US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Canada braces as tariff deadline looms and talks with US ‘chaos machine’ drag

      by

      After months of tariff threats from the US and escalating trade tensions that have sowed anger in Canada and fractured a once-close alliance, the country is now fast approaching a 1 August deadline to reach a deal with the Trump administration – which has shown no signs of backing down.And observers are keeping a close eye on negotiations this week to determine whether too large a chasm has grown between the countries, resulting in what could be an explosive end to what was decades of free-flowing trade.Canada is also in a highly vulnerable position, as it has closely intertwined its economy with the US’s, and is extremely reliant on a low-barrier trade environment, said William Huggins, an assistant professor in economics at McMaster University in Ontario.“Canada has tried to negotiate sort of forcefully from a position of not acquiescing to every demand, but by the same token, has also realised it’s not in the strongest position to do so … We’ve had to navigate carefully,” said Huggins.The Canadian public is also anxiously awaiting the deadline to strike up a deal. Economists and political scientists say the country’s prime minister, Mark Carney, was elected on the belief that he’s the right person to be at the helm of negotiations and lead Canada through a tenuous period with their southern neighbour.His successes or failures in this arena could affect public perception – as he has characterised his government as being the most adept in the crisis around its sovereignty due to the tariffs and Donald Trump’s persistent claims that he’d like to make Canada the 51st state.“[Carney] is in a situation where he doesn’t hold all the cards and whoever we put in was going to have to figure out a way through this … [His] ability to plan is severely limited by the chaos machine that is operating south of the border,” said Dennis Pilon, the chair of the politics department at York University in Ontario.On Monday, Carney said at a news conference on Prince Edward Island that the trade negotiations are at an “intense pace” and that they are “complex”. But he projected tentative optimism, stating that the negotiations are “tough” because the government is standing up for Canadian interests.“There is a landing zone that’s possible but we have to get there. We’ll see what happens,” he told reporters.But Trump spoke of the negotiations flippantly when asked by reporters outside the White House last Friday. “We haven’t really had a lot of luck with Canada … Canada could be one where there’s just a tariff, not really a negotiation,” he said.So far, much of the talks have happened behind closed doors. There was a glimpse into what could be the dynamic between Carney and Trump when the prime minister had his first meeting with the president in the Oval Office in early May. There were positive tones in both initially offering praise for each other, but the encounter quickly grew tense as Trump repeated his annexation claims, which were subsequently rebuffed by Carney.Since March, Trump has imposed several tariffs on Canadian goods and energy resources. There is a 25% tariff on all goods, excluding potash and energy products. But there’s separately a 10% tariff on energy resources, including potash. Additionally, there’s a further 50% tariff on steel and aluminum imports and a 25% tariff on autos and auto parts.At this stage, the tariffs have seemingly not delivered a significant blow to Canada’s economy, but that could change quickly. The Royal Bank of Canada noted in its June forecast that nearly 90% of Canadian goods are exempt from tariffs under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the free trade deal that replaced Nafta in 2020 and which provides a degree of insulation.In an assessment published by the Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD) on Tuesday, it reported that energy exports have not been significantly affected by the tariffs, as most exports are compliant under the USMCA, and are therefore exempt from tariffs.Some of the insulation so far from tariffs could be from opening Canada up to other markets. TD said that in the past four months, Canadian businesses rapidly moved to reorient supply chains and export to non-US markets. Now about 30% of exports go outside the US – a level not seen since the pandemic, when TD notes there was disorientation in trade.But TD also warned that the negative effects of the tariffs might be beginning to emerge. It said that Canadian exports to the US are “generally underperforming” in tariff-targeted industries, particularly steel and automaking. Canada’s auto exports fell to levels not seen since late 2022, following the April imposition of tariffs. Automakers have also “slashed” production in response, it said.Andrea Lawlor, an associate professor of political science at McMaster University, said that while there haven’t been many layoffs or a complete reorientation of production lines yet, industries targeted by tariffs are preparing to do so.Lawlor also said that Carney has been prudent in his negotiation strategy so far, and right in waiting for deals to be brokered between the US and other nations, as they were this month with Japan and the EU, to help inform Canada’s strategy.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAnd despite concerns about marred relationships with First Nations people, pushing forward controversial infrastructure legislation and his quick scrapping of Canada’s digital services tax – which many, including top former diplomats, viewed as fawning capitulation toward Trump – the prime minister is still enjoying fairly positive polling in his term’s infancy.Abacus Data reported at the end of June that 52% of Canadians surveyed approve of the Carney government. The research firm states it shows that his post-election honeymoon period is “far from over”.Lawlor said the best outcome for Carney in the negotiations is a favourable trade deal – however, there has been signalling from Carney, in his discussion of “tough” talks so far, that Canadians may have to accept a baseline of tariffs.“Many Canadians just simply will not be satisfied if that is the outcome,” she said. But due to Carney facing limited criticism of his interactions with the Americans so far, Lawlor said she believes the prime minister will not face extreme negative blowback if he doesn’t trounce tariffs for good this week.But he will be more vulnerable if the tariffs start to place downward pressure on multiple industries, she said.As Canadians are waiting and watching for the Friday deal deadline, the real fears are around the cementing of a new world order and whether long-term business and consumer decisions need to be made in response, said Preetika Joshi, an assistant professor at McGill University in Quebec that specialises in taxation.“If you were a business owner and you knew Trump is going to be in power for only three, four years, would you necessarily make big, significant changes in your supply chain … or would you just wait it out?” she said.But given some grim messaging from those close to Carney – Canadians might be facing tough decisions. Dominic LeBlanc, the federal minister responsible for Canada-US trade, said last week there’s a lot of work ahead of them and minimised the 1 August deadline.“We’re going to continue to work toward the 1 August deadline,” said LeBlanc to reporters in Washington. “But all of these deadlines are with the understanding that we’ll take the time necessary to get the best deal,” he said.Deal or no deal, the negotiations might reveal that there isn’t a best-case scenario, said Joshi.“What we were used to before Trump, where there were very little tariffs, that reality is slightly over,” she said. “We’ll have to wait and see … but the reality is that there are going to be some tariffs.” More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Pete Hegseth’s aides used polygraphs against their own Pentagon colleagues

