US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Marco Rubio announces sweeping reorganisation of US state department

      by

      The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has proposed a sweeping reorganisation of the US state department as part of what he called an effort to reform it amid criticism from the Trump White House over the execution of US diplomacy.If approved, the reorganisation would cut more than 700 positions and eliminate 132 of 734 offices, according to state department officials. But those officials also stressed that the plan, which was suddenly announced on Tuesday, remained a proposal and would not lead to immediate layoffs or cuts.Other reports on Tuesday leaked through the conservative news outlet the Free Press said that Rubio was planning to request an across-the-board 15% reduction in personnel. That would mark the largest cut in the diplomatic corps in decades, although it is less drastic than draft proposals that had been circulated and a report from the White House’s office of management and budget that suggested a 50% cut in the department’s budget.“The sprawling bureaucracy created a system more beholden to radical political ideology than advancing America’s core national interests,” Rubio said in a statement. “That is why today I am announcing a comprehensive reorganization plan that will bring the Department in to the 21st Century.”The reorganisation may be followed by other announcements on staffing and cuts, a department official said, that would close a number of overseas missions, reduce staff and minimise offices dedicated to promoting liberal values in a stated goal to subsume them into regional bureaus.“Our organisational chart has become bloated … with the priorities of past administrations,” said a senior state department official. “This is an attempt to go back to the traditional roots of the state department … to the primacy of the regional bureaus and of our foreign missions.“The state department will lose relevance if it cannot turn things around in an expeditious manner,” the official said.In his remarks, Rubio wrote that he was targeting departments that were involved in the global promotion of democracy and human rights, writing that the expansive “domain … provided a fertile environment for activists to redefine ‘human rights’ and ‘democracy’ and to pursue their projects at the taxpayer expense.“The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor became a platform for left-wing activists to wage vendettas against ‘anti-woke’ leaders in nations such as Poland, Hungary, and Brazil, and to transform their hatred of Israel into concrete policies such as arms embargoes,” Rubio wrote. “The Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to international organizations and NGOs that facilitated mass migration around the world, including the invasion on our southern border.”Yet a number of state department staffers said the cuts were less severe than expected and that key information had not yet been released on how many jobs may be cut. “There is no information on [personnel] cuts”, which is “what most people are waiting for”, said one state department employee.One draft executive order shared with the Guardian and previously reported on by the New York Times would have eliminated almost all of its Africa operations and shut down embassies and consulates across the continent.Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate foreign relations committee, said that she would “scrutinise” the reorganisation and that she would “hold Rubio to his pledge” to appear before the committee and engage with Congress on the future of the state department.“Any changes to the state department and USAID must be carefully weighed with the real costs to American security and leadership,” she said. “When America retreats – as it has under President Trump – China and Russia fill the void. A strong and mission-ready state department advances American national security interests, opens up new markets for American workers and companies and promotes global peace and stability.”Tammy Bruce, the department spokesperson, denied on Tuesday that the billionaire Elon Musk’s unofficial “department of government efficiency” was in charge of the reorganisation, but said that Doge’s approach had informed the proposal.“We know the American people love the result of Doge,” she said, when asked whether Musk’s department was directly involved. “Doge was not in charge of this, but this is the result of what we’ve learned, and the fact that we appreciate the results, and we want more of those results.” More

    • 250 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Yes, I’m a half-Palestinian lesbian, but I dream of being a Republican congresswoman. Here’s my six-point plan | Arwa Mahdawi

