US news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Americans, including Republicans, losing faith in Trump, new polls reveal

      by

      Americans, including some Republicans, are losing faith in Donald Trump across a range of key issues, according to polling released this week. One survey found a majority describing the president’s second stint in the White House so far as “scary”.Along with poor ratings on the economy and Trump’s immigration policy, a survey released on Saturday found that only 24% of Americans believe Trump has focussed on the right priorities as president.That poll comes as Trump’s popularity is historically low for a leader this early in a term. More than half of voters disapprove of Trump’s performance as president, and majorities oppose his tariff policies and slashing of the federal workforce.The scathing reviews come as Trump next week marks 100 days of his second stint office, and suggest Americans are already experiencing fatigue after a period that has seen global financial market nosedives and chilling deportations, including of documented people.A poll by the Associated Press-Norc Center for Public Affairs Research published this weekend, found that even Republicans are not overwhelmingly convinced that Trump’s attention has been in the right place.A narrow majority, 54%, of Republicans surveyed said that Trump is focussed on the “right priorities”, while the president’s numbers with crucial independent voters are much weaker. Just 9% of independents said that the president is focussed on the right priorities – with 42% believing Trump is paying attention to the wrong issues.About four in 10 people in the survey approve of how Trump is handling the presidency overall, and only about 40% of Americans approve of Trump’s approach to foreign policy, trade negotiations and the economy.Meanwhile, a New York Times/Siena College poll of registered voters on Friday found that Trump’s approval rating is 42%, and just 29% among independent voters. More than half of voters said Trump is “exceeding the powers available to him”, and 59% of respondents said the president’s second term has been “scary”.While Republican leaders typically receive strong scores on economic issues, Americans have been underwhelmed by Trump’s performance. The Times survey found that only 43% of voters approve of how Trump is handling the economy – a stark turnaround from a Times poll in April 2024, which found that 64% approved of Trump’s economy in his first term.Half of voters disapproved of Trump’s trade policies with other countries, and 61% said a president should not have the authority to impose tariffs without congressional approval, while the Times reported that 63% – including 40% of Republicans – said “a president should not be able to deport legal immigrants who have protested Israel”.Further on immigration, a Washington Post-ABC-Ipsos poll on Friday found that 53% of Americans now disapprove of the president’s handling of immigration matters, while 46% approve. In February the majority was the other way, with half of those surveyed approving of Trump’s approach on that issue.The Post reported that as support has drained away on this topic, at this point 90% of Democrats, 56% of independents and 11% of Republicans dislike the way Trump is dealing with immigration.The poor reviews have dogged Trump all week. An Associated Press poll on Thursday found that about half of US adults say that Trump’s trade policies will increase prices “a lot” and another three in 10 think prices could go up “somewhat”, and half of Americans are “extremely” or “very” concerned about the possibility of the US economy going into a recession in the next few months.Polling conducted by the Trump-friendly Fox News has brought little respite. A survey published on Wednesday found that just 38% of Americans approve of Trump on the economy, with 56% disapproving.The Fox News poll found that 58% of respondents disapproved of Trump’s performance, and 59% disapproved on inflation. Just three in 10 Americans said they believed Trump’s policies were helping the economy, and only four in 10 said Trump’s policies will help the country.Among generation Z, generally regarded as those born between 1995 and 2012, a staggering 69% told pollsters for an NBC Stay Tuned survey that they don’t approve of Trump’s handling of the economy and the cost of living. Gen Z participants complained of struggling to even pay the rent in some places, let alone buy a home, and they worry about inflation.A minority of gen Z people polled thought the country would be stronger if more people lived by traditional binary gender roles and more than 90% of those polled said they believed foreign students with visas or green cards should have the same due process protections as US citizens. This comes amid the Trump administration declaring there are only two genders, male and female, and arresting and detaining some pro-Palestinian student activists without due process. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump officials deport two-year-old US citizen and mother of one-year-old girl

