opponent could be construed as a criminal-terrorist.Trump may not even need to rely on the justice department to criminalize his enemies – dozens of local cops joined the 6 January 2021 putsch at the US Capitol, and local prosecutors have eagerly charged student activists with felonies. This is another reason to avoid the innocence trap: many police love Trump, and law enforcement can very easily make their adversaries seem like criminals.The innocence trap is dangerous because allegations of criminality have always been deployed to justify state violence. If we only defend the “innocent”, the fascists will argue that their victim “was no angel”. An anti-fascist rhetoric that carves out exceptions for imperfect victims is a gift to our opponents.

      Jonathan Ben-Menachem is a PhD candidate in sociology at Columbia University, where he researches the politics of criminalization More

    • 175 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump says Fed chair would resign if asked and condemns him over interest rates

      by

      Donald Trump early on Thursday condemned the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, for not lowering US interest rates, and expressed a wish for him to be gone from his role.The US president lambasted Powell as “always too late and wrong” in a post on his Truth Social platform. Trump noted that the European Central Bank (ECB) was poised on Thursday to lower interest rates again, without mentioning that the body has been responding to the chaos caused by Trump’s initiatives on tariffs.Addressing reporters later in the day, Trump claimed Powell would resign if he asked him to. Powell himself has said that he would not resign if asked to do so by the president.Trump has been pressuring Powell to cut US interest rates for months, even though the central bank is independent of the administration in setting monetary policy and the White House typically does not publicly lobby the Federal Reserve.The ECB had been expected to cut interest rates for the seventh time this year in order to prop up economic growth, and then did so not long before US markets were due to open. Powell enraged Trump on Wednesday night by warning that the president’s sweeping tariffs could raise inflation. That would make the Fed even more hesitant to cut interest rates.Christine Lagarde, the ECB president, in explaining the reasons why it has – unlike the Fed – cut interest rates, said “the economic outlook is clouded by exceptional uncertainty” because of Trump’s tariffs, which constitute a negative demand shock.Lagarde was speaking after cutting the ECB’s main deposit rate by 25 basis points to 2.25%.Europe had been preparing another interest rate cut following the global financial turmoil caused by Trump’s tariffs push, in which he has gone back and forth on whether, when and how deeply to tax imports from other countries, and on which countries, since he returned to the White House for a second term.He retreated sharply earlier this month from his decision to impose tariffs worldwide, pausing most of the charges for 90 days, although most notably not on China, after markets plunged and US government bonds – traditionally seen as one of the world’s safest financial assets – had suffered a dramatic sell-off. Wall Street chiefs and other experts also forecast a heightened likelihood of recession. Economists polled by Reuters on Thursday put US recession odds at 45%.After insisting for days that he would hold firm on his aggressive trade strategy, unveiled in full on 2 April, which he dubbed “liberation day”, Trump announced on 9 April that all countries that had not retaliated against US tariffs would receive a reprieve – and only face a blanket US tariff of 10% – until July.Powell on Wednesday said the US economy was well-positioned but added that Trump’s tariffs were likely to cause “at least a temporary rise in inflation. The inflationary effects could also be more persistent.”He indicated that the prospect of sweeping tariffs on virtually every trade partner could put the Fed in the unenviable position of having to choose between tackling inflation and unemployment.The World Trade Organization, meanwhile, warned that Trump’s tariffs would send international trade into reverse this year, depressing global economic growth.The International Monetary Fund (IMF) managing director, Kristalina Georgieva, said the global outlook was also weakening in the face of the Trump tariff onslaught, adding central banks like the Federal Reserve needed to remain agile and credible.“Resilience is being tested again – by the reboot of the global trading system,” she said.Trump also said as part of his Truth Social post at daybreak on Thursday that “Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough”. He dubbed him, further in the post, “Too Late” and put forward the argument that prices were coming down, from oil to eggs.Trump nominated Powell to become Fed chair during his first term in the White House, in 2018, and Joe Biden renominated him during his term in the White House, in 2022. The US Senate confirms the chair and the US president cannot terminate the head of the Federal Reserve before the end of their four-year fixed stints. Powell is in place until next spring.The US central bank has held interest rates steady at 4.25% to 4.5% since the start of this year.Trump said in his post: “The ECB is expected to cut interest rates for the 7th time, and yet, “Too Late” Jerome Powell of the Fed, who is always TOO LATE AND WRONG, yesterday issued a report which was another, and typical, complete “mess!” Oil prices are down, groceries (even eggs!) are down, and the USA is getting RICH ON TARIFFS. Too Late should have lowered Interest Rates, like the ECB, long ago, but he should certainly lower them now. Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough!”The New York Fed president, John Williams, spoke to Fox Business on TV on Thursday and backed up Powell’s wariness on rates.“I don’t see any need to change the setting of the Fed funds rate any time soon … It’s really about collecting information, understanding better what’s happening in the economy during the rest of this year, understanding kind of how the uncertainty plays out,” Williams said.Meanwhile, Politico, citing unnamed sources, reported after Trump’s post that the treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, had been cautioning White House officials against any attempt to fire Powell, for which there is no tested mechanism, saying it would risk destabilizing financial markets.And there was a fresh alarm bell sounded on the risk of stagflation, in which high inflation combines with high unemployment amid stagnant economic growth.“A sudden crystallization of the threat to Fed independence would both intensify market stress and shift it in more of a stagflationary direction with a sharp increase in tail risk,” Krishna Guha, vice-chair of an arm of the financial advisory firm Evercore ISI, said in a note.Reuters contributed reporting More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump Media urges regulators to investigate hedge fund’s vast bet against stock

