US news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Judge dismisses trespassing charges against immigrants crossing US-Mexico border

      by

      A federal judge in New Mexico on Thursday dismissed trespassing charges against dozens of immigrants caught in a new military zone on the US-Mexico border, marking a setback for Trump administration efforts to raise penalties for unlawful crossings into the US.Chief US magistrate judge Gregory Wormuth began filing the dismissals late on Wednesday, ruling that immigrants did not know they were entering the military zone in New Mexico and therefore could not be charged, according to court documents and a defense attorney.Assistant federal public defender Amanda Skinner said Wormuth dismissed trespassing charges against all immigrants who made initial court appearances on Thursday. The immigrants still face charges accusing them of crossing the border illegally.“Judge Wormuth found no probable cause,” Skinner said in an email.New Mexico US attorney Ryan Ellison, who filed the first trespassing charges against migrants on 28 April, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The so-called New Mexico national defense area was established in April along 180 miles (290km) of the border, and US army troops were authorized to detain immigrants entering the area from Mexico.A second buffer zone was set up in Texas this month. Defense secretary Pete Hegseth said in a social media post the military would continue to expand the zones to gain “100% operational control” of the border.US attorneys charged over 100 immigrants with crossing the border illegally and trespassing in the military zones in New Mexico and Texas. Potential combined penalties were up to 10 years imprisonment, according to Hegseth.But Wormuth pushed back against the charges for the immigrants in New Mexico, ordering Ellison on 1 May to show proof they were aware they entered the military zone unlawfully.Defense attorneys argued warning signs in the area were inadequate to inform immigrants they were committing a crime, a position Wormuth agreed with.“The criminal complaint fails to establish probable cause to believe the defendant knew he/she was entering” the military zone, Wormuth wrote in his orders dismissing charges.The Department of Defense did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans say they want more American babies – but which kind?

      by

      Some of the children were too young to stand on their own. Instead, they sat on their parents’ knees or in their parents’ arms, waving American flags. Many of them seemed confused about what, exactly, was even happening.But these kids were in the midst of making history: their families were among the first to take advantage of Donald Trump’s February executive order granting white South Africans refugee status in the United States, on the grounds that Afrikaner landowners – who make up just 7% of South Africa’s population yet, decades after the end of apartheid, control about half of its land – are facing persecution. While the doors to the US refugee program have been slammed shut to virtually everyone else, these Afrikaners showed up in the US earlier this week, their refugee status promising a path to US citizenship.Days later, the Trump administration took a far narrower view of who deserves access to the American polity. On Thursday morning, a lawyer for the Trump administration argued in front of the US supreme court that the 14th amendment does not guarantee citizenship to the American-born children of “illegal aliens” – a view contradicted by more than a century of legal precedent.This split screen raises a vital question: is the Trump administration really interested in helping children and families flourish – or only the “right” families?Over the last several months, the Trump administration’s policies on immigration, families, and children have been pockmarked by all kinds of contradictions. The administration is reportedly considering numerous policies to convince people to have more children, such as “baby bonuses” of $5,000 or medals for mothers who have six or more kids. The Department of Transportation has issued a memo directing the agency to “give preference to communities with marriage and birth rates higher than the national average”. And JD Vance has proclaimed: “I want more babies in the United States of America.”These moves are, in part, fueled by the growing power of the pronatalism movement, which believes that the declining birthrate in the US is an existential threat to its workforce and its future.Why, then, does the government want to exclude an estimated 150,000 babies born every year?“It’s hard to look at any of these policies and not believe that they’re created for the purpose of satisfying a political base that was promised some sort of notions of recreating a nostalgia for a white Christian nationalist nation,” said P Deep Gulasekaram, a professor of immigration law at the University of Colorado Law School.If the fate of the US workforce is really of concern, experts say immigration could help grow it – but the Trump administration has taken a hardline stance against immigrants from the Global South and their children. The administration has not only reportedly turned the refugee agency responsible for caring for children who arrive in the US alone into an arm of Ice, but also slashed funding for legal representation of children in immigration proceedings. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are trying to block parents who lack Social Security Numbers – such as undocumented people – from benefiting from the child tax credit, even in cases where their children are US citizens.The Trump administration has also unveiled new screening protocols that make it far more difficult for undocumented people to “sponsor”, or take custody of, children who enter the US alone. Just last week, the National Center for Youth Law and the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward sued the Trump administration over the changes, which they say have forced kids to languish in government custody. Between December 2024 and March 2025, kids went from spending an average of two months in government custody to spending an average of six.“This administration has compromised the basic health and safety of immigrant children in egregious ways,” Neha Desai, managing director of children’s human rights and dignity at the National Center for Youth Law, said in an email.In March, KFF, a charity that conducts health policy research, conducted focus groups of Hispanic adults who are undocumented or likely living with someone who is undocumented. Many spoke of the effect that the Trump administration’s policies are having on their families and kids.“I have a six-year-old child. Honestly, I’m afraid to take him to the park, and he asks me, ‘Mom, why don’t we go to the park?’” one 49-year-old Costa Rican immigrant woman told KFF. “How do I tell him? I’m scared.”“Even the children worry. ‘Mom, did you get home safely?’ They’re already thinking that something is going to happen to us on the street,” added a 54-year-old Colombian immigrant woman. “So that also makes me very nervous, knowing that there might come a time when they could be left here alone.”The supreme court arguments on Thursday centered not on the constitutionality of birthright citizenship, but on the legality of lower court orders in the case. Still, some of the justices expressed concerns about what the case could mean for children.Eliminating birthright citizenship, Justice Elena Kagan suggested, could render children stateless. The high court needed a way to act fast, she said.If the justices believe that a court order is wrong, she asked, “why should we permit those countless others to be subject to what we think is an unlawful executive action?”Both the historical and legal record make clear that the 14th Amendment encapsulates birthright citizenship, Gulasekaram said. But, he said, predicting the supreme court’s moves is a “fool’s errand”.“There’s really no way of getting around the the conclusion that this is a call to some form of racial threat and racial solidarity as a way of shoring up support from a particular part of the of the of the Trump base,” Gulasekaram said. “Citizenship and the acquisition of citizenship has always been racially motivated in the United States.” More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican push to cut green tax credits would raise utility bills, new data shows