      by

      The Trump administration has deported a two-year-old US citizen “with no meaningful process”, according to a federal judge, while in a different case the authorities deported the mother of a one-year-old girl, separating them indefinitely.Lawyers in the two cases, the first in Louisiana and the second in Florida, say their clients were arrested at routine check-ins at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) offices and were given virtually no opportunity to speak with them or family members.They are the latest examples of the White House cracking down on documented immigrants, including green card holders and also even citizens who have the status by birth or naturalization. The unorthodox policy and the frequent avoidance of due process has brought about a clash with the judicial branch of the US government in a battle over the constitution.The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), National Immigration Project and several other allied groups said in a statement that deporting children who are US citizens, as in these two cases, are a “shocking – although increasingly common – abuse of power”.US district judge Terry Doughty in Monroe, Louisiana, said the two-year-old girl, who was referred to as VML in court documents, was deported with her mother to Honduras.“It is illegal and unconstitutional to deport, detain for deportation, or recommend deportation of a US citizen,” said the judge.He scheduled a hearing for 19 May “in the interest of dispelling our strong suspicion that the government just deported a US citizen with no meaningful process”.VML was apprehended by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) on Tuesday with her mother, Jenny Carolina Lopez Villela, and older sister when Villela attended a routine appointment at its New Orleans office, according to a filing by Trish Mack, who said the child’s father asked her to act as the child’s custodian. The girl’s father is seeking to have her returned to the United States.Immigrants of all sorts with cases in process, pending appeals or parole, have routinely been required to regularly check in with Ice officers, sometimes for many years. And so long as they had not violated any regulations or committed any crimes, they were usually sent on their way. Now, as the Trump administration pushes for the mass arrest and deportation of immigrants, check-ins have become increasingly fraught.According to Mack, when VML’s father briefly spoke to Villela, he could hear her and the children crying. According to a court document, he reminded her that a US citizen “could not be deported”.However, prosecutors said Villela, who has legal custody, told Ice that she wanted to retain custody of the girl and take her to Honduras. They said the man claiming to be VML’s father had not presented himself to Ice despite requests to do so.VML is not prohibited from entering the US, federal prosecutors said..She was among two families deported from Louisiana, also including one pregnant woman, the advocacy groups noted.The Department of Homeland Security and the justice department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.“These actions stand in direct violation of Ice’s own written and informal directives, which mandate coordination for the care of minor children with willing caretakers – regardless of immigration status – when deportations are being carried out,” the ACLU said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn Florida, meanwhile, a Cuban-born woman who is the mother of a one-year-old girl and the wife of a US citizen was detained at a scheduled check-in with Ice in Tampa, her lawyer said on Saturday.Heidy Sánchez was held without any communication and flown to Cuba two days later. She is still breastfeeding her daughter, who suffers from seizures, her lawyer, Claudia Cañizares, said.Cañizares said she tried to file paperwork with Ice to contest the deportation on Thursday morning but Ice refused to accept it, saying Sánchez was already gone. Sánchez is not a criminal and has a strong case on humanitarian grounds for staying in the US, Cañizares said.Donald Trump, whose presidential campaigns have focused heavily on immigration, said earlier this month he wanted to deport some violent criminals who are US citizens to El Salvadoran prisons, where he removed hundreds of Venezuelans and some Salvadorans last month without even a court hearing. He sent them to a brutal prison for suspected gangsters and terrorists, claiming they were all violent criminals when it has since been argued that most were not and even if they were they had the right to due process.The comments from Trump about sending US citizens or what he termed “home grown” criminals to another country to be incarcerated have alarmed civil rights advocates and is viewed by many legal scholars as unconstitutional.The US supreme court has ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate and effectuate” the return of Maryland resident Kilmar Ábrego García, who was sent to the country on 15 March with hundreds of others despite a US court order protecting him from deportation.Opinion polls in the last week show Trump struggling for approval with voters who were surveyed, including on some of his hardline anti-immigration tactics.Reuters and the Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats decry Wisconsin judge’s arrest as Republicans call to remove her

      by

      The FBI’s arrest of Wisconsin judge Hannah Dugan has triggered strong reactions from Republican and Democratic politicians, as the Trump administration veered closer to direct confrontation with the judiciary over its crackdown on immigration.Following the Milwaukee county circuit judge’s arrest on Friday, over allegations that she helped a man evade US immigration officers at her courthouse, Republicans have called for her removal while Democrats regard her arrest as a reflection of the administration’s increasing disregard of judicial independence amid its push to deport immigrants on an enormous scale.In a clear signal that the administration welcomed a political fight over the judge’s arrest, the FBI director, Kash Patel, posted a photograph of Dugan in handcuffs on Twitter/X on Friday night, captioned: “No one is above the law.”According to the criminal complaint against the judge filed in federal court, a six-person arrest team, which included an immigration officer and two FBI agents, arrived at the courthouse to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican immigrant facing three misdemeanor battery counts they intended to deport.Flores-Ruiz was in Dugan’s courtroom on 18 April for a scheduling hearing. The complaint alleges that when the arrest team identified themselves to courthouse security, and waited in the public hallway outside Dugan’s courtroom, she confronted them and ordered them to report to the chief judge’s office. Then, according to a court officer cited in the complaint, Dugan directed the defendant and his lawyer to a side exit from the courtroom, which led to a private hallway.In response to Dugan’s arrest, Representative Glenn Grothman, a Wisonsin Republican, accused Dugan of being a “liberal judge [who] would go so far as to obstruct federal law enforcement in order to protect a violent illegal immigrant from arrest”.Tony Wied, another Republican representative of Wisconsin in Congress, demanded Dugan’s resignation. “Absolutely unacceptable,” Wied wrote, adding: “Not only are activist judges trying to thwart the president’s agenda, now they are actively breaking the law to protect illegal aliens. Judge Dugan should resign immediately.”Democrats, including Wisconsin’s governor, Tony Evers, condemned the FBI’s arrest of Dugan as an overreach of executive power by Donald Trump.Evers said: “In this country, people who are suspected of criminal wrongdoing are innocent until their guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt.” He went to add: “Unfortunately, we have seen in recent months the president and the Trump administration repeatedly use dangerous rhetoric to attack and attempt to undermine the judiciary at every level, including flat-out disobeying the highest court in the land and threatening to impeach and remove judges who do not rule in their favor.”Referencing the US president and the White House’s own messaging of likening Trump to a king, the state’s Democratic senator, Tammy Baldwin, said: “Make no mistake, we do not have kings in this country … By relentlessly attacking the judicial system, flouting court orders, and arresting a sitting judge, this president is putting those basic Democratic values that Wisconsinites hold dear on the line.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionMeanwhile, the state’s former Republican governor Scott Walker called on, the Wisconsin state legislature “to remove disgraced Milwaukee county circuit court judge Hannah Dugan from office”.Republicans from outside of Wisconsin echoed those calls, with Tennessee’s representative Tim Burchett saying: “If she broke the law, she needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent. No double standards.”But Wisconsin’s Democratic representative Gwen Moore countered that what she called the administration’s “willingness to weaponize federal law enforcement is shocking and this arrest has all the hallmarks of overreach. Federal law enforcement coming into a community and arresting a judge is a serious matter and would require a high legal bar.”Milwaukee’s city council members also released a statement, saying: “Perhaps the most chilling part of judge Dugan’s arrest is the continued aggression by which the current administration in Washington DC has weaponized federal law enforcement, such as ICE, against immigrant communities.”Similarly, Milwaukee county board supervisor, Miguel Martinez, said: “The people will not stand for an administration that continues to weaponize our justice system as a means to intimidate immigrant communities, made clear by the cumulative actions over recent weeks.”Becca Balint, a Vermont Democrat who sits on the House judiciary committee, told Axios that there should “absolutely” be a probe into Dugan’s arrest. “On the face of it, this is dangerous and outrageous and it is designed to intimidate our judiciary,” she said.Her fellow House judiciary committee member, Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin, said: “This is a drastic escalation and dangerous new front in Trump’s authoritarian campaign of trying to bully, intimidate and impeach judges who won’t follow his dictates.”“We must do whatever we can to defend the independent judiciary in America … This is an unmistakable descent further into authoritarian chaos,” he added. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘100-year timeframe’: how Project 2025 is guiding Trump’s attack on government