      by

      Senior aides to the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, conducted polygraphs on their own colleagues this spring, in some cases as part of an effort to flush out anyone who leaked to the media and apparently to undercut rivals in others, according to four people familiar with the matter.The polygraphs came at a time of profound upheaval in his office, as Hegseth opened a leak investigation and sought to identify the culprits by any means necessary after a series of sensitive disclosures and unflattering stories.But the polygraphs became contentious after the aides who were targeted questioned whether they were even official, given at least one polygraph was ordered without Hegseth’s direct knowledge and sparked an intervention by a Trump adviser who does not work at the Pentagon.The fraught episode involved Hegseth’s lawyer and part-time navy commander Tim Parlatore seeking to polygraph Patrick Weaver, a senior adviser to the secretary who was at the White House in Donald Trump’s first term and has ties to Trump’s deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, the people said.When Weaver learned of his impending polygraph, he complained to associates that he had been suspected without evidence, the people said. That led the external Trump adviser to take his complaint to Hegseth – only for Hegseth to say he did not even know about the test.The external Trump adviser called Parlatore on his cellphone to shut down the impending polygraph, shouting down the line that in Trump’s second term, career employees did not get to question political appointees, according to two people familiar with the conversation.Weaver does not appear to have escalated his complaint to the White House, telling associates that he preferred not to bother Miller with problems. Earlier reports suggested the White House intervened on Weaver’s behalf but the people said the White House learned of the test after it was cancelled.A White House spokesperson declined to comment. A Pentagon spokesperson, Sean Parnell, said in a statement: “The Department will not comment on an ongoing investigation.”The extraordinary episode underscored ongoing concerns around Hegseth’s ability to manage the Pentagon – he is still facing an inspector general report into his disclosures in a Signal chat about US strikes against the Houthis – and why a Trump adviser ended up staging an intervention.Weaver’s cancelled polygraph was earlier reported by the Washington Post. But the effort at the Pentagon to weed out leakers with lie detector tests continued against uniformed military officers even after the incident with Weaver, three of the people said.Hegseth’s then-military aide and current acting chief of staff, Ricky Buria, at one point ordered polygraphs against several people connected to possible and perceived rivals at the Pentagon including senior adviser Eric Geressy, despite his own polygraph coming back as inconclusive.View image in fullscreenBuria, who is said not to care for Geressy, did not order a polygraph against him in the wake of the Weaver incident. Instead, the people said, he ordered polygraphs for officers who worked for Geressy, including Hegseth’s military assistants Capt William Francis, a former Navy Seal, and Col Mike Loconsolo.In an additional twist, the polygraphs for the uniformed officials became fraught after one person complained his had not been conducted by the Defense Intelligence Agency but a defense department contractor, and was separately told his polygraph could just double as being for his regular background investigation, two people familiar with the matter said.Hegseth himself threatened polygraphs to catch leakers, including against two top military officials, the Wall Street Journal earlier reported: navy Adm Christopher Grady, the vice-chair of the joint chiefs of staff, and army Lt Gen Douglas Sims, the director of the joint staff.According to two people familiar with the case of Sims, Buria had privately suggested that he might have played a role in leaking a classified plan for the Panama canal to NBC News, among other transgressions that included an allegation that Sims had been disrespectful.While it does not appear that Sims was actually polygraphed, Hegseth revoked his promotion to a four star general, despite earlier agreeing to the move at the recommendation of multiple career and political officials, the New York Times earlier reported.Hegseth told Sims that his connections to Gen Mark Milley, the former chief of the joint staff that Trump hates, were disqualifying – although Sims had ironically helped remove Milley’s portrait off the wall at the Pentagon when Hegseth arrived at the Pentagon, one of the people said.Several officials, including the chairman of the joint chiefs, Gen Dan Caine, told Hegseth that Sims was not a leaker and deserved better. Hegseth told officials he would sleep on it but never revisited the matter, the people said. More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      How an 18th-century law enabled internment – and may do so again

