United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Syrians Rejoice at Being Exempted From Trump Travel Ban

      by

      Damascus residents hope the decision is another sign that the world is normalizing relations with Syria after the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad.During his first term, President Trump included Syria in a series of travel bans targeting mostly Muslim-majority nations, branding refugees from the war-ravaged country as requiring “extreme vetting” to protect national security.The impact was immediate: flights were canceled, refugee resettlements were halted, and families were separated.But on Wednesday, Syria was exempted from Mr. Trump’s new travel ban, representing another sign of the seismic shift in U.S. foreign policy toward the country after the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad, the former president, in December.Syria was one of only four countries that were blacklisted in Mr. Trump’s first term that were excluded this time around, alongside Iraq, North Korea and Nigeria.For many Syrians, the news added to a growing sense of optimism about the country’s future as it emerges from years of war and decades of authoritarian dictatorship.“This is something that brings hope for the future, especially for the younger generation,” said Lina Habshi as she shopped in Damascus to prepare for Eid al-Adha, a major religious holiday. “My daughter was studying chemistry, but opportunities were limited here. Now she might be able to travel and grow in her field.”Her 16-year-old daughter, Rama, echoed Ms. Habshi’s sentiment. “I feel like the government’s actions are changing how Syrians are viewed,” she said. “Now we have a presence outside our country.”For decades, the United States treated Syria as a pariah. That position hardened following the outbreak of the Syrian civil war in 2011 and the subsequent rise of the Islamic State, a terrorist group that seized parts of the country and carried out attacks overseas.But in recent months, the Trump administration has sought better relations. Mr. Trump lifted some sanctions on Syria last month and held talks with the new president, Ahmed al-Shara, a former rebel commander with past links to Al Qaeda. It was the first time the leaders of the two countries had met in 25 years.The new Syrian government has pledged to restore stability after more than a decade of war. In return, Washington has sought to leverage the promise of a rapprochement with a number of demands, including the expulsion of “foreign terrorists” from Syria and guarantees that the Islamic State will not be allowed to gain more power, according to the White House.For many Syrians, the travel ban exemption was another sign that the country was once again being accepted by the wider world after decades of isolation.“We’re so happy,” said Tahani Madani, an employee at Syria’s largest commercial bank. “Honestly, it’s hard to even describe our joy. Thank God, things are getting better.” More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Top Democrat Warns Hegseth He Could Face Fines for Accepting Qatari Plane

      by

      Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland urged the defense secretary to come to Congress for approval of the jet President Trump wants to use as Air Force One.Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, informed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday that he could face steep fines for having accepted a luxury jet from the Qatari government, arguing the gift violated the Constitution and a federal gifts law, and required congressional approval.Mr. Hegseth was the official who formally accepted a Boeing 747 jetliner from Qatar last month, according to a Defense Department spokesman. The Pentagon has directed the Air Force to upgrade its security measures so that President Trump can use the plane as a new Air Force One.The gift has raised a host of concerns among both Republicans and Democrats in Congress. Some have focused on national security risks, saying they worry the plane might have listening devices, or that Mr. Trump’s desire for a new plane before he leaves office might rush any security upgrade and lead corners to be cut on critical protection systems.But many lawmakers, especially Democrats such as Mr. Raskin, have focused on the ethical issues raised by a lavish gift to an American president from a foreign government. They have accused Mr. Trump of corruption and expressed fears that Qatar may be trying to improperly influence the Trump administration.In a letter on Wednesday, Mr. Raskin, a former professor of constitutional law, warned Mr. Hegseth that his acceptance of the plane violated the Constitution’s emoluments clause, which bars federal officials from accepting financial benefits from foreign governments without Congress’s approval.Congress has not yet taken any formal vote to accept the plane as a gift from Qatar. Officials in the Trump administration have said that the gift is to the U.S. government, not to him as president, and therefore that it does not violate the Constitution or ethics laws.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court Unanimously Rules for Straight Woman in Workplace Discrimination Suit