      by

      David A Graham doesn’t say he read Project 2025 so you don’t have to, but it might be inferred.The Atlantic staff writer’s new book, The Project: How Project 2025 Is Reshaping America, is a swift but thorough overview of the vast far-right plan for a second Trump administration that achieved notoriety last year. Over just 138 pages, a passing dream next to the Heritage Foundation’s 922-page doorstop, Graham considers the origins of Project 2025, its aims and effects so far.There’s a reason Project 2025 came out so long.“They’re looking at a 100-year timeframe,” Graham said. “They’re looking at things from the New Deal and saying, ‘This is where the government went wrong, and we need to fix these things. We need to change them permanently and reframe what the government does and what its relationship with every American is.’”The New Deal is the name given to the vast expansion of the federal government under Franklin D Roosevelt in the 1930s, in response to the Great Depression and laying the foundation of the modern US state.Project 2025 was published in 2023. As the 2024 election loomed, Democrats raised alarms about its hardline policy recommendations on issues including climate, LGBTQ+ rights, reproductive healthcare and more. Incendiary rhetoric raised awareness too. Kevin Roberts, Heritage president and author of the Project 2025 foreword, said he and his allies were “in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be”, then peppered his own book with images of fire and destruction. In praise of Roberts, JD Vance, Donald Trump’s running mate, said it was time to “load the muskets”.To Graham, such bellicose rhetoric was “terrifying” but also, in retrospect, a clear signpost to things to come. “To say that publicly before the election is really a strange public relations choice. It’s such a chilling thing to say. But you know, it told us what they wanted.”Amid controversy, Trump tried to distance himself from Project 2025 and its authors. But then he won the election. At the outset of his second term, he duly unleashed slashing cuts to federal staffing and budgets and a barrage of executive orders advancing policies directly linked to Project 2025 or firmly in its spirit.Graham is an award-winning reporter, used to working fast. He started writing The Project “at the very end of November”, weeks after Trump defeated Kamala Harris, “and turned the book in in mid-January”.He wrote the book, he said, because “we the press, we the American public, had talked a lot about Project 2025 during the election, and it felt like it had kind of gone away – but it remained really relevant. And I felt like there was a lot in it that I didn’t understand, and a lot that had been missed.”During the 2024 election, experts did indeed advise that such policy plans for possible administrations have existed for decades but have rarely been enacted. The sheer size of Project 2025 might also have lulled some into a false sense of security. Like many reporters, Graham “had dabbled in parts of it”. Unlike many, he found “it was a different experience to read the whole thing altogether.“I think it is both more radical in some ways than it came across – like, when you’re just reading atomized policies, you don’t get what a social program it is – [but] one of the other things that I think is interesting is how there are ideas that I think are either [only] fairly objectionable or might have widespread appeal, right next to ones that are totally out in right field. You’ll be in the same paragraph or in the same chapter.“And the third thing I think is interesting is the way there are disagreements within the text, either between the authors or between the authors and Donald Trump. Those cleavages within the right I think are worth paying attention to now.”Trump opponents looking for cleavages will not find them in the influential office of management and budget, now directed by Russ Vought, a Christian nationalist, advocate of “traumatizing” political enemies, and Project 2025 co-author. The original director of Project 2025, Paul Dans, fell victim to political necessity in 2024, forced out of the Heritage Foundation as Trump came under pressure – but remains a true believer, recently declaring Trump’s actions in office to be beyond his “wildest dreams”.But there is also Elon Musk. The world’s richest man has led Trump’s so-called department of government efficiency, or Doge, in attacking federal agencies and departments with startling speed and recklessness.“This is one of the places I have been most surprised,” Graham said, “because I think the methods that they lay out [in Project 2025] are really important. I thought that an important part of this was going to be how deeply people like Russ Vought had thought about, ‘OK, how can we work within the bounds of the law to achieve these things? How can we rework the bureaucracy?’ And in fact, Musk came in and just blasted right through it and made it a lot easier for them, and a lot faster. I certainly didn’t expect that. It’s not contemplated in the book or in the original document.”Nor are Trump’s beloved tariffs much loved by Project 2025 and its free-trade-loving authors.Graham said: “There are these big differences within Project 2025. The most obvious place is the chapters on tariffs … they [also] disagree with Trump on Ukraine. They’re much more hawkish on Ukraine, and anti-Russia. You have this sort of standard, ‘We stand up for Israel, We oppose Iran,’ sort of thing, but foreign policy is barely mentioned. It’s all about China. And Trump talks the talk on China, but then many of the things he’s doing, like tariffs, which are discussed in Project 2025 but not as a major priority, are alienating the rest of the world, which makes it very hard to take on China.“But then, even something as small as how to handle childcare, you have different people having different views [within Project 2025]. One of the things that jumps out at me is they did a really good job of figuring out how to meld these longstanding social and religious conservative priorities on to Maga. They find places where they can work with Trump.Trump is very interested in talking about trans rights and Democrats, and men are very interested in fighting back much more broadly on gender norms, LGBTQ+ rights, and so … Project 2025 becomes sort of like a tip of the spear to get Trump’s attention. They care about “wokeness”, and DEI, maybe for different reasons than he does, but they’ll attack that, and it gets him onboard.On another key issue of Trump’s second term, Graham sees the White House and the ideologues of Project 2025 much more closely aligned.Project 2025 is “very focused on illegal immigration, but also on legal immigration. Overall, the point is to have fewer people who are born overseas in the US, by whatever means necessary. And so they talk about mass deportation, and they talk about detention centers, but they also talk about reducing the number of visas that people get and trying to … find people who have lied on their citizenship applications, to revoke citizenship, denaturalization.“There are things where you see maybe not a direct correlation but the same spirit. So we see in Project 2025 an argument that we need to crack down on student visas from quote, unquote, unfriendly countries, and use student visas as a sort of tool of political warfare.”Trump may not be implementing Project 2025 word for word but its authors have much to delight them. Conversely, Graham’s book is sprinkled with lines that prompt grim laughter.Consider the case of James Sherk, a Trump adviser on civil service and labor issues in the first term who drafted “Schedule F”, a proposal to reclassify about 50,000 civil service jobs as political, thereby allowing a president to fire such people at will. Under Joe Biden, Schedule F was shelved. Ahead of Trump’s second term, Project 2025 advocated putting it swiftly to use.Last year, Sherk spoke to ProPublica. “The notion we’re going to can 50,000 people is just insane,” he said. “Why would you do that? That would kneecap your ability to implement your agenda.”Under Trump, more than 260,000 government workers have been fired, taken buyouts or retired early.