      by

      Naoko Fujii’s great-grandfather Jotaro Mori was out fishing when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941.When Mori returned home hours later, the FBI was waiting at his door, ready to arrest him under a wartime law that declared citizens of foreign adversaries “alien enemies”. He was detained without due process and spent the next four years in concentration camps across the western US, including the infamous camp Lordsburg in New Mexico where two elderly Japanese internees were killed. The government seized his home and laundry business so that when he was released, he was left with nothing.“There was no warrant, no charges, no evidence he ever did anything,” said Fujii, who added that, at the time of his arrest, her great-grandfather had been living in America for more than four decades. “He was picked up just because he’s Japanese.”In March, Donald Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 for just the fourth time in US history, deporting scores of Venezuelan migrants, without due process, to a mega-prison in El Salvador. Civil rights groups challenged the administration’s authority to use the law, which is now being heard by the conservative 5th circuit court of appeals.As the case looks likely to soon reach the supreme court, advocates and legal experts pointed to the dangerous precedent established by the last time the law was invoked, which led to the mass incarceration of both immigrants and US citizens of Japanese descent.“The Alien Enemies Act normalized the idea of internment and targeting people not based on their conduct but on their ancestry,” said Katherine Yon Ebright, counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice and leading expert on the history of the 18th-century law.The law stipulates that, when war is declared, “all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation” over the age of 14 can be apprehended or removed. This means anyone who was born or holds citizenship in a country considered a “foreign adversary” is vulnerable, Yon Ebright said, whether or not they actually pose a national security threat.“By the structure of the law,” Yon Ebright said, “you can be targeted based on who you are and where you’re born, not what you’ve done.”The Alien Enemies Act was one of four laws passed as part of the sweeping Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798; the three others have since expired or been repealed. The law was invoked just three times in US history, all in times of war.On 7 December 1941, in the immediate aftermath of the Pearl Harbor attack, President Franklin D Roosevelt invoked the Alien Enemies Act to round up more than 31,000 Japanese, German and Italian nationals. Two months later, the law paved the way for executive order 9066, which directed 120,000 Japanese on the west coast – two-thirds of whom were US citizens – to internment camps across the country.In the 1940s, Japanese immigrants faced an impossible situation, said Aarti Kohli, executive director at the legal services group Asian Law Caucus. Discriminatory federal laws barred them from becoming naturalized citizens, which made them targets under the Alien Enemies Act.“It’s a catch-22,” Kohli said. “They were targeted because they weren’t citizens, but they also couldn’t become citizens.”The Trump administration invoked the law to deport more than 200 Venezuelan migrants it accused of being members of the transnational criminal gang Tren de Aragua. Similar to Japanese internees, experts say, Venezuelan deportees were not given a chance to disprove the government’s accusations. In a 14 March memorandum, the Department of Justice claimed that the Alien Enemies Act allows federal law enforcement officers to conduct warrantless house raids and deportations without court hearings.Government deception is one throughline connecting the current and most recent invocations of the Alien Enemies Act, Kohli said.In 1983, the organization was part of a multi-team effort to clear the conviction records of three Japanese Americans held in wartime concentration camps. Their legal cases uncovered proof that the justice department suppressed, altered and destroyed intelligence reports that acknowledged Japanese Americans did not pose a military threat to the US.Similarly, Kohli said, multiple intelligence agencies have contradicted Trump’s claim that the Venezuelan government is controlling Tren de Agua – which formed his rationale for invoking the Alien Enemies Act.Descendants of those who suffered under the law are fighting to ensure that history does not repeat itself. In January, dozens of groups representing former internees and their families endorsed a measure to repeal the statute, introduced by Senator Mazie Hirono and Representative Ilhan Omar.The legacy of the Alien Enemies Act is not confined to the US. More than 2,000 Japanese immigrants in Latin America were deported to the US for internment as part of an obscure hostage exchange program. The Latin Japanese internees were treated both as “alien enemies” and unlawful entrants whom the US tried to deport to warn-torn Japan, Yon Ebright said, a country that many had little memory of.Grace Shimizu’s father immigrated from Japan to Peru in the 1920s, when he was 18. He and his brothers operated a successful charcoal business in Lima that was blacklisted by authorities. When war broke out, the government seized the company and shipped the brothers to a US concentration camp.None of them ever returned to Peru, Shimizu said. After the war, her uncle and his family were deported to Japan. Her father fought his deportation order and, with the sponsorship of Japanese American relatives in California, lived out the rest of his life in the San Francisco Bay Area.“This kind of government abuse is not new,” said Shimizu, director of the Campaign for Justice: Redress Now for Japanese Latin Americans. But today, “there are many more individuals and communities targeted as ‘the enemy’, technological advances to enhance overreach and capacity, and twisted government policies, actions and justifications.” More