      by

      As House Republicans propose taking a sledgehammer to the green tax credits in Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, new data shows the loss of those incentives could lower some Americans’ household income by more than $1,000 a year due to increased utility bills and job losses.Though Donald Trump has called climate spending a “waste” of money, the data – published by the industry group Clean Energy Buyers Association (Ceba) on Thursday – provides evidence that rescinding them would actually increase expenses for ordinary Americans in red and blue districts alike.The rollback would increase the price of electricity and gas, the report found. And it would lead to job losses and “economic slowdown”, it says.“Americans voted to combat the cost-of-living crisis in the 2024 election,” said Rich Powell, CEO of Ceba. “Now is the time for Congress to incentivize private investment in more sources of low-cost, reliable energy that fuels economic growth and jobs, helps the United States secure energy dominance and independence, and decreases energy costs nationwide.”The new figures, crunched for Ceba by the National Economic Research Associates consulting firm, focus specifically on credits 48E and 45Y, for clean energy investment and production respectively. In a reconciliation package draft this week, the House ways and means committee proposed phasing out these incentives after 2031, and placing many new restrictions on them in the meantime.If the rollbacks proceed as proposed, the new study found, at least 19 states would see the cost of energy increase for both consumers and industry between 2026 to 2032. (More states would probably see similar impacts, but the authors did not examine all 50 “because of the turnaround time for research”, Ceba said).New Jersey is the state expected to see the biggest economic losses if the clean energy investment and production credits are repealed, the authors found. There, the authors found the rollback could increase household gas and utility bills by 2.9% and 13.3% respectively. The repeal would also trigger the loss of 22,180 jobs, they found.All told, households across the state would see a stunning $1,040 average loss in annual household income and a $3.24bn decrease in state GDP, the authors wrote.“As commercial and industrial activity declines, demand for labor and capital falls, leading to wage losses, declining household income, and shrinking investment,” the research says.The authors’ outlook for state-level electricity markets assumes an incremental growth in electricity demand due to the growth of data centers. Some of Ceba’s members are tech giants – including Amazon, Google and Meta – who are bringing more data centers online.An earlier Ceba report, published in February, forecast the effect on electricity prices alone across all 50 states. If the clean energy investment and production credits are repealed, the average American household would see their annual household utility bills increase by $110 by 2026, it found.Wyoming would see the largest rise of 29.5% on average for households across the state, the earlier report found. More