      by

      My haters are going to rejoice when I say this, but I think it’s high time I changed careers. Being a half Palestinian, wholly homosexual freelance writer based in the US isn’t currently looking like the most stable situation. Either my livelihood is going to get obliterated by AI, or I’m getting shipped to a detention centre for thoughtcrimes and gender treachery. It’s anyone’s guess which comes first.Having mulled over the various directions my future could take (dog-cloning saleswoman, astronaut, head of sanitation for the city of Philadelphia), I have finally decided what I want to be when I grow up. And I’m going to exclusively reveal the result in this column. I’m … going into politics!Once upon a time, the fact that I have zero experience in politics may have been an impediment. In a country run by a reality TV star turned convicted felon, however, the criteria for what qualifies one for office have drastically changed. The fact that I am a permanent resident rather than a US citizen would also normally pose a problem, but the beauty of Trumpworld is that all the silly old laws from the past are getting ripped up. Anything – even Republican congresswoman Arwa – is possible if you abandon your principles and play your cards right.And I intend to play my cards perfectly. I have done extensive research and devised a cunning plan for how to make it in modern American politics. Study it carefully and you too can be as successful as I am obviously going to be.1. Become a billionaire and buy yourself a roleAmbassadorships have, in effect, always been pay-to-play in the US but, thanks to the self-proclaimed “GREATEST FRIEND THAT AMERICAN CAPITALISM HAS EVER HAD!”, the entire government is now for sale. You can seemingly buy yourself everything from a nice little foreign policy to a cabinet position. Never has democracy been so democratised: anyone with enough cash can participate. The only snag to this strategy is that I do not, in fact, have enough cash. Like many a feckless millennial I squandered all my “political influence” money on avocado toast.2. Become a billionaire’s special little boyIf you can’t become a billionaire yourself, find one you can sell your soul to: it’s what I call the JD Vance manoeuvre. The vice-president would still be writing about hillbillies were it not for tech billionaire Peter Thiel’s mentorship and piles of money.3. Achieve notoriety through whatever means possibleShould you be unable to locate a billionaire who wants to use you as an avatar to advance their dystopian accelerationist agenda, you will have to master the dark arts of the trollitician. John Fetterman (nominally a Democrat) and far-right Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene both seem to have advanced their careers by modelling themselves on internet trolls. Fetterman wanders around in basketball shorts, chumming it up with accused war criminals, and praising Trump for his “God-tier level trolling”; Greene spreads conspiracy theories about governments controlling the weather. Meanwhile, a Republican candidate for governor of California, clearly hoping to achieve name recognition through virality, has proposed that migrant women can stay in the country if they “marry one of our Californian incels”.4. Harness the potential of “A1” technologyDuring a recent panel discussion, former wrestling mogul turned education secretary Linda McMahon – who may or may not be in that position because she donated handsomely to Trump’s campaign – repeatedly referred to AI as A1. “Now let’s see A1 and how can that be helpful,” McMahon mused at one point. Food for thought.5. Share your top-secret plans in multiple group chatsThe Trump administration, we keep being told, is the most transparent in history. If you want to get ahead, you’ll have to embrace that ethos. For more information, go find Pete “nobody’s texting war plans” Hegseth on Signal – he’ll fill you in on all the deets. Along with his brother, lawyer, wife, and some random dude he once met in a bar.6. Finally, sit back and watch your net worth riseGetting your foot in the door is the hard part. Once you’re in, the job’s a breeze: cancel all your public events and ignore your constituents, stat. Like Marjorie Taylor Greene, focus on making extremely well-timed trades in the stock market. If you bump into a pesky constituent, post a video of yourself ranting at them in the skincare aisle, as South Carolina congresswoman Nancy Mace just did. Most importantly, remember JFK’s famous quote: “Ask not what you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you.” That’s how it goes, right? More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Hegseth blames ousted officials for leaks in latest Signal chat scandal