    • 225 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s Unesco withdrawal is part of a broader assault on democracy | Liesl Gerntholtz and Julie Trebault

      by

      Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States a second time from what is essentially the beacon of global culture and heritage – Unesco – is depressing but unsurprising given the administration’s lack of respect for art and culture that celebrates the diversity of humanity in all of its fullness. But it is still a grave error of moral leadership that harms the United States’ global standing on free expression, human rights and democracy.Earlier this year, he initiated a takeover of the Kennedy Center’s programming and content, and linked National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) grants to highly partisan ideological conditions. Meanwhile, the government’s attempts at censorship in schools are all but rewriting American history.Trump has also systematically removed the United States from global obligations connected to health, human rights and the betterment of society. This includes withdrawing from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the UN human rights council (UNHRC) and in effect the dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).It was only a matter of time before Unesco – the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization – came under fire, representing as it does everything the Trump White House rails against. Unesco’s chief was unsurprised, saying that since the last time Trump was in power and pulled the US out of the organization, they had reduced their reliance on US funding significantly and would be carrying on with its mission.Why, then, does this withdrawal matter? Surely it can be chalked up to another strong-arm tactic designed to make headlines and give the administration some more “America First” policies to boast about. Unfortunately, when it comes to culture, it is not that simple.Culture comes under fire when democracy is dying. Russia’s imprisonment of writers, artists and cultural figures who question official narratives about the war on Ukraine; or the Taliban’s destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas – these are examples of how culture becomes both a target and a battleground because it represents identity, memory and freedom of thought – the very things authoritarianism seeks to control or erase.What the US administration has dismissed as “woke” is actually Unesco preserving democratic ideals, teaching the world valuable lessons based in history and protecting artistic freedom – all things that autocrats see as a threat to their ability to control the narrative. It is no small irony that the organization’s recognition of Palestine has also been used as an excuse for the withdrawal, when Unesco is one of the leaders of Holocaust education in the world, and Palestine itself is suffering near total cultural obliteration.It would be a grave error for the United States not to recognize that Trump’s disdain for cultural preservation is part of a broader assault on human rights, democracy, free expression and artistic freedom. It is a story repeated across the world and throughout time. It is notable that one of the few countries to also withdraw from Unesco was South Africa, which withdrew in 1955 in protest against Unesco’s stance against apartheid. During this period of isolation, the apartheid government intensified its control over culture and education, seeking to tightly control the narrative in South Africa and globally about its discriminatory policies.There is still time to reverse this decision. PEN America, which defends free expression worldwide and ARC, the Artists at Risk Connection that protects artistic freedom, urge Congress to oppose this latest move to further isolate the United States globally, and ensure that the country continues to fulfill its international human rights obligations. US funders and foundations should also increase support to writers, journalists and media outlets, artists and cultural institutions, and free expression advocates in countries affected by the shutdown of US foreign assistance.By working with Unescoto commemorate sites of apartheid resistance when it rejoined in 1994, South Africa has shown how global engagement can honor truth and build inclusive memory; the United States, by contrast, risks forfeiting that same moral leadership by retreating from the very institution that makes such progress possible.

