More stories

  • in

    5 Takeaways: Behind Trump’s Deal to Deport Migrants to El Salvador

    Internal documents and interviews with people familiar with the operation reveal how the White House seized on a wartime law to accelerate immigrant deportations.President Trump’s deportation in March of more than 200 alleged gang members from Venezuela to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador has emerged as a flashpoint in his administration’s use of wartime powers to expel immigrants.Lawyers for those deported say the March 15 operation circumvented due process and swept up those who are not gang members. The Supreme Court is now poised to weigh in on how the White House has sought to apply the Alien Enemies Act, which had previously only been invoked by presidents in time of war.A team of reporters from The New York Times reviewed court filings and government documents and interviewed government officials and lawyers for deportees and their relatives to reconstruct how the United States secured the deal with El Salvador and seized on the law to supercharge its deportation efforts.Here are five takeaways.El Salvador’s president pressed the U.S. for assurances that the deportees had gang ties.President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador has championed President Trump and his immigration agenda and publicly celebrated the arrival of the deportees from the United States. But behind the scenes, Mr. Bukele expressed concern about who the United States sent to be imprisoned in his new Terrorism Confinement Center, known as CECOT, according to according to people familiar with the situation and documents obtained by The New York Times.During the negotiations, Mr. Bukele told U.S. officials he would take only what he described as “convicted criminals” from other countries. He made it clear that he did not want migrants from other nations whose only crime was being in the United States illegally.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

    Trump Says He Could Free Abrego Garcia From El Salvador, but Won’t

    Trump’s comments undermined previous statements by his top aides and were a blunt sign of his administration’s intention to double down and defy the courts.President Trump, whose administration has insisted it could not bring Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador to the United States, said he does have the ability to help return the wrongly deported Maryland man, but is not willing to do so because he believes he is a gang member.“You could get him back, there’s a phone on this desk,” said Terry Moran, an ABC News correspondent, noting a Supreme Court order to “facilitate” the release of Mr. Abrego Garcia.“I could,” Mr. Trump replied.Mr. Moran said Mr. Trump could call Mr. Bukele and get Mr. Abrego Garcia back immediately.“And if he were the gentleman that you say he is, I would do that,” Mr. Trump said. “But he is not.” Mr. Trump added that government lawyers do not want to help bring Mr. Abrego Garcia back to the United States.Mr. Trump’s comments not only undermined previous statements by his top aides, but were a blunt sign of his administration’s intention to double down and defy the courts. Before the interview with ABC News, the administration had dug in on its refusal to heed the Supreme Court order to help return Mr. Abrego Garcia, who is a Salvadoran migrant. Trump officials have said that because he was now in a Salvadoran prison, it was up the Salvadoran government to release him.The Justice Department has argued that it can respond to the Supreme Court’s demand that the administration “facilitate” Mr. Abrego Garcia’s release by doing little more than letting him enter if he manages to present himself at a port of entry.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

    Mark Carney Has to Deliver on Trump and the Economy After Canada Election Win

    The Canadian prime minister achieved a stunning political upset, running on an anti-Trump platform and promising to revive the economy. Now, he needs to deliver. Canada’s banker-turned-prime-minister pulled off a political miracle, leading his party from polling abyss to a rare fourth term in power, and securing the top government job after entering electoral politics just three months ago.Mark Carney, the country’s new leader, told Canadians that he was the right person to stand up to President Trump and that, with his economics expertise, he knew how to boost the country’s lackluster economy and fortify it in turbulent times. Now he has to actually do all of that, and quickly, as his country moves from a prolonged period of political turmoil and faces the fallout of a trade war with its closest ally and economic partner: the United States. Mess at HomeWhen Mr. Carney’s predecessor, Justin Trudeau, announced in January that he would resign after 10 years leading Canada, he created a rare opportunity that Mr. Carney jumped at. But after Mr. Carney won the race to replace Mr. Trudeau in March as prime minister and leader of the Liberal Party, he also inherited a messy situation at home that he must now urgently take on. The Canadian Parliament has not been in session since before Christmas, after Mr. Trudeau suspended its activities to be able to hold the Liberal leadership election that elevated Mr. Carney. 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