      by

      Donald Trump’s fledgling media firm has urged market regulators to investigate “suspicious activity” after a London-based hedge fund disclosed a vast bet against its stock.Trump Media & Technology Group, owner of the US president’s Truth Social platform, raised questions over trading by Qube Research & Technologies.Earlier this week, Qube revealed a significant short position in Trump Media via filings with Germany’s federal Gazette Bundesanzeiger. It disclosed a position of almost 6m shares, according to Trump Media.Short-selling is a way of betting against a public company. An investor borrows a stock, and then sells it on; should the stock fall, the investor then buys it back and pockets the difference.In a memo to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Trump Media – which trades under the ticker “DJT”, using Trump’s initials – said the total short interest in the company was 10.7m as of 31 March, according to Nasdaq, where its shares are listed, and had only risen to about 11m as of Wednesday.These factors “especially when combined with the history of suspicious trading surrounding DJT stock … could be indications of the illegal naked short selling of DJT shares”, Trump Media claimed.Qube did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The SEC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Shares in Trump Media rallied by about 7% in New York on Thursday. They have fallen by more than a third this year.The firm is currently seeking to branch out beyond its core Truth Social platform, and this week announced investment accounts based on themes, including “Made in America” and “Energy Independence”, which align with the Trump administration’s agenda.On its website, Qube says it combines “data, research, technology and trading expertise” to “solve the most complex challenges”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe hedge fund was spun out of Credit Suisse in 2018, and is still led by Pierre-Yves Morlat and Laurent Laizet, former employees of the bank. It also has offices in Paris, Hong Kong, Singapore and Dubai.In that time, Qube has grown quickly to rival some established giants of the industry, reportedly managing about $23bn of assets, which according to industry estimates would put it among the top 1% of hedge funds. It is also considered unusual for its lack of a New York office and collaborative corporate culture.Alongside its short position in Trump Media, Qube has short positions in a range of UK-listed companies, including real estate firms, fashion retailer Boohoo and bowling centre operator Hollywood Bowl Group, according to the latest disclosures with the UK’s City regulator, the Financial Conduct Authority. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Musk’s SpaceX is frontrunner to build Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ missile shield