      Liesl Gerntholtz is the managing director of the PEN/Barbey Freedom to Write Center at PEN America. Julie Trebault is executive director of the Artists at Risk Connection More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: president on tariff blitz ahead of August deadline

      by

      Donald Trump’s administration has imposed sanctions against the judge overseeing the prosecution of his far-right ally Jair Bolsonaro and hit Brazil with huge tariffs amid accusations from the country’s president that Trump has launched “a direct attack on Brazilian democracy”.The US president has partly attributed his 50% tariff to his outrage at the supposed political “witch-hunt” against Bolsonaro, the former Brazilian president, who is on trial over an alleged coup attempt after the 2022 election.Amid a blitz of tariff announcements, Trump also hit India with a 25% levy and an extra “penalty” because it buys arms and energy from Russia, while imposing a 15% rate on South Korea as part of a trade deal that avoids even higher levies.Domestically, experts say they have “enormous concerns” with a Trump administration initiative for millions of Americans to upload personal health data and medical records on new apps and systems run by private tech companies.Here are the key stories.Trump accused of attack on Brazil’s democracy over Bolsonaro judge sanctionsAllies of Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva have accused Donald Trump of launching “a direct attack on Brazilian democracy” after the US treasury slapped sanctions on Alexandre de Moraes, the supreme court judge widely credited with helping save Brazilian democracy from a 2022 rightwing coup.The controversial US move was announced on Wednesday by the secretary of the treasury, Scott Bessent, shortly before Trump followed through on a threat to hit Brazilian imports with 50% tariffs by signing an executive order “to deal with the recent policies, practices and actions by the government of Brazil”.Read the full storyBrazilian president hits back as US tariffs threaten trade showdownLuiz Inácio Lula da Silva has said he does not fear getting on the wrong side of Donald Trump as South America’s largest economy braces for the introduction of 50% tariffs.Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order confirming the US would impose the rate on Brazil from next week.Read the full storyDivided Fed holds interest rates in face of Trump pressureThe US Federal Reserve left its benchmark interest rate unchanged on Wednesday despite intense pressure from Trump to lower rates. Amid an onslaught of attacks from the White House against the Fed, officials at the central bank said economic “uncertainty” remained too high to lower rates.Read the full storyUS to impose 15% tariffs on South Korea as part of trade deal, Trump saysThe president has said the US will charge a 15% tariff on imports from South Korea as part of an agreement with the key Asian trading partner and ally that avoids even higher levies.The arrangement – announced shortly after Trump met with Korean officials at the White House – came during a blizzard of trade policy announcements ahead of a self-imposed 1 August deadline, when the president has promised higher tariffs will kick in on US imports from a range of countries.Read the full storyTrump administration launching health tracking system with big tech’s helpThe US government is pushing an initiative for millions of Americans to upload personal health data and medical records on new apps and systems run by private tech companies, promising easier to access health records and wellness monitoring.“There are enormous ethical and legal concerns,” said Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University law professor who specialises in public health. “Patients across America should be very worried that their medical records are going to be used in ways that harm them and their families.”Read the full storyEx-CIA agent hits out at Gabbard for going after Obama A former CIA officer who helped lead the intelligence assessments over alleged Russia interference in the 2016 presidential election has said Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, is ignorant of the practices of espionage after she accused Barack Obama and his national security team of “treasonous conspiracy” against Donald Trump.Read the full storyKamala Harris won’t run for California governor Donald Trump’s former rival for the presidency, Kamala Harris, has announced she is not running for California governor, as had been widely expected.The former vice-president and 2024 Democratic presidential nominee announced on Wednesday that she would not run, in a decision that leaves the contest to lead the country’s largest blue state wide open.Read the full storyTrump backs Israel and rebukes Starmer over Palestinian state recognitionDonald Trump has doubled down on his backing for Israel after having appeared to give a green light to the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, to recognise a Palestinian state.Amid signs of mounting opposition among his Maga base to Israel’s military operation in Gaza, Trump criticized Starmer’s plan to grant recognition as “rewarding Hamas”, even after having not taken issue with it when the pair met in Scotland this week. The Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, later announced his country also planned to formally recognise Palestine in September.Read the full storyUS placed on rights watch list under TrumpA group of global civil society organisations has placed the US on a watchlist for urgent concern over the health of its civic society, alongside Turkey, Serbia, El Salvador, Indonesia and Kenya.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      The US is suspending a “de minimis” exemption that allowed low-value commercial shipments to be shipped into the country without facing tariffs, the White House said. Under Trump’s order, parcels valued at or under $800 sent outside of the international postal network will face “all applicable duties”.