      by

      The embattled US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has defended his most recent use of the encrypted messaging app Signal to discuss sensitive military operations, blaming fired Pentagon officials for orchestrating leaks against the Trump administration.In an interview with former colleagues at Fox News on Tuesday morning, the defense secretary suggested the problems stemmed from former officials, appointed by this administration, for leaking information to damage him and Donald Trump, adding that there was an internal investigation and that evidence would eventually be handed to the justice department.“When you dismiss people who you believe are leaking classified information … Why would it surprise anybody if those very same people keep leaking to the very same reporters whatever information they think they can have to try to sabotage the agenda of the president or the secretary?” Hegseth said.In a statement posted on X over the weekend, the three dismissed top officials – Dan Caldwell, Colin Carroll and Darin Selnick – wrote that they were “incredibly disappointed” by the way they were removed, adding that “unnamed Pentagon officials have slandered our character with baseless attacks on our way out the door.”Hegseth, in the interview, also confirmed the news that his chief of staff, Joe Kasper, will stay at the Pentagon, but it’s “going to be in a slightly different role”.The controversy stems from recent reporting in the New York Times, after a second Signal chat was identified in which Hegseth is again believed to have shared sensitive operational details about strikes against Houthis in Yemen – including launch times of fighter jets, bomb drop timings and missile launches – with a group of 13 people, including his wife, brother and personal lawyer, some of whom possessed no security clearance.Hegseth dismissed those reports in the interview, characterizing criticism as politically motivated attacks.“No one’s texting war plans,” Hegseth told Fox and Friends. “What was shared over Signal then and now, however you characterize it, was informal, unclassified coordinations for media coordination among other things.”An earlier revelation in March detailed how Hegseth had shared similar military information in another Signal chat that included Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of the Atlantic, who later published the messages after Hegseth and the White House insisted they were not classified.After the interview, NBC News reported that the operational details came from army Gen Michael Erik Kurilla, commander of US Central Command, who shared the strike plans minutes before launch, according to three US officials with direct knowledge of the matter.Less than 10 minutes later, Hegseth is said to have forwarded some of that sensitive information to the aforementioned Signal group chats on his personal phone.The first chat leak appeared to be a violation of the defense department’s own classification guidelines, and it triggered an investigation by the Pentagon’s inspector general into his use of the encrypted messaging app.The backlash against Hegseth’s misuse of Signal while running the government’s largest and most funded office – that could get a budget of $1tn – has only gotten more intense over the last few days.Representative Don Bacon, a Republican and former air force general who chairs the House armed services committee’s cyber subcommittee, became the first member of the GOP to openly support Hegseth’s removal.“I had concerns from the get-go because Pete Hegseth didn’t have a lot of experience,” Bacon told Politico. “If it’s true that he had another [Signal] chat with his family, about the missions against the Houthis, it’s totally unacceptable,” he added later.The former chief Pentagon spokesperson John Ullyot wrote in a Politico Magazine opinion piece over the weekend that “the building is in disarray” and that “it’s hard to see Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth remaining in his role for much longer.”Retired US navy admiral James Stavridis similarly condemned Hegseth’s actions, telling CNN: “There is absolutely no reason on the planet Earth he should be doing that and he knows it.”Despite the professional controversies – and the fact that the current administration appointed the officials he is now attacking – Hegseth portrayed himself as a disruptive force against entrenched interests at the Pentagon.“They’ve come after me from day one, just like they’ve come after President Trump,” Hegseth said. “A lot of people come to Washington and they just play the game … That’s not why I’m here. I’m here because President Trump asked me to bring war fighting back to the Pentagon every single day. If people don’t like it, they can come after me.” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Don’t believe the doubters: protest still has power | Jan-Werner Müller

