More stories

  • in

    Experts Doubt Kennedy’s Timetable for Finding the Cause of Autism

    The nation’s health secretary announced that he planned to invite scientists to provide answers by September, but specialists consider that target date unrealistic.Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nation’s health secretary, pledged on Thursday to seek out experts globally to discover the reasons for the increasing rates of autism in the United States.“We’ve launched a massive testing and research effort that’s going to involve hundreds of scientists from around the world,” Mr. Kennedy announced at a cabinet meeting held by President Trump. “By September, we will know what has caused the autism epidemic and we’ll be able to eliminate those exposures.”“There will be no bigger news conference than that,” Mr. Trump replied.But scientists who have worked for decades to find a cause greeted Mr. Kennedy’s predicted timeline with skepticism.They said that a single answer would be hard to identify in a field of possible contributors including pesticides, air pollution and maternal diabetes.Dr. Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician and expert on environmental toxins, pointed to the current mass layoffs and cutbacks for research at Mr. Kennedy’s Department of Health and Human Services as one reason for doubting such quick progress.“Given that a great deal of research on autism and other pediatric diseases in hospitals and medical schools is currently coming to a halt because of federal funding cuts from H.H.S.,” he said, “it is very difficult for me to imagine what profound scientific breakthrough could be achieved between now and September.”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

  • in

    These Are the 381 Books Removed From the Naval Academy Library

    The Navy released the titles of 381 books on Friday evening that were removed from the U.S. Naval Academy’s Nimitz Library on the Annapolis, Md., campus this week because their subject matter was seen as being related to so-called diversity, equity and inclusion topics.President Trump issued an executive order in January that banned D.E.I. materials in kindergarten through 12th grade education, but the office of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth informed the Naval Academy on March 28 that he intended the order to apply to the school as well, even though it is a college.Read the Navy’s list of removed booksRead Document 19 pagesFirst on the list is “How to Be Anti-Racist” by Ibram X. Kendi. Also listed are “The Making of Black Lives Matter,” by Christopher J. Lebron; “How Racism Takes Place,” by George Lipsitz; “The Fire This Time,” edited by Jesmyn Ward; “The Myth of Equality,” by Ken Wytsma; studies of the Ku Klux Klan, and the history of lynching in America.The list also includes books about gender and sexuality, like “Bodies in Doubt: An American History of Intersex” by Elizabeth Reis, and “Between XX and XY: Intersexuality and the Myth of Two Sexes” by Gerald N. Callahan. President Trump issued a separate executive order in January proclaiming that there are only two sexes.The academy began pulling books from the shelves at Nimitz Library on Monday evening and largely completed the task before Mr. Hegseth visited midshipmen on campus Tuesday afternoon. More

  • in

    Lawsuit Challenges Trump’s Legal Rationale for Tariffs on China

    The New Civil Liberties Alliance — a nonprofit group that describes itself as battling “violations by the administrative state” — sued the federal government on Thursday over the means by which it imposed steep new levies on Chinese imports earlier this year.The new filing, which the group said was the first such lawsuit to challenge the Trump administration over its tariffs, set the stage for what may become a closely watched legal battle. It comes on the heels of President Trump’s separate announcement on Wednesday of broader, more extensive tariffs targeting many U.S. trading partners around the world.At issue are the tariffs that Mr. Trump announced on China in February and expanded in March. To impose them, Mr. Trump cited a 1970s law that generally grants the president sweeping powers during an economic emergency, known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.Mr. Trump charged that an influx of illegal drugs from China constituted a threat to the United States. But the alliance argued in the lawsuit, on behalf of Simplified, a Pensacola, Fla.-based company, that the administration had misapplied the law. Instead, the group said the law “does not allow a president to impose tariffs,” but rather is supposed to be reserved for putting in place trade embargoes and sanctions against “dangerous foreign actors.”Port Manatee in Palmetto, Fla., on TuesdayScott McIntyre for The New York TimesMr. Trump cited that same law as one of the legal justifications for the expansive global tariffs he announced with an executive order on Wednesday. That order raised the tariff rate on China to at least 54 percent, adding new levies on top of those that the president imposed earlier this year.Mr. Trump’s new order specifically described the U.S. trade deficit with other nations as “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States.”For now, the alliance asked the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Florida to block implementation and enforcement of the president’s earlier tariffs on China. “You can look through the statute all day long; you’re not going to see the president may put tariffs on the American people once he declares an emergency,” said John J. Vecchione, senior litigation counsel for the alliance.A spokesman for the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. More

  • in

    Workers at Wilson Center Put on Leave as Trump Seeks Shutdown

    Almost all the employees of the Wilson Center, a prominent nonpartisan foreign policy think tank in Washington, were placed on leave on Thursday and blocked from their work email accounts as Elon Musk’s task force quickly shut down most of the center.About 130 employees received orders telling them not to return to the office after the end of the day, according to an email reviewed by The New York Times and people with direct knowledge of the actions.The Wilson Center employees are to be paid while on leave but will be fired soon, in line with what has happened at other institutions that Mr. Musk’s workers have dismantled in recent weeks.Only five employees will remain — a president, two federal employees and two researchers on fellowships. Those positions are mandated in the center’s congressional charter. The cuts align with an executive order President Trump signed in March.Private donations to the center will be returned to the donors, according to a person familiar with the center who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retribution. It was not clear what would be done with the center’s endowment.On Thursday afternoon, dozens of employees carried boxes and bags filled with papers, plants and posters out of the center’s offices in the Ronald Reagan Building, which houses several government agency offices.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

