US justice system

Subterms

    Latest story

    225 Shares56 Views

    Forget diplomatic niceties: it’s beyond time Europe denounced Trump’s trashing of democracy in the US | Paul Taylor

    by

    What do you do when you discover your best friend is abusive to their partner at home? That question, or something similar, should be addressed to European leaders – and indeed to all of us in the European public space, who are watching, often speechless, as Donald Trump takes a cudgel to the institutions of American democracy.For the last nine months, European leaders have bitten their tongues, looked the other way and engaged in flattery, appeasement and wild promises to keep the US president sweet and engaged in European security. The overwhelming imperative for Trump to stand with Europe against Russia over its war on Ukraine – or at least not against us and alongside Vladimir Putin – has led them to swallow unrealistic defence spending targets and unbalanced trade terms. For what gain?No European leader has publicly contradicted Trump’s inflated claims to have ended eight wars in eight months, nor criticised his demolition of the multilateral rules-based free trade order, his assault on the United Nations, or his selective use of tariffs to pursue political vendettas around the world.The only time European leaders briefly found their voices was when JD Vance used the stage of the Munich security conference to launch a fierce attack on European democracy. Vance accused US allies of suppressing free speech and said he was more worried by “the threat from within … the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values” than by any threat from Russia or China to the continent’s freedom. To underline his support for freedom of anti-immigrant hate speech, he chose to meet the leader of the far-right German AfD Alice Weidel in Munich in the midst of an election campaign, and to snub Berlin’s then-chancellor, Olaf Scholz of the Social Democrats.With millions of Americans now taking to the streets to protest against Trump’s authoritarian drift at home, isn’t it time for European leaders to speak up and assert their moral autonomy by signalling Europe’s support for democracy in the US, and for those who are trying to defend it?This is not to suggest that an expression of European dismay would have any practical effect on the dismantling of checks and balances in the US political system, the abolition of the USAID foreign aid agency, the crackdowns on universities, law firms and science, the abuse of the justice system against political enemies, or the purging of the armed forces and, most alarmingly, the deployment of the military in American cities to combat the “enemy from within”.While the US can protect security in Europe and deserves our undying gratitude for having done so for the last 80 years, Europeans cannot protect democracy in the US. They can and must, however, protect liberal democracy in Europe, which risks becoming a collateral victim of Trump’s domestic and foreign policy agenda.What happens in America doesn’t stay in America. It is often a precursor for trends in Europe. Just as the #MeToo and “woke” movements spilled over from Hollywood studios and US campuses to European film sets and universities, so the tide of illiberalism and repression rising in Washington is already washing up on European shores in countries such as Hungary and Serbia. By speaking up about Trump’s assaults on the independence of the US civil service, judiciary, legal profession, media and armed forces, and his moves to criminalise dissent, European leaders would be asserting the values of the rule of law, the separation of powers and liberal democracy that they have a duty to preserve at home.If Elon Musk can use his social media platform and the world’s biggest fortune to intervene in German elections in favour of Weidel’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) – or in British politics in support of convicted anti-Islam extremist Tommy Robinson – then surely we, too, can make our voices heard in US politics. We can offer support and practical cooperation to states, cities and courts that share our values, and moral support to US freedom campaigners. Our governments and regions can build partnerships on climate action, civil rights and development assistance with like-minded US states and local authorities. We can offer jobs, visas and scholarships to US scientists and academics hit by Trump’s cuts to research funding. Europe stands only to gain from a self-inflicted American brain drain.The massive No Kings protests in towns and cities across the US were fortunately peaceful, despite Trump’s deployment of armed forces in Washington DC, Los Angeles, Memphis, Portland and other cities, and the attempted mobilisation of the National Guard across 19 states. But having branded his leftwing opponents “domestic terrorists”, the risk is growing that Trump will make good on his threat to invokethe 1807 Insurrection Act and claim sweeping powers to use the military against American protesters.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe last time the US military was used for domestic policing against demonstrations was under Richard Nixon in 1970, when the National Guard shot dead four students protesting, at Kent State University in Ohio, against the draft and the US military intervention in Cambodia. An earlier precedent for the deadly use of force against peaceful protesters was in Selma, Alabama in 1965, when state and local police violently broke up civil rights marches by black Americans demanding the unhindered right to vote. On both those historic occasions, European media criticised the use of force against peaceful demonstrators, but governments on this side of the Atlantic kept their mouths shut, motivated by the principle of non-interference in the affairs of an allied state.With the administration and its billionaire buddies intervening at will in support of hate speech and its proponents in Europe and against EU digital regulation, there is no longer any justification for staying silent. On the contrary, the defence of European liberal democracy starts by recognising when it is under threat in our closest ally.

