US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares112 Views

      in US Politics

      US imposes sanctions on Palestinians for requesting war crimes investigation

      by

      The United States has imposed sanctions against three Palestinian human rights groups that asked the international criminal court to investigate Israel over allegations of genocide in Gaza, according to a notice posted to the US treasury department’s website on Thursday.The three groups – the Gaza-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights and Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, and the Ramallah-based Al-Haq – were listed under what the treasury department said were international criminal court-related designations.The groups asked the ICC in November 2023 to investigate Israeli air strikes on densely populated civilian areas of Gaza, the siege of the territory and displacement of the population.A year later, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence chief, Yoav Gallant, as well as a Hamas leader, Ibrahim al-Masri, for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.Donald Trump’s administration has imposed sanctions against ICC judges as well as its chief prosecutor over the Israeli arrest warrants and a past decision to open a case into alleged war crimes by US troops in Afghanistan.The ICC, which was established in 2002, has jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in its 125 member countries. Some nations, including the US, China, Russia and Israel, do not recognise its authority.The US sanctions against the Palestinian groups come days after the world’s biggest academic association of genocide scholars passed a resolution saying the legal criteria had been met to establish Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.Israel called the announcement disgraceful and “entirely based on Hamas’s campaign of lies”.Israel launched its assault on the Gaza Strip in October 2023, after fighters from Hamas, the Palestinian militant group in control of the territory, attacked southern Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking 250 hostages back into Gaza.Since then, Israel’s war has killed 63,000 people, forced nearly all Gaza’s residents to flee their homes at least once, and set off a starvation crisis in parts of the enclave that a global hunger monitor describes as a famine. More

    • 125 Shares118 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ immigration jail can stay open, appeals court says

      by

      An appellate panel on Thursday put on hold an order to wind down operations at the “Alligator Alcatraz” immigration center in the Florida Everglades, allowing its construction and operation to continue.Last month a federal judge in Miami had ordered the closure of the Trump administration’s notorious immigration jail within 60 days, and ruled that no more detainees were to be brought to the facility while it was being wound down.That shock ruling by district court judge Kathleen Williams built on a temporary restraining order she had issued two weeks previously, halting further construction work at the remote tented camp, which has attracted waves of criticism for harsh conditions, abuse of detainees and denial of due process as they await deportation, as well as environmental damage.The state of Florida, which funded and built the hastily-erected camp and runs it on behalf of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agency, then appealed.On Thursday afternoon, a three-judge panel in Atlanta decided by a 2-1 vote to stay Williams’ order pending the outcome of Florida’s appeal, saying the ruling was in the public interest.Ron DeSantis’s administration in late June had raced to build the facility on an isolated airstrip surrounded by wetlands to aid Donald Trump’s efforts to deport people deemed to be in the US unlawfully.The Florida Republican governor said the location in the swampy and remote Everglades was meant as a deterrent against escape, much like the infamous, now disused, island prison in San Francisco Bay that Republicans named it after.The US president visited the facility and praised its harsh environment for detainees, some of whom have accused the authorities of inadequate medical care and other poor conditions.The 11th US circuit court of appeals ruled in a split opinion that the Trump administration was likely to prevail in a legal battle with environmental groups that say the facility is endangering the fragile Everglades and its wildlife.Two judges sided with the Trump administration, and one judge dissented.
      The majority ruled that the project, funded by Florida, which is seeking reimbursement fees from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the parent agency of Ice, did not trigger the kind of environmental review needed for federally funded construction projects.Although both DeSantis and the DHS secretary, Kristi Noem, have said the federal government will pay for expanding the detention facility, there is no evidence that federal funds have been used for construction, the court ruled.The detention center cost about $250m to build and covers more than 18 acres. The facility is 37 miles west of Miami in a vast subtropical wetland that is home to alligators, crocodiles and pythons – imagery that the White House leveraged to show its determination to remove migrants – and also home to many rare birds, plants and creatures such as manatees.The Associated Press and Reuters contributed reporting More

