More stories

  • in

    Trump signs executive orders to spur US ‘nuclear energy renaissance’

    Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders on Friday intended to spur a “nuclear energy renaissance” through the construction of new reactors he said would satisfy the electricity demands of data centers for artificial intelligence and other emerging industries.The orders represented the president’s latest foray into the policy underlying America’s electricity supply. Trump declared a national energy emergency on his first day in office over and moved to undo a ban implemented by Joe Biden on new natural gas export terminals and expand oil and gas drilling in Alaska.Nuclear does not carry oil and gas’s carbon emissions, but produces radioactive waste that the United States lacks a facility to permanently store. Some environmental groups have safety concerns over the reactors and their supply chain.Trump signed four orders intended to speed up the approval of nuclear reactors for defense and AI purposes, reform the Nuclear Regulatory Commission with the goal of quadrupling production of electricity over the next 25 years, revamp the regulatory process to have three experimental reactors operating by 4 July 2026 and boost investment in the technology’s industrial base.“Mark this day on your calendar. This is going to turn the clock back on over 50 years of overregulation of an industry,” the interior secretary, Doug Burgum, said at an Oval Office event where Trump signed the orders.“President Trump here today has committed to energy dominance, and part of that energy dominance is that we’ve got enough electricity to win the AI arms race with China.”High-profile accidents at nuclear plants in the United States and abroad stirred public opposition to nuclear energy in decades past, but Trump described the technology as “very safe”.However, the effort of the “department of government efficiency” to downsize the federal workforce has created snafus like the temporary firings of some employees at the National Nuclear Security Administration, which oversees the US nuclear arsenal. It is also feared to hamper a long-running nuclear waste cleanup operation in Washington state.In Congress, Trump’s Republican allies have moved to implement his energy policies and repeal Biden’s.A sprawling tax-and-spending bill the House of Representatives passed this week changes the rules for tax incentives created under Biden for renewable energy power plants to make them available only for projects that begin construction within 60 days of the bill’s enactment, and are completed by 2028.But nuclear plants only have to be under construction by 2028, a less strict guideline. More

  • in

    Trump says he is hitting EU with 50% tariff as trade talks are ‘going nowhere’

    Donald Trump has said he will impose a 50% tariff on all EU imports to the US from 1 June after claiming trade talks between the two trading blocs were “going nowhere”.In a surprise announcement, the US president posted on his Truth Social platform that his long-running battle to secure concessions from the EU had stalled.He accused the EU of taking advantage of the US on trade, saying: “Our discussions with them are going nowhere! Therefore I am recommending a straight 50% Tariff on the European Union, starting on June 1, 2025.”Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump claimed the EU had “taken advantage” of the US and claimed the new tariffs would be imposed unless EU companies moved their operations to the US.“It’s time that we play the game the way I know how to play the game,” said Trump.Stock markets slumped in response to the news, the tech-heavy Nasdaq closed down 1% as Trump also signalled plans to impose tariffs on Apple, Samsung and other phone manufacturers. The broader S&P 500 lost 0.68%. The STOXX Europe 600 index fell by 1.7%. In London the FTSE 100 closed down 0.2% after initially dropping as much as 1.5%. Germany’s car makers were particularly hard hit, with BMW down 3.7%, Volkswagen off 2.6% and Mercedes-Benz down 4%.The US imposed a 20% “reciprocal” rate on most EU goods on 2 April, but halved that rate a week later until 8 July to allow time for talks. It has retained 25% import taxes on steel, aluminium and vehicle parts and is threatening similar action on pharmaceuticals, semiconductors and other goods.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“This is a major escalation of trade tensions,” said Holger Schmieding, the chief economist at Berenberg, on Friday. “With Trump you never know but this would be a major escalation. The EU would have to react and it is something that would really hurt the US and European economy.”EU negotiators have been locked in meetings with White House representatives since Trump’s so-called “liberation day” tariffs were first announced. Dozens of countries have been holding discussions to try to bring down their own levies before the 90-day pause elapses.The White House has relented on many of its most onerous tariffs, including lowering total tariffs on Chinese goods from 145% to 30% after what Trump declared were constructive talks with Beijing, which lowered its retaliatory border taxes from 125% to 10% in response.A week ago the US president appeared to acknowledge that Washington lacked the ability to negotiate deals with scores of countries at once, saying the US would instead send letters to some trading partners to unilaterally impose new tariff rates.Perceptions of an easing back on a hardline approach to trade brought a period of calm to stock markets, but Friday’s threat of a 50% levy on EU goods, plus a separate threat made the same day of 25% tariffs on iPhones made abroad, have brought an end to the peace.The EU presented a fresh trade proposal to the US on Thursday. The offer included phased tariff cuts on non-sensitive goods, plus cooperation on energy, AI and digital infrastructure. The bloc was readying about $108bn in retaliatory tariffs if talks failed.To sweeten the deal, EU officials were also willing to extend a 2020 tariff-free arrangement on US lobster imports, according to the Financial Times. But it appears to have proved insufficient to persuade the US president to sign a deal allowing only his 10% universal tariff to apply to the EU, as it does the UK. More