    Paul Taylor is a senior visiting fellow at the European Policy Centre More

    More stories

    • 163 Shares93 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump has built a regime of retribution and reward | Sidney Blumenthal

      by

      Donald Trump’s voracious desire for retribution has quickly evolved into a regular and predictable system. In the year since his election, the president’s rage and whims have assumed the form of policies in the same way that Joseph Stalin’s purges could be called policies. Figures within the federal system of justice who do not do his bidding are summarily fired and replaced by loyalists. Leaders who have called him to account or are in his way may face indictment, trial and punishment. Opponents have been designated under Presidential National Security Memorandum No 7 as “Antifa”: “anti-American”, “anti-Christian” and “anti-capitalist”, and threatened with prosecution as a “terrorist”. Meanwhile, many aligned with him escape justice, whether through the hand of the Department of Justice (DoJ) or the presidential pardon power. Now, he demands compensation for having been prosecuted to the tune of $230m from the DoJ budget.Each of the cases involving prosecution of Trump’s enemies and, on the other hand, the leniency extended to his allies has its own peculiarities of outrage. But whatever their unique and arbitrary perversities, they are expressions of what has emerged as a technique. These episodes are not isolated or coincidental. Trump’s purge of DoJ prosecutors and FBI agents, accompanied by his installment of flunkies in senior positions, started in a rush and quickly assumed a pattern, but has now been molded into a regime. The justice department and the FBI have been remade into political agencies under Trump’s explicit command to carry out his wishes. Injustice is made routine. It is the retribution system.The origin of this system has been exposed in the complaint of three former senior FBI officials filed on 10 September in the US district court in DC against the FBI director, Kash Patel, and the US attorney general, Pam Bondi, for illegal termination in “a campaign of retribution against Plaintiffs for what Defendants deemed to be a failure to demonstrate sufficient political loyalty”. In the complaint, Brian Driscoll, the former acting FBI director, describes a conversation in which Patel “openly acknowledged the unlawfulness of his actions”.Driscoll had tried to shield FBI agents from being fired, the complaint alleges. Patel told him that “they” – understood by Driscoll to be the White House and justice department – had directed him to fire anyone whom they identified as having worked on a criminal investigation against Trump. The complaint continues: “Patel explained that he had to fire the people his superiors told him to fire, because his ability to keep his own job depended on the removal of the agents who worked on cases involving the President. Patel explained that there was nothing he or Driscoll could do to stop these or any other firings, because ‘the FBI tried to put the President in jail and he hasn’t forgotten it.’” When Driscoll told Patel he was violating the FBI’s own internal rules, Patel allegedly said “he understood that and he knew the nature of the summary firings were likely illegal”.Since Patel’s alleged admission to Driscoll, the DoJ and the FBI have been gutted and repurposed for Trump’s retribution system. Six of the FBI’s senior executives were fired or forced out in the early weeks of the administration. About 4,500 professional attorneys at the DoJ have accepted a “deferred resignation program”. At least seven federal prosecutors, including those in the southern district of New York, resigned in protest over what they viewed as political interference in dropping the corruption case against the New York City mayor, Eric Adams, in exchange for his cooperation with Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement roundups of immigrants. The public integrity section of the DoJ, which handles corruption cases, has been reduced to two attorneys. The civil rights division has been decimated: 70% of its staff has left. One-third of senior leaders at the DoJ have quit. The section enforcing environmental law has lost half its leadership.In the Adams case, the acting US attorney for the southern district of New York, Danielle Sassoon, resigned in protest against what she described as “quid pro quo”. Tom Homan, Trump’s “border czar”, appeared as the enforcer with Adams on Fox News to declare: “If he doesn’t come through, I’ll be back in New York City.” And Emil Bove, previously the acting deputy attorney general and a former Trump attorney, who arranged the deal, was awarded an appellate federal judgeship, a potential stepping stone to the supreme court.Trump’s immunity for crimes committed while in office, granted by the extraordinary ruling of the Republican majority on the supreme court, thus thwarting his prosecution over the January 6 insurrection and preserving his political viability for the 2024 election, is the foundation stone on which he stands to protect his stalwarts. With such immunity, he has been freed to authorize corruption. The effect of the supreme court decision permeates his administration and the Republican party down to its bones. Trump v United States has metastasized. As Richard Nixon’s White House counsel John Dean said about the Watergate scandal, it has become “a cancer on the presidency”.The understanding that nobody significant who is working for or supporting Trump can ever expect to face the bar of justice for criminal behavior has been absorbed as an operating principle. In his service, they are released from following the rule of law in favor of obedience to the rule of the leader. As Trump stated in granting a commutation to former Republican congressman George Santos, convicted of stealing of Covid unemployment insurance benefits, credit card fraud, embezzlement of election funds and identity theft, among other crimes, “at least Santos had the Courage, Conviction, and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN!” Santos is now able to attend the Kennedy Center Honors, when disco queen Gloria Gaynor is bestowed her award and belts I Will Survive – apparently one of his favorites.In his inside-out world, Santos the con is transformed into Trump’s projection of himself as a victim. Santos is washed clean; he is resurrected. The Santos commutation, after serving 84 days of an 87-month sentence, was a minor masterstroke for Trump to demonstrate even more than contempt for the law and his exultation of stupidity. Santos was not just the class clown of the House Republican conference. The fake descendant of Holocaust survivors, phony Goldman Sachs banker, bogus real estate tycoon, but real Brazilian drag queen, was an albatross for congressional Republicans. Trump’s commutation is another one of his gestures to demonstrate that House Republicans will swallow any embarrassment and insult with servility.Santos’s commutation represents the obverse but essential element of the retribution system – the rewards system. The favors began on his inauguration day, when Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of more than 1,500 people involved in the January 6 assault on the US Capitol, followed by pardons for 23 anti-abortion activists convicted under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, 16 politicians as of June (including those from his first term), financial fraudsters and closely connected donors. One of the January 6 pardoned prisoners, Christopher Moynihan, was arrested on 20 October for attempted murder of the House Democratic leader, Hakeem Jeffries. More than 10 of the January 6 insurrectionists pardoned by Trump have been rearrested, charged or sentenced on a variety of charges, including child sexual assault and plotting to kill FBI agents.Homan, the “border czar”, has no need for a pardon or commutation. He was exempted from prosecution by Trump’s justice department after having reportedly been taped in a sting operation by FBI agents in September 2024 accepting $50,000 in cash in a Cava bag in exchange for promising to deliver federal contracts once he assumed his position under Trump.Homan has offered a series of conflicting explanations about the money. On Fox News, he insisted he did “nothing criminal”, a non-denial denial. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, offered a different explanation, announcing that Homan had never taken the cash. When the Rhode Island senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat on the Senate judiciary committee, asked Bondi on 7 October, “what became of the $50,000?”, she did not answer, but spewed a falsehood that Whitehouse had taken a campaign donation from someone who had held meetings with Jeffrey Epstein. Apparently taking the cue, Homan went on the rightwing NewsNation to say: “I didn’t take $50,000 from anybody.” In short, he has claimed he has not done anything illegal in not doing it. If he were to write about it, Homan might borrow the title from OJ Simpson’s If I Did It.Trump’s pardons and grants of clemency often bypass the traditional review process of the pardon attorney at the justice department, even though he has replaced the professional Liz Oyer with the crackpot Ed Martin, who was an organizer of Stop the Steal rallies and attorney for January 6 defendants. As the acting US attorney for the District of Columbia, Martin led the purge of DoJ prosecutors of January 6 insurrectionists. But Martin’s tenure was abbreviated when it was clear his confirmation to hold the job permanently would be rejected by the Senate. Trump sent him to DoJ, where he is also the head of the new “weaponization working group”. Martin has overseen the cellophane-thin indictment of the Federal Reserve Board governor Lisa Cook for alleged mortgage fraud, which she denies. Trump has fired her, but the supreme court has allowed her to stay in her job until it hears the arguments in the case in January 2026.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump’s scheme of indicting “enemies within” on contrived mortgage application fraud charges extends to the New York attorney general, Letitia James, who successfully prosecuted Trump for financial fraud, and targeting the California Democratic senator Adam Schiff, who led Trump’s first impeachment. Trump has enlisted for this particular retribution campaign the enthusiastically thuggish Bill Pulte, like Trump another unworthy entitled heir, grandson to the billionaire founder of a home building empire, to dredge up the thin gruel to make the accusations. Pulte has a history of making belligerent insults, even to a family member who filed a lawsuit against him to stop his “degrading and threatening harassment”. In early September, at the new exclusive private club in Washington for Trump people, the Executive Branch, the treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, confronted Pulte for “trash-talking him” to Trump. “I’m going to punch you in your fucking face,” Bessent said, according to the New York Post. Yet Trump still apparently values Pulte for his utility as one of his loudmouth bullies.Martin peeked into the James case with a letter to her attorney Abbe Lowell on 12 August asking for her to resign as “an act of good faith”, adding that his letter was “confidential”. Lowell replied that given the letter’s obvious violation of the code of “professional responsibility” for justice department attorneys, “I was not sure it was actually from you.” Lowell also noted that Martin had staged a strange “photo opportunity”, standing in front of James’s brownstone in Brooklyn accompanied by a photographer from the New York Post, “outside the bounds of DoJ and ethics rules”. Even more bizarrely, Martin wore a trenchcoat, perhaps in homage to the character of Columbo, a fictional detective made famous in a TV series of the 1970s but earlier played by the actor Thomas Mitchell, Martin’s uncle. “One has no conceivable idea of any proper or legitimate reason you went to Ms James’ house, what you were doing, and for what actual purpose,” wrote Lowell.When Trump demanded the indictment of the former FBI director James Comey, his recent appointee as the US attorney in the eastern district of Virginia, Erik Siebert, refused on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence for the allegation. He was promptly replaced by Lindsey Halligan, a former beauty contestant and insurance lawyer from Florida, who had assisted in Trump’s documents case at Mar-a-Lago, and had been elevated to a senior associate staff secretary in his White House. Six top attorneys in the eastern district’s office either resigned in protest or were fired. One of the longtime professional prosecutors who was fired, Michael Ben’Ary, taped a letter to the door, stating: “Leadership is more concerned with punishing the President’s perceived enemies than they are with protecting our national security.”Comey’s daughter, Maurene Comey, an assistant US attorney in the southern district of New York, was fired in July. She filed a lawsuit claiming her “politically motivated termination” was “unlawful and unconstitutional” and solely the result of her relationship to her father. Perhaps coincidentally, she was the prosecutor in the cases of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.Just when James Comey filed a motion for the judge to dismiss the case against him as a vindictive prosecution, a reporter at Lawfare, Anna Bower, revealed that Halligan had initiated text messages on Signal petulantly complaining to her about her stories on the Letitia James case and demanding corrections. In fact, Bower had only tweeted a New York Times article that cast doubt on the central contention of the prosecution that James used a second home as a rental property. Halligan demanded changes in the article that Bower did not write, but Halligan claimed she couldn’t discuss them because of grand jury secrecy, which she broadly hinted at. Then, when Bower informed her she would publish their exchange, Halligan belatedly insisted it was off the record. She noted that she erased her messages on Signal on a regular basis, which violates the Federal Records Act. In the world of yesterday, Halligan would have been instantly removed and under investigation from both the DoJ and congressional committees. A DoJ spokesperson responded to Bower with the department’s official statement: “Good luck ever getting anyone to talk to you when you publish their texts.”The sheer amateurishness of Halligan may make Trump’s system appear unprecedented, which it is certainly in American history. Nixon at his worst only aspired to what Trump is putting into practice. But aspects of it have had their parallels in the purges that were characteristic of authoritarian regimes of the past. “In other words, this system is the logical outgrowth of the Leader principle in its full implication and the best possible guarantee for loyalty,” wrote Hannah Arendt in The Origins of Totalitarianism.The cranks, incompetents and ambitious losers recruited to carry out Trump’s vengeance invariably display a spectrum of quirks. His preference would be that they would all be a chorus line of former beauty queens. “It’s that face. It’s those lips. They move like a machine gun,” Trump has mused about his press secretary, Karoline Leavitt. Whoever the Trump misfit might be, beauties or Ed Martin, they are replaceable widgets that function within the system he has created. Trump wages war on the “enemies within” with the eccentrics at his disposal. They represent the revenge of the second-rate or less, taking positions once held by the most qualified and then wreaking havoc on their meritorious betters in a wave of resentment. They reflect their damaged leader. That is the beating heart of Trumpism.