      The Project is published in the US by Random House More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican unity to be tested in talks over Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’

      by

      Donald Trump has made a simple request of Congress’s Republican leaders: deliver “one big, beautiful bill” that will turn his campaign promises into reality. By all indications, there will be little beautiful about the negotiations to come when Congress returns to session on Monday.The bill envisioned by the president will extend tax cuts enacted during his first term, fund more border defenses and mass deportations of undocumented immigrants and potentially include the president’s vow to end the taxation of tips, overtime and social security payments. To pay for it, the GOP is eyeing dramatic reductions in government spending, and has targeted social safety net programs relied on by tens of millions of Americans.But even with the cuts, experts say this could be one of the steepest increases to the federal deficit in recent US history.That prospect has tested the resolve of Congress’s Republican majorities, which are relatively small – three seats in the Senate and House of Representatives each. While many lawmakers insist that government spending must be reined in to manage the United State’s budget deficit at a time of high borrowing costs, small groups of lawmakers have already registered their opposition to dismantling programs they say help their constituents.Earlier this month Republicans muscled through the budget framework for the bill, an important step that outlines how much they will spend and cut, and allows them to circumvent Democratic opposition in the Senate. But though party leaders described it as a sign of unity, experts say the plan instead illustrated just how divided the GOP is. The resolution gives the House and Senate separate targets for savings and expenditures – differences that would usually be resolved before passage.“The budget resolution that they adopted is unique, I would say, somewhat unprecedented,” said Bill Hoagland, a former top budget adviser to Republican senators who is now a senior vice-president at the Bipartisan Policy Center thinktank.“What they’ve done here is keep the ball moving by kicking the can further down the road and leaving unsettled a number of differences, particularly on the spending side.”Just how riven the party is will become clear in the weeks to come, after Congress returns and Republicans set to work crafting the bill amid an economy made newly precarious by Trump’s on-again, off-again approach to tariff policy. Party leaders have cast the bill as a way to make good on Trump’s promise of a “golden age” in American, fueled by smaller, deregulated government.“Our aim is to deliver on our promises in this big, beautiful bill regarding things like border security, restoring peace through strength, and American energy dominance and regulatory reform, to get the economy really humming again,” House speaker Mike Johnson said earlier this month.The speaker and his Senate counterpart, majority leader John Thune, say they intend for the bill to reduce government spending by at least $1.5tn, and make permanent the tax cuts that analyses found mostly benefited the rich after their enactment in 2017.But the budget framework’s instructions to the Senate target a mere $4bn in spending cuts, while assuming the tax cuts are “current policy” and therefore cost nothing, to the chagrin of many economists. The House plan acknowledges that extending the tax cuts will cost trillions of dollars, and proposes dramatic funding cuts elsewhere.Its instructions indicate that Medicaid, which provides health insurance for poor and disabled Americans, could lose around $800b in funding, which would be its largest cut in history. Republicans have additionally signaled a willingness to cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as Snap, while the climate-change fighting Inflation Reduction Act passed under Joe Biden could be slashed.Both chambers also intend to couple the bill with an increase in the US government’s debt limit. The congressional budget office estimates the limit will be hit in August or September, after which the government will be unable to borrow to pay its obligations, potentially sparking a financial crisis.The resulting bill could cost as much as $5.8tn for the next 10 years, a huge amount that Maya MacGuineas, the president of the spending wary Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, described as “the largest deficit increase in history” and “an absolute disgrace”.So big is the spending plan that Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former chief economist at the White House Council of Economic Advisers under Republican George W Bush, warned that extending the tax cuts alone would likely crowd out the other policies Trump campaigned on, such as ending the taxation on tips and other income.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“This is a very unambitious piece of tax legislation, from an economic policy point of view. It doesn’t really do much and, and I don’t think there’s any real will collectively to do big spending cuts, and they’ve taken off limits the places where that you really do need to reform,” Holtz-Eakin said, referring to social security and Medicare. Both programs are big drivers of the budget deficit, but Trump and the Republicans say they oppose cutting them.Finding an agreement on the bill is expected to be a major lift for Republican leaders in Congress, particularly since the tiny House majority could empower small groups of lawmakers to hold up the bill.Already, a dozen Republicans have publicly said they will not support legislation that reduces Medicaid coverage “for vulnerable populations” and 21 others have argued against repealing clean energy tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act. Members of the far-right House Freedom Caucus, meanwhile, are expected to stand against any bill that does not sufficiently reduce spending.“When you want to cut $1.5tn, you’re going to get to a lot of programs that people rely on. And when that happens, they’re going to start to hear about it,” Joe Morelle, the No 2 Democrat on the spending-focused House appropriations committee, told the Guardian.He predicted that no Democrats would vote for the forthcoming bill, meaning that Johnson and Thune will be left to get it through their chambers with their party’s votes alone.Trump has attempted to corral Congress by threatening to support challengers to Republicans who don’t vote his way. But with the GOP taking aim at safety net programs popular in their own districts, Morelle said many lawmakers will have to weigh facing the president’s wrath against losing re-election.“Who do they fear more? The retribution of an angry president, or do they fear the retribution of voters who are going to say, sorry, without healthcare, I’m not voting for you?” Morelle said. More