    White House Assails Amazon, Citing Tariff Pricing Report

    The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, attacked the retail giant over a report that suggested Amazon would display the cost of tariff-related price increases. Amazon said it never considered doing so on its main website.There’s a fresh spat brewing between the White House and Amazon.Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, on Tuesday accused the online retail giant of being “hostile and political,” citing a report — disputed by Amazon — from Punchbowl News saying that the company would start displaying the exact cost of tariff-related price increases alongside its products.Displaying the import fees would have made clear to American consumers that they are shouldering the cost of President Trump’s tariff policies rather than China, as he and his top officials have often claimed would be the case.An Amazon spokesman said the company had considered a similar idea on part of its site, Amazon Haul, which competes with Temu, a Chinese retailer. Temu primarily ships directly to consumers and has begun displaying “import charges” to reflect the end of a customs loophole that had exempted low-priced items from tariffs.“Teams discuss ideas all the time,” the spokesman, Ty Rogers, said in a statement. “This was never a consideration for the main Amazon site and nothing has been implemented on any Amazon properties.”Standing beside Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent during a briefing at the White House on Tuesday morning, Ms. Leavitt tore into the retailer. She said that she had just been on the phone with the president about the report, and she asked why Amazon hadn’t done such a thing when prices increased during the Biden administration because of inflation.Ms. Leavitt said it was “not a surprise” coming from Amazon, as she held up a copy of a 2021 article from Reuters with the headline, “Amazon partnered with China propaganda arm.” Mr. Trump’s aggressive tariffs on Chinese goods have touched off an escalating trade war, even as his administration has backed off its broader global levies amid what it said were negotiations with dozens of nations on new trade deals.Ms. Leavitt’s attack on Amazon was all the more noteworthy because the company’s founder, Jeff Bezos, has lately gone to great lengths to curry favor with this White House. Amazon donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural fund, securing seats for Mr. Bezos and his bride-to-be in the Capitol Rotunda for the inauguration.In December, Mr. Bezos explained his Trump-ward turn while speaking at The New York Times DealBook conference. “What I’ve seen so far is he is calmer than he was the first time,” Mr. Bezos said of Mr. Trump, “more confident, more settled.”He added, “I’m very hopeful. He seems to have a lot of energy around reducing regulation.”Ms. Leavitt was asked whether the White House still considered Mr. Bezos to be a Trump supporter, given the latest report.“Look, I will not speak to the president’s relationships with Jeff Bezos,” Ms. Leavitt said, “but I will tell you that this is certainly a hostile and political action by Amazon.” More