    • 188 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Newark mayor says prosecutors tried to ‘humilate’ him by forcing redo of fingerprints and mugshot

      by

      Ras Baraka, the Democratic mayor of Newark, said federal prosecutors were seeking to “humiliate and degrade” him by making him give fingerprints and have a mugshot taken for a second time on Thursday.The move came after a court appearance on a trespassing charge stemming from his arrest at an immigration detention center where he was protesting with several members of Congress.The charges against Baraka have unfolded amid fears that the Trump administration is seeking to prosecute Democratic politicians, judges or others who have opposed its policies.Baraka appeared in court for a roughly 15-minute procedural hearing before magistrate judge André Espinosa. The hearing covered mostly scheduling for discovery in the case, which stemmed from an encounter on Friday outside the Delaney Hall immigration detention center.Assistant prosecutor Stephen Demanovich said the government disputed Baraka’s claims that he committed no crime and was invited on to the facility’s property. Confusion over whether Baraka had been fingerprinted and processed after his arrest unfolded after the judge brought the proceedings to a close.As the parties began to walk away, the judge added that the mayor would need to be processed by the US Marshals Service and that it would take 10 minutes. Baraka, looking confused, said he had already been processed after his arrest. The judge said “agents” had processed him but not the marshals.“Let’s go,” Baraka said, before indicating he would go with the marshals.Speaking to a crowd of supporters outside court, Baraka addressed why it took him a while to emerge from the building.“They’re trying their best to humiliate and degrade me as much as they possibly can,” he said. “I feel like what we did was completely correct. We did not violate any laws. We stood up for the constitution of this country, the constitution of the state of New Jersey.”The trespassing charge against Baraka carries a maximum sentence of 30 days in prison.One of Baraka’s attorney’s, Rahul Agarwal, said the defense expected to seek to dismiss the charges because the mayor was arrested by federal agents on private property. He added that it was a “selective prosecution” and that only the mayor had been arrested.Demanovich said the government disputed that but did not go into detail.Baraka has been an outspoken opponent of Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown and a vocal opponent of the facility’s opening.In video of the Friday altercation shared with the Associated Press, a federal official in a jacket with the homeland security investigations logo can be heard telling Baraka he could not enter because “you are not a Congress member”.Baraka then left the secure area, rejoining protesters on the public side of the gate. Video showed him speaking through the gate to a man in a suit, who said: “They’re talking about coming back to arrest you.”“I’m not on their property. They can’t come out on the street and arrest me,” Baraka replied.Minutes later, several Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents, some wearing face coverings, surrounded him and others on the public side. Baraka was dragged back through the gate in handcuffs.Delaney Hall is a two-storey building next to a county prison and formerly operated as a halfway house. In February, Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded a 15-year contract to the Geo Group Inc to run the detention center.Politicians and activists have said facility has been reopened in contravention of local ordinances and without the necessary permits. It is the largest such facility in the north-eastern US, and the first to open during Trump’s second term, according to Ice.A trial date for Baraka has not yet been set.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 188 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Love, hope, community and resistance’: ACLU to unveil 9,000 sq ft quilt for trans rights

