United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Transgender Rights Are Human Rights

      by

      More from our inbox:‘I Am So Sorry’Lying to ChildrenThe Education Department said it would investigate two colleges that have been caught up in disputes regarding transgender athletes.Demetrius Freeman/ReutersTo the Editor:Re “Pain Is the Point of Trump’s Transgender Policy,” by Jennifer Finney Boylan (Opinion guest essay, Feb. 18):For most of my life I feared what would happen if anyone knew that I experienced a full spectrum of both feminine and masculine expressions. The shame began when I was a small child and followed me throughout much of my life. Even so I did not grow up with a fear of my government. America was a work in progress.I have seen rights gradually extended to women, racial minorities and sexual minorities, including trans and nonbinary people. However, today I find myself joining the rapidly growing ranks of innocent Americans who get up each morning fearing their own government.By targeting trans and nonbinary people, our president seeks to secure unchecked power at the expense of the vulnerable and innocent. Scapegoating minorities is a tried and true model for dictators throughout history. Here President Trump joins the likes of Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orban by manufacturing a perceived threat from an innocent minority, which will eventually justify restrictions on civil rights for everyone.I have listened to his calls for a return to a time when there were only two genders. That was also a time when America freely and openly discriminated against women, people of color, Jews and others. The fact is there have never been just two genders. Many societies accepted us, and even those that tried to ban us recognized our existence in those very bans.We will not disappear again into the shadows. We will resist, those who love us will resist, and those who are decent will resist. As long as we do so, the ideal that all Americans are created equal will not fade, that this country might endure and grow once again.Mark PetersenPark City, UtahTo the Editor:Re “Trump’s Shameful Campaign Against Transgender Americans” (editorial, Feb. 16):The Trump administration’s attacks on transgender and nonbinary individuals compromise our safety and attempt to strip us of our rights and our humanity. These policies aren’t just cruel — they are also deeply un-American.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Is Breaking Things We Can’t Just Fix

      by

      President Trump is doing damage to America that could take a generation or more to repair. The next election cannot fix what Trump is breaking. Neither can the one after that.To understand the gravity of the harm Trump has inflicted on the United States in the first month and a half of his presidency, a comparison with the Cold War is helpful. Republicans and Democrats often had sharp differences in their approach to the Soviet Union — very sharp. The parties would differ, for example, on the amount of military spending, on the approach to arms control and on American military interventions against Soviet allies and their proxies.Deep disagreement over Vietnam helped drive American political debate, both within and between parties, for more than a decade. During the Reagan era, there were fierce arguments over the MX, a powerful intercontinental ballistic missile, and over the deployment of intermediate-range missiles in Europe.These differences were important, but they were less important than the many points of agreement. Both parties were committed to NATO. Both parties saw the Soviet Union as the grave national security threat it was. For decades, both parties were more or less committed to a strategy of containment that sought to keep Soviet tyranny at bay.At no point did Americans go to the polls and choose between one candidate committed to NATO and another candidate sympathetic to the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. The very idea would have been fantastical. American elections could reset our national security strategy, but they did not change our bedrock alliances. They did not change our fundamental identity.Until now.Consider what happened in the Oval Office on Friday. Trump and Vice President JD Vance ambushed President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on live television. Vance accused Zelensky of being “disrespectful,” and Trump attacked him directly:You’re gambling with the lives of millions of people. You’re gambling with World War III. You’re gambling with World War III and what you’re doing is very disrespectful to the country — this country — that’s backed you far more than a lot of people say they should.Trump’s attack on Zelensky is just the latest salvo against our allies. Back in office, Trump has taught our most important strategic partners a lesson they will not soon forget: America can — and will — change sides. Its voters may indeed choose a leader who will abandon our traditional alliances and actively support one of the world’s most dangerous and oppressive regimes.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 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Judge Rules Trump Can’t Fire Head of Federal Watchdog Agency Without Cause