      Republicans have unveiled a new congressional map in Texas that would allow the party to pick up as many as five additional congressional seats, an aggressive manoeuvre that has already met decisive outcry from Democrats and comes as the GOP tries to stave off losses in next year’s midterm elections.

      Arizona congressman Greg Stanton says the US government violated federal law when it refused to allow him to visit a local restaurant owner held in an immigration detention facility last week.

      Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, has said the country is demanding the repatriation of at least 30 of its citizens currently being held in the controversial Florida immigration detention centre known as “Alligator Alcatraz”.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened 29 July 2025. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Brown University reaches deal with Trump administration to restore $50m in funds

      by

      Brown University has reached an agreement with the Trump administration that will reinstate nearly $50m in research funding and close several federal investigations into the institution, university president Christina Paxson announced in a campus-wide email on Wednesday.The settlement follows the Trump administration’s threat in April to freeze $510m in federal support to Brown. This makes Brown the third Ivy League school to reach a resolution with the federal government this month.Under the terms of the agreement, Brown will commit to nondiscrimination in both admissions and campus programs, and will grant federal officials access to its admissions data. The arrangement brings to an end investigations led by the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education and Justice.A statement from the institution said that the “voluntary agreement will reinstate payments for active research grants and restore Brown’s ability to compete for new federal grants and contracts, while also meeting the core imperative of preserving the ability for our students and scholars – both domestic and international – to teach and learn without government intrusion”.The agreement between Brown and Trump does not require the university to admit any wrongdoing. And unlike Columbia University, which agreed to pay a $200m settlement, Brown’s deal does not involve any financial penalty. The email stated that “the government does not have the authority to dictate teaching, learning and academic speech”.The education secretary, Linda McMahon, had previously described the Columbia settlement as a “roadmap”, predicting it would “ripple across the higher education sector and change the course of campus culture for years to come”.In addition to a pledge to “reaffirm compliance with nondiscrimination laws” in admissions and programs, the deal also prevents Brown from administering gender-affirming surgeries to minors or prescribing puberty blockers.The university has also agreed to implement the Trump administration’s definitions of male and female (as outlined in a January executive order) for women’s athletics, student programs, campus facilities and housing. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas Republicans unveil congressional map that could gift them five seats