      by

      “It would be a lie if I said I wasn’t anxious,” Abdool Corlette said while discussing his latest project with the American Civil Liberties Union, Freedom to Be. An award-winning film-maker and head of brand at the ACLU, Corlette has been working for nearly two years with hundreds of trans people across the country to create a 9,000 sq ft quilt, composed of 258 panels that are packed with responses to the question: what does freedom mean to you?Corlette is anxious because Freedom to Be is all about trans joy and trans freedom, and it will make a defiant stand for both on 17 May in Washington DC in spite of the war that Donald Trump has waged against the trans community since his inauguration.“We have been doing everything we can to create contingency plans to make sure we have every scenario accounted for,” Corlette said. “This is what keeps me up at night, making sure our guests are safe.”This was not the celebration that Corlette had hoped for. When Freedom to Be kicked off in September 2023, it was focused more around combating the tsunami of anti-trans legislation that has taken over statehouses since 2020, as well as the related wave of anti-trans rhetoric that has seeded the ground for such legislation. The first two prongs of the campaign have already occurred: with the first, Corlette helped tell the stories of trans kids whose lives had been transformed by gender-affirming medical care, and with the second he spearheaded a rally on the steps of the supreme court on 4 December 2024, in conjunction with oral arguments in the case of United States v Skrmetti. The eventual ruling on that case will decide on the legality of bans against gender-affirming care for trans minors.The third prong of Freedom to Be happens this weekend as part of WorldPride, an annual global celebration of the LGBTQ+ community that just happens to occur in DC this year. The festivities will play out during the upswing of one of the most virulently anti-queer governments in US history, and, already, attenders from all over the world have pulled out, as have many of the event’s corporate sponsors.View image in fullscreenIn spite of the potentially dangerous situation, Corlette is hoping that the trans community will be able to find joy as he publicly displays the completed quilt. “I want someone who is feeling heavy to walk into that space and see that across the United States there’s 9,000 sq ft of messages of love, hope, community and resistance,” Corlette said. “Joy is what I want to blanket that day.”Lee Blinder, founding executive director of Trans Maryland, took part in helping create some of those messages that Corlette hopes trans people and their allies will see in DC. On 9 February this year, less than three weeks into the Trump administration, Blinder walked into a local queer bar to host more than 100 members of the trans community in creating squares for the quilt. According to Blinder, coming together to make the quilt instilled hope amid the onslaught against trans people that filled Trump’s first weeks in office. “People walked into that room feeling extraordinarily grateful to be there,” Blinder said. “There were these gorgeous multicolored sewing machines; there was so much thought and intention that went into the event. Multiple people came up to me and said, ‘We’re so grateful that y’all had this event. This is what I needed.’ It was really nice to be there and take time out of that impossible week.”Blinder’s comments speak to the power of being in community, even when confronted by the profound threats to basic human rights and bodily autonomy posed by the Trump administration and Republican-led state governments. It is a power Blinder is quite familiar with, as for years they have led Trans Maryland in hosting weekly trans support groups and organizing a program in which trans people help each other with name and gender marker changes. “It’s trans people who have been through the process helping other community members,” they told me.View image in fullscreenBlinder plans to be in DC for the unveiling of the Freedom to Be quilt, and they are extremely thrilled to be participating. “I’m really excited to see it all stitched together in person,” they said. “I saw all the quilt squares stacked there [in the bar] after everyone had made them – there’s this pool table in the space, and they’d lay them out there where we could see a little bit of the vision of how they would all come together.”Blinder echoed many who have posed art as an important element in fighting back against the Trump administration and other anti-LGBTQ+ governments. In particular, they see the way that art can bring together communities, while also opening minds and hearts, as integral to pushing back against authoritarian political movements. “The process of creating art has been a longstanding element of resistance for the trans and queer community,” they said. “It’s a key component with the resistance against fascism – it’s played a key role in the past, and I think it will continue to play a significant role in the resistance as it is right now.”According to Corlette, working with trans people at a particularly dangerous time for the community has been a powerful and often painful experience, as he has built personal relationships with individuals who have been harmed by repressive governmental policies. “Individuals who were storytellers in the first part of this campaign have had to pick up and leave their home states for fear of safety for their own bodies,” he said. “That’s what makes it so personal.”View image in fullscreenCorlette hopes that Freedom to Be will not just reach trans people and their allies but also connect with anyone who is feeling demoralized amid the authoritarian ambitions of the Trump administration. “No matter how daunting this fight is, hope has not been lost,” he said. “If the most marginalized community in the country is remaining in the fight, everyone else should be as well.”Ultimately, Corlette sees Freedom to Be as continuing a legacy of transformative community action taken by the queer community in support of itself. For him, spreading stories and joy while giving the community ways to be together is what’s most important. “This monument is a direct descendant of the Aids memorial quilt,” he said. “We wanted to really be in the legacy of those who came before us, to use art and advocacy to not only memorialize but to create pockets of joy for communities to tell their stories and come together to celebrate their existence.” More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      This pregnant woman sued Trump over birthright citizenship. Now it’s up to the supreme court