    • 138 Shares118 Views

      in US Politics

      President of Northwestern University quits amid layoffs forced by Trump cuts

      by

      The president of Northwestern University said Thursday that he was stepping down amid a turbulent period marked by clashes with Republican lawmakers and steep federal funding cuts under the Trump administration that forced widespread layoffs.Michael H Schill, who has led the institution for three years, has been under heavy scrutiny in conservative circles this year. The Trump administration slashed nearly $800m in research funding after sustained criticism from Republicans.“Over the past three years, it has been my profound honor to serve as president of Northwestern University,” Schill wrote in a message to students, faculty and staff. “In that time, our community has made significant progress while simultaneously facing extraordinary challenges. Together, we have made decisions that strengthened the institution and helped safeguard its future.”The university’s handling of campus protests over the war in Gaza placed Schill under fire by conservatives. During a congressional hearing last year, Republicans accused Northwestern of failing to adequately address antisemitism, with some Jewish advocacy groups even demanding his resignation.Schill acknowledged the difficulties in his resignation statement, pointing to the freeze on federal research funds among other challenges.“As I reflect on the progress we have made and what lies ahead, I believe now is the right time for new leadership to guide Northwestern into its next chapter,” he said. “Therefore, I have decided, in consultation with the leadership of the Board of Trustees, that I will step down as President.”The funding freeze, announced in April, was a major financial blow that led Northwestern to announce the elimination of about 425 jobs in July, about half of which were unfilled positions. Administrators conceded that the layoffs were “a drastic step” and “the most painful measure we have had to take”.Michael Blake, a former Democratic National Committee (DNC) vice-chair and a graduate of Northwestern, posted a strong objection on social media.“Northwestern Alum. Don’t be silent. Our President is resigning b/c of GOP pressure in accusing our Alma mater of being Antisemitic (which NU is not) while the Federal govt withholds funds for Black causes (Racist). Stand up for the current Cats and those who come behind us,” he posted, referring to the wildcats nickname of Northwestern students and alumni.Others were pleased with Schill’s resignation. Republican congressman Tim Walberg of Michigan, who also serves as chairman of the House education and workforce committee, said in a statement: “President Schill will leave behind a legacy of not only failing to deter antisemitism on campus but worsening it. These students not only deserve better, but the law requires it. Northwestern’s next president must take prompt and effective action to protect Jewish students from the scourge of antisemitism.”Schill’s departure comes amid a broader Republican campaign targeting elite universities, part of an effort launched in response to student protests over the Gaza conflict. Since then, Republican lawmakers and Trump officials have escalated pressure on higher education institutions, accusing them of failing Jewish students.The administration has increasingly relied on freezing federal research dollars, sometimes in the billions, to push universities toward its policy preferences. These moves have forced several institutions to reach settlements with the Trump administration in order to resume their funding. More

    • 175 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump set to host US tech leaders at Rose Garden – minus Elon Musk

      by

      When Donald Trump hosts leaders from the US’ biggest tech companies at a lavish Rose Garden dinner on Thursday night, there will be one notable absence. Elon Musk, once inseparable from Trump and a constant, contentious presence in the White House, will not be in attendance.The dinner, which will include Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Apple’s Tim Cook and OpenAI’s Sam Altman, is exactly the type of event where Musk would have sat at Trump’s right hand only a few months ago. Instead, the Tesla CEO stated on his social media platform X that he was invited but could not make it. He said he planned to send a representative. He spent the day on X posting a familiar stream of attacks on immigration and trans people.The White House did not respond for comment on why Musk would not be at the dinner.Musk’s absence, even if voluntary, is a stark turnaround from when Trump repeatedly joked following the election that “Elon won’t go home, I can’t get rid of him.” The vacant seat highlights a divide that has emerged between the two men since their very public falling out earlier this year, one that has seen Musk’s influence over the government wane despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars to reelect Trump during the 2024 election.Musk’s omission from the list of attendees also echoes one of the seminal moments of his political evolution, another White House event. In 2022, then-president Joe Biden failed to invite the Tesla CEO to a summit on electric vehicles over concerns it would draw backlash from autoworkers unions. Musk, who had not yet publicly aligned himself with the Republican party, lashed out at the White House for the snub and declared that he would not vote for Biden. The move proved enormously costly for Democrats.The incident clearly stuck with Musk, who like Trump has shown a tendency to harbor longterm grudges. Even on the day of Trump’s Rose Garden dinner, he reserved his ire for Biden rather than Trump, retweeting a clip of himself from 2023 addressing Biden’s snub with the post “I try not to start fights, but I do finish them.”In the ensuing years, Musk has taken a hard turn to the political right. He has turned X into a bastion of far-right influencers, whom he frequently retweets to his over 200 million followers. He has promoted false theories about Democrats conspiring to get immigrants to illegally vote en masse and embraced far-right political parties around the world. He also became Trump’s most vocal and deep pocketed supporter, contributing nearly $300m to the reelection campaign and Republican causes.Musk’s support for Trump placed him in a position of immense power after the president’s inauguration as the tech mogul established and led the so-called “department of government efficiency’s” (Doge) sweeping dismantling of federal agencies. It also turned him into a prominent guest at political dinners and events, only a year after the British government did not invite him to a major tech summit as he made inflammatory anti-immigrant posts that claimed a “civil war” would take place in the UK.Since Musk and Trump’s relationship imploded in May over policy differences – Musk railed against Trump’s signature One Big Beautiful Bill – which then snowballed into Musk accusing Trump of being in the files pertaining to notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the xAI CEO has all but vanished from high-profile government events. Although Trump still praises Musk as a “genius”, he told reporters on Wednesday night that Musk has “got some problems” and the two have not been seen together since their public spat.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAs Musk has feuded with Trump and ceded his place in the White House, however, rival tech moguls have grown closer with the administration and filled some of the vacuum. Earlier this month, Trump hosted Cook, the Apple CEO, at the White House, who gifted him a 24-karat gold souvenir. Meanwhile, Trump aides have discussed cutting Musk’s government contracts, according to the Wall Street Journal, only to find upon review that doing so would endanger too many key operations.If Musk were to attend Thursday’s dinner, it would create an awkward arrangement as he is suing two of the companies in attendance – Apple and OpenAI, helmed by his former collaborator and now nemesis Altman. As with Trump, Musk has also attacked Gates for his ties to Epstein after Gates accused him of “killing children” through Doge’s cuts to foreign aid. More