      by

      Republicans have unveiled a new congressional map in Texas that would allow the party to pick up as many as five additional congressional seats, an aggressive maneuver that has already met decisive outcry from Democrats and comes as the GOP tries to stave off losses in next year’s midterm elections.Republicans already hold 25 of Texas’s 38 congressional seats. But at the urging of Donald Trump, Texas’s governor, Greg Abbott, called a special session this month to redraw the state’s congressional districts. After contentious hearings across the state, Republicans unveiled their proposed map on Wednesday.“We expected them to be greedy,” said Sam Gostomski, executive director of the Texas Democratic party. “The bottom line is, they are going to turn Texas into almost certainly the most gerrymandered state in the country.”Had the map been in place for the 2024 election, Trump would have carried 30 of the districts, while Kamala Harris would have carried just eight, according to data from Dave’s Redistricting App, an online tool that allows for analysis of voting districts.On first glance at the maps, “it was more packing and more trying to divide people,” said state representative Barbara Gervin-Hawkins, a Democrat from San Antonio and a member of the Texas house’s redistricting committee. “We’re trying to digest it and look at it and look at the numbers and see how it all plays out.”Republican legislators held three hearings to hear from voters about redistricting. But the proposed maps were not presented at the meetings, rendering the legally required hearings into a pro forma exercise.“How do people even know what to comment on if the maps aren’t published?” she said. “I call it a sneak attack to put the maps out after the hearing.”The map unveiled on Wednesday represents the most aggressive effort for Republicans. While analysts said Republicans could target three Democratic seats easily, trying to claim more risked spreading GOP voters too thin.One of the proposed changes in the maps would consolidate two Democratic seats in Austin, currently held by Representatives Greg Casar and Lloyd Doggett. Other changes include shifting boundaries of districts in south Texas, where Republicans have made inroads among Hispanic voters.“Merging the 35th and the 37th districts is illegal voter suppression of Black and Latino Central Texans,” Casar said in a statement. “If Trump is allowed to rip the Voting Rights Act to shreds here in Central Texas, his ploy will spread like wildfire across the country. Everyone who cares about our democracy must mobilize against this illegal map.”The map also radically redraws district lines in Houston, eliminating one majority people of color seat held by Democrats.“The map is extreme invidious discrimination and accomplishes what the President has demanded of the governor and more,” said Al Green, a member of the US Congress. “The DoJ demanded that the race card be played, and the governor dealt the people of Texas a racist hand.”Green pledged to run for re-election, despite the changes in district boundaries.Democrats narrowly won two seats in south Texas where a majority of voters also chose Trump. The redistricting widens the margin a Republican congressional candidate might expect to win, given the 2024 result.Democrats have already denounced the Republican efforts as a naked partisan power grab and have contemplated redrawing maps in states where they hold the power to do so. A Super Pac supporting House Democrats has pledged to donate upwards of $20m to target Republicans.The redistricting process in states typically occurs at the start of each new decade, when new census data is available.“This proposed map is a racially discriminatory, brazen power grab. It is an insult to all Texans, who have demonstrated overwhelming, bipartisan opposition to President Trump’s order to draw a mid-decade gerrymander. Texans deserve better than this, and if the legislature and the governor follow through with enacting this egregious gerrymander, it will face fierce legal challenges,” said Marina Jenkins, executive director of the National Redistricting Foundation, which has opposed the Texas effort.Democrats have few options to fight the redistricting. While a court challenge will be filed almost immediately, federal judges in the conservative fifth judicial circuit may not resolve the dispute before the 2026 election, and may not resolve it in their favor.The Texas house select committee on redistricting has scheduled a public hearing on the proposed maps for Friday. The Texas AFL-CIO put out a call on Wednesday afternoon to pack the capitol in Austin and testify.Democratic legislators may leave the state in order to deny Republicans a legislative quorum and prevent them from passing law. Doing so presents practical and legal costs for those who do, but may be the last remaining bargaining chip they have before the issue enters the courts.“I can tell you that our members are going to fight it for as long as it takes,” Gostomski said, “but at the end of the day, the only real legal mechanism in place is, at some point, the GOP leadership has to decide if they are more interested in representing their constituents than protecting Donald Trump’s power.” More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Kamala Harris announces she will not run for governor of California