  • in

    U.S. Seeks to Calm Tempest in Europe Over Trump’s Anti-Diversity Policies

    The U.S. State Department is seeking to quell a diplomatic tempest roiling Europe this week after American embassies in several countries sent letters to foreign contractors instructing them to certify their compliance with President Trump’s policies aimed at unraveling diversity programs.The letters, directed at companies in France, Spain, Denmark, Belgium and elsewhere that have contracts with the U.S. government, rankled European companies and officials, who are pushing back at what they described as a pressure campaign by the Trump administration to impose anti-diversity policies abroad.Late Tuesday, the State Department tried to walk back the letters, saying that the compliance requirement applies to companies only if they were “controlled by a U.S. employer” and employ U.S. citizens. That contradicted the details in the embassy letters, which said that Mr. Trump’s D.E.I.-quashing orders applied to all suppliers and contractors of the U.S. government, regardless of their nationality and the country in which they operate.The State Department’s statement repeated much of the letters’ content. It said that American embassies and missions worldwide were reviewing their contracts and grants to ensure that they were consistent with an executive order Mr. Trump signed the day after taking office. The order instructs federal contractors not to engage in diversity, equity and inclusion programs, which it described as “illegal discrimination.”The State Department said that the embassy letter “only asks contractors and grantees around the world to certify their compliance with applicable U.S. federal anti-discrimination laws.”“⁠There is no ‘verification’ required beyond asking contractors and grantees to self-certify their compliance’,” its statement said. “In other words, we are just asking them to complete one additional piece of paperwork.”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

  • in

    Democrats Sue Trump Over Executive Order on Elections

    Nearly every arm of the Democratic Party united in filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Monday night, arguing that a recent executive order signed by the president seeking to require documentary proof of citizenship and other voting reforms is unconstitutional.The 70-page lawsuit, filed in Federal District Court in Washington, D.C., accuses the president of vastly overstepping his authority to “upturn the electoral playing field in his favor and against his political rivals.” It lists President Trump and multiple members of his administration as defendants.“Although the order extensively reflects the president’s personal grievances, conspiratorial beliefs and election denialism, nowhere does it (nor could it) identify any legal authority he possesses to impose such sweeping changes upon how Americans vote,” the lawsuit says. “The reason why is clear: The president possesses no such authority.”The lawsuit repeatedly argues that the Constitution gives the president no explicit authority to regulate elections, noting that the Elections Clause of the Constitution “is at the core of this action.” That clause says that states set the “times, places and manner” of elections, leaving them to decide the rules, oversee voting and try to prevent fraud. Congress may also pass federal voting laws.As Democrats debate how best to challenge the Trump administration’s rapid expansion of executive power, the lawsuit represents one of the first moments where seemingly every arm of the party is pushing back with one voice.Such unity is further evidence that Democrats still view the issue of democracy as core to their political brand, as well as a key issue that can help them claw back support with voters as they aim to build a new coalition ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. In February, Democrats sued the Trump administration over attempts to control the Federal Election Commission. Weeks earlier, the D.N.C. joined a lawsuit over new voting laws in Georgia.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

  • in

    For God’s Sake, Fellow Lawyers, Stand Up to Trump

    President Trump this month issued an executive order clearly intended to destroy the venerable law firm Perkins Coie, a firm that has zealously represented clients large and small for more than a century.The order left no doubt that Perkins Coie’s primary offense was representing Hillary Clinton in 2016 and standing up for other causes Mr. Trump views unfavorably. It could not have been more blatantly unconstitutional than if a legal scholar had been asked to draft a template for an unlawful executive order: It violates the First Amendment, contravenes fundamental due process rights and imperils the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.On March 11, the courageous and skillful law firm Williams & Connolly filed a lawsuit on Perkins Coie’s behalf, seeking to enjoin the president’s order on constitutional grounds. At a hearing the next day, Judge Beryl A. Howell of Federal District Court in Washington issued an order temporarily barring enforcement of most of the order. The Justice Department responded by moving to disqualify Judge Howell, a motion she rejected in a withering opinion on Wednesday.Our firm stands with Perkins Coie and all firms and lawyers who fight against this president’s lawless executive actions. That’s why we’ve called on other firms to join us in submitting a friend of the court brief in support of Perkins Coie.If lawyers and law firms won’t stand up for the rule of law, who will?Beyond the Perkins Coie executive order, Mr. Trump has issued similar, and equally unlawful, executive orders directed at other law firms that have represented causes or people he doesn’t like, including because they have sued him, investigated him or contributed in some way to civil and criminal legal matters brought against him. That includes executive orders in recent days targeting the firms WilmerHale and Jenner & Block. He also issued a memorandum directed across the board at lawyers and law firms that have taken on causes he disfavors, including the pro bono representation of political asylum seekers.We applaud Jenner & Block’s and WilmerHale’s lawsuits, filed Friday, challenging the administration’s executive orders.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