  • in

    Judge blocks Trump administration’s ban on Harvard accepting international students

    A US federal judge on Friday blocked the government from revoking Harvard University’s ability to enroll foreign students just hours after the elite college sued the Trump administration over its abrupt ban the day before on enrolling foreign students.US district judge Allison Burroughs in Boston issued the temporary restraining order late on Friday morning, freezing the policy that had been abruptly imposed on the university, based in nearby Cambridge, Massachusetts, on Thursday.Meanwhile, the Trump administration has accused Columbia University of violating civil rights laws, while overseas governments had expressed alarm at the administration’s actions against Harvard as part of its latest assault on elite higher education in the US.Harvard University announced on Friday morning that it was challenging the Trump administration’s decision to bar the Ivy League school from enrolling foreign students, calling it unconstitutional retaliation for the school previously defying the White House’s political demands.In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Boston, Harvard said the government’s action violates the first amendment of the US constitution and will have an “immediate and devastating effect for Harvard and more than 7,000 visa holders”.“With the stroke of a pen, the government has sought to erase a quarter of Harvard’s student body, international students who contribute significantly to the university and its mission,” Harvard said in its suit. The institution added that it planned to file for a temporary restraining order to block the Department of Homeland Security from carrying out the move.The Trump White House called the lawsuit “frivolous” but the court filing from the 389-year-old elite, private university, the oldest and wealthiest in the US, said: “Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard.”Harvard enrolls almost 6,800 foreign students at its campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Most are graduate students and they come from more than 100 countries.Meanwhile, the Department of Health and Human Services’ office for civil rights late on Thursday cited Columbia University, claiming the New York university acted with “deliberate indifference towards student-on-student harassment of Jewish students from October 7, 2023, through the present”, marking the date when Hamas led the deadly attack on Israel out of Gaza that sparked a ferocious military response from the Jewish state, prompting prolonged pro-Palestinian protests on US streets and college campuses.“The findings carefully document the hostile environment Jewish students at Columbia University have had to endure for over 19 months, disrupting their education, safety, and well-being,” said Anthony Archeval, the acting director of the office for civil rights at HHS, in a statement on the action.It continued: “We encourage Columbia University to work with us to come to an agreement that reflects meaningful changes that will truly protect Jewish students.” Columbia University had not yet issued a statement on the citation as of early Friday morning.Orders by the Trump administration earlier this month to investigate pro-Palestinian protesters at Columbia University raised alarms within the Department of Justice, the New York Times reported. A federal judge denied a search warrant for the investigation.Earlier this year, Columbia University agreed to a list of demands from the Trump administration in response to $400m worth of grants and federal funds to the university being cancelled over claims of inaction by the university to protect Jewish students.Burroughs said Harvard had shown it could be harmed before there was an opportunity to hear the case in full. The judge, an Obama administration appointee, scheduled hearings for 27 May and 29 May to consider next steps in the case.The Harvard Crimson student newspaper reported that the Department of Homeland Security gave Harvard 72 hours to turn over all documents on all international students’ disciplinary records and paper, audio or video records on protest activity over the past five years in order to have the “opportunity” to have its eligibility to enroll foreign students reinstated.Before Harvard filed suit, the Chinese government early on Friday had said the move to block foreign students from the school and oblige current ones to leave would only hurt the international standing of the US. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology extended an open invitation to Harvard international students and those accepted in response to the action against Harvard.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOn Friday afternoon, despite the judge’s ruling, Chinese students at Harvard were cancelling flights home and seeking legal advice on staying in the US and saying they were scared in case Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents came to their accommodation to take them away, as they have done to other foreign students.The former German health minister and alumnus of Harvard, Karl Lauterbach, called the action against Harvard “research policy suicide”. Germany’s research minister, Dorothee Baer, had also, before Harvard sued, urged the Trump administration to reverse its decision, calling it “fatal”.Harvard’s lawsuit lists as the plaintiffs the “President and fellows of Harvard college” versus defendants including the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice), the Department of Justice and the Department of State, as well as the government’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program and individual cabinet members – Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary; Pam Bondi, the attorney general; Marco Rubio, the secretary of state; and Todd Lyons, the acting director of Ice.The White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said on Friday: “If only Harvard cared this much about ending the scourge of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators on their campus they wouldn’t be in this situation to begin with.”She added: “Harvard should spend their time and resources on creating a safe campus environment instead of filing frivolous lawsuits.”Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, wrote an open letter to students, academics and staff condemning an “unlawful” and “unwarranted” action by the administration.“The revocation continues a series of government actions to retaliate against Harvard for our refusal to surrender our academic independence and to submit to the federal government’s illegal assertion of control over our curriculum, our faculty, and our student body,” it said.The Associated Press and Reuters contributed reporting More