      by

      Opinions about the protests this month keep oscillating between two extremes. Optimists point to the larger-than-expected numbers (larger than expected by many police departments for sure); they enthusiastically recall a famous social scientific finding according to which a non-violent mobilization of 3.5% of a population can bring down a regime. Pessimists, by contrast, see protests as largely performative. Both views are simplistic: it is true that protests almost never lead to immediate policy changes – yet they are crucial for building morale and long-term movement power.Earlier this year, observers had rushed to declare resistance “cringe” and a form of pointless “hyperpolitics”, a “vibe shift” (most felt by rightwing pundits, coincidentally) supposedly gave Donald Trump a clear mandate, even if he had won the election only narrowly. Meanwhile, Democrats were flailing in the face of a rapid succession of outrageous executive orders – many of which were effectively memos to underlings, rather than laws. But taken at face value, they reinforced an impression of irresistible Trumpist power.As we now know from the Crowd Counting Consortium – a joint project by Harvard University and the University of Connecticut – this sense of defeatism was always more felt at elite level rather than on the ground: already in the first weeks of Trump 2.0, there were far more protests than during the same period in the first administration. What seemed to be missing was a massive event serving as a focal point: now the more than 1,000 gatherings, with 100,000 showing up in DC alone, have provided one.The enthusiasm about large and astonishingly diverse crowds has also revived a tendency, though, to focus on what has become an almost totemic number, a kind of social science Hallmark card for protesters: according to Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan, civil, non-violent resistance that mobilizes 3.5% of a population has overwhelming chances of success (whereas violent action is actually more likely to fail or be outright counterproductive).Three and a half per cent would mean 11 million people on the streets – even the Women’s March, generally seen as highly successful, mobilized “only” four or so million people. The first Earth Day event in 1970 – generally seen as the largest single-day demonstration in US history – brought out “only” 20 million.As Chenoweth has cautioned, the 3.5% number was not some hard social scientific law, let alone a prescription. Many movements have been successful with fewer participants. Plus, what might best be described as a “historical tendency” was measured at a time when no one was conscious of it. Things might be different if one specifically tries to mobilize in light of a 3.5% goal; conversely, power-holders might now be determined to prevent resisters reaching a particular threshold at all costs.In any case, protests and resistance are not the same: the former, by definition, accepts existing authorities and asks for change; the latter does not necessarily recognize the legitimacy of the powers that be – and it was the latter that Chenoweth and Stephan were looking at. Protest rarely leads to immediate policy change; in fact, according to the writer and activist LA Kauffman, perhaps the only clear example of a direct result is a protest that in fact did not happen. In 1941, the civil rights leader A Philip Randolph threatened Franklin D Roosevelt with a protest against racial discrimination in the defense industry and the military; before a march on Washington took place, Roosevelt conceded and issued an executive order banning discrimination in the defense industry.Yet immediate policy change is not the only metric of success. Especially in light of the defeatist elite stance earlier this year, people coming out and seeing each other can be a major morale booster. What is so often dismissed as performative – music, drums, people parading with handmade signs to have their photos taken by others – is not a matter of collective narcissism; rather, it has been recognized by many modern thinkers, starting with Rousseau, as an important part of building community. Politically inspired and inspiring festivals are not some frivolous sideshow; they allow citizens to experience each others’ presence, their emotional dispositions (many are seething with anger!), and their commitment.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrue, it matters what happens next. Many of the protests that took place during the past decade were ultimately unsuccessful because rapid mobilization via social media had not been preceded by patient organizing and the creation of effective structures for continuous engagement. By contrast, what remains the most famous protest in US history – the 1963 March on Washington – was a capstone march after years of difficult, often outright dangerous organizing. The march was flawlessly executed and produced celebrated images; it is less well-known that it was coordinated with the Kennedy administration and very tightly controlled by civil rights leaders (only approved signs were allowed; there was an official recommendation for what lunch to bring: peanut butter and jelly sandwiches).At the end of the march, participants repeated a text read out by none other than A Philip Randolph: they promised they would not “relax until victory is won”. It matters whether those who expressed anger earlier this month can stay engaged, building on the easy connections during spontaneous encounters at a protest. Even by itself, though, what civil rights leaders called the “the meaning of our numbers” will be not go unnoticed by politicians and, less obviously, courts hardly insensitive to public opinion.

      Jan-Werner Müller is a Guardian US columnist and a professor of politics at Princeton University More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Pro baseball player Tarik El-Abour is everything RFK Jr says he can’t be

