United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares96 Views

      in Elections

      U.S. Court Agrees to Keep Trump Tariffs Intact as Appeal Gets Underway

      by

      The appeals court’s decision delivered an important but interim victory for the Trump administration.A federal appeals court agreed on Tuesday to allow President Trump to maintain many of his tariffs on China and other U.S. trading partners, extending a pause granted shortly after another panel of judges ruled in late May that the import taxes were illegal.The decision, from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, delivered an important but interim victory for the Trump administration, which had warned that any interruption to its steep duties could undercut the president in talks around the world.But the government still must convince the judges that the president appropriately used a set of emergency powers when he put in place the centerpiece of his economic agenda earlier this year. The Trump administration has already signaled it is willing to fight that battle as far as the Supreme Court.The ruling came shortly after negotiators from the United States and China agreed to a framework intended to extend a trade truce between the two superpowers. The Trump administration had warned that those talks and others would have been jeopardized if the appeals court had not granted a fuller stay while arguments proceeded.At the heart of the legal wrangling is Mr. Trump’s novel interpretation of a 1970s law that he used to wage a global trade war on an expansive scale. No president before him had ever used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to impose tariffs, and the word itself is not even mentioned in the statute.But the law has formed the foundation of Mr. Trump’s campaign to reorient the global economic order. He has invoked its powers to sidestep Congress and impose huge taxes on most global imports, with the goal of raising revenue, bolstering domestic manufacturing and brokering more favorable trade deals with other countries.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

    • 88 Shares156 Views

      in Elections

      F.D.A. Looks to A.I. to Enhance Efficiency

      by

      With a Trump-driven reduction of nearly 2,000 employees, agency officials view artificial intelligence as a way to speed drugs to the market.The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.“The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.“I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”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 Shares195 Views

      in Elections

      Defying Trump’s Firing, Smithsonian Says It Controls Personnel Decisions

      by

      The Smithsonian is challenging the president’s authority to dismiss the leader of the National Portrait Gallery but says it will look into his complaints.In a challenge to President Trump, the Smithsonian said on Monday that the president did not have the right to fire Kim Sajet, the director of the National Portrait Gallery, despite his recent announcement that she had been terminated.“All personnel decisions are made by and subject to the direction of the secretary, with oversight by the board,” said a statement from the Smithsonian, which oversees that museum and 20 others, as well as libraries, research centers and the National Zoo. “Lonnie G. Bunch, the secretary, has the support of the Board of Regents in his authority and management of the Smithsonian.”The statement came hours after the Board of Regents, including Vice President JD Vance, discussed the president’s announcement at a quarterly meeting. When Mr. Trump said 10 days ago that he had fired Ms. Sajet, he called her “a highly partisan person, and a strong supporter of DEI, which is totally inappropriate for her position.”The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Ms. Sajet was not mentioned in the Smithsonian’s statement. But the board said it was asking Mr. Bunch to take steps to ensure the institution’s nonpartisan nature.“The Smithsonian must be a welcoming place of knowledge and discovery for all Americans,” the statement said. “The Board of Regents is committed to ensuring that the Smithsonian is a beacon of scholarship free from political or partisan influence, and we recognize that our institution can and must do more to further these foundational values.”The statement said the board had directed Mr. Bunch to articulate expectations to museum directors about what is displayed in their institutions and to give them time to make any changes needed “to ensure unbiased content.”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

    • 138 Shares185 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s Crackdown on LA Protests Contrasts With His Jan. 6 Response

      by

      The president often expresses an open desire for aggressive law enforcement and harsh tactics when protests originate from the political left.When violent protests originate from the right — such as those in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017, or at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 — President Trump has chosen to downplay the violence or suggest the protesters have a noble cause and have been treated unfairly.But when protests originate from what he views as the political left, Mr. Trump often expresses an open desire for law enforcement and the military to harshly crack down on them.Over the weekend, Mr. Trump ordered that 2,000 National Guard troops be deployed on the streets of downtown Los Angeles to quell protests against his administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. That was followed by orders on Monday to send 700 Marines to join them, and then later in the day, with an order for 2,000 additional National Guard troops.Even though the demonstrations have been largely contained to specific areas and mostly peaceful, Mr. Trump claimed on social media that the protesters were “insurrectionist mobs” and that Los Angeles had been “invaded and occupied by Illegal Aliens and Criminals.”In endorsing harsh law enforcement tactics against immigration protests, Mr. Trump is picking a political fight on ground that Republicans believe is advantageous terrain. Stephen K. Bannon, a former adviser to Mr. Trump, said on his podcast on Monday that the president’s response was “quite smart.”“He just won a massive national election on this very topic,” Mr. Bannon said, magnifying Mr. Trump’s showing in a race he won by less than 2.3 million popular votes. Mr. Bannon accused Democratic-led jurisdictions of inviting in undocumented immigrants and refusing to arrest violent protesters. “This is why President Trump has to bring in the National Guard and federalize them,” he said.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