      by

      Kamala Harris, the former vice-president and 2024 Democratic presidential nominee, announced on Wednesday that she will not run for governor of California – a highly anticipated decision that leaves the contest to lead the country’s largest blue state wide open.“For now, my leadership – and public service – will not be in elected office,” Harris said in a statement, ending months of speculation about her political future after losing the 2024 presidential election to Donald Trump.“I look forward to getting back out and listening to the American people, helping elect Democrats across the nation who will fight fearlessly, and sharing more details in the months ahead about my own plans,” she added.Harris, 60, who previously served as California’s attorney general and US senator, had been exploring a run for the state’s top job since leaving the White House in January. But, she said in the statement, “after deep reflection, I’ve decided that I will not run for governor in this election”. The decision does not rule out a future run for public office, including a third bid for the White House, after unsuccessful campaigns in 2020 and 2024.Among the other possibilities Harris is exploring is starting a non-profit or leading a policy thinktank, said a personal familiar with her thinking. Allies said she would be a sought-after surrogate and fundraiser ahead of the 2026 midterms.“I think we can expect her to continue to invigorate the younger generation who really vibed off of her energy, her authenticity, and, you know, her willingness to talk about things that you don’t normally talk about when you’re on the campaign trail,” said the California congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove, one of the Democrats Harris spoke with in recent months as she weighed a run for governor.Harris’s looming decision had in effect paralyzed the race to replace Gavin Newsom, the term-limited Democratic governor, with early polling suggesting she was Californians’ top choice. The Harris-less race to lead California will now take place in a political landscape dramatically reshaped by her loss to Trump in November, which plunged the party into a period of paralysis and soul-searching.In the months since, the Democratic base has grown increasingly furious with its old guard, demanding fresh leadership and a more combative approach to what they view as Trump’s increasingly authoritarian agenda.In a nod to the discontent roiling her party, and the country, Harris said: “We must recognize that our politics, our government, and our institutions have too often failed the American people, culminating in this moment of crisis. As we look ahead, we must be willing to pursue change through new methods and fresh thinking – committed to our same values and principles, but not bound by the same playbook.”While the decision was disappointing to supporters eager to see Harris square off again with Trump during the final years of his term, Harris had given few signals that she was deeply excited by the prospect of leading the state from the governor’s perch in Sacramento. The months-long slog to next year’s contest would have forced Harris to grapple with her role in Democrats’ losses in November, which has already drawn criticism from corners of the party eager for leaders to step aside and make space for a new generation of candidates.The crowded field of Democrats running for governor in California is so far made up of long-serving or well-known political leaders, including Xavier Becerra, the former attorney general of California who served with Harris in Biden’s cabinet as the secretary of health and human services; Antonio Villaraigosa, the former Democratic mayor of Los Angeles; the state’s lieutenant governor, Eleni Kounalakis, who is close friends with Harris; and the former representative Katie Porter.The most prominent Republicans in the race are Chad Bianco, the sheriff of Riverside county, and Steve Hilton, the former Fox host and former adviser to then UK prime minister David Cameron. Ric Grenell, a longtime Trump ally, has also toyed with the idea of running.In a statement, Villaraigosa commended Harris’s leadership and said that her decision “reflects her continued commitment to serving at the highest levels of government”.Becerra described Harris’s decision as an “important turning point for her and our state” that would reshape the “race for governor, but not the stakes”.“California needs a governor who will treat the cost of living crisis like the emergency it is, and who will stand up to the chaos and corruption of the Trump White House,” he said in a statement.Meanwhile, Newsom, who came up in San Francisco politics with Harris, also praised the former vice-president. “Kamala Harris has courageously served our state and country for her entire career,” he said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Whether it be as a prosecutor, attorney general, senator, or vice-president she has always kept a simple pledge at the heart of every decision she’s made: For the People. Grateful for her service and friendship – and looking forward to continuing the fight in whatever the future might hold for her.”Republicans – some of whom had been eager to elevate Harris as the face of the Democratic party – nevertheless touted her decision as a political victory for the president.“Kamala Harris’s political career is over thanks to President Trump,” said Kollin Crompton, a spokesperson for the Republican Governors Association, adding, perhaps prematurely: “Americans across the country can sigh in relief that they won’t have to see or hear from Kamala Harris any longer.”Harris had maintained a relatively low profile since she returned home to Los Angeles, offering few clues about her political future. She remained mostly out of view as protests erupted in response to the Trump administration’s immigration raids in Los Angeles earlier this summer. In a statement issued after Trump ordered national guard troops deployed Los Angeles, she said that protest was “a powerful tool” and said she supported the “millions of Americans who are standing up to protect our most fundamental rights and freedoms”.She has been selective about when to weigh in against the Trump administration’s actions. Earlier this year, Harris delivered a sharp speech in which she warned that the US was witnessing a “wholesale abandonment of America’s highest ideals” by the US president.On Wednesday, Harris vowed to remain politically engaged.“We, the People must use our power to fight for freedom, opportunity, fairness, and the dignity of all,” she said. “I will remain in that fight.”Dani Anguiano contributed to this report More