      by

      With the highest court in the US poised to hear her case – and decide her family’s future – Monica was keeping busy babyproofing her house.Monica is a plaintiff in one of three lawsuits challenging Donald Trump’s birthright citizenship order, a case that is being heard before the nation’s highest court on Thursday. She’s expecting her first child in early August.The Guardian first spoke with her in January, not long after Trump took office and signed an executive order seeking to end the constitutionally recognized right of birthright citizenship. Since then, she said, her belly has grown bigger, her feet more swollen. And she is still waiting to see whether her baby will be born as a citizen, or stateless.“We can only wait and hope,” she said. “Let’s wait in faith and trust in the laws of this country.”The Guardian is not publishing Monica’s surname, to protect her from retribution. She and her husband fled political persecution in Venezuela in 2019, and came to the US seeking asylum. The couple had been waiting for their immigration court hearing when they found out, in early January, that Monica was pregnant.“We were so excited,” she said. Just two weeks later, news of Trump’s executive order landed like a blow. Acquiring Venezuelan citizenship for their child would be impossible – both Monica and her husband were outspoken critics of their country’s autocratic leader, Nicolás Maduro – and contacting the government could put them in danger.“I had to fight for my baby,” she said.She had been a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (Asap), a non-profit group that advocates for immigrant rights, and when lawyers from the group reached out to expecting parents to see if any would like to join a lawsuit challenging Trump’s order, Monica felt compelled to respond.Two immigration advocacy groups, Asap and Casa, are named as plaintiffs alongside Monica and four other mothers in one of three cases challenging the executive order. A second case was filed by four states and pregnant women, and a third by 18 states, the District of Columbia and San Francisco. The supreme court is hearing these cases consolidated as one.Other than her mother and a few close relatives, nobody knows that she is involved in one of the most closely watched cases to come before the supreme court this year. She has concealed her identity and tried to maintain a low profile, to avoid biasing her family’s asylum case, and to protect her family in Venezuela.But the topic of birthright citizenship and the administration’s intention to end it often comes up in her conversations with friends – especially with immigrant mothers who, like her, worry about their babies’ futures. “We are all on standby,” she said.They worry, too, about news that mothers are being separated from their babies – or being deported alongside their children. “Every day there are new changes, there are new executive orders about us immigrants,” she said. “Every day there is more fear in immigration conditions.”In the meantime, she said, there’s nothing to do but focus on the day to day. Monica and her husband have kept busy getting their home baby-ready, purchasing and assembling cribs and car seats. Now that she’s in her third trimester, she’s packed a go-bag with a change of clothes and other essentials – ready in case she needs to rush to the hospital. “We’re really down to the last few weeks already,” she said.Recently, they settled on a name. More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Stephen Miller is wrong: the president can’t just suspend habeas corpus | Austin Sarat