      Sidney Blumenthal, former senior adviser to Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, has published three books of a projected five-volume political life of Abraham Lincoln: A Self-Made Man, Wrestling With His Angel and All the Powers of Earth. He is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 225 Shares146 Views

      in US Politics

      Comey due in court over Justice Department case accusing him of lying to Congress – US politics live

      by

      Pope Leo told US bishops visiting him at the Vatican on Wednesday that they should firmly address how immigrants are being treated by President Donald Trump’s hardline policies, attendees said, in the latest push by the pontiff on the issue.Leo, the first US pope, was handed dozens of letters from immigrants describing their fears of deportation under the Trump administration’s policies during the meeting, which included bishops and social workers from the US-Mexico border.“It means a lot to all of us to know of his personal desire that we continue to speak out,” El Paso Bishop Mark Seitz, who took part in the meeting, told Reuters.The Vatican did not immediately comment on the pope’s meeting.The case against former FBI director James Comey comes as attorney general Pam Bondi was questioned in the Senate yesterday over claims that the justice department is being weaponised to pursue Trump’s enemies.Throughout the five-hour hearing, Bondi declined to talk about many of the administration’s controversial decisions, despite persistent questioning from the Democrats. When pressed, she personally attacked several senators from the minority or invoked the ongoing government shutdown to depict them as negligent.“You voted to shut down the government, and you’re sitting here. Our law enforcement officers aren’t being paid,” Bondi replied when the committee’s top Democratic senator, Dick Durbin of Illinois, questioned the Trump administration’s rationale for sending the national guard into Chicago.“I wish you love Chicago as much as you hate President Trump,” she continued, adding: “If you’re not going to protect your citizens, President Trump will.”In his opening statement, Durbin described Bondi as doing lasting damage to the department tasked with enforcing federal law.“What has taken place since January 20, 2025, would make even President Nixon recoil,” he said.. “This is your legacy, Attorney General Bondi. In eight short months, you have fundamentally transformed the justice department and left an enormous stain in American history. It will take decades to recover.”Of particular concern to Democrats were the charges against Comey, which came after Trump publicly called on Bondi to indict his enemies and fired a veteran prosecutor who refused to bring the case.The attorney general avoided talking about the indictment, saying it was a “pending case”, but argued it was approved by “one of the most liberal grand juries in the country”.Good morning and welcome to our coverage of US politics with former FBI Director James Comey set to make his first court appearance in a Justice Department criminal case accusing him of having lied to Congress five years ago.The arraignment is expected to be brief, according to Associated Press, but the moment is nonetheless loaded with historical significance given that the case has amplified concerns that the Justice Department is being weaponized in pursuit of Donald Trump’s political enemies.Comey is expected to plead not guilty at the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia, and defense lawyers will almost certainly move to get the indictment dismissed before trial, possibly by arguing that the case amounts to a selective or vindictive prosecution.The two-count indictment alleges that Comey made a false statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee on 30 September 2020, by denying he had authorized an associate to serve as an anonymous source to the news media, and that he obstructed a congressional proceeding.Comey has denied any wrongdoing and has said he was looking forward to a trial. The indictment does not identify the associate or say what information may have been discussed with the media.Though an indictment is typically just the start of a protracted court process, the Justice Department has trumpeted the development itself as something of a win.Trump administration officials are likely to point to any conviction as proof the case was well-justified, but an acquittal or even dismissal may also be held up as further support for their long-running contention that the criminal justice system is stacked against them.The judge randomly assigned to the case, Michael Nachmanoff, is a Biden administration appointee. Known for methodical preparation and a cool temperament, the judge and his background have already drawn the president’s attention, with Trump deriding him as a “Crooked Joe Biden appointed Judge.”You can read our report here and stay with us to see how it plays out:We’ll also be covering all the developments amid the national guard arriving in Chicago and the ongoing government shutdown.In the White House, Trump is due to receive an intelligence briefing at 11am EST and taking part in a round table on Antifa at 3pm.And in Egypt, a US delegation has joined the indirect talks taking place between Hamas and Israel on Trump’s Gaza plan with the latest news that hostage and prisoner lists have been exchanged.In other developments:

      Donald Trump met the Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, and jokingly pushed him to agree to “a merger” of their two countries. He also declined to rule out invoking the insurrection act to put troops on the streets of the US, which might have made the prospect of joining the union even less appealing.