      by

      Elon Musk’s SpaceX and two partners have emerged as frontrunners to win a crucial part of Donald Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defense shield, six people familiar with the matter said.Musk’s rocket and satellite company is partnering with the software maker Palantir and the drone builder Anduril on a bid to build key parts of Golden Dome, the sources said, which has drawn significant interest from the technology sector’s burgeoning base of defense startups.In his 27 January executive order, Trump cited a missile attack as “the most catastrophic threat facing the United States”.All three companies were founded by entrepreneurs who have been major political supporters of Trump. Musk has donated more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect Trump, and now serves as a special adviser to the president working to cut government spending through his so-called “department of government efficiency”.Despite the Pentagon’s positive signals to the SpaceX group, some sources stressed the decision process for Trump’s Golden Dome was in its early stages. Its ultimate structure and who is selected to work on it could change dramatically in the coming months.The three companies met with top officials in the Trump administration and the Pentagon in recent weeks to pitch their plan, which would build and launch 400 to more than 1,000 satellites circling the globe to sense missiles and track their movement, sources said.A separate fleet of 200 attack satellites armed with missiles or lasers would then bring enemy missiles down, three of the sources said. The SpaceX group is not expected to be involved in the weaponization of satellites, these sources said.One of the sources familiar with the talks described them as “a departure from the usual acquisition process. There’s an attitude that the national security and defense community has to be sensitive and deferential to Elon Musk because of his role in the government.”SpaceX and Musk have declined to comment on whether Musk is involved in any of the discussions or negotiations involving federal contracts with his businesses.
      The Pentagon did not respond to detailed questions from Reuters, only saying it will deliver “options to the president for his decision in line with the executive order and in alignment with White House guidance and timelines”.The White House, SpaceX, Palantir and Anduril also did not respond to questions.In an unusual twist, SpaceX has proposed setting up its role in Golden Dome as a “subscription service” in which the government would pay for access to the technology, rather than own the system outright.The subscription model, which has not been previously reported, could skirt some Pentagon procurement protocols allowing the system to be rolled out faster, the two sources said. While the approach would not violate any rules, the government may then be locked into a subscription and lose control over its ongoing development and pricing, they added.Some Pentagon officials have expressed concerns internally about relying on the subscription-based model for any part of the Golden Dome, two sources told Reuters. Such an arrangement would be unusual for such a large and critical defense program.The US space force general Michael Guetlein has been in talks on whether SpaceX should be the owner and operator of its part of the system, the two sources said. Other options include having the US own and operate the system, or having the US own it while contractors handle operations. Guetlein did not respond to a request for comment.The retired air force general Terrence O’Shaughnessy, a top SpaceX adviser to Musk, has been involved in the company’s recent discussions with senior defense and intelligence leaders, the two sources said. O’Shaughnessy did not respond to requests for comment.Should the group led by SpaceX win a Golden Dome contract, it would be the biggest win for Silicon Valley in the lucrative defense contracting industry and a blow to the traditional contractors.However, those long-standing contractors, such as Northrop Grumman, Boeing and RTX are expected to be big players in the process as well, people familiar with the companies said. Lockheed Martin put up a webpage as a part of its marketing efforts.SpaceX is pitching for the part of the Golden Dome initiative called the “custody layer”, a constellation of satellites that would detect missiles, track their trajectory, and determine if they are heading toward the US, according to two sources familiar with SpaceX’s goals.SpaceX has estimated the preliminary engineering and design work for the custody layer of satellites would cost between $6bn and $10bn, two of the sources said. In the last five years, SpaceX has launched hundreds of operational spy satellites and more recently several prototypes, which could be retrofitted to be used for the project, the sources said.Reuters reviewed an internal Pentagon memo from the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, issued shortly before a 28 February deadline to senior Pentagon leadership asking them for initial Golden Dome proposals and calling for the “acceleration of the deployment” of constellations of satellites.The time frame could give SpaceX an advantage because of its fleet of rockets, including the Falcon 9, and existing satellites that could be repurposed for the missile defense shield, the people familiar with the plan said. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Tufts student detained for writing op-ed denied bail by US immigration judge