    • 200 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      How ‘revenge of the Covid contrarians’ unleashed by RFK Jr puts broader vaccine advances at risk

      by

      The US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, entered office with a pledge to tackle the US’s chronic disease epidemic and give infectious disease a “break”. In at least one of those goals, Kennedy has been expeditious.Experts said as Kennedy makes major cuts in public health in his first weeks in office, the infrastructure built to mitigate Covid-19 has become a clear target – an aim that has the dual effect of weakening immunization efforts as the US endures the largest measles outbreak since 2000.“If his goal is to undermine public health infrastructure, he’s making strides there,” said Dorit Reiss, a University of California Law School professor whose research focuses on vaccine law. “If his goal is combating chronic diseases – he’s not doing very well.”The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has been characterized by upheaval since Kennedy and the billionaire Elon Musk’s unofficial “department of government efficiency” (Doge) cumulatively axed 20,000 jobs – roughly a quarter of the 82,000-person workforce.And it appears that turmoil will continue: a leaked budget memo shows the administration poised to propose a budget cut of another $40bn, or roughly one-third of the department’s discretionary spending.Amid the cuts, attacks on Covid-19 infrastructure have proven thematic, and show the administration’s hostility toward work that once mitigated the virus. That’s included attacking promising vaccine platforms and elevating once-ostracized voices to high-level roles.“The Covid-19 pandemic is over, and HHS will no longer waste billions of taxpayer dollars responding to a non-existent pandemic that Americans moved on from years ago,” a spokesperson for HHS told the Guardian in response to questions about its strategy.“HHS is prioritizing funding projects that will deliver on President Trump’s mandate to address our chronic disease epidemic and Make America Healthy Again.”Gregg Gonsalves, a Yale University associate professor and infectious disease epidemiologist, calls this strategy the “revenge of the Covid contrarians”.“They’re not interested in the science, they’re interested in their conclusions and having the science bend to their will,” said Gonsalves. “They want to create a Potemkin village of their own making that looks like science but has nothing to do with science at all.”Among Kennedy’s changes: attacks on the promising platform that supported Covid-19 vaccine development, delayed approval of a Covid-19 vaccine, the clawing back of grants that provided local immunization support and studied vaccine safety, and elevating one-time critics of Covid-19 policy.“When the new administration came in, we were hearing even within the organization: ‘We can’t say Covid, we’re not allowed to say Covid,’” said Lori Tremmel Freeman, chief executive officer of the National Association of County and City Health Officials (Naccho), about her members’ conversations.Freeman noted that “we kind of saw the writing on the wall a couple months ago that: ‘OK, they really don’t want anything Covid-related to be pursued any more.’ Everything Covid-related is quite honestly at risk.”In the latest change, Kennedy said this week he may remove Covid-19 shots from the childhood vaccine schedule, which would probably make the shots harder to get by limiting insurance coverage.“The recommendation for children was always dubious,” Kennedy told Fox News. Although a minority of children are vaccinated, the shots are recommended, especially for immune-compromised children.Freeman believes the desire to erase the government’s Covid legacy led to HHS’s decision to claw back $11bn in public health funds from states and localities. In effect done overnight, the clawback gave local officials only hours to lay off workers, cancel immunization clinics and even stop construction projects.“That’s why we feel like the drawback of the funding occurred: Covid,” said Freeman.A spokesperson for HHS characterized this as a savings, and said most canceled awards were for Covid-19-related work.The pullback led to the cancellation of more than 50 measles immunization clinics in Texas, where the measles outbreak has already claimed the lives of two unvaccinated children, to pilot programs such as “Text4Vax”, which sent reminders about pediatric vaccines to parents.Among the canceled grants were also programs that would seem to align with Kennedy’s rhetoric about vaccine safety – among them, a study of the safety and effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccines in pregnant women in California and global Covid-19 vaccine safety monitoring in New Zealand.“If you start to take away people from health departments – the immunizers, the educators, the clinicians – through some of these other funding cuts , it disables the program naturally,” said Freeman. “You can’t put as many shots in arms.”Larger cancelled grants included a $2.25bn grant program to reduce Covid-19’s impact on the people worst affected, which had been sent to states and localities from South Dakota to Florida and the Virgin Islands to Vermont.Under Kennedy’s watch, HHS has also taken the unusual step of delaying an expected vaccine approval, reportedly under the watch of a Kennedy political appointee.The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which sits under the umbrella of HHS, delayed the expected 1 April approval of the Novavax Covid-19 vaccine. Novavax confirmed to the Guardian that its application remained on hold, and said it would have “no further comments”.Reiss said she doesn’t think “any vaccine that’s in the pipeline is going to go forward under Kennedy” or that “he will let any vaccine go far now”.Dr Tracy Hoeg, a political appointee, was reportedly involved in the decision. Hoeg also appeared as the FDA’s representative at a special advisory committee on immunizations in April, where she took the opportunity to question the efficacy of Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine.An HHS spokesperson told the Guardian: “The FDA’s independent review process for the Novavax vaccine, like all vaccines, is based solely on ensuring safety and efficacy, not political considerations. Any delays are a result of scientific review, not a lack of priority. It’s important to focus on the facts rather than unfounded speculation.”Scientists have also said they fear for the future of messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine technology – the platform that underpinned the fast development of Covid-19 vaccines and that held promise for treating and preventing a wide range of diseases.Hoeg served on Florida’s public health integrity committee, which served as a platform for Covid-19 criticism during the pandemic. At the time, it was chaired by the Florida surgeon general, Dr Joseph Ladapo, who has also sown doubt about the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines.Hoeg could be further buttressed by insiders such as Dr Matthew Memoli, who, Kennedy said, “is going to be running Niaid [National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases]”. Memoli, whom Kennedy described as “the top flu researcher at NIH”, is known for opposition to Covid-19 vaccine mandates and declined to be vaccinated. In March, Memoli sent an email to NIH grant officials requiring any grant applications that reference mRNA technology to be reported to Kennedy’s office. He also canceled government-backed studies on vaccine hesitancy.The nominee for HHS general counsel, Michael B Stuart, is also well-known for involvement in vaccine fights. Stuart, a former West Virginia lawmaker, in 2023 proposed a bill to exempt virtual public school students from vaccine requirements and allow private schools to set their own requirements, according to Stat.“Dismantling the sort of vaccine infrastructure this country relies upon – that’s been in place for several dozens and dozens of years – only impacts the chronic disease front he’s trying to ameliorate as well,” said James Hodge, a professor of law at Arizona State University and a health law expert who said he worries about the future of vaccine advisory committees. “Acquiring infectious diseases leads to chronic conditions later.”Still, some of Kennedy’s most ardent supporters and reported informal advisers, such as the former cardiologist Peter McCullough, have argued these actions don’t go far enough.“The big threat is that we still have Covid-19 vaccines on the market,” McCullough told KFF Health News. “It’s horrendous. I would not hesitate – I would just pull it. What’s he waiting for?” McCullough did not respond to requests for comment from the Guardian. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Conservatives fighting ‘antisemitism’ are actively targeting US Jews. Why? | Josh Schreier