  • in

    Mexico to Give U.S. More Water From Their Shared Rivers

    A joint agreement appeared to avert a threat by President Trump of tariffs and sanctions in a long-running dispute over water rights in the border region.Mexico has agreed to send water to the United States and temporarily channel more water to the country from their shared rivers, a concession that appeared to defuse a diplomatic crisis sparked by yearslong shortages that left Mexico behind on its treaty-bound contribution of water from the borderlands.Earlier this month, President Trump threatened additional tariffs and other sanctions against Mexico over the water debt, amounting to about 420 billion gallons. In a social media post, Mr. Trump accused Mexico of “stealing” water from Texas farmers by not meeting its obligations under a 1944 treaty that mediates the distribution of water from three rivers the two countries share: the Rio Grande, the Colorado and the Tijuana. In an agreement announced jointly by Mexico and the United States on Monday, Mexico will immediately transfer some of its water reserves and will give the country a larger share of the flow of water from the Rio Grande through October.The concession from Mexico averted the threat of more punishing tariffs and diplomatic enmity with the United States amid the rollout of Mr. Trump’s new trade policies. But fulfilling the agreement is expected to significantly strain Mexico’s farmlands and could revive civil unrest triggered by previous water payments to the United States. Much of the Mexican borderlands are enduring extreme drought conditions, according to Mexico’s meteorological agency and water commission, and Mexico’s water reserves are at historic lows.Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, has taken a conciliatory approach in negotiations with the Trump administration. Hours after Mr. Trump’s threat of tariffs over the water dispute earlier this month, Ms. Sheinbaum acknowledged that her country had fallen short of its treaty commitments, citing the extreme drought and saying that Mexico had been complying “to the extent of water availability.”In a statement on Monday, the State Department lauded Ms. Sheinbaum “for her personal involvement” in negotiating the agreement, and spoke of “water scarcity affecting communities on both sides of the border.” A statement from the Mexican foreign ministry on the agreement noted that the United States had agreed not to seek a renegotiation of the 1944 water treaty.Longstanding tensions over water have simmered between Mexico and the United States. In 2020, those tensions exploded into violence in Mexico, as farmers rioted and seized control of a dam in the border region in an effort to shut off water deliveries to the United States.Rising temperatures and drought have made the water from rivers Mexico and the United States share all the more valuable.According to data provided by the International Boundary and Water Commission, which mediates water disputes between the two countries, Mexico has fallen well short of its treaty commitments on water delivery in the last five years. Between October 2020 and October 2024, Mexico provided just over 400,000 acre-feet of water, far less than the roughly 1.4 million acre-feet called for under treaty stipulations. The debt has only grown since.Emiliano Rodríguez Mega More

  • in

    Canada’s Political Landscape Upended by Trump, Trudeau and Tariffs

    After nearly a decade in power, the Liberal Party seemed destined to be swept out on a wave of anti-incumbency sentiment. Then events took a surprising turn.Until January, polls suggested that the Conservative Party would handily regain power from the Liberals in any Canadian election held this year.Two things overturned that expectation: the resignation of Justin Trudeau as prime minister and President Trump’s trade war with Canada, along with his threat to annex the country and make it the 51st state by sowing economic chaos.Trump’s Trade WarWhile Mr. Trump pulled back from his initial threat of tariffs on everything imported from Canada, he has imposed several measures that hit key sectors of Canada’s economy: a 25 percent tariff on automobiles, aluminum and steel, and a similar one on Canadian exports that do not qualify as North American goods under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which he signed during his first term in office. An auto parts tariff of 25 percent is scheduled to take effect on Saturday. Last week, Mr. Trump suggested that the automobile tariffs, which are reduced based on their U.S.-made content, could be increased. He offered no specifics.Autos and auto parts are Canada’s largest exports to the United States, outside oil and gas. Canada Hits BackUnder Mr. Trudeau, Canada placed retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods coming into Canada that are expected to generate 30 billion Canadian dollars, about $22 billion, in revenue over a year.After becoming prime minister in March, Mark Carney imposed an additional 8 billion Canadian dollars, about $5.7 billion, in tariffs, including a 25 percent levy on autos made in the United States — but not on auto parts. Automakers with assembly lines in Canada will still largely be able to bring in American-made cars of those brands duty free.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

    Trump Has Destroyed What Made America Great. It Only Took 100 Days.