      by

      A federal judge said that the president’s efforts to remove Hampton Dellinger, who leads the Office of Special Counsel, were unlawful.A federal judge in Washington on Saturday blocked the Trump administration from ousting the top official at a federal watchdog agency, finding that its efforts to do so were unlawful.In an order on Saturday evening, Judge Amy Berman Jackson granted a permanent injunction against the government, allowing Hampton Dellinger to remain the head of the watchdog agency, the Office of Special Counsel. The order required the Trump administration to recognize Mr. Dellinger’s authority in that position, barring it from taking any action to “treat him in any way as if he has been removed” or otherwise interfere with his work.The administration immediately indicated it would challenge the ruling, starting an appeals process that appeared likely to end at the Supreme Court.In a 67-page opinion explaining the order, Judge Jackson, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, stressed the unique responsibilities Congress gave the office when it was created under a 1978 law. She noted its central role in protecting whistle-blowers in the federal government, a role that she said would be compromised if Mr. Dellinger were allowed to be removed without a cause stipulated under the law. The judge had earlier put a temporary block on the firing.“It is his independence that qualifies him to watch over the time-tested structure that is supposed to bar executive officials from taking federal jobs from qualified individuals and handing them out to political allies — a system that Congress found intolerable over a century ago,” she wrote. The ruling came a week after the Supreme Court declined to intervene in the temporary block on removing Mr. Dellinger. Lawyers for the government argued to the court that Mr. Trump had the authority as the head of the executive branch to place his preferred pick in charge of the office. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Signs Order to Designate English as Official Language of the U.S.

      by

      The order did not require changes to federal programs but was a victory for America’s English-only movement, which has ties to efforts to restrict immigration and bilingual education.President Trump signed an order designating English as the official language of the United States, the White House said on Saturday.The order did not require any changes to federal programs and appeared to be largely symbolic. But the pronouncement was the biggest victory yet for the country’s English-only movement, which has long been tied to efforts to restrict bilingual education and immigration to the United States.More than 30 states have already designated English as their official language.“Establishing English as the official language will not only streamline communication but also reinforce shared national values, and create a more cohesive and efficient society,” the order said.The executive order rescinds a Clinton-era mandate that required agencies and recipients of federal funding to provide language assistance to non-English speakers, but allows agencies to keep current policies and provide documents and services in other languages.While more than three-quarters of Americans speak only English at home, there are about 42 million Spanish speakers in the country and three million Chinese speakers.The White House appeared eager to deliver on another of Mr. Trump’s “America First” promises, but the order was notable in its lack of sweeping changes. G.O.P. officials have in recent years mixed nativist calls with outreach to Spanish-speaking voters, with whom they have made gains.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 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Picks Another Trade Fight With Canada Over Lumber

      by

      The president initiated an investigation that could lead to tariffs on lumber imports, nearly half of which comes from Canada.President Trump on Saturday initiated an investigation into whether imports of lumber threaten America’s national security, a step that is likely to further inflame relations with Canada, the largest exporter of wood to the United States.The president directed his commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, to carry out the investigation. The results of the inquiry could allow the president to apply tariffs to lumber imports. A White House official declined to say how long the inquiry would take.An executive memorandum signed by Mr. Trump ordered the investigation and was accompanied by another document that White House officials said would expand the volume of lumber offered for sale each year, increasing supply and helping to ensure that timber prices do not rise.The trade inquiry is likely to further anger Canada. Some of its citizens have called for boycotts of American products over Mr. Trump’s plans to impose tariffs on all Canadian imports beginning on Tuesday. The president, who also plans to hit Mexico with similar tariffs, says the levies are punishment for failure to stem the flow of drugs and migrants into the United States.Many Canadians have contested Mr. Trump’s assertion that fentanyl is flowing from its country into the United States.Canada and the United States have sparred over protections in the lumber industry for decades. The countries have protected their own industries with tariffs and other trade measures, and argued about the legitimacy of those measures in disputes both under the North American Free Trade Agreement and at the World Trade Organization.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

      Shocked by Trump Meeting, Zelensky and Ukraine Try to Forge a Path Forward

      by

      For months leading into the American elections last fall, the prospect of a second Trump presidency deepened uncertainty among Ukrainians over how enduring American support would prove in a war threatening their national survival.After President Volodymyr Zelensky’s disastrous meeting with President Trump in the White House on Friday, many Ukrainians were moving toward a conclusion that seemed perfectly clear: Mr. Trump has chosen a side, and it is not Ukraine’s.In one jaw-dropping meeting, the once unthinkable fear that Ukraine would be forced to engage in a long war against a stronger opponent without U.S. support appeared to move exponentially closer to reality.“For Ukraine, it is clarifying, though not in a great way,” Phillips O’Brien, an international relations professor at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, said in an interview. “Ukraine can now only count on European states for the support it needs to fight.”An immediate result was that Ukrainians, including opposition politicians, were generally supportive of Mr. Zelensky on Saturday for not bending to Mr. Trump despite tremendous pressure.Maryna Schomak, a civilian whose son’s cancer diagnosis has been complicated by the destruction of Ukraine’s largest children’s cancer hospital by a Russian missile strike, said that Mr. Zelensky had conducted himself with dignity.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 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      The Dark Heart of Trump’s Foreign Policy