    • 150 Shares132 Views

      in US Politics

      US justice department reportedly opens criminal inquiry into Fed governor Lisa Cook

      by

      The US justice department has initiated a criminal investigation into mortgage fraud claims against Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook, according to new reports, as a lawsuit she filed against Donald Trump over her firing makes its way through court.Lawyers with the justice department have issued subpoenas for the investigation, according to the Wall Street Journal.Last month, Trump moved to fire Cook over unconfirmed claims that she listed two properties as her primary residence. Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing and Finance Agency and a close ally of Trump, alleged Cook had lied on bank documents and records to obtain a better mortgage rate.Cook, a voting member of the Fed board that sets interest rates, said she has “no intention of being bullied to step down” and that she would “take any questions about my financial history seriously”.In response to Trump’s bid to dismiss her, Cook filed a lawsuit against the president arguing that her removal was unconstitutional and threatened the independence of the Fed. Cook’s lawyers say the firing was “unprecedented and illegal” and that federal law requires showing “cause” for a Fed governor’s removal.“An unsubstantiated allegation about private mortgage applications submitted by Governor Cook prior to her Senate confirmation is not [cause],” her lawyers said in court documents.In court documents, lawyers for Cook suggested that a “clerical error” may be behind the discrepancies found in her mortgage records.Cook was appointed by Joe Biden in 2022 for a 14-year term on the board that was set to end in 2038. She is the first Black woman to be appointed to the board.US district court judge Jia Cobb heard arguments for the lawsuit last week and said she will expedite the case, which is ultimately expected to be taken up by the US supreme court.Trump’s attacks against Cook come against the backdrop of a long fight the White House has waged against the Fed, which has historically been treated as nonpartisan.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEarlier in the year, Trump threatened to fire the Fed chair, Jerome Powell, for not lowering interest rates, but ultimately walked back his threats after negative responses from investors. Trump also tried to accuse Powell of fraud over renovations at the Fed’s headquarters, which have cost more than anticipated.Abbe Lowell, Cook’s lawyer, told the Journal that “it takes nothing for this DoJ to undertake a new politicized investigation”. The justice department did not immediately respond to the Guardian’s request for comment.This is the third mortgage fraud inquiry the justice department has launched against Democrats and Democratic-appointed officials. Experts have called the pattern a type of “lawfare” as Trump and his allies use their roles to take down other officials.Last month, the US attorney general, Pam Bondi, appointed a special attorney to investigate similar mortgage fraud allegations the White House has levied against California senator Adam Schiff and the New York attorney general, Letitia James. More