      by

      The Trump administration claims that its moves to defund universities, arrest and deport students and force schools to demote or monitor professors are meant to combat antisemitism, protect Jewish students and remove “Hamas-supporting” foreign nationals from the country. American pro-Israel groups including the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Hillel International, Aipac and the Heritage Foundation have united behind Republican measures to crack down on higher education and its putative antisemitism. Religiously identified groups such as the Orthodox Union and Christians United for Israel have joined the chorus, celebrating the punishment of supposedly antisemitic students and professors. Whatever their varied pasts, today’s pro-Israel groups are not about protecting American Jews. Instead, they are allies in Maga’s war on free speech, academic freedom and the US’s democratic society itself.To be clear: the pro-Israel campaign to “protect” Jews by punishing anti-Zionist speech often targets Jews. After a student complaint about a tenured Jewish professor’s Twitter post, Muhlenberg College fired her. The ADL has rewarded Muhlenberg by grading it “better than most” colleges for fighting “antisemitism”. The ADL also accused Jewish Voice for Peace, a large, anti-Zionist Jewish group with chapters on many American campuses, of “promot[ing] messaging” that can include “support for terrorists”. Under pressure from the Trump administration, Columbia University expelled a Jewish graduate student and United Auto Workers local president who demonstrated against the war in Gaza.Most chillingly, the Trump administration recently sent all staff at Barnard College a questionnaire inquiring if they were Jewish, ostensibly to gauge campus antisemitism. For many, the experience of being asked by the government to self-identify as a Jew was terrifying; as one historian put it: “We’ve seen this movie before, and it ends with yellow stars.”Canary Mission, a pro-Israel website that publishes information on students and professors who supposedly “promote hatred of the USA, Israel and Jews”, has been targeting an Israeli American scholar of the Holocaust along with many other Jews (including the author of this piece). Project Esther, an initiative launched by the conservative Heritage Foundation – the thinktank behind Project 2025 – blames the “American Jewish community’s complacency” for the “pro-Palestinian movement’s” ability to continue working for “the destruction of capitalism and democracy”. Maga’s pro-Israel partners do not protect Jews; they help Trump in his war on our academic freedom and open society more generally.Of course, unlike some pro-Israel groups, the Trump administration has a broader antipathy toward higher education. As JD Vance put it, “the professors are the enemy”. But the pro-Israel movement furnishes Maga with a crucial weapon in their war on this “enemy”: charges of antisemitism. The entire “US education system”, according to Project Esther, has been “infiltrated” by “Hamas-supporting organizations” that now “foster antisemitism under the guise of “‘pro-Palestinian,’ anti-Israel, anti-Zionist narratives … within the rubric of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and similar Marxist ideology”. Of course, by linking Palestinian solidarity with longstanding rightwing bogeymen like antiracism and communism, Project Esther gives away the game; their “antisemitic” charge is a tool to silence Maga’s left-leaning critics in higher education.Meanwhile, many pro-Israel groups seem to tolerate Maga’s proximity to antisemitism. If they didn’t, we might expect to hear more about Vance’s meeting with Germany’s neo-Nazi-linked AfD, Steve Bannon’s singling out of “American Jews that do not support Israel and do not support Maga” as “the number one enemy to the people in Israel”, or Trump’s claim that the Democratic senator Chuck Schumer is “not Jewish” but “Palestinian”.The ADL went so far as to defend Elon Musk’s apparent Nazi salute at Trump’s inauguration. True, the ADL rightfully criticized some of these other incidents, as well as Trump’s antisemitic advertisements, and his meeting with Kanye West and Nick Fuentes. But these cases do not seem to merit breaking with Maga. Why? Because the pro-Israel movement advocates for Israel, not American Jews.For this reason, the American pro-Israel movement has been collaborating in the Trump administration’s campaign to roll back everyone’s constitutional rights. By now, most of us have seen the footage of Mahmoud Khalil and Rümeysa Öztürk, both students at American universities, being surrounded by groups of government agents and forced into the backs of unmarked vehicles. The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, promised that hundreds of other students have been stripped of their visas. Neither Khalil nor Öztürk have any demonstrated ties to Hamas. Khalil even spoke out against antisemitism, declaring that “antisemitism and any form of racism has no place on this campus and in this movement”. Furthermore, as a permanent resident and a student visa holder, both Khalil and Öztürk are guaranteed first amendment protections. Yet Hillel International failed to condemn the arrests, and the ADL outright celebrated Khalil’s.Ultimately, Trump and many in the pro-Israel movement have allied against free speech in higher education because it is a pillar of an open society that threatens both of them. The right has long had it out for universities. The pro-Israel movement, meanwhile, saw the campus encampments with horror; a wide cross-section of students and professors from a variety of religious, racial and ethnic backgrounds came together to speak out against Israel’s killing of tens of thousands of people.Even more galling for the pro-Israel movement, Jews actively participated in the protests – even conducting Passover seders, as well as Kabbalat Shabbat and Havdalah services amid them. These young Jews are not alone; less than half of Americans now sympathize with Israel, and one-third believe Israel is committing genocide. These facts do not threaten American Jews, but they do threaten Maga and the heavily evangelical pro-Israel movement. As long as increasing numbers of students, professors and many others speak out for Palestinians’ humanity, the pro-Israel movement, armed with disingenuous accusations of antisemitism, will aid Maga’s war on American higher education and democracy itself.