      by

      The justices rejected an appeals court’s requirement that members of majority groups meet a heightened standard to win employment discrimination cases.The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ruled in favor of a straight woman who twice lost positions to gay workers, saying an appeals court had been wrong to require her to meet a heightened burden in seeking to prove workplace discrimination because she was a member of a majority group.The decision came two years after the Supreme Court struck down race-conscious admissions programs in higher education and amid the Trump administration’s fierce efforts to root out programs that promote diversity and could make it easier for white people, men and other members of majority groups to pursue claims of employment discrimination.The standards for proving workplace discrimination under a federal civil rights law, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote for the court, “does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group.”The case was brought by Marlean A. Ames, who had worked for the Ohio Department of Youth Services, which oversees parts of the state’s juvenile corrections system. After a decade there, in 2014 she became the administrator of a program addressing prison rape. Five years later, she applied for a promotion.Her supervisors turned her down, saying she lacked vision and leadership skills. They eventually gave the position to a gay woman who had been at the department for a shorter time and, unlike Ms. Ames, lacked a college degree.Not long after denying her the new position, her supervisors removed her from her existing job, telling her that they had concerns about her leadership and offering her a demotion that came with a substantial pay cut. She was replaced by a gay man with less seniority.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 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Orders Investigation of Biden and His Aides

      by

      The executive order is the latest effort by President Trump to stoke outlandish conspiracy theories about his predecessor and question the legality of his actions in office.President Trump ordered his White House counsel and the attorney general on Wednesday to investigate former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his staff in Mr. Trump’s latest attempt to stoke outlandish conspiracy theories about his predecessor.In an executive order, Mr. Trump put the power and resources of the federal government to work examining whether some of Mr. Biden’s presidential actions were legally invalid because his aides had enacted those policies without his knowledge.The executive order came after Mr. Trump shared a social media post over the weekend that claimed Mr. Biden had been “executed in 2020” and replaced by a robotic clone, following a pattern of suggestions by the president and his allies that Mr. Biden was a mentally incapacitated puppet of his aides.The former president called such claims “ridiculous and false” in a statement on Wednesday after the order’s release.“Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency,” he said. “I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation and proclamations.”The order comes after disclosure in recent weeks that Mr. Biden, 82, had received a diagnosis of advanced prostate cancer and in the wake of renewed scrutiny of his health during his presidency.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 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      ‘Carol,’ Whose Detention Rattled Her Small Missouri Town, Is Released

      by

      Ming Li Hui’s detention by the immigration authorities brought the reality of President Trump’s immigration crackdown to rural Missouri, where supporters rallied for her freedom.An immigrant waitress from Hong Kong whose looming deportation brought home the reality of President Trump’s immigration crackdown to her conservative Missouri hometown was freed on Wednesday after more than a month in jail.“They released me,” the waitress, Ming Li Hui, better known as Carol to everyone in Kennett, Mo., said in a voice mail message left for her lawyer and relayed to The New York Times.Her lawyer, Raymond Bolourtchi, said Ms. Hui, 45, had been released under a federal immigration program that offers a “temporary safe haven” to immigrants from Hong Kong and a handful of other countries who are concerned about returning there. The so-called deferred enforced departure gives Ms. Hui a reprieve but does not guarantee her future in the United States.“By no means are we in the clear,” Mr. Bolourtchi said. “But at this point I’m optimistic. It’s an immediate sigh of relief.”Ms. Hui, who was born in Hong Kong, entered the United States 20 years ago on a short-term tourist visa and stayed long past its expiration, in the process building a life, having three children and becoming a beloved waitress serving waffles and hugs to the breakfast crowd at a diner in Kennett, a rural farming town in the Bootheel of Missouri.She was ordered deported more than a decade ago but had been able to stay in the country through a series of temporary permissions from the immigration authorities that ended abruptly with her arrest in late April.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Travel Order Bans People From 12 Countries From Entering U.S.

      by

      The president’s proclamation barred travel from countries including Afghanistan, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.President Trump on Wednesday signed a travel ban on 12 countries, primarily in Africa and the Middle East, resurrecting an effort from his first term to prevent large numbers of immigrants and visitors from entering the United States.The ban, which goes into effect on Monday, bars travel to the United States by citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.Mr. Trump also imposed restrictions — but stopped short of a full ban — on travel from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. People from those countries cannot come to the United States permanently or get tourist or student visas.The travel ban is the latest move in Mr. Trump’s sweeping crackdown on immigration, including blocking asylum at the southern border and barring international students from Harvard University. His administration has also conducted immigration raids across the country.The decision came just days after an Egyptian man in Colorado was arrested and charged with carrying out an attack on a group honoring hostages being held in Gaza. Trump administration officials had warned that there would be a crackdown after that attack.“The recent terror attack in Boulder, Colo., has underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstay their visas,” Mr. Trump said in a video message announcing the travel ban. “We don’t want them.”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