    • 175 Shares111 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr accused of ‘reckless disregard for science and the truth’ in Senate hearing

      by

      The US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, faced the Senate finance committee in a tense and combative hearing on Thursday, during which lawmakers questioned his remarks expressing vaccine skepticism, claims that the scientific community is deeply politicized and the ongoing turmoil plaguing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).In a hearing lasting more than three hours and ostensibly about the Trump administration’s healthcare agenda, Kennedy defended his leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), claiming that his time at the agency will be focused on “unbiased, politics-free, transparent, evidence-based science in the public interest”.Senate Democrats on the committee began the hearing calling for Kennedy’s resignation. “Robert Kennedy’s primary interest is taking vaccines away from Americans,” ranking member Ron Wyden, a Democratic senator from Oregon, said in his opening remarks. “People are hurt by his reckless disregard for science and the truth in this effort. I hope the very least, Robert Kennedy has the decency to tell the truth this morning.”Raphael Warnock, also a Democrat, called Kennedy a “hazard to the health of the American people”, repeating calls for him to step down or for Donald Trump to fire him.Last week, Kennedy fired the CDC director, Susan Monarez, less than a month after she was confirmed to her position. She is now mounting a legal case challenging her removal.Shortly after Monarez’s termination, several leading public health officials at the CDC resigned from their positions, citing frustration with Kennedy’s approach to vaccines and his management style.Kennedy said Monarez was “lying” about her claims that she was fired for refusing to sign off on the secretary’s new vaccine policies. Instead, Kennedy said that she was removed after admitting to being untrustworthy.The Democratic senator Elizabeth Warren, of Massachusetts, was unconvinced – citing Kennedy’s prior characterization of the former CDC director as “unimpeachable”.“You had full confidence in her and you had full confidence in her scientific credentials, and in a month she became a liar?” she asked. Thom Tillis, the outgoing Republican senator of North Carolina, asked about the same contradiction in his questioning.Monarez’s lawyers responded in a statement to Kennedy’s comments, calling them “false” and “at times, patently ridiculous”. They added that Monarez would repeat her published claims “under oath”.Kennedy also justified wider firings at the CDC , calling them “absolutely necessary”.“We are the sickest country in the world,” he said. “That’s why we need to fire people at CDC. They did not do their job. This was their job to keep us healthy.”In June, Kennedy fired all 17 members of the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee – a move that defied a promise he made during his confirmation hearing to Republican senator Bill Cassidy, a physician who chairs the Senate health committee. Many of Kennedy’s replacements for the advisory panel have a history of vaccine skepticism.When asked about the changes to the advisory committee, and how that will change vaccine recommendations and scheduling, Kennedy said he didn’t anticipate changes to the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine.In an exchange with Kennedy, Cassidy noted the possible conflict of interest with some of the panel’s new members who are involved in ongoing litigation with vaccine manufacturers.Cassidy cast a critical vote to confirm Kennedy earlier this year. He had previously expressed a number of concerns about the health secretary’s historic comments that undermined vaccine efficacy. The senator has since been critical of a number of Kennedy’s policies, including his decision to cut half a billion dollars worth of mRNA vaccine funding – calling the move “unfortunate”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLast month, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the new batch of Covid-19 vaccines, but placed restrictions on who would be able to access them. The agency has authorized shots for people 65 and older, who are known to be more at risk from serious illnesses from Covid infections. Younger people will only be eligible if they have an underlying medical condition that makes them vulnerable. Infectious disease experts say that this policy could prove extremely dangerous, particularly for young children.On Tuesday, Kennedy defended HHS’s handling of the measles outbreak that affected several states in an opinion piece. While the secretary branded his agency’s response as effective, public health experts said Kennedy’s own messaging around vaccines was muddied and confusing.Cassidy concluded his remarks at the hearing by telling Kennedy that his policies were “effectively denying people the vaccine”, sharing an email from a doctor friend who expressed confusion about Covid inoculation eligibility given the FDA’s new recommendation policies.Kennedy snapped back: “You’re wrong.”The Republican senator John Barrasso, of Wyoming, also a doctor, expressed similar concerns about Kennedy’s policies. “In your confirmation hearing you promised to uphold the highest standard for vaccines,” Barrasso said. “Since then, I’ve grown deeply concerned.”During a back and forth with the Virginia senator Mark Warner, a Democrat, Kennedy falsely claimed that there are “no cuts to Medicaid” under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act – Trump’s hallmark domestic policy legislation that was signed into law in July.The congressional budget office estimates that around 7.8 million people stand to lose their health insurance over a decade, due to Medicaid changes under the law.Multiple Democrats on the committee had heated exchanges with the health secretary. Many of them pointed out the inconsistency between Kennedy’s recent support for the president’s “Operation Warp Speed” and his disparagement of the Covid-19 shot. He has previously called it the “deadliest” vaccine ever manufactured.At the hearing, Kennedy refused to acknowledge the wealth of data that shows that the Covid-19 vaccine has saved lives.“Trump has said the vaccine works, and has saved millions of lives. Your own process, on the other hand, has not been transparent,” said the Democratic senator Maggie Hassan, of New Hampshire. “You repeatedly choose to ignore data because it doesn’t match your preconceived notions and lies.” More