      Trump suggested that he might not follow a law mandating that furloughed government workers will get backpay after the government shutdown ends.

      In a tense hearing before the Senate judiciary committee on Tuesday, the US attorney general, Pam Bondi, stood accused by Democrats of weaponizing the US Department of Justice, “fundamentally transforming” the department, and leaving “an enormous stain on American history” that it will take “decades to recover [from]”. Bondi criticized Democratic lawmakers in personal terms as she faced questions over the department’s enforcement efforts in Democratic-led cities.

      House speaker Mike Johnson said that his decision to stave off swearing in representative-elect Adelita Grijalva of Arizona has “nothing to do” with the fact that she would be the 218th signature on the bipartisan discharge petition – to compel a House vote on the full release of the Epstein files.

      Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, visited the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) facility in Portland, Oregon accompanied by conservative influencers. Portland police cleared the street outside ahead of Noem’s arrival, keeping a handful of protesters, one dressed as a chicken and another as a baby shark, at distance. More

    • 175 Shares167 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump threatens to invoke Insurrection Act as Bondi faces Senate – US politics live

      by

      Good morning and welcome to our live coverage of US politics as Donald Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to deploy more troops into Democrat-led cities.“We have an insurrection act for a reason. If I had to enact it I would do that,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Monday, adding, “if people were being killed and courts were holding us up or governors or mayors were holding us up, sure I would do that.”It came after a federal judge in Oregon temporarily halted a National Guard deployment in Portland although troops from Texas could be deployed in Chicago as soon as today despite a lawsuit from Illinois against the move.Meanwhile, Pam Bondi is likely to grilled over troop deployments as she faces the Senate judiciary committee. The attorney general is also likely to face questions over the indictment last month of the former FBI director James Comey, deadly strikes on boats believed to be carrying drugs off the coast of Venezuela, as well as the brewing controversy over the release of documents related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.Trump is also due to welcome the Canadian PM, Mark Carney, to the White House with trade talks expected to be the main focus of discussions.Later, he will meet American-Israeli former hostage Edan Alexander as the world marks the two-year anniversary of the 7 October attacks. In Egypt, indirect talks are taking place between Israel and Hamas over Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza.And, of course, this all comes amid the backdrop of the ongoing government shutdown, now entering its second week. Stay with us for all the latest developments.In other news:

      A career federal prosecutor in Virginia has told colleagues she does not believe there is probable cause to file criminal mortgage fraud charges against New York attorney general Letitia James, according to a person familiar with the matter. The prosecutor, Elizabeth Yusi, oversees major criminal cases in the Norfolk office for the US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia and plans to soon present her conclusion to Lindsey Halligan, a Trump ally, who was installed as the US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia last month.

      The US supreme court has declined to hear an appeal from Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell of her sex trafficking conviction. Maxwell in 2022 was sentenced to 20 years in prison for sex trafficking and related crimes.

      The Trump administration said that funds from a US government program that subsidizes commercial air service to rural airports are set to expire as soon as Sunday because of the government shutdown.

      Jimmy Kimmel emerged as more popular than Donald Trump after a spat with the president’s administration temporarily left the talkshow host off the air in September, according to a recent poll.

      Brazil’s Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has urged Donald Trump to scrap tariffs on his country’s imports and sanctions against its officials, as the two men held what the Brazilian presidency called a “friendly” video call. More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Every American should read this judge’s stirring rebuke to Trump | Austin Sarat

