US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US judge blocks Trump’s suspension of refugee resettlement program

      by

      A federal judge has blocked Donald Trump’s attempt to suspend the US’s refugee admission system after ruling that the move exceeded his powers.The ruling, from US district judge Jamal Whitehead, stated that Trump’s executive order affecting refugee admissions, issued on the day of his inauguration, amounted to an illegal usurpation of the powers of Congress.“The president has substantial discretion … to suspend refugee admissions. But that authority is not limitless,” Whitehead told a court in Seattle in delivering his verdict.The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by major refugee assistance groups, who argued that Trump’s order breached the system created by acts of Congress to absorb refugees into the US, while impeding their ability to help refugees already in the US.Whitehead agreed that it represented an “effective nullification of congressional will”.The ruling is a significant setback for Trump’s agenda on immigration – on which he has moved to end protected status for around half-a-million Haitians in the US legally, as well as deport undocumented migrants.August Flentje, a lawyer for the justice department, told the judge that the administration was likely to consider filing an emergency appeal.Trump’s executive order said the refugee program – a form of legal migration to the US – would be suspended because cities and communities had been taxed by “record levels of migration” and didn’t have the ability to “absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees”.The federal refugee system has been in place for decades and helps people who have escaped war, natural disaster or persecution. Despite long-standing support from both parties for accepting thoroughly vetted refugees, the program has become politicized in recent years.Trump temporarily halted it during his first presidency, and then dramatically lowered the number of refugees who could enter the US each year.The groups challenging his latest order included the International Refugee Assistance Project on behalf of Church World Service, the Jewish refugee resettlement agency HIAS, Lutheran Community Services Northwest, and individual refugees and family members. They said it had several restricted their ability to provide critical services to refugees, including those already in the US.Some refugees whose entry had previously been approved had their travel cancelled on short notice, and families who have waited years to reunite have had to remain apart, the lawsuit said.Last week a federal judge in Washington DC refused to immediately block the Trump administration’s actions in a similar lawsuit brought by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. That case faces another hearing on Friday. More

    • 150 Shares135 Views

      in US Politics

      More than 20 Musk staffers resign over Doge’s ‘dismantling of public services’

      by

      More than 20 civil service employees resigned on Tuesday from Elon Musk’s so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), saying they were refusing to use their technical expertise to “dismantle critical public services”.“We swore to serve the American people and uphold our oath to the constitution across presidential administrations,” the 21 staffers wrote in a joint resignation letter, a copy of which was obtained by the Associated Press. “However, it has become clear that we can no longer honor those commitments.”The employees also warned that many of those enlisted by Musk to help him slash the size of the federal government under Donald Trump’s administration were political ideologues who did not have the necessary skills or experience for the task ahead of them.The former government employees said that they had been visited in the office by individuals wearing White House visitor’s passes, who interrogated employees about their political loyalty, work experience as well as their colleagues in the federal workforce. The letter also denounced the widespread worker layoffs that Doge has put into effect.The mass resignation of engineers, data scientists and product managers is a temporary setback for Musk and the Republican president’s tech-driven purge of the federal workforce. It comes amid a flurry of court challenges that have sought to stall, stop or unwind their efforts to fire or coerce thousands of government workers out of jobs.When news of the letter was first reported, Musk called the article “more fake news” in a post on X, though his tweets appeared to also confirm the resignations.“These were Dem political holdovers who refused to return to the office,” Musk wrote on his X platform. “They would have been fired had they not resigned.”Doge employee Katie Miller seemed to ridicule the staffers who resigned, saying: “These were full remote workers who hung Trans flags from their workplaces,” in a separate post on X.On Tuesday, it was reported that Amy Gleason was identified as the acting administrator of Doge.The staffers who resigned worked for what was once known as the United States Digital Service, an office established during Barack Obama’s administration after the botched rollout of healthcare.gov, the web portal that millions of Americans use to sign up for insurance plans through the Democrat’s signature healthcare law.Meanwhile, New York’s Democratic governor wants to hire federal workers fired by Doge. Kathy Hochul on Tuesday welcomed recently laid-off federal workers to apply for state jobs using an online portal.“The federal government might say: ‘You’re fired,’ but here in New York, we say: ‘You’re hired.’ In fact, we love federal workers,” Hochul said in a videotaped statement. More

