Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      House Votes to Block California Plan to Ban New Gas-Powered Cars in 2035

      by

      Republicans, joined by a handful of Democrats, voted to eliminate California’s electric vehicle policy, which had been adopted by 11 other states.The House on Thursday voted to bar California from imposing its landmark ban on the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035, the first step in an effort by the Republican majority to stop a state policy designed to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles.The 246-to-164 vote came a day after Republicans, joined by a few Democrats, voted to block California from requiring dealers in the state to sell an increasing percentage of zero-emission, medium and heavy-duty trucks over time. And, lawmakers also voted on Wednesday to stop a state effort to reduce California’s levels of smog.All three policies were implemented under permissions granted to California by the Biden administration. They pose an extraordinary challenge to California’s longstanding authority under the 1970 Clean Air Act to set pollution standards that are more strict than federal limits.And the legality of the congressional action is in dispute. Two authorities, the Senate parliamentarian and the Government Accountability Office, have ruled that Congress cannot revoke the waivers.California leaders condemned the actions and promised a battle.Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, called the move “lawless” and an attack on states’ rights. “Trump Republicans are hellbent on making California smoggy again,” Governor Newsom said in a statement.“Clean air didn’t used to be political,” he said, adding, “The only thing that’s changed is that big polluters and the right-wing propaganda machine have succeeded in buying off the Republican Party.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      May Day Protests Are Expected to Mobilize Outcry Against Trump

      by

      Organizers see a traditional day for labor marches as an opportunity to show growing opposition to the Trump administration’s agenda.Protesters are expected to gather in more than 1,000 cities and towns across the country on Thursday to oppose President Trump’s plans to cut education funding, rollback workers’ rights and carry out mass deportations.The protests, spearheaded by 50501, a loose coalition of grass-roots activist groups, will coincide with traditional May Day demonstrations by labor organizations. Large crowds are anticipated in major cities such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Washington, where police have already closed roads.The streets around City Hall in Philadelphia will also be shut down for an event where Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, is slated to speak.Organizers in small towns say they are also expecting dozens, if not hundreds, of participants at protests in front of municipal buildings and public schools, with some wearing red to indicate support for public education. In Norman, Okla., and Sauk City, Wis., demonstrators will stand on bridges and display signs for motorists.The Trump administration has engaged in efforts to quell dissent in corporate America, the civil service, universities and the media. But in recent weeks, demonstrations opposing Mr. Trump’s agenda, governing style and expansion of executive power have increased in size and frequency.Town halls have become unruly and combative, pushing many Republican lawmakers to avoid facing voters altogether. And collective efforts by universities, nonprofit groups, unions and even some law firms have slowly started to build momentum against the administration.Large groups of people have mobilized across the country, including for the “Hands Off!” protests on April 5, which focused on opposition to Elon Musk, a major political donor to Mr. Trump and unelected billionaire working with the administration, gutting large portions of the federal government.Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois, a Democrat who first ran for office in 2018 because of his revulsion to Mr. Trump’s first term, called for a larger outcry during a speech on Sunday in New Hampshire. “It’s time to fight everywhere and all at once,” he said. “Never before in my life have I called for mass protests, for mobilization, for disruption. But I am now.” More

    • 100 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Microsoft Drops Simpson Thacher & Bartlett Law Firm

      by

      The tech giant instead engaged a firm that is fighting the president’s executive orders, Jenner & Block, in a sign that those firms can still attract clients.When big law firms attacked by President Trump decided to make a deal with him rather than fight, many did so because their leaders feared that clients would abandon a firm caught on the administration’s bad side.Now that logic may be getting less compelling. A major company, Microsoft, has dropped a law firm that settled with the administration in favor of one that is fighting it.Large companies like Microsoft often farm out legal work to dozens or even hundreds of firms and may move business depending on circumstances, like pricing, expertise or potential conflicts. Microsoft declined to comment on why it changed law firms in a significant case last week, but the switch suggests that a firm that chose to fight the Trump administration could still attract an important client.On April 22, several attorneys at the law firm Simpson Thacher & Bartlett informed the Delaware Court of Chancery that they would no longer be representing Microsoft in a case related to the company’s 2023 acquisition of the video game giant Activision Blizzard, according to court filings.Simpson Thacher reached a deal with the White House last month in which the firm committed to perform $125 million in free legal work for causes acceptable to the Trump administration. In a joint statement with other firms making similar agreements, Simpson Thacher said the pro bono work would be on behalf of “a wide range of underserved populations.”On the same day that the Simpson Thacher lawyers filed paperwork withdrawing from the Microsoft case, at least three partners at the firm Jenner & Block informed the court that they would be representing Microsoft in the case. Jenner is fighting in court to permanently block a Trump administration executive order targeting its business.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Tariffs and Shrinking GDP Raise Political Stakes

      by

      The report that the economy contracted in the first quarter underscored how much President Trump has at risk as he pursues an aggressive trade war.President Trump took office 101 days ago after a campaign in which voters bought his argument that he could skillfully manage the economy and that his policy prescriptions could both bolster growth and eradicate inflation.So the news on Wednesday that the nation’s gross domestic product had contracted in the first three months of the year was a sharp political jolt as well as a blinking economic warning.It came at the end of a quarter in which stock prices were down sharply, Wall Street’s worst performance at the start of a new presidential term since Gerald R. Ford tried to steer the country out of scandal and inflation 51 years ago. And it only added to the widespread uncertainty among businesses and consumers about what the rest of the year might hold as Mr. Trump pursues a trade war that is already choking off supply chains and threatening to push prices up and lead to shortages of critical components and products on shelves.It is too soon to predict where the American economy is headed for the rest of the year, and Mr. Trump remains insistent that he will produce a flurry of trade deals that will bring manufacturing back to the United States and usher in a new age of prosperity.But the first-quarter figures brought the political risks for him into focus. For Mr. Trump, what is at stake is a question of fundamental competence on an issue that he has always used to define himself.If the report proves to be a harbinger of an extended slowdown or recession, the situation could become the economic analog of President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s fumbled withdrawal from Afghanistan four years ago this summer. Mr. Biden’s job approval ratings never recovered from that early debacle. Nothing he did later — not the millions of jobs created, not the big legislative victories, not the rapid response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — could restore the sense among voters that he could be trusted to carry out the job with the skill they assumed he brought to it.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Rejects Bipartisan Measure to Undo Trump’s Tariffs