      by

      Democracy requires that we do more than look out for our own interests and defend our own rights. Ever since the birth of this nation, its citizens and leaders have echoed Benjamin Franklin’s admonition that “we must all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”In Donald Trump’s America, hanging separately seems to be the order of the day. This seems especially true when it comes to his treatment of this country’s millions of non-citizen residents.From the start of his political career, demonizing immigrants has been Trump’s stock in trade. Since his return to office, he has been unusually aggressive in his campaign to round up, detain and deport people whose citizenship status is questionable, and, in some cases, citizens have been caught up in the dragnet.The administration has repeatedly violated the constitution by targeting people because of how they look or the sound of their accents. It has even singled them out because of what they have said or written.On 30 September, Judge William Young of the United States district court of Massachusetts made clear that when it comes to freedom of speech, the constitution does not distinguish between people born in the United States and those who have come here as immigrants. His decision in American Association of University Professors v Rubio offers both a stirring civics lesson and an unusually personal rebuke against the Trump administration. The court found that the Trump administration had violated the right to free speech in its push to detain and deport pro-Palestinian foreign scholars.In his opinion, the judge went beyond the usual bounds of a judicial decision to note that the president “ignores everything … The Constitution, our civil laws, regulations, mores, customs, practices, courtesies – all of it; the President simply ignores it all when he takes it into his head to act”. Young added: “While the President naturally seeks warm cheering and gladsome, welcoming acceptance of his views, in the real world he’ll settle for sullen silence and obedience. What he will not countenance is dissent or disagreement.”The judge also accused the president of “bullying”.Legal purists who might applaud the judge’s reading of the constitution will be offended by seeing that kind of language in a judicial opinion. But what he did helps frame the danger Trump poses to the rights of immigrants in a way that connects them to the rest of us.Bravo, Judge Young.Recall the case of Mahmoud Khalil, a green card holder and graduate of Columbia University. He was arrested and detained in March for participating in pro-Palestinian protests on the Columbia University campus. He was held for more than a hundred days in Louisiana.As his lawyer said on Democracy Now: “If free speech means anything in this country,” he noted, it means “government agents can’t pick you up off the street and throw you into jail because of what you’ve said.” But that is exactly what the administration did, hoping to make an example out of Khalil and send a chilling message to other immigrants.Or how about Rümeysa Öztürk, a Tufts University graduate student, arrested by masked Ice agents for writing an op-ed calling on Tufts to do something to protect human rights in Gaza? As a Washington Post story notes, “Ozturk had committed no crime, yet her detention was a priority for the new Trump administration. US officials used the immigration system in unprecedented ways to covertly research and detain noncitizen students, relying on an investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security whose work traditionally has focused on crimes such as drug smuggling and human trafficking.”“The effort to deport pro-Palestinian student activists,” the Post reports, “represented the Trump administration’s first major challenge to free-speech norms in the United States.” It had to know that what it was doing violated the First Amendment but went ahead anyway under the pretext that it was acting to prevent or punish terrorist activities.This is not the first time that immigrants have been punished for saying or doing things that an administration labelled dangerous. But since the middle of the 20th century, the supreme court has held that the government cannot deport people because of their views or what they say.At that time, Justice William Douglas explained that “freedom of speech and of the press is accorded aliens residing in this country” and that “the utterances made by … [them] were entitled to that protection”. Justice Frank Murphy joined him and stated: “Once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders.”Young cited those views in his own opinion. “Noncitizens’ speech rights are,” he said, “identical to those of citizens.” He argued: “Political speech is not, on its own, a facially legitimate reason for expelling persons from this country.”After laying out in great detail all the things the Trump administration has done to violate that principle, including its mistreatment of Khalil and Öztürk, he called out Trump for ignoring the constitution and acting as if “the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech applies to American citizens alone”.Young called the case he was deciding “perhaps the most important ever to fall within the jurisdiction of this district court”.Citing the language of the first amendment – “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech” – the judge insisted: “‘No law’ means ‘no law.’ The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction” between citizens and non-citizens, “and it is not to be found in our history”, Young wrote.That reference to “our history” suggests that Trump’s treatment of non-citizens is un-American. But Young was not finished.He added: “Triumphalism is the very essence of the Trump brand. Often this is naught but hollow bragging: ‘my perfect administration,’ wearing a red baseball cap in the presidential oval office emblazoned ‘Trump Was Right About Everything,’ or most recently depicting himself as an officer in the First Cavalry Division.”He criticized Trump for his “triumphal, transactional, imperative, bellicose, and coarse” language that “seeks to persuade – not through marshaling data driven evidence, science, or moral suasion, but through power”.Near the end of his opinion, Young quotes former president Ronald Reagan. “Freedom,” Reagan said, “is a fragile thing and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people …”Returning to Trump, the judge goes on to say: “I’ve come to believe that President Trump truly understands and appreciates the full import of President Reagan’s inspiring message – yet I fear he has drawn from it a darker, more cynical message … [and that he] believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected.”By going beyond the precise issue in this case, the free speech rights of immigrants, and going after Trump, Young’s opinion helps frame threats to the rights of immigrants in a way that connects them to the rest of us. He hopes to rekindle the spirit of Reagan and inspire Americans to prove Trump wrong by showing that they will “stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values”.

      Austin Sarat, William Nelson Cromwell professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College, is the author or editor of more than 100 books, including Gruesome Spectacles: Botched Executions and America’s Death Penalty More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      MyPillow founder defamed Smartmatic election tech company, judge rules

      by

      MyPillow founder Mike Lindell defamed the election technology company Smartmatic with false statements that its voting machines helped rig the 2020 presidential election, a federal judge in Minnesota ruled recently.But US district judge Jeffrey Bryan deferred until future proceedings the question of whether Lindell – one of the country’s most prominent propagators of false claims that the 2020 election was a fraud – acted with the “actual malice” that Smartmatic still needs to prove to collect any damages.The judge said there are “genuine fact disputes” as to whether Lindell’s statements were made “with knowledge that they were false or made with reckless disregard to their falsity”. He noted that the defense says Lindell has an “unwavering belief” that his statements were truthful.The statements cited by the judge in his ruling on Friday arose from Lindell’s criticism of the results of the 2020 election in California’s Los Angeles county, which Democratic challenger Joe Biden carried with 71% of the vote over Republican incumbent Donald Trump. The results in LA county helped Biden secure the state’s 55 electoral votes as his electoral college victory sent him to the White House and ended Trump’s first presidency.The county used Smartmatic’s computerized touchscreen ballot-marking devices and was the company’s only customer for the 2020 election. Lindell alleged the machines were rigged to change Trump votes to Biden votes.The judge ruled there were 51 specific times when Lindell falsely claimed – in documentaries he produced and through various media and personal appearances – that Smartmatic interfered with the results.“The court concludes that, based on the record presented, no reasonable trier of fact could find that any of the statements at issue are true,” Bryan wrote.Smartmatic attorney Erik Connolly said they will be seeking “nine-figure damages” from Lindell and MyPillow for “spreading lies” about the company.“Smartmatic did not and could not have rigged the 2020 election,” Connolly said in a statement. “It was impossible, and everything that Mr Lindell said about Smartmatic was false.”Smartmatic has been on a winning streak, having reached settlements in 2024 with two conservative news outlets, including Newsmax and One America News Network. The Florida-based company also still has an active case against Fox News.Lindell also has made similar claims against Dominion Voting Systems. He lost a case involving the Denver-based company in June when a jury ruled that he defamed a former Dominion employee by accusing him of treason. The jury awarded $2.3m in damages.Lindell told the Associated Press shortly after the Smartmatic ruling was filed that he hadn’t seen it – but that it was “the most bizarre thing I’ve ever heard”.Lindell went on to call Smartmatic “one of the most corrupt companies in the world”, and he vowed to keep fighting until its voting machines are “melted down and turned into prison bars”. He said he will take his crusade to eliminate voting machines in favor of paper ballots all the way to the US supreme court if he has to.Lindell, known as the “MyPillow guy” for his bedding company, also said he recently re-established residence in Minnesota as a step toward a likely run for governor against the incumbent Democratic governor, Tim Walz. While MyPillow is based in the Minneapolis suburbs, Lindell had been living until recently in Texas.Lindell and MyPillow have faced a number of legal and financial setbacks in recent years, but he won a victory in July when a federal appeals court ruled he did not have to pay a $5m arbitration award to a software engineer who disputed data that Lindell claimed proved China interfered in the 2020 election. The court said the arbitration panel overstepped its authority. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Dangerous abuse of power’: lawmakers sound alarm over Comey indictment