      by

      The writ of habeas corpus is much older than the US constitution. That writ, which enables people detained by the government to challenge their detention in court, has been regarded as an essential bulwark of liberty in the English-speaking world since the 15th century.In this country, Alexander Hamilton said the writ of habeas corpus provides “greater security to liberty and republicanism” than any other provision in the constitution. And in his first inaugural address, President Thomas Jefferson called the protections provided by habeas corpus one of the “essential principles of our Government”.But you would never know that from what Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, said on Friday. Talking to reporters outside the White House, Miller reported that the administration was “actively looking at” the possibility of suspending the writ of habeas corpus for people who are in the country illegally.What Miller said suggests he is either ignorant about the constitution or he just doesn’t care. Either way, the authority to suspend the writ of habeas corpus is vested in Congress, not the president.Miller’s comments should be a wake-up call for Mike Johnson, the speaker of the House of Representatives, and John Thune, the Republican majority leader in the Senate. By defending Congress’s prerogatives, the Republican leaders could defuse another brewing constitutional crisis – and act in line with what the founders of the American republic would want.Miller’s remarks come after a string of defeats in federal courts over the arbitrary way Trump and his colleagues have handled what they see as the crisis of illegal immigration. And now Miller seems to think that the president can unilaterally strip those people of a right guaranteed to everyone in the government’s custody, regardless of their citizenship status.“Well”, he observed, “the constitution is clear – and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land – that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion.” Yesterday, the homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, joined Miller in claiming that the level of illegal border crossings under Joe Biden counted as a constitutional reason to suspend the right.They are right that the writ can be suspended.But, whatever one thinks about what Biden did when he was in office, there is no invasion. The Department of Homeland Security itself says that the first 100 days of the Trump administration have produced “The Most Secure Border in American History”.And even if there was, the constitution’s text suggests that the president cannot suspend what Miller called the “privilege” of habeas corpus. The suspension clause is in article I of the constitution, where the powers of Congress are enumerated, not in article II, which deals with the executive branch.The language of the constitution also makes clear that the writ of habeas corpus may be suspended only if Congress determines that there is a “Rebellion or Invasion” and that “the public Safety may require it”.Looking back at the constitutional convention is also instructive. The convention considered but did not adopt the following language: “The privileges and benefits of the writ of habeas corpus … shall not be suspended by the Legislature except upon the most urgent and pressing occasions, and for a limited time …”Instead, the convention adopted the language of article I, section 9, that “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” And in 1807, Chief Justice John Marshall cleared up any doubt about which branch of government could suspend habeas corpus.He wrote: “If at any time the public safety should require the suspension of the powers vested by this act in the courts of the United States, it is for the legislature to say so.” Joseph Story, a prominent early commentator on the constitution and the convention that proposed it, also confirmed that “the power is given to Congress to suspend the writ of habeas corpus in cases of rebellion or invasion.”In fact, the writ of habeas corpus has only been suspended four times in American history. The first time was in 1861 when President Lincoln, acting without congressional authority, suspended it in Maryland, a border state, to address potential threats to the capital.Habeas corpus was also suspended in South Carolina in places that were overrun by the Ku Klux Klan during Reconstruction; in the Philippines during an insurrection against US rule in 1905; and in Hawaii following the bombing of Pearl Harbor.With respect to Lincoln’s unilateral action, Chief Justice Roger Taney ruled it was unconstitutional, saying about the suspension clause: “Congress is of necessity the judge of whether the public safety does or does not require it; and its judgment is conclusive.” Since then, the supreme court has consistently reiterated Taney’s view.For example, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, when suspected terrorists were held without trial in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Justices Antonin Scalia and John Paul Stevens wrote: “the Constitution’s Suspension Clause … allows Congress to relax the usual protections temporarily.”It is time for Republican congressional leaders to look in the mirror. Five years ago, senator Thune claimed that “Republicans believe in … the Constitution, and that’s what dictates what happens.” Similarly, speaker Johnson’s website proudly proclaims: “Each branch of government must adhere to the Constitution, and… Congress must faithfully perform its constitutional responsibility.”They should live up to those pronouncements and heed Story’s admonition that “the practice of arbitrary imprisonments has been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny.” Now would be a good time for them to tell the president that they will not allow him to ignore the constitution and usurp a power that it assigns exclusively to Congress.

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

    • 238 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Why is Maga-land so obsessed with Kai Trump turning 18? Do you really need to ask? | Arwa Mahdawi