      by

      The journalist Fareed Zakaria discusses the worldview emerging from Trump’s foreign policy decisions regarding Ukraine, Gaza, China and beyond.The New York TimesThe Dark Heart of Trump’s Foreign PolicyThe journalist Fareed Zakaria discusses the worldview emerging from Trump’s foreign policy decisions regarding Ukraine, Gaza, China and beyond.This is an edited transcript of an episode of “The Ezra Klein Show.” You can listen to the conversation by following or subscribing to the show on the NYT Audio App, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.What is the Donald Trump doctrine? What is Donald Trump’s foreign policy?I think the place to begin to try to untangle what we’ve actually seen is to listen to the way Trump and Vice President JD Vance speak about our allies.Archived clip of Donald Trump: I’ve had very good talks with Putin, and I’ve had not such good talks with Ukraine. They don’t have any cards, but they play it tough.Archived clip of JD Vance: The threat that I worry the most about vis-à-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within. The retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values — values shared with the United States of America.Archived clip of Donald Trump: I mean, look, let’s be honest: The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States. That’s the purpose of it. And they’ve done a good job of it, but now I’m president.Something is new here. The Trump doctrine that we’ve seen in the first month of this presidency is going to reshape the world much more fundamentally than Trump did in the four years of his first term. That’s in part because of who is around him now — JD Vance and Elon Musk, instead of the foreign policy establishment.So I wanted to have a bigger picture conversation about what this Trump doctrine is. I’m joined today by Fareed Zakaria, the host of “Fareed Zakaria GPS” on CNN, a Washington Post columnist and the author of the best-selling book, “Age of Revolutions.”This episode contains strong language.Ezra Klein: Fareed Zakaria, welcome back to the show.Fareed Zakaria: Always a pleasure, Ezra.To the extent you feel you can define it, what’s the Trump doctrine?Part of the problem with Trump is that he is so mercurial. He’s so idiosyncratic that, just when you think you figured out the Trump doctrine, he goes and says something that kind of sounds like the opposite of the Trump doctrine.But I do think that there is one coherent worldview that Trump seems to espouse and has espoused for a long time. The first ad he took out when he was a real estate developer was in 1987. It was an ad about how Japan was ripping us off economically and Europe was ripping us off by free-riding on security. And what that represents, fundamentally, is a rejection of the open international system that the United States and Europe have built over the last eight decades.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 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Intelligence Officials Continue Chat Messages Inquiry

      by

      Officials confirmed that the N.S.A. managed a system that had been used for sexually explicit chats and L.G.B.T.Q. discussions. An order to fire dozens after the chats were revealed drew scrutiny amid a military purge of transgender soldiers.Intelligence officials are continuing to investigate sexually explicit messages that were posted on a government chat tool, the National Security Agency said Friday, exchanges that prompted the nation’s top intelligence official to order the firing of more than 100 officers this week.In a statement on Friday, a spokesman for the National Security Agency said the messages were posted on Intelink, a tool that the N.S.A. manages for the entire intelligence community.“N.S.A. takes the allegations of recently identified misconduct on Intelink very seriously,” the spokesman said in a statement. “Behavior of this type will not be tolerated on this or any other N.S.A.-hosted system.”The existence of the messages was disclosed on Monday by Christopher F. Rufo, a conservative activist. Intelligence officials confirmed that the National Security Agency managed the system that had been used for the sexually explicit chats.People briefed on the inquiry said some of the chat logs that were made public had been altered or manipulated, in some cases to remove classified markings or other material. But the people familiar with the inquiry said some context was removed from the exchanges and screenshots in other instances might not have been accurate representations.Long-serving U.S. civil servants said there was little doubt that some of what was posted was inappropriate for any workplace, much less a system in classified networks that is meant for intelligence sharing. At least one of the chat rooms involved was shut down last year, according to a U.S. official.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