      Joshua Schreier is a professor of history and Jewish studies at Vassar College. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      They staged protests for Palestine. The consequences have been life-changing

      by

      EK was completing a take-home exam on 6 March when the dean of student conduct at Swarthmore College emailed her about an urgent Zoom meeting. On the video call, she said, the dean told her that she would be suspended for one semester for staging a protest at the college’s trustees’ dinner in December 2023. Using a bullhorn, EK had interrupted the event to demand that the school divest from products that fuel Israel’s war on Gaza.A panel of students and school employees had found her responsible for assault, among other code of conduct violations for the incident. EK, a final-semester senior who is using a pseudonym out of fear of retaliation, recalled being in shock: “I’ve been really distraught by all of this,” EK said. “I used to be unhoused before I came to Swarthmore, so to be put into this situation again is very disturbing.”She filed an appeal in mid-March and remained in campus housing until the school came to a decision on 10 April. A first-generation, low-income college student on financial aid, EK had been forbidden from campus housing pending the appeal decision, and lost crucial finances when she was let go from her school job. She said she also fears she may be vulnerable to attacks from the Trump administration, which has penalized pro-Palestinian protesters: “I’m worried that this is not the end, and only the beginning, especially now that it’s on my record. It could be the case that I could face further punitive measures from the federal government, and the college is not doing anything to protect students.”In March, the Trump administration listed Swarthmore College as one of 60 schools at risk of losing hundreds of millions of federal dollars for allowing what it considered antisemitic harassment on campus. Colleges and universities across the country were already quashing pro-Palestinian protests by suspending and arresting students, and several revised their policies to ban encampments prior to Trump’s inauguration. But some have gone even further to penalize students in light of the government’s threats to pull their funding.In some cases, those preventive measures have been for naught. Columbia announced that it expelled students who occupied a building last year and revoked alumnis’ diplomas at the same time the federal government still cancelled $400m worth of contracts and grants to the university. Harvard University placed the undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee on probation and temporarily banned the pro-Palestinian group from hosting events, only for the Trump administration to freeze $2.2bn in federal grants to the school two weeks later.Though Columbia and Harvard have received the most attention for their responses to activists, campus crackdowns have been widespread. The Guardian spoke to 1o student protesters in Pennsylvania, California, Wisconsin and New York who have faced disciplinary action from their colleges and universities. They said that the process is often arbitrary and marked by fear tactics aimed to discourage them from protesting in the future. Building a defense for disciplinary hearings, they said, distracted them from their studies and caused anxiety, as the processes can last months.In some cases, the disciplinary process has no conclusive end, causing students to languish while being banned from campus or otherwise limited from participating in student life. Following pushback from students and faculty, EK said, Swarthmore College agreed to pay for her off-campus housing until the end of the semester. She is taking virtual classes and will be allowed to graduate on time, but she is still barred from attending on-campus events or from walking with her peers during graduation.In a statement to the Guardian, Swarthmore College spokesperson Alisa Giardinelli said that the school repeatedly warned student protesters that their actions were in violation of the college’s code of conduct, and that they would face disciplinary action if found responsible. Despite the college’s efforts to discuss the students’ demands, including that the school divest from weapons manufacturers that fuel Israel’s war on Gaza, “some students chose to continue to engage in – and in some cases escalated – behaviors that violated the Code”, Giardinelli said.Guardian interviews with student activists, attorneys and researchers reveal an increased sense of hostility on campuses since 7 October 2023, which has stoked fear and anxiety and resulted in financial concerns for some pro-Palestinian student protesters. Some attorneys have said that Palestinians, Arab Muslims, and people of color have been universities’ primary targets when repressing pro-Palestinian free speech. In March, the federal government went even further in targeting pro-Palestinian scholars and students of color by arresting and detaining the Georgetown University professor Badar Khan Suri and the Columbia graduate student Mahmoud Khalil.“A majority of students who are contacting us for support are either Palestinian, Arab Muslim or other students of color,” said the advocacy group Palestine Legal’s staff attorney, Tori Porell. Additionally, low-income students or those who rely on financial aid are hardest hit by disciplinary actions, she said: “Students who live on campus might rely on campus meal plans. If they are abruptly suspended, they are losing access to housing, to their food, to healthcare, and they might not have funds to just fly home the way some students with more resources would.”In 2024, Palestine Legal received more than 2,000 requests for legal assistance, with about two-thirds coming from students, staff or faculty on college campuses.While schools have long served as stages for mass protests including against the Vietnam war and South Africa’s apartheid, activists say that the universities’ actions toward them have had a chilling effect on civil disobedience this academic year. Still, students such as Dahlia Saba, a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, see it as their duty to continue pushing universities to divest from Israel, whose war on Gaza has killed at least 62,000 Palestinians since October 2023.Saba was at a conference in Colorado last July when she received a concerning text message from her schoolmate Vignesh Ramachandran. The two were being investigated by the University of Wisconsin-Madison for a May 2024 op-ed that they had written in a local publication. The article criticized the university’s failure to respond to a student-led proposal around transparent and ethical investment, and demanded that it divest from arms-manufacturing companies fueling Israel’s war on Gaza.She pulled up an email from the university about the charges that she faced, which included allegedly refusing to comply with rules about no picnicking or camping. (Wisconsin state statute prohibits tents or camping on undesignated parts of university land.) Saba, a graduate student in electrical engineering, recalled her thoughts in that moment: would the charges jeopardize her career, or prevent her from being vocal about Palestinian rights in the future?