    • 150 Shares135 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s Iron Dome for America system is now reportedly called Golden Dome

      by

      Donald Trump’s Iron Dome for America initiative for a missile defense system protecting US skies from attack has been reportedly renamed the Golden Dome for America.In a video published on Thursday, secretary of defense Pete Hegseth referred to the project as “the Golden Dome or Iron Dome”. A defense official confirmed shortly after that the name of the initiative has been officially changed to “Golden Dome”, according to military news website Defense One.A spokesperson for Space Force did not respond to a Guardian query on the possible name change.The idea of a new name comes as a team of technical experts has been assembled by the US Space Force to determine which programs can help build out the initiative.The Iron – or perhaps now Golden – Dome for America executive order, signed by Trump on 27 January, is a directive for Hegseth to submit a comprehensive plan that details an implementation strategy, including the required architecture, for a missile defense system.Trump is known for his grand renaming of things, including the Gulf of Mexico, which is now known officially in the US as the Gulf of America, as well as having a gaudy taste for golden and luxurious decorations, such as that which often adorn his apartments and buildings like Trump Tower in New York.The defense system focuses heavily on the concept of space-based sensors and interceptors. The company that currently dominates the market for such equipment is the Elon Musk-owned SpaceX, leading to concerns that this project is another way for Musk to make money from federal programs.The team will finish planning in “a matter of weeks”, a senior Space Force official told reporters Monday.Last month, it was announced that the space development agency, a branch under the Space Force, was in the process of acquiring new satellites in order to create a network of missile-tracking sensors within Earth’s orbit. This network would be part of the Dome system.While Trump’s executive order argues that the US is in need of a space-centric defense against missile threats, many critics question the technical and financial feasibility of such a project.The name and concept of the Dome for America alludes to Israel’s Iron Dome, a defense system designed to counter against short-range rockets and missiles. More

    • 125 Shares135 Views

      in US Politics

      Apple shareholders vote against ending DEI program amid Trump crackdown

      by

      Apple shareholders voted down an attempt to pressure the technology company into yielding to Donald Trump’s push to scrub corporate programs designed to diversify its workforce.A proposal drafted by the National Center for Public Policy Research – a self-described conservative thinktank – urged Apple to follow a litany of high-profile companies that have retreated from diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives currently in the Trump administration’s crosshairs.After a brief presentation about the anti-DEI proposal, Apple announced shareholders had rejected it without disclosing the vote tally. The preliminary results will be outlined in a regulatory filing later on Tuesday.The outcome vindicated Apple management’s decision to stand behind its diversity commitment even though Trump asked the US Department of Justice to look into whether these types of programs have discriminated against employees whose race or gender are not aligned with the initiatives’ goals.But Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, has maintained a cordial relationship with Trump since his first term in office, an alliance that so far has helped the company skirt tariffs on its iPhones made in China. After Cook and Trump met last week, Apple on Monday announced it would invest $500bn in the US and create 20,000 more jobs during the next five years – a commitment applauded by the president.Tuesday’s shareholder vote came a month after the same group presented a similar proposal during Costco’s annual meeting, only to have it overwhelmingly rejected.That snub did not discourage the National Center for Public Policy Research from confronting Apple about its DEI program in a pre-recorded presentation by Stefan Padfield, executive director of the thinktank’s Free Enterprise Project, who asserted “forced diversity is bad for business”.In the presentation, Padfield attacked Apple’s diversity commitments for being out of line with recent court rulings and said the programs expose the Cupertino, California, company to an onslaught of potential lawsuits for alleged discrimination. He cited the Trump administration as one of Apple’s potential legal adversaries.“The vibe shift is clear: DEI is out and merit is in,” Padfield said in the presentation.The specter of potential legal trouble was magnified last week when the Florida attorney general, James Uthmeier, filed a federal lawsuit against Target for allegedly failing to properly disclose the financial risks of its DEI programs to stakeholders.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut Cook conceded Apple may have to make some adjustments to its diversity program “as the legal landscape changes” while still striving to maintain a culture that has helped elevate the company to its current market value of $3.7tn – greater than any other business in the world.“We will continue to create a culture of belonging,” Cook told shareholders during the meeting.In its last diversity and inclusion report issued in 2022, Apple disclosed that nearly three-fourths of its global workforce consisted of white and Asian employees. Nearly two-thirds of its employees were men.Other major technology companies for years have reported employing mostly white and Asian men, especially in high-paid engineering jobs – a tendency that spurred the industry to pursue largely unsuccessful efforts to diversify. More