      by

      For Donald Trump, the indictment of former FBI director and longtime foe James Comey was,“justice in America”. Legal observers and lawmakers see something far more troubling.A former Republican appointed to lead the bureau by Barack Obama and kept on by Trump until he fired him in 2017, Comey was indicted Thursday on charges related to allegedly lying to Congress five years ago during a hearing on the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election.The charges were filed in the eastern district of Virginia only after Erik Siebert was forced out as US attorney for reportedly finding no grounds to indict Comey. The justice department replaced him with a Trump loyalist with little prosecutorial experience, Lindsey Halligan, and shortly after, a grand jury indicted Comey on one count of making a false statement to Congress and one count of obstruction of a congressional proceeding.The indictment is the latest sign that the president is making good on his promise “to turn our justice system into a weapon for punishing and silencing his critics”, said Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee.“This kind of interference is a dangerous abuse of power. Our system depends on prosecutors making decisions based on evidence and the law, not on the personal grudges of a politician determined to settle scores,” Warner said.Adam Schiff, the Democratic senator and a former federal prosecutor who played a lead role in Trump’s first impeachment, said on X he had “never witnessed such a blatant abuse of the” justice department, calling it “little more than an arm of the president’s retribution campaign”.In a letter to Pam Bondi, the attorney general, Democrats on the Senate judiciary committee described Siebert’s firing and Comey’s indictment as “the latest steps in President Trump’s efforts to reshape the nation’s leading law enforcement agency into a weapon focused on punishing his enemies”.Top House Democrat Hakeem Jeffries said it was “crazy to me” that Trump was pursuing a “malicious prosecution” against Comey, given that the FBI chief’s public revival of an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email use days before the 2016 election is seen as playing a role in Trump’s victory.“These charges are going to be dismissed. James Comey will win in court. But what it reflects is a broader attack on the rule of law that should frighten every single American, whether you’re a Democrat, an independent or a Republican,” he said at the Capitol.Mike Zamore, national director of policy and government affairs at the American Civil Liberties Union, said Trump “has yet again proven his disdain for the principles that have actually made America great”.“By undermining the rule of law at each and every turn, threatening individuals who speak out against him, and arresting, investigating, and prosecuting elected officials of the opposition party and others who displease him, the president and his administration have corrupted our system of justice to turn his campaign of retribution into reality,” he said, adding that Trump’s public push to indict Comey amounts to “a grotesque abuse of presidential power”.Eric Swalwell, the Democratic congressman and member of the House judiciary committee, told CNN: “I promise you, when Democrats are in the majority, we are going to look at all of this, and there will be accountability, and bar licenses will be at stake in your local jurisdiction if you are corruptly indicting people where you cannot prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt on.”Norm Eisen, executive chair of pro-democracy group Democracy Defenders Fund, warned the indictment puts “the safety of every American and our national security itself in danger. This indictment has all the hallmarks of a vindictive and meritless prosecution, worthy only of the totalitarian states the United States used to oppose”.“This matters far beyond James Comey. It’s about every citizen’s right to live free from persecution by their own leaders. Criticizing our leaders is a fundamental right, regardless of how much our leaders don’t like it,” he said.Trump has spent the hours since Comey’s indictment was announced insulting him on Truth Social, calling him “One of the worst human beings this Country has ever been exposed to” on Thursday night and “A DIRTY COP” on Friday morning.His allies have taken up his argument, if not his tone.“Comey demonstrated complete arrogance and unwillingness to comply with the law,” said Ted Cruz, the Republican senator whose exchange with the former FBI director at a 2020 hearing is the subject of the allegations.Chuck Grassley, the Republican chair of the Senate judiciary committee, said: “If the facts and the evidence support the finding that Comey lied to Congress and obstructed our work, he ought to be held accountable.”“Say it with me, Democrats: nobody is above the law,” said Mike Davis, a prominent Trump legal defender, echoing a phrase often used by Democrats when Trump and his allies were facing prosecutions before his election victory last year.“We are just getting started today with this indictment,” Davis said. “It’s going to get much worse for the Democrats.” More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Judges rule against Trump administration on deporting Guatemalan children and Venezuelans