      by

      When Tarik El-Abour was in middle school, his teacher asked him and his classmates a simple question. What do you want to be when you grow up? When it was time for him to answer, El-Abour gave a reply that thousands of children have said before. He wanted to be a baseball player. But his teacher shot back with something less than encouraging: “You’d better have a Plan B.” El-Abour, who was diagnosed with autism at the age of three, remained undeterred. Rather than listening to his pessimistic instructor, he distanced himself from her.He thought that if he continued to talk to her, she might convince him he was unable to achieve his goal. In the end, he was right, and the teacher was wrong. El-Abour grew up to become a baseball player after receiving a degree in business administration from Bristol University in California. He first played professionally in the Empire League, where he was named rookie of the year in 2016 and was an All-Star in 2017. Then, in 2018, he signed a deal with the Kansas City Royals, a franchise just three years removed from winning the World Series. He played outfield in the minor leagues during the 2018 season, flourishing under the mentorship of JD Nichols of World Wide Baseball Prospects and Reggie Sanders of the Royals, becoming the first recorded autistic player in MLB history.All of this will be news to the US health and human services secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, who said earlier this month that: “Autism destroys families, and more importantly, it destroys our greatest resource, which is our children … These are kids who will never pay taxes. They’ll never hold a job. They’ll never play baseball. They’ll never write a poem. They’ll never go out on a date. Many of them will never use a toilet unassisted.”El-Abour chooses to let Kennedy’s comments slide off him.“When it comes to politics,” the 32-year-old tells the Guardian, “I’m so used to crazy stuff being said by people. I’m just in a spot where it doesn’t really get to me. I get that’s just how some things are. The way I look at it, the only things I care about are the things I have control over – like baseball and those I care about most.”El-Abour, who is now playing in the Zone 22 scouting league in Los Angeles and hoping for another shot at the majors, says he doesn’t know what it’s like not to be autistic. But he explains that the way his brain works helps him focus and embrace repetition – both valuable qualities for a ballplayer. “Baseball requires a lot of repetition to be good at it,” he says. “And people with autism tend to be repetitive. I guess that’s maybe where it benefits me.”Kennedy, a fan of doing his own research, may want to note that El-Abour is not the only autistic professional athlete in the US. Tony Snell, who also has two autistic sons, was diagnosed with autism. And he had a nine-year NBA career, playing on several teams, including the Chicago Bulls and New Orleans Pelicans. “Learning I have [autism] helped me understand my whole life,” said Snell in a recent interview. “This is why I am the way I am.” Joe Barksdale, who revealed in 2022 that he was diagnosed with autism, played eight years in the NFL. And Nascar driver Armani Williams also stated publicly he is autistic. Of course, there are more autistic athletes coming up in the ranks, too.“It was a surprise when the [Kennedy] news came out last week,” El-Abour’s mother, Nadia, tells the Guardian. “I wanted to post something then Tarik said, ‘No, the [media] will take care of it.’ Tarik started laughing. He goes, ‘Oh, wow, why did he [Kennedy] choose baseball?’”She says that, unlike some politicians today, her son is very logical. Many autistic people, she explains, don’t attach emotion to the truth. Something simply either is true or it isn’t. “They can’t understand why we don’t accept the truth,” Nadia says. It’s the same reasoning El-Abour employed when flouting his middle school teacher’s “Plan B” idea. In fact, he bristled at it so much that he didn’t even want to be around the energy of the school building, often crossing the street rather than walk near it.“He doesn’t see obstacles,” Nadia says of her son. “He doesn’t think of ‘I can’t.’ He just thinks, ‘How … how can I do that?’”El-Abour, who was non-verbal until he was about six years old, started playing baseball later in life, around 10 years old. At first, he was unsure if he liked the game, which his father signed him up for. But when he got into the batter’s box, something happened. He even gave up his spot as pitcher on the team because he was told pitchers don’t bat in the pros. From then on, he arranged his whole life around things that would make him be a better player. He painted an X on the garage to practice his throwing accuracy. He took fly balls into the night with his coaches. Rather than, as Kennedy would have us believe, baseball was something unattainable for El-Abour, it helped him blossom.Indeed, El-Abour’s life is a far cry from the picture Kennedy Jr and others have tried to paint. But despite any number of ignorant comments, El-Abour says he’s grateful for who he is and proud of what he’s achieved so far in his life. He says “it’s an honor” that people ask him about his autism and he’s glad he can add to the conversation. “It’s very humbling,” El-Abour says, “to be possibly making an impact. Baseball really gave me something that I enjoy and love doing. It always gives me something to be motivated for and to be better at each day throughout my life. And that’s really good.” More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Over 100 US university presidents sign letter decrying Trump administration