    • 150 Shares135 Views

      in US Politics

      House Republicans to vote on spending deal that could slash Medicaid funding

      by

      House Republicans are planning to vote on Tuesday on a spending blueprint central to Donald Trump’s agenda, but the package faces potential derailment over nearly $1tn in Medicaid cuts that could fracture their slim majority.The fiscal year 2025 proposal includes approximately $4.5tn in tax cuts alongside increased spending for defense and border security. To offset these costs, the plan tasks congressional committees with finding about $2tn in spending reductions over the next decade.But some lawmakers are warning that the budget could include an estimated $800bn in potential cuts from Medicaid, a federal program providing healthcare coverage to more than 72 million Americans. Though the resolution doesn’t explicitly target Medicaid, skeptical lawmakers warn there are few alternatives to achieve the $880bn in cuts assigned to the energy and commerce committee.If the budget measure doesn’t pass by the 14 March deadline, the government faces a shutdown – and Democrats are committed to not voting it through.“Let me be clear, House Democrats will not provide a single vote to this reckless Republican budget,” said the House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, from the steps of the US Capitol on Tuesday surrounded by Democratic lawmakers and advocates protesting the vote. “Not one, not one, not one.”With Democrats united in opposition, House speaker Mike Johnson’s slim Republican majority cannot afford more than one defection. Several moderate Republicans from vulnerable districts have expressed concerns, particularly those with constituents heavily reliant on Medicaid.Eight House Republicans, including the California representative David Valadao and the New York representative Nicole Malliotakis, warned in a letter to Johnson last week that “slashing Medicaid would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities”.The Nebraska Republican Don Bacon, representing a district that backed Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential candidate in November, has demanded leadership to prove the proposal “won’t overly cut Medicaid”.Opposition to the House budget resolution has been steadily building over the last few weeks. During last week’s recess, constituent anger over Republicans’ proposed cuts to Medicaid and other social safety net programs as well as Elon Musk’s efforts to dismantle the federal government boiled over at town halls and congressional offices across the country.At an earlier Capitol Hill rally on Tuesday, Senator Chris Murphy assailed the Republican budget bill as the “most massive transfer of wealth and resources from poor people and the middle class to the billionaires and corporations in the history of this country”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHe continued: “You’re talking about $880bn of cuts to Medicaid … That means that sick kids die in this country. That means that hospitals in depressed communities and rural communities close their doors, right? That means that drug and addiction treatment centers disappear all across this country.”The vote comes after the Senate passed its own budget bill last week – a less contentious one that Trump does not support as much as the House’s. House leadership must now navigate competing demands within their caucus: some members want deeper tax cuts while others seek steeper spending reductions or protection for social programs.“There may be more than one [defector], but we’ll get there,” Johnson said on Monday. “We’re going to get everybody there. This is a prayer request. Just pray this through for us because it is very high stakes, and everybody knows that.” More

    • 138 Shares151 Views

      in US Politics

      More than just a game: How sports are reflecting Canada-U.S. tensions

      by

      Canada emerged victorious in the 4 Nations Face-off hockey tournament on Feb. 20, but the event was overshadowed by growing political tensions between Canada and the United States.

      In the lead-up to the final game, American fans booed the Canadian national anthem, likely in response to Canadian fans booing the American national anthem ahead of a game between the two teams on Feb. 15.