      by

      The Trump administration has been handed a double defeat by judges in immigration cases, barring the executive branch from deporting a group of Guatemalan children and from slashing protections for many Venezuelans in the US.A federal judge on Thursday ordered the administration to refrain from deporting Guatemalan unaccompanied immigrant children with active immigration cases while a legal challenge plays out.Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee based in Washington DC, kept in place an earlier judicial block on the policy, sharply criticizing the administration’s unproven assertion that the children’s parents wanted them deported.The administration attempted to deport 76 Guatemalan minors being held in US custody in a surprise move in the early morning on 31 August, sparking a lawsuit and emergency hearing that temporarily halted the move.The Department of Justice lawyer Drew Ensign initially said that the children’s parents had requested they be returned home, but the department later withdrew that claim. Reuters published a Guatemalan government report saying that most parents of the roughly 600 Guatemalan children in US custody could not be contacted and of those who could, many did not want their children forced back to the country.Kelly said the justice department’s explanation “crumbled like a house of cards” in light of that report.The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the justice department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Kelly said some children were unexpectedly taken from their shelter beds in the middle of the night, driven to the airport and, in some cases, put on planes, leaving them worried and confused. At one shelter in McAllen, Texas, a young girl was so scared that she vomited, Kelly wrote, citing evidence submitted in the case.Immigrant children who arrive at US borders without a parent or guardian are classified as unaccompanied and sent to federal government-run shelters until they can be placed with a family member or foster home, a process outlined in federal law.Meanwhile, late on Wednesday, a federal appeals court rejected an attempt by the Trump administration to set aside a judge’s order holding that it unlawfully rolled back temporary protections from deportation granted to 600,000 Venezuelans living in the US.A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based ninth US circuit court of appeals declined to pause a judge’s 5 September ruling holding that the homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, lacked the authority to end the program, known as temporary protected status or TPS.“Vacating and terminating Venezuela’s TPS status threw the future of these Venezuelan citizens into disarray, and exposed them to a substantial risk of wrongful removal, separation from their families, and loss of employment,” the panel said.The justice department has said that if a stay were denied, it might take the case to the US supreme court, which in May put on hold an earlier injunction Chen issued and cleared the way for the administration to end temporary protections for about 348,000 of the Venezuelans at issue.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the DHS, in a statement said the ninth circuit’s ruling “is nothing short of open defiance against the US Supreme Court”. The administration had contended the supreme court’s May decision meant Chen’s latest ruling had to be similarly paused.“Luckily for us, and for all Americans, the Ninth Circuit is not the last stop,” McLaughlin said.TPS is available to people whose home country has experienced a natural disaster, armed conflict or other extraordinary event. It provides eligible migrants with work authorization and temporary protection from deportation. The program was created in 1991 and extended under Joe Biden to cover about 600,000 Venezuelans and 521,000 Haitians. Noem reversed the extensions, saying they were no longer justified, prompting legal challenges.Chen’s decision had also applied to 521,000 Haitians. The administration did not ask the ninth circuit to put that part of Chen’s ruling on hold as a second judge in New York had already blocked the revocation of the Haitians’ status. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Georgia supreme court ends Fani Willis bid to reverse removal from Trump case

      by

      The Georgia supreme court on Tuesday declined to hear Fani Willis’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling disqualifying the Fulton county prosecutor from prosecuting Donald Trump’s election interference case.In a 4-3 decision, the state’s highest court let stand the lower court order disqualifying Willis from the racketeering and election interference case that initially snagged 19 defendants, including Donald Trump, in 2023.Georgia’s appeals court removed Willis from the case in December 2024, citing the “appearance of impropriety” created by her relationship with former special prosecutor Nathan Wade.The appellate decision in effect established a new standard in Georgia law for removing a prosecutor from a case, which the Georgia supreme court’s decision allows to stand without review.Trump, while president, is protected from state-level prosecutions, but the other remaining defendants are still subject to prosecution. The case will be reassigned by the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia, but it is unclear whether Pete Skandalakis, executive director of the council, will be able to find a prosecutor willing to take up the politically fraught, legally complicated case.He said he expected the formal process to begin within a month or so. Skandalakis, a district attorney elected by conservative voters outside of metro Atlanta may simply choose to drop the charges against the remaining 14 defendants, rather than risk the backlash of their constituents and the increasingly vocal and retributive ire of the president. But the primary consideration was a matter of capacity, Skandalakis said.“I have to start looking, today, for a prosecutor to take this case,” Skandalakis said. “You kind of narrow it down to resources – who has the staff – and then you kind of branch out. There are some offices that are too small, that are overrun with cases.”Willis and attorneys for Trump and other defendants did not immediately respond to a request for comment.A grand jury in Atlanta indicted Trump and 18 others in August 2023, using the state’s anti-racketeering law to accuse them of participating in a wide-ranging scheme to illegally overturn Trump’s narrow 2020 loss to Joe Biden in Georgia. The alleged scheme included Trump’s call to the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, urging him to help find enough votes to beat Biden. Four people have pleaded guilty. Trump and the others have pleaded not guilty. More