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Republican Policy Bill Would Add $2.4 Trillion to Debt, Budget Office Says

      by

      The estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is all but certain to inflame an already intense debate inside the G.O.P. about the fiscal consequences of their bill to enact President Trump’s agenda.The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday that the broad Republican bill to cut taxes and slash some federal programs would add $2.4 trillion to the already soaring national debt over the next decade, in an analysis that was all but certain to inflame concerns that President Trump’s domestic agenda would lead to excessive government borrowing.The C.B.O. analysis focused on the version of the bill that passed the House late last month, but the cost estimate could change as Republicans in the Senate begin to put their imprint on the legislation. G.O.P. lawmakers there want to deepen some of the bill’s tax cuts, while others are pressing to pare back some its cuts to Medicaid, the government health care program for the poor, and clean-energy tax incentives.Conservatives and Wall Street investors had already expressed grave concerns that the measure would swell federal deficits, and some Senate Republicans have said they cannot back the legislation in its current form. That could derail the bill’s progress, given that the party can afford to lose no more than three votes in the Senate if all Democrats vote against it.The legislation had long been expected to add significantly to the debt, given the enormous cost of extending the tax cuts that Republicans first put into place in 2017, the central pillar of the bill. Hard-right lawmakers demanded that the party use their total control of Washington to also slash spending and contain the cost of the legislation, but the C.B.O.’s estimate was a reminder that the party fell well short of covering the roughly $3.8 trillion cost of extending the tax cut.In the House version of the bill, Republicans also turned to some well-worn gimmicks in a bid to lower the sticker price of the legislation. Several of the bill’s tax cut provisions, including Mr. Trump’s campaign pledges to not tax tips and overtime pay, would last for only a few years. Those cuts could become far more costly if they were continued.In recent weeks, some analysts on Wall Street have started to voice their worry about the consequences of the legislation, given the nation’s already-precarious fiscal situation. Moody’s downgraded the credit rating of the United States last month, the last of the major rating firms to cast some doubt on the country’s ability to pay its bills.To defend their legislation, some Republicans and White House aides have taken to attacking the C.B.O. as politically motivated and unreliable. But several nonpartisan independent groups that have analyzed the bill have also concluded that it would add significantly to the federal debt. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Some House Republicans Have Regrets After Passing Trump’s Domestic Policy Bill

      by

      The sprawling legislation carrying President Trump’s domestic agenda squeaked through the House with one vote to spare, but some Republicans now say they didn’t realize what they voted for.When Republicans muscled their sweeping domestic policy bill through the House by a single vote after an overnight debate, they breathed a sigh of relief, enjoyed a celebratory moment at sunrise and then retreated to their districts for a weeklong recess.Not even two weeks later, the victory has, for some, given way to regret.It turns out that the sprawling legislation to advance tax and spending cuts and to cement much of President Trump’s domestic agenda included a raft of provisions that drew little notice or debate on the House floor. And now, Republicans who rallied behind the bill are claiming buyer’s remorse about measures they swear they did not know were included.Last week, Representative Mike Flood of Nebraska admitted during a town hall meeting in his district that he did not know that the bill would limit judges’ power to hold people in contempt for violating court orders. He would not have voted for the measure, he said, if he had realized.And as lawmakers returned to Washington on Tuesday after their weeklong break, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia said that she had been unaware that the mega-bill she voted for would block states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade.“Full transparency, I did not know about this section,” Ms. Greene posted on social media, calling it a violation of states’ rights and adding that she “would have voted NO if I had known this was in there.”The remorseful statements highlighted the realities of legislating in the modern age. Members of Congress, divided bitterly along partisan lines and often working against self-imposed political deadlines, have become accustomed to having their leaders throw together huge pieces of legislation at the very last moment — and often do not read the entirety of the bill they are voting on, if they read any of it at all. At the same time, the polarization of Congress means that few pieces of legislation make it to the floor or to enactment — and the few “must pass” bills that do are almost always stuffed full of unrelated policy measures that would otherwise have little hope of passing on their own.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