      This was not the first recent airing of grievances from Canadian fans at a sporting event. Following U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement of tariffs against Canada and repeated calls for Canada to become the 51st state, fans at a Toronto Raptors game and Ottawa Senators game booed the American national anthem.

      Read more:
      How Donald Trump’s attacks on Canada are stoking a new Canadian nationalism

      Despite the proposed tariffs being postponed for 30 days, Trump’s antagonistic vision for Canada-U.S. relations has stoked anti-American sentiments among Canadians, including calls to boycott American goods and a deteriorating belief in close Canada-U.S. relations.

      Those anti-American sentiments boiled over again when Canada faced the U.S. in Montréal, showcasing how sport can be used as an expression of nationalism — especially at a time of increased tensions between the two countries.

      Why sports matter politically

      It’s not surprising that sport has become an arena for nationalist political rhetoric. Sport possesses powerful symbolism that can be exploited to great affect in forming a coherent national identity.

      In this way, sporting events are a way fandoms can reinforce national identity as an objective symbol that connects to primitive forms of national ideology.

      Sport is also a powerful psychological setting for national rhetoric. A person’s social identity, or how they see themselves in relation to others, can be reinforced through sport. This can happen, for instance, when someone views themselves as a member of a team and celebrates their success, or views a rival team or country in a negative light after a loss.

      Additionally, the outcome of a game can boost in-group favouritism, which can influence whether consumers buy goods from a specific vendor.

      Toronto Raptors forward Bruce Brown, left to right, forward Scottie Barnes and forward Chris Boucher react as fans boo the American national anthem before first half NBA action against the Los Angeles Clippers in Toronto on Feb. 2, 2025.
      THE CANADIAN PRESS/Frank Gunn

      Nationalism versus patriotism

      Generally, research suggests sports reinforce a national in-group identity that is more patriotic than nationalistic. However, the vitriol Canadians have expressed during the American national anthem leans towards expressing nationalist views rather than patriotic ones.

      Patriotism typically focuses on why a country is great without necessarily disparaging outsiders or other countries. Nationalism, on the other hand, tends to play up why one’s country is great while vilifying another country or group.

      Trump’s focus on using tariffs to bully Canada into increasing security at the border has undoubtedly soured relations between the two countries. If Trump decides to flex the United States’ capacity to be a bully in U.S.-Canadian relations, Canada is stuck with limited options.

      But are Canadians playing right into Donald Trump’s hand by leaning into an adversarial relationship?

      How Trump uses sports for political gain

      Trump has a history of using major sporting events to his political benefit. During his last presidential campaign, he attended the Army-Navy football game and became the first sitting president to attend the recent Super Bowl in New Orleans.

      Trump also considered attending the 4 Nations final between the U.S. and Canada in Boston, but couldn’t attend due to a scheduled speech with U.S. governors. Still, he made his presence felt by calling the American team the morning before the game to wish them luck.

      Looking ahead, Trump may continue to use international sporting events to assert his vision for U.S. relations with Canada and Mexico.

      Elon Musk, right, U.S. special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, centre, FIFA President Gianni Infantino and Jared Kushner listen as Trump speaks at the Future Investment Initiative Institute summit in Miami Beach, Fla., on Feb. 19, 2025.
      (Pool via AP)

      In January, Trump invited Gianni Infantino, the head of FIFA, to his inauguration, just as preparations have begun for the 2026 World Cup, which is to be hosted by Canada, Mexico and the U.S.

      With Infantino and Trump becoming increasingly friendly, it seems likely Trump will use the upcoming World Cup to influence North American relations. At the very least, he will likely try to insert himself into its coverage.

      Trump using sport to reinforce his image

      Beyond politics, Trump uses sports to play into his crafted image as a hyper-masculine man. This image has played a large part in Trump’s popularity among young men and helped him win a second term as president.

      Yet Trump does not necessarily fit the masculine norms his supporters lionize. Trump is fairly tall, which has been shown to be preferred among American voters. However, unlike past presidents such as Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard Nixon, who played college football, Trump’s athletic background is limited to high school football.