      by

      Kai Trump, the president’s granddaughter and the eldest of Donald Trump Jr’s five children, has just turned 18. To be clear, I do not have a list of Trump family birthdays on my fridge. But it has been forced upon my consciousness because an awful lot of people in Trumpworld are being weird about it.Fox News, for example, decided to post both an Instagram message (which got more than 87,000 likes) and a tweet wishing Kai a very happy 18th birthday. Which is a little odd considering that the high school student is not a public figure. Kai, who has a large social media following, did briefly speak at the Republican national convention last year and has posted support for her grandfather, but that doesn’t seem to justify a birthday announcement by a major media network.Especially, by the way, as Fox News doesn’t appear to have been so excited about Barron Trump when he turned 18. (Although it did put up an Instagram post on Barron’s 19th birthday, with a quote from Donald calling him a “a very smart guy”.) It’s almost – and bear with me here – as if they have some sort of weird interest in the fact that a teenage girl has turned 18.Am I accusing the folk at Fox News of being a bunch of creeps? Absolutely not! I’d never do that. Although if you look at the reactions to the Fox News posts or the comments attached to a New York Post Page Six piece about Kai’s birthday, there are plenty of people out there who should be on some sort of watchlist or registry. Particularly the people who have read far too much into the fact that Kai recently posted a TikTok video of her and three friends dancing to Promiscuous by Nelly Furtado and Timbaland with the caption: “last day being 17″.While things have moved on somewhat, there’s also a very depressing history of media figures counting down to young girls turning the age of consent. Look at British singer Charlotte Church, who got a record deal as an opera singer when she was just 12. There was a media frenzy in 2002 when she turned 16 (the age of consent in England). On her birthday, Chris Moyles, a BBC radio DJ who was 28 at the time, publicly announced he wanted to “lead her through the forest of sexuality now she had reached 16”. Making this disgusting comment didn’t ruin Moyles’s career, by the way. Just like 38-year-old Jerry Seinfeld dating a 17-year-old high schooler hasn’t hurt the billionaire comedian’s career at all either.Harry Potter star Emma Watson has also talked about being sexualized by the media when she was a teenager. Watson has said the paparazzi even took photos up her skirt, and published them in an English tabloid, the moment she turned 18 and it was “legal”.It was a similar story with twins Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, who have been on TV since they were tiny. In 2004 numerous websites started counting down to their 18th birthday including the “Olsen Twin Jailbait Countdown Clock” run by radio shock jocks Lex Staley and Terry Jaymes. The New York Post also crowed about the twins being “legal”.More recently, in 2018, a radio host called Patrick Connor called Olympic athlete Chloe Kim, then just 17 years old, a “little hot piece of ass”. Conner then referenced Wooderson, a character in the film Dazed and Confused who pursues high school girls. “Her 18th birthday is 23 April, and the countdown is on baby, ’cause I got my Wooderson going,” said Connor. “‘That’s what I like about them high school girls.’” In a sign that some progress has made when it comes to mainstream misogyny, Connor was forced to apologize for the remark and fired.Since we live in litigious times I would like to reiterate, once again, that while some people (not me!) have accused Fox News of being creepy about Kai, I’m sure they meant nothing sinister by their post. After all, unlike depraved liberals, the Maga crowd are an extremely wholesome bunch who live and die for family values.I will concede, however, that it is sometimes hard to wrap one’s head around the Maga definition of “family values”. The president, for example, is a legally defined sexual predator who has also been accused, by Miles Taylor, a staffer in Trump’s first administration, of sexualizing his oldest daughter Ivanka.In a book published in 2023, Taylor writes: “[Trump] said he talked about Ivanka Trump’s breasts, her backside, and what it might be like to have sex with her, remarks that once led [former chief of staff] John Kelly to remind the president that Ivanka was his daughter.”Former Fox News star Tucker Carlson also seems to have a strange definition of family values. I’m sorry to remind you of this if you’ve wiped it from your memory but last year Carlson made an extraordinary (even by Maga standards) speech at a Trump rally in which he likened the now president to an angry father spanking his daughter.“I’m not going to lie. It’s going to hurt you a lot more than it hurts me,” Carlson said. “And you earned this. You’re getting a vigorous spanking because you’ve been a bad girl. You’re only going to get better when you take responsibility for what you did. It has to be this way.’” The crowd then erupted into chants of “Daddy Don”!Maga also seems to adopt different values, depending on what sort of family they’re looking at. Conservative influencers were vile about Ella Emhoff, Kamala Harris’s stepdaughter, when Harris was running for president. Newsweek senior editor Josh Hammer wrote: “Doug Emhoff’s daughter is like something out of a horror film,” for example. Podcast host Benny Johnson also called Emhoff and her father “creepy” for having their arms around each other in a video. The right seems eager to scrutinize the family of politicians when they don’t agree with their politics. They went on the warpath, however, when a former NBCUniversal executive joked about Barron being “fair game” (meaning that it was OK for the press to criticize him) when he turned 18.Anyway, happy birthday to Kai Trump. At 18 she is still very young – but it would seem like it’s the Maga adults who have the real growing up to do. More