      by

      More than 100 presidents of US colleges and universities have signed a statement denouncing the Trump administration’s “unprecedented government overreach and political interference” with higher education – the strongest sign yet that US educational institutions are forming a unified front against the government’s extraordinary attack on their independence.The statement, published early on Tuesday by the American Association of Colleges and Universities, comes weeks into the administration’s mounting campaign against higher education, and hours after Harvard University became the first school to sue the government over threats to its funding. Harvard is one of several institutions hit in recent weeks with huge funding cuts and demands they relinquish significant institutional autonomy.The signatories come from large state schools, small liberal arts colleges and Ivy League institutions, including the presidents of Harvard, Princeton and Brown.In the statement, the university presidents, as well as the leaders of several scholarly societies say they speak with “one voice” and call for “constructive engagement” with the administration.“We are open to constructive reform and do not oppose legitimate government oversight,” they write. “However, we must oppose undue government intrusion in the lives of those who learn, live, and work on our campuses.”Harvard’s lawsuit comes after the administration announced it would freeze $2.3bn in federal funds, and Donald Trump threatened to revoke its tax-exempt status, over claims the university failed to protect Jewish students from pro-Palestinian protests. The suit and the statement, taken together, mark an increasingly muscular response from universities following what initially appeared to be a tepid approach.While some university leaders have in recent weeks criticised the administration and indicated they will not abide by its demands, the statement marks the first time presidents have spoken out collectively on the matter. The joint condemnation followed a convening of more than 100 university leaders called by the AAC&U and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences last week to “come together to speak out at this moment of enormity”, said Lynn Pasquarella, the president of the AAC&U.Pasquarella said that there was “widespread agreement” across a variety of academic institutions about the need to take a collective stand.“Much has been written about this flood-the-zone strategy that’s being used in the current attacks on higher education, and it’s a strategy designed to overwhelm campus leaders with a constant barrage of directives, executive orders, and policy announcements that make it impossible to respond to everything all at once,” she said, explaining why it has taken until now for a joint response. “Campus leaders have had a lot to deal with over the past few months, and I think that’s part of the reason, but it’s also the case that they are constrained by boards, by multiple constituencies who are often asking them to do things that are at odds with one another.”The Trump administration has issued a barrage of measures aimed at universities the right has described as “the enemy” – some under the guise of fighting alleged antisemitism on campuses and others in an explicit effort to eradicate diversity and inclusion initiatives. Billions in federal funds are under threat unless universities comply with extreme demands, such as removing academic departments from faculty control, “auditing” the viewpoints of students and faculty, and collaborating with federal authorities as they target international students for detention and deportation. Along with its actions against Harvard, it has threatened and in some cases withheld millions more from Cornell, Northwestern, Brown, Columbia, Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania.Columbia has largely accepted the administration’s requirements to restore funding, including placing an academic department under outside oversight. Its president did not sign the collective statement.The measures against the schools, which are already upending academic research, undermine longstanding partnerships between the federal government and universities, and are contributing to an atmosphere of repression, the statement’s signatories note.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Our colleges and universities share a commitment to serve as centers of open inquiry where, in their pursuit of truth, faculty, students, and staff are free to exchange ideas and opinions across a full range of viewpoints without fear of retribution, censorship, or deportation,” they write.Last week, Harvard University issued the strongest rebuke yet of the administration’s demands, with president Alan Garber setting off a showdown with the White House by saying that the university would not “surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights”.While Harvard’s lawsuit was the first by a university, higher education associations and organisations representing faculty have filed other legal challenges over the cuts.Faculty at some universities are also organising to protect one another, with several members of the Big Ten Academic Alliance, a consortium of some of the country’s largest state universities, signing on to a resolution to establish a “mutual defence compact”.At a second convening by the AAC&U on Monday some 120 university leaders also discussed what steps they may take next, including efforts to engage their broader communities and the business world to defend academic freedom.The joint statement, Pasquarella added, was just the beginning, and intended “to signal to the public and to affirm to ourselves what’s at stake here, what’s at risk if this continual infringement on the academy is allowed to continue”. More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Harvard sues Trump administration over efforts to ‘gain control of academic decision-making’

      by

      Harvard University has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging it is trying to “gain control of academic decision-making at Harvard”.The university is fighting back against the administration’s threat to review about $9bn in federal funding after Harvard officials refused to comply with a list of demands that included appointing an outside overseer to ensure that the viewpoints being taught at the university were “diverse”. Harvard is specifically looking to halt a freeze on $2.2bn in grants.The lawsuit comes as the Trump administration has sought to force changes at multiple Ivy League institutions after months of student activism centered around the war in Gaza. The administration has painted the campus protests as anti-American, and the institutions as liberal and antisemitic, which Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, refuted.White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement that the “gravy train of federal assistance” to institutions like Harvard was coming to an end.“Taxpayer funds are a privilege, and Harvard fails to meet the basic conditions required to access that privilege,” Fields said.In a letter announcing the university’s decision to reject Trump’s demands, Garber wrote: “No government – regardless of which party is in power – should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.”Garber, in a statement published on Monday, reiterated that the Trump administration had doubled down on its response to the university’s refusal to comply with the administration’s demands, despite claims that the letter indicating Harvard’s federal research funding was at risk was sent by mistake.“The government has, in addition to the initial freeze of $2.2bn in funding, considered taking steps to freeze an additional $1bn in grants, initiated numerous investigations of Harvard’s operations, threatened the education of international students, and announced that it is considering a revocation of Harvard’s 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status,” Garber wrote.“These actions have stark real-life consequences for patients, students, faculty, staff, researchers, and the standing of American higher education in the world.”Harvard is the first university to file a lawsuit in response to Trump’s crackdown on top US universities that is says mishandled last year’s pro-Palestinian protests and allowed antisemitism to fester on campuses. But protesters, including some Jewish groups, say their criticism of Israel’s military actions in Gaza is wrongly conflated with antisemitism.Earlier this month, the Trump administration had sent a letter to Harvard with the list of demands, which included changes to its admissions policies, removing recognition of some student clubs, and hiring some new faculty.Last Tuesday, Trump had called for Harvard, the US’s oldest and wealthiest university and one of the most prestigious in the world, to lose its tax-exempt status, CNN first reported.“Perhaps Harvard should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting ‘Sickness?’ Remember, Tax Exempt Status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!” the US president said in a post on his Truth Social platform. More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: Harvard sues White House; president backs Hegseth in Signal scandal