      Nor did Trump serve in the military like previous presidents John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, both of whom served in the Second World War. Trump, by contrast, avoided service during the Vietnam war for medical and educational reasons.

      Despite a lack of traditional masculine bonafides, Trump has shown an ability to use sporting events for his political gain. He has used sporting events as potent media environments to insert his talking points and burnish his masculine image.

      In the end, the boos from Canadian fans may be music to Donald Trump’s ears. He wants to be hated by outsiders so he can turn around to his supporters and say that the U.S. is under attack at its borders. He wants the sporting accomplishments of the American men’s teams to reflect on his strength.

      It can still go against him, as we saw Thursday night with Canada beating the U.S. in overtime. Justin Trudeau wasted no time using that moment to respond with strong rhetoric in a tweet.

      What happened on the ice was out of Trump’s control. But he used the event to serve his own goals, sowing greater divisiveness across borders. The shadow of his combative rhetoric loomed large over the entire event. More

    • 225 Shares79 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Starmer’s aid cuts: they won’t buy security, but they will undermine it | Editorial

      by

      Politics is about choices. Some are forced on governments by circumstance. Others are self‑imposed. Labour’s decision to cut the aid budget to “pay” for increased defence spending is firmly in the latter category. It is also wrong – forcing the world’s poor to pay for Britain’s safety. This is a false economy. Cutting aid will make the world more unstable, not less. The very crises that fuel conflict – poverty, failed states, climate disasters and mass displacement – will only worsen with less development funding. Labour’s logic is self‑defeating: diverting money from aid to defence does not buy security; it undermines it.The numbers tell the story. Despite government attempts to inflate the amounts involved, the extra £5bn‑£6bn for defence is tiny relative to Britain’s GDP. The UK could easily absorb this through borrowing – especially in a global financial system where sterling is heavily traded – or, if the government prefers, through a modest wealth tax. Yet Sir Keir Starmer has chosen to frame this as a zero-sum game, where aid must give way to security. Why? Because this is not about economic necessity – it’s about political positioning. Labour wants to prove that it can be fiscally disciplined even when the numbers don’t demand it. It wants to neutralise Tory attacks, even when the real battle is over priorities, not affordability.It is also a move that aligns with Donald Trump’s worldview. The US president wants to close down the US government’s main overseas aid agency, treating it as an expensive indulgence rather than a pillar of foreign policy. Sir Keir is set to go to Washington this week. A UK prime minister that echoes Mr Trump’s “America first” instincts on defence and aid may find the meeting more congenial. If so, Sir Keir may be taking the idea that “the meek shall inherit the earth” a little too literally.Labour doesn’t just believe in fiscal discipline, it believes that it must believe in fiscal discipline and it constructs a justification for that belief. The problem is this: by accepting Conservative trade‑offs, Labour locks itself into an orthodoxy that it may later need to break. In a volatile world, Britain – outside the EU – must boost high-value exports and cut reliance on fragile supply chains. Even under Joe Biden, the UK was kept out of the US-EU Trade and Technology Council, which strengthened transatlantic industrial policy. Yet when does Downing Street admit Britain’s real limit is productive capacity – not budget deficits?Britain’s fiscal constraint is artificial, but its resource constraints are real. Energy, food and manufacturing are matters of national security, not just market functions. Without investment, dependence on key imports makes Britain vulnerable to supply-chain shocks and price inflation. That should make the announcements by Labour’s Ed Miliband and Steve Reed matter. If every pound spent requires a cut elsewhere, neither would have had much to say.Sir Keir often presents himself as a pragmatist rather than an ideologue – claiming to be adapting to circumstances rather than adhering to dogma. But such pragmatism is itself a belief system, one that treats capitalism’s rules as unchangeable, markets as beyond politics, and history as a one‑way street where past mistakes justify permanent, crippling caution. In doing so, he isn’t just rejecting alternatives – he’s rewriting history to suggest they were never an option to begin with.Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More