“For me, it’s still important to speak up,” Saba, a Palestinian American, told the Guardian, “because the point of these repression tactics is to try to silence us. And so I think that makes it all the more imperative to refuse to be silenced.”A ‘Palestine exception’ to free speechSince October 2023, many schools have responded to pro-Palestinian campus protests in an outsized way compared with demonstrations going back several decades, say attorneys. In a Harvard Crimson series, 11 former student activists said that Harvard’s response to pro-Palestinian protesters had been more violent and punitive than the treatment they experienced for protesting against South Africa’s apartheid, against fossil fuel divestment, and for university workers to be paid living wages.Race and political views may account for universities’ stricter policies and punishments since last year. Pointing to the Orange county district attorney’s list of people who had been suspended and arrested, Thomas Harvey, a California attorney who represents pro-Palestinian students facing criminal charges, said: “It’s very rare that it’s anyone other than people of color.” Harvey said he knows many of the students on the district attorney’s list because he’s represented them or provided them pro bono legal support. “It seems very obvious that race, combined with political viewpoints about being pro-Palestinian, are the targets of the most severe punishment.”UT, a Muslim woman of color and Swarthmore College senior, said that she was alarmed to learn how closely the college surveilled her during pro-Palestinian protests. On 6 March 2025, UT, who is using her initials out of fear of being doxxed, received an email from the school that she would be on academic probation until she graduated for violating the college’s code of conduct during rallies between October 2023 and March 2024. Last spring, she received a packet from the university on the evidence they had against her, including CCTV footage of her walking on a path next to the woods on campus.“It was a real moment of realization that there is so much surveillance on this campus, and especially out of the students that were charged, very few were white students. Most students were students of color, and first-generation, low-income students. And to learn that the college is so meticulously tracking these students – it was a very scary moment.”Giardinelli of Swarthmore College told the Guardian that “sanctions are based solely on alleged misconduct, without regard to race, socioeconomic standing, or identity”. Of the surveillance, she said: “CCTV images are only used, when available, to verify involved parties and behaviors that are suspected to be, or are alleged violations of, the Student Code of Conduct or of state and federal law.”Schools’ crackdowns on pro-Palestinian student protesters are indicative of a “Palestine exception” to free speech, said Farah Afify, a research and advocacy coordinator at the civil rights group Council on American-Islamic Relations (Cair). As the co-author of Cair’s analysis on how universities target pro-Palestinian protesters, Afify consolidated incidents found in newspaper reports and education-related complaints that Afify received from October 2023 to May 2024.“Students who support Palestinian rights,” Afify said, “tend to face harsher discipline, harsher criticism, more challenges by people who would otherwise encourage that kind of expression because it meets the standard principles of what we’d expect of our institutions of higher education.” Cair has since launched a website where students can report their campuses to be investigated and placed on the organization’s “institutions of particular concern” list for targeting pro-Palestinian protesters.‘There’s a genocide, and we need to be organizing against it’While Saba was found responsible for violating the University of Wisconsin’s policies by a student-conduct investigating officer last August, her charges were dropped in October after she appealed them before a committee consisting of a student and university employees. Palestine Legal also sent her school a letter demanding that they end disciplinary proceedings against students in September, which assisted in Saba and another unnamed student’s charges being dropped.In a statement to the Guardian, University of Wisconsin-Madison spokesperson Kelly Tyrrell said that the school “does not disclose details related to individual student conduct cases”, and weighs each case based on a person’s conduct history and the circumstances surrounding the offense. She said the university seeks to create a campus “where all students feel supported, can pursue their educational goals without disruption, and are free to express themselves and engage across difference on complex topics, whether in their local community or around the world”.Despite the intimidation and disciplinary action that student protesters say they faced by their universities, they remain resolute in their fight to speak against their schools’ ties to Israel.Saba said she feels vindicated that her charges were dropped, though she thinks that the university’s system was flawed for finding her co-author, Ramachandran, culpable on the same limited evidence. Still, she holds onto hope that her school will eventually disclose its investments to the public and divest from companies that contribute to or profit from Israel’s war on Gaza.“This university, like many other universities, has lost its sense as a moral institution, an institution of ethics and an institution that aspires to do good in the world,” Saba said. “I want to see a university that actually responds to the demands of its students, rather than restricting their rights, and that prioritizes acting as a force of justice in the world, rather than just a machine that takes in money and spits out degrees.”Additional reporting by Adria R Walker More