    • 75 Shares185 Views

      in Elections

      This Is What Autocracy Looks Like

      by

      Since Donald Trump was elected again, I’ve feared one scenario above all others: that he’d call out the military against people protesting his mass deportations, putting America on the road to martial law. Even in my more outlandish imaginings, however, I thought that he’d need more of a pretext to put troops on the streets of an American city — against the wishes of its mayor and governor — than the relatively small protests that broke out in Los Angeles last week.In a post-reality environment, it turns out, the president didn’t need to wait for a crisis to launch an authoritarian crackdown. Instead, he can simply invent one.It’s true that some of those protesting Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Los Angeles have been violent; on Sunday one man was arrested for allegedly tossing a Molotov cocktail at a police officer, and another was accused of driving a motorcycle into a line of cops. Such violence should be condemned both because it’s immoral and because it’s wildly counterproductive; each burning Waymo or smashed storefront is an in-kind gift to the administration.But the idea that Trump needed to put soldiers on the streets of the city because riots were spinning out of control is pure fantasy. “Today, demonstrations across the city of Los Angeles remained peaceful, and we commend all those who exercised their First Amendment rights responsibly,” said a statement issued by the Los Angeles Police Department on Saturday evening. That was the same day Trump overrode Gov. Gavin Newsom and federalized California’s National Guard, under a rarely used law meant to deal with “rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States.”Then, on Monday, with thousands of National Guard troops already deployed to the city, the administration said it was also sending 700 Marines. The Los Angeles police don’t seem to want the Marines there; in a statement, the police chief, Jim McDonnell, said, “The arrival of federal military forces in Los Angeles — absent clear coordination — presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us charged with safeguarding this city.” But for Trump, safeguarding the city was never the point.It’s important to understand that for this administration, protests needn’t be violent to be considered an illegitimate uprising. The presidential memorandum calling out the National Guard refers to both violent acts and any protests that “inhibit” law enforcement. That definition would seem to include peaceful demonstrations around the site of ICE raids. In May, for example, armed federal agents stormed two popular Italian restaurants in San Diego looking for undocumented workers; they handcuffed staff members and took four people into custody. As they did so, an outraged crowd gathered outside, chanting “shame” and for a time blocking the agents from leaving. Under Trump’s order, the military could target these people as insurrectionists.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 Shares126 Views

      in Elections

      Trump and Newsom Skewer Each Other After National Guard Deployment to LA Protests

      by

      President Trump said that Gov. Gavin Newsom should be arrested for his governance of California, while Mr. Newsom issued a barrage of retorts online.A war of words erupted Monday between Gov. Gavin Newsom and the White House, punctuated by President Trump saying that the governor should be arrested because “he’s done such a bad job” leading California.The latest feud came after a weekend of clashes in Los Angeles as residents protested federal immigration raids and President Trump’s decision to deploy National Guard troops without support from Mr. Newsom.Mr. Trump has criticized Mr. Newsom on various issues for months, including his handling of the Los Angeles fires and California’s transgender athlete policy. Mr. Newsom had, for the most part, sparingly struck back while still trying to show deference to the president.But that ended this weekend. And by Monday, the governor was firing back with a barrage of social media posts, emails and news interviews, in a tone that ranged from snarky to serious.All of it was suited for an era of politics that rewards jousting by online gladiators.The latest skirmish began when Mr. Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, told NBC News on Saturday that he would arrest anybody, including Mr. Newsom, who interfered with immigration enforcement.The governor responded with a dare for Mr. Homan.“Come after me,” Mr. Newsom said in an interview with MSNBC on Sunday. “Arrest me, tough guy. Let’s just get it over with.”Reporters then asked Mr. Trump on Monday if he thought Mr. Homan should arrest Mr. Newsom.“I would do it if I were Tom,” Mr. Trump said. “Look, I like Gavin Newsom, he’s a nice guy. But he’s grossly incompetent.”Mr. Newsom responded by sharing on X a video of the president’s comments— and pinned it to the top of his feed to give it extra prominence.“The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor. This is a day I hoped I would never see in America,” he wrote, calling it an “unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.”Later Monday, a reporter asked Mr. Trump what crime Mr. Newsom should be charged with if he were to be arrested.“His primary crime is running for governor, because he’s done such a bad job,” Mr. Trump said. “What he’s done to that state is like what Biden did to this country.”Mr. Newsom posted that video, too. He added social media posts that needled Mr. Trump’s Republican supporters, including Vice President JD Vance, Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama and Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio.Mr. Jordan posted a comment on X saying, “We fly the American flag in America” — an apparent reference to the many Latin American flags that demonstrators carried at the protests in Los Angeles. Mr. Newsom shot back with a photo of Jan. 6 protesters on the steps of the U.S. Capitol, one of them attacking police officers with an American flag.“Like this?” Mr. Newsom wrote. More

    • 125 Shares187 Views

      in Elections

      A Tricky Balance for L.A. Law Enforcement During Immigration Protests

      by

      Local agencies have tried to make clear that they are not involved in civil immigration enforcement, but that when protests turn violent, they will intervene.Los Angeles law enforcement agencies have responded to demonstrations over federal immigration raids this weekend, but they have also tried to make clear that they themselves were not carrying out immigration sweeps.That has required a careful balance. And local law enforcement officials such as the Los Angeles County sheriff, Robert Luna, know that many of the residents they serve, as well as their own colleagues, have family histories like those of the people being targeted by President Trump’s immigration raids.Sheriff Luna grew up in an unincorporated part of East Los Angeles that was patrolled by the department he is now in charge of. And so for him, the whole situation “does hit home.”“I come from an immigrant family,” Sheriff Luna said in a telephone interview on Sunday. “I have a lot of family members who migrated here. Some of them legally, some of them illegally.”He said that he firmly believed that undocumented immigrants who commit serious or violent crimes should be put through the criminal justice system and be deported if eligible. But, he added: “The majority of our immigrants do not fit that category. They are our cooks, our gardeners, our nannies, our hotel workers. That’s what my mom and dad did.”The standoffs over the immigration raids have created difficult optics for local law enforcement agencies whose officers and deputies have clashed with protesters and have at times deployed flash-bang grenades, projectiles and other crowd-control measures.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