    • 175 Shares69 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s domestic troop deployments aren’t about crime – they’re about intimidation | Moira Donegan

      by

      “We’re going in,” Donald Trump said on Tuesday, when asked whether national guard troops would be sent to invade Chicago. The comment came as reports emerged that national guard troops from Texas – not yet federalized under direct presidential control – were preparing to deploy to Chicago in the coming days, in defiance of the opposition repeatedly and forcefully expressed by the Chicago mayor, Brandon Johnson, and the Illinois governor, JB Pritzker, both Democrats.The White House and the president’s allies have claimed that the deployment is a response to violent crime in Chicago. This is a lie. Crime in Chicago has dropped dramatically over the past decades, as it has in every major American city – including Los Angeles, where Trump deployed the national guard and the marines earlier this year, and Washington DC, where armed federal agents have patrolled the streets for much of the past month. The deployment of armed forces to American cities – serving at his pleasure even when they are not officially under his direct command – has nothing to do with “crime”, except insofar as the administration has sought to redefine the term to mean Democratic governance, racial pluralism or the presence of immigrants. There is no violent crime in Chicago, or in any of these cities, that federal troops can be usefully deployed to quell.Instead, the federal agents who will probably invade Chicago in the coming days are there to serve a very different purpose. They are there to assert Trump’s personal authority over government actions, to intimidate populations that did not vote for him, to terrorize and kidnap immigrants and destroy their families, and to make sure that every American knows that even if they succeed in electing Democrats to run their cities and states, the Trump regime can send armed men to their neighborhoods who answer to Republicans.As Trump expands his military occupation of opposition-controlled cities, the chances of a violent confrontation between armed agents of the regime and ordinary Americans rise dramatically. American city dwellers have not yet been terrified into silent submission; many of us still retain the self-respect that has been engendered by a lifetime of democratic citizenship. These people will inevitably, and righteously, protest the Trump administration’s incursions. They will shout with outrage when they see their neighbors dragged into vans by masked men; they will jeer and mock the jackboots sent to terrorize them. Eventually, it seems inevitable that someone will throw a rock, or slam a door too loudly, or frighten one of the masked, armed men who knows he has been deployed by an unpopular ruler to suppress a once-free public. And one of those men, terrified and hate-filled and ashamed, might, in that moment, fire his gun. By sending troops into cities that do not support him, the Trump administration is assembling kindling in neat stacks around a frayed and fragile civic peace; they are pouring lighter fluid, and lighting a match. They are hoping for a conflagration that will provide an excuse for even more brutality.It seems almost naive to ask if any of this is legal. The supreme court has made it clear that the president – or, at least, this president – has virtually no limits on his authority under conditions of an “emergency”. That no emergency is in evidence in Chicago or any of the other opposition-controlled cities that Trump-aligned forces are invading is irrelevant: an “emergency”, like a “crime”, can be whatever Trump wants it to be. The supreme court will, eventually, either greenlight Trump’s actions or delay intervening against him for long enough that he will be able to accomplish his aims anyway.But lower courts are showing more willingness to check Trump’s more flagrantly illegal conduct – at least temporarily. In California on Tuesday, a court ruled that Trump’s deployment of the marines and the federalized California national guard into Los Angeles earlier this year violated the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law that prohibits the use of federal armed services to enforce domestic law. But in Chicago, the Trump administration is trying a workaround: according to Pritzker, the troops that are amassing are un-federalized members of the Texas national guard – technically under the command of Greg Abbott, the governor, though unambiguously serving the president’s aims. If Pritzker’s claim – which Abbott’s office has disputed – is true, then the theory is apparently that Republican-controlled states have the authority to send their own troops into Democratic- controlled states – against the wishes and without the permission of the local authorities – to enforce partisan policy preferences.Pritzker, in an attempt to calm his people and prevent needless violence, implored Chicagoans to “not take the bait”. And certainly the ground forces will create some viral video moments that the president will enjoy posting to his followers. But the line between what is a mere performative display of power and what is an actual seizure of power is no longer quite clear. The boots and the guns, at any rate, are real.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More