      by

      Harvard University has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration in a bid to halt a freeze of $2.2m in funding, as a battle between Trump and the Ivy League institution escalates.In a damning legal complaint filed with the Massachusetts district court, Harvard’s president, Alan M Garber, accused the Trump administration of trying to “gain control of academic decision making at Harvard”, adding that no government “should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue”.The Trump administration has sought to force changes at multiple Ivy League institutions after months of student activism centered around the war in Gaza. The administration has painted the campus protests as anti-American, and the institutions as liberal and antisemitic, a claim that Garber refutes.Here are the key stories at a glance:Harvard says Trump ‘slamming on the brakes’ to vital research In a statement accompanying the lawsuit, Harvard’s Garber said the funding freeze was putting health research into jeopardy, including improving the prospects for children who survive cancer, understanding how cancer spreads through the body, predicting the spread of infectious disease outbreaks and easing the pain of soldiers wounded on the battlefield.“As opportunities to reduce the risk of multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s disease, and Parkinson’s disease are on the horizon, the government is slamming on the brakes,” he wrote.Read the full story‘Full-blown meltdown’ at Pentagon over HegsethA former top Pentagon spokesperson has slammed Pete Hegseth’s leadership of the department of defense, as pressure mounts on the defense secretary after reports of a second Signal chatroom used to discuss sensitive military operations.Read the full storyTrump says Hegseth is ‘doing a great job’ Donald Trump offered public support for defense secretary Pete Hegseth a day after it emerged the defense secretary had shared information about US strikes in Yemen last month in a second Signal group chat that included family members, his personal lawyer and several top Pentagon aides.Read the full storyDemocrats land in El Salvador to push for Ábrego García’s releaseA delegation of four House Democrats has arrived in El Salvador to push for the release of Kilmar Ábrego García, part of a mission to challenge the Trump administration’s refusal to comply with a supreme court order to facilitate his returnto the United States.Read the full storyStock markets fall as Trump calls Fed chair ‘a major loser’US stock markets started falling again on Monday morning as Trump continued attacks against the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, whom the president called “a major loser” for not lowering interest rates.Read the full storyTrump axes key STI lab amid dramatic rise in syphilisThe Trump administration’s cuts to a sexually transmitted infection lab at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention comes as some states announce enormous increases in syphilis. The Trump administration has made deep cuts to health programs, affecting expert leadership and programs that surveil, test and research STIs.Read the full storyFederal employees ‘improperly’ shared sensitive documentsUS government employees “improperly” shared sensitive documents, including White House blueprints, with thousands of federal workers, the Washington Post reported. Staff at an independent agency that oversees the construction and preservation of government buildings, shared a Google Drive folder contacting confidential files to all GSA staff members, totaling more than 11,200 people.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      The US supreme court heard arguments in a case that could threaten Americans’ access to free preventive healthcare services under the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare.

      British lawmakers and peers have called for Trump to be blocked from addressing parliament during his UK visit.

      Hundreds of marches, pickets and cleanup events took place across the US in the run-up to Earth Day as environmental and climate groups step up resistance to the Trump administration’s “war on the planet”.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 20 April 2025. More