    In 1941, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt marshaled support for the fight against fascism, his chief antagonists were isolationists at home. “What I seek to convey,” he said at the beginning of an address to Congress, “is the historic truth that the United States as a nation has at all times maintained clear, definite opposition to any attempt to lock us in behind an ancient Chinese wall while the procession of civilization went past.” Roosevelt prevailed, and that victory expanded America’s relationship with the world in ways that remade both.Eighty-four years later, President Trump is systematically severing America from the globe. This is not simply a shift in foreign policy. It is a divorce so comprehensive that it makes Britain’s exit from the European Union look modest by comparison.Consider the breadth of this effort. Allies have been treated like adversaries. The United States has withdrawn from international agreements on fundamental issues like health and climate change. A “nation of immigrants” now deports people without due process, bans refugees and is trying to end birthright citizenship. Mr. Trump’s tariffs have upended the system of international trade, throwing up new barriers to doing business with every country on Earth. Foreign assistance has largely been terminated. So has support for democracy abroad. Research cuts have rolled back global scientific research and cooperation. The State Department is downsizing. Exchange programs are on the chopping block. Global research institutions like the U.S. Institute of Peace and the Wilson Center have been effectively shut down. And, of course, the United States is building a wall along its southern border.Other countries are under no obligation to help a 78-year-old American president fulfill a fanciful vision of making America great again. Already a Gaza cease-fire has unraveled, Russia continues its war on Ukraine, Europe is turning away from America, Canadians are boycotting our goods and a Chinese Communist Party that endured the Great Famine and the Cultural Revolution seems prepared to weather a few years of tariffs. Travel to the United States is down 12 percent compared with last March, as tourists recoil from America’s authoritarian turn.The ideologues driving Mr. Trump’s agenda defend their actions by pointing to the excesses of American foreign policy, globalization and migration. There is, of course, much to lament there. But Mr. Trump’s ability to campaign on these problems doesn’t solve them in government. Indeed, his remedies will do far more harm to the people he claims to represent than to the global elites that his MAGA movement attacks.Start with the economic impact. If the current reduction in travel to the United States continues, it could cost up to $90 billion this year alone, along with tens of thousands of jobs. Tariffs will drive up prices and productivity will slow if mass deportations come for the farm workers who pick our food, the construction workers who build our homes and the care workers who look after children and the elderly. International students pay to attend American universities; their demonization and dehumanization could imperil the $44 billion they put into our economy each year and threaten a sector with a greater trade surplus than our civilian aircraft sector.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

    The Dinner That Helped Save Europe

    In 1979, during John Paul II’s first visit to the United States as pope, he met with President Jimmy Carter at the White House. Shortly after that, he invited Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter’s national security adviser, to dinner at the Vatican Embassy in Washington. Along with world affairs, Carter wanted to discuss declining morals with the recently elected pope, but Brzezinski had more practical subjects in mind.For the pontiff and the adviser, their mutual obsession was the Soviet Union. Over a simple meal at the Apostolic Nunciature of the Holy See, they explored how they could together weaken Moscow’s grip over its captive nations. Brzezinski was stunned by the pope’s geopolitical knowledge. He joked that Carter was more like a religious leader while the pope seemed more like a world statesman. The vicar of Christ affirmed the quip with a belly laugh, Brzezinski noted in his personal diary, to which I acquired exclusive access.From that dinner onward, the two Polish-born figures — one the first non-Italian pope in 455 years, the other America’s first (and to date, probably the only) Polish-speaking grand strategist — became intimate allies.Their serendipitous relationship proved critical in late 1980 in dissuading the Soviets from invading Poland, where the Solidarity movement had just emerged as a serious challenge to the Communist government. It was a partnership sustained by a running dialogue conducted during Brzezinski’s visits to the Vatican, in long handwritten correspondence and over the phone. His White House speed dial had P for “pope.”John Paul’s relationship with Brzezinski is a vivid example of how diplomacy works when there is mutual trust. Good chemistry is rare but extremely productive. Sustained dialogue with both friends and adversaries in today’s volatile world is, if anything, even more critical. The ability at a tense moment to pick up the phone and know that you can trust the person on the other end is the fruit of constant gardening.Yet it is increasingly hard to find the time. Technology means that presidential envoys are always within White House reach to respond to the cascade of competing demands. The world is also a more complex place than it was 40 years ago, and U.S. diplomats have rarely been held in lower regard at home. Twenty-four-hour media scrutiny also makes secrecy far harder. Henry Kissinger’s covert visit to Beijing in 1971 to pave the way for U.S. rapprochement with Mao Zedong’s China is hard to imagine today.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