      by

      Only three Republicans joined Democrats in voting to end the national emergency President Trump declared to impose tariffs on most U.S. trading partners, leaving the measure short of the support needed to pass.The Senate on Wednesday rejected an effort to undo President Trump’s sweeping tariffs on most U.S. trading partners, even as a small group of Republicans joined Democrats in delivering a rebuke to a trade policy that many lawmakers fear is causing economic harm.The vote deadlocked at 49 to 49, meaning it failed despite three Republicans joining Democrats in favor of a measure that sought to terminate the national emergency declaration Mr. Trump used this month to impose 10 percent reciprocal tariffs.Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky and a cosponsor of the resolution, crossed party lines to support it, as well as Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. But the defections were not enough to make up for the absences of two supporters: Senators Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, and Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, who backed a similar measure this month.“It’s still a debate worth having,” Mr. Paul said of the failed resolution. He noted that many of his Republican colleagues are privately expressing consternation over Mr. Trump’s trade war but have carefully calibrated their public responses to defer to the president.A subsequent procedural vote on the measure prompted Vice President JD Vance to go to Capitol Hill on Wednesday evening to cast the deciding vote to table it, formally ending the effort to challenge Mr. Trump’s use of the emergency power for wide-ranging tariffs.Even if the resolution had passed the Senate, it had no path to enactment. The White House has threatened a veto, and House Republican leaders moved pre-emptively to prevent any such measure from being forced to the floor until the fall at the earliest. The maneuver was aimed at shielding their members from politically tricky votes on the matter.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Elise Stefanik, Cabinet Hopes Dashed, Considers Her Next Move

      by

      Styrofoam packing peanuts littered an empty office in the Rayburn House Office Building across from the Capitol on Monday morning as two moving men unpacked a plush couch, an upholstered armchair, lamps and a lucite side table.Representative Elise Stefanik of New York was back.This had not been the plan.Ms. Stefanik, the self-proclaimed “ultra MAGA” warrior whom President Trump nominated to serve as ambassador to the United Nations, had expected to sail through her Senate confirmation vote, which was to be scheduled in early April.So she boxed up her office. She sent off her longtime chief of staff, Patrick Hester, to start a new job at the State Department, where he ended up working for seven days. She completed a “farewell tour” of her district, checked out schools for her son in New York City and was looking forward to moving into the $15 million Manhattan penthouse that comes with what is considered a fairly cushy job.Instead, Ms. Stefanik was back here on Capitol Hill amid the peanuts, contemplating her next steps and pinning most of the blame for what happened on Speaker Mike Johnson.To detractors, the president’s decision to pull Ms. Stefanik’s nomination was something akin to karmic comeuppance for a Republican lawmaker who was elected as a moderate but tacked unapologetically to the MAGA right, coming to personify the opportunistic shape-shifting that has gripped her party in the age of Mr. Trump.Ms. Stefanik’s plight seemed to crystallize in one succinct cautionary tale the limits of loyalty in the MAGA universe. Even one of the president’s most stalwart defenders, an effective ally since his first impeachment trial, ultimately did not get what she had long been promised.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

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Under Trump, Stocks Have the Worst Start to a Presidential Term Since 1974

      by

      During the first 100 days of the Trump administration, shock waves from the chaotic tariff rollout continue to send tremors through the global financial system.One hundred days of President Trump. Seventy days of whipsaw trading in financial markets. Thirty three days of losses. More than $6.5 trillion wiped from the value of public companies.For financial markets, the 9 percent drop in the S&P 500 is on track for the worst start to a presidential term since Gerald R. Ford took over from Richard M. Nixon in August 1974 after the Watergate scandal. The slump is worse even than when the tech bubble burst at the turn of the century, and George W. Bush inherited a market already in free fall.In contrast, Mr. Trump inherited an economy on solid footing and a stock market rising from one record high to another.That swiftly changed when Mr. Trump unveiled his marquee suite of tariffs on April 2 — not the first new import taxes announced by his administration, but by far the most sweeping. Volatility erupted. Wall Street frantically began to grapple with the economic consequences of the new government’s policies.The S&P 500 tumbled more than 10 percent in two days, a drop comparable to some of the worst days of the pandemic-induced sell-off in March 2020 and, before that, the financial crisis in 2008.Stocks have since stabilized, but the shock waves from the chaotic tariff rollout continue to send tremors through the global financial system.Trump’s Astonishing 100 Days, in 8 ChartsBy many measures, the opening months of President Trump’s second term stand apart from those of essentially any modern president.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

      Timeline: How the Administration Deported Migrants Despite Judge’s Order

      by

      <!–> [–><!–>The New York Times reconstructed how the Trump administration and President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador struck a deal that led to the deportation of more than 200 Venezuelan migrants to a Salvadoran prison.–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> –>The day before<!–> –><!–> [–><!–>Mr. Trump secretly signed an executive order invoking an 18th-century wartime law called […] More