      by

      A Turkish PhD student and former Fulbright scholar detained after co-authoring a campus newspaper op-ed about Gaza has been denied bond by an immigration judge, as her legal team continues to urgently petition a federal court in Vermont for her release.Rümeysa Öztürk, who had been studying at Tufts University, was seized by plainclothes Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents on 25 March near her home in Massachusetts and shuttled through three states before landing in a Louisiana detention facility – all without being charged with any crime.An immigration judge denied bond on Wednesday, ruling Öztürk was both a “flight risk” and a “danger to the community” despite the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) only arguing the flight risk aspect, according to the petition filed by her legal team later that night.According to the documents, the DHS case against Öztürk in immigration court consists solely of a “one-paragraph Department of State memorandum” that revoked her visa, citing her co-authorship of an op-ed that had “found common cause with an organization that was later temporarily banned from campus”.“They don’t even show anything more than what was published in the op-ed,” said Esha Bhandari, an attorney from the American Civil Liberties Union who is representing Öztürk in federal court. “It’s fully constitutionally protected speech, no crimes at all … If this is allowed, anyone could be punished for anything they say.”Her federal attorneys are asking a federal judge to order her immediate release – which would supersede the immigration judge’s detention order – or, at minimum, to return her to detention in Vermont by Friday. They have also requested her federal case be expedited to 23 April, or the earliest available date.“It’s simply unconstitutional to keep her in detention for this,” Bhandari said. “We think that the court can decide it on the papers under the governing legal standards, but if it wants to hold a hearing, we’re asking for a hearing later in April. Time is of the essence; Rümeysa’s health is not well in detention.”Wednesday’s court filings from Öztürk’s legal team documented six asthma attacks since her detention began, with officers dismissing one episode as “all in her mind” while medical staff reportedly provided no treatment.Öztürk is among a long list of individuals connected to US universities who have had their visas revoked or been denied entry to the United States after the Trump administration’s aggressive stance in targeting pro-Palestine demonstrations or expressing public support for Palestinians. A Louisiana immigration judge similarly authorized the deportation of the Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, accepting the federal government’s assertion that he represents a national security risk.In late March, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, boasted that the state department had canceled at least 300 student visas related to pro-Palestinian protests, and that number has more than doubled since.When it comes to the visa termination process, Bhandari said that Öztürk, like other similarly targeted individuals, had “no opportunity to protect their rights” before the government changed their legal statuses. More

    • 188 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Cory Booker to visit El Salvador in effort to return wrongly deported man to US

      by

      Cory Booker plans to travel to El Salvador, a source familiar with the New Jersey senator’s itinerary said, as Democrats seek to pressure the Trump administration to return a wrongly deported Maryland resident.Booker’s trip to the Central American country would come after the Maryland senator Chris Van Hollen traveled there this week to meet with his constituent Kilmar Ábrego García, a Salvadorian national deported last month in what the Trump administration acknowledged was an “administrative error”. Despite a supreme court ruling saying his administration must “facilitate” Ábrego García’s return, Trump has refused to take steps to do so, and El Salvador’s government on Wednesday denied Van Hollen a meeting with the deportee.Ábrego García’s case has become a rallying cry for Democrats, who argue it is a sign of Donald Trump’s reckless approach to immigration enforcement and willingness to defy court orders. An immigration judge in 2019 had given Ábrego García protection from deportation, finding that he may face retaliation if he returns to El Salvador.Booker wrote on X earlier this week: “The Supreme Court was clear: the Trump administration must act to facilitate the return of Kilmar Ábrego García to the United States. There is no room for debate – yet Trump is refusing, in defiance of a lawful court order.“Every member of Congress should be standing up for the Constitution and demanding that the administration act to return Mr. Ábrego García to the U.S. and to his family.”Trump administration officials have countered by accusing Democrats of caring more about undocumented immigrants than US citizens. On Monday, the Republican congressman Riley Moore toured El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (Cecot), where US authorities say Ábrego García is being held, and gave a thumbs up in front of a cell packed with inmates.Several other Democratic lawmakers have signaled they would like to visit El Salvador and Cecot, including Adriano Espaillat, chair of the Congressional Hispanic caucus, and Robert Garcia, Yassamin Ansari and Maxwell Alejandro Frost, all members of the investigative House oversight committee. Delia Ramirez of the House homeland security committee has also asked for a visit to Cecot.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBooker, who ran for president in 2020 and is viewed as a potential candidate again three years from now, has been particularly outspoken against Trump. Earlier this month, he delivered a speech from the Senate floor warning of the “grave and urgent” danger presented by his presidency that ran for 25 hours and five minutes – the longest such speech ever. More