  • in

    Fear on campus: Harvard’s international students in ‘mass panic’ over Trump move

    Harvard’s foreign students described an atmosphere of “fear on campus” following an attempt by the Trump administration to ban international scholars at the oldest university in the US.On lush, grassy quads filled with tents and chairs ready for end-of-year graduation celebrations, international students said there was “mass panic” after Thursday’s shock announcement by the Department of Homeland Security.The move triggered cancelled flights home for the summer, scrambles for housing to stay in the US over the break, and even swift attempts to transfer schools.On Friday, Harvard sued for a “blatant violation” of the US constitution and Allison Burroughs, a federal judge of the district of Massachusetts, temporarily blocked the White House from revoking Harvard’s ability to enroll foreign students, who comprise an estimated 27% of the student body, or about 6,700 students.Genia Lukin, a third-year PhD candidate from Israel in Harvard’s psychology department, found out during a lab meeting. She said: “It was definitely a moment of: ‘Oh wow, what?’ Obviously, a lot of people are extremely anxious and extremely bewildered and this weird combination of this situation that just exploded out of the blue for most of the international students.”The 41-year-old added that she was in “wait-and-see mode” following the injunction and had cancelled travel abroad with her husband for the foreseeable future. Said Lukin: “The uncertainty is driving people crazy right now. What’s going to happen? Can we complete our degrees remotely? I worked very hard to get into my program so losing the PhD in the middle where I’m a good way through would be pretty devastating.”But, fearful of repercussions following a nationwide crackdown on academics and student protesters, including the arrest and detention of local Tufts University undergraduate, Rümeysa Öztürk, in nearby Somerville, in March, many other students and staff spoke on condition of anonymity.One 24-year-old Ukrainian freshman, who is a Harvard undergraduate during term time and returns to a war-torn country during holidays, said that she had delayed her scheduled flights next week back to her parents who are displaced in western Ukraine, unsure if she can get back into the US.“I feel really shocked,” she said. “If I leave, I’m not sure I’ll get back in. I’m lucky, I have housing the whole summer, so if I need to stay I can. Not all my friends have that. Some people are talking about transferring to different schools, but the transfer window is basically shut now.”She added: “Getting into Harvard is a big deal, it’s transformative, but this is outside our control. It goes against logic, but things go against logic in America right now.”A Chinese visiting scholar from Peking University in Beijing, here for an 18-month research trip for her PhD, called the legal battle “really, really scary” and described “mass panic” among her international friends when the attempted ban was announced on Thursday.The 28-year-old woman said: “We stayed up all night talking about our options, our plan Bs. I was going to go to the UK this summer because my professor has a position in Manchester. I’m a bit worried I won’t be able to get back in. I have to go back to Beijing to finish my PhD, but a lot of students here had long-term plans to stay in America. Harvard is like a special light in the world. If something happens to Harvard it makes me frightened.”A Haitian master’s student, who recently graduated, said a town hall organised by the university to talk to students about their fears had a waiting list of 100 people within minutes, and a campus-wide text chat “blew up with hundreds of messages in an hour”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut she added that the strong statement by Alan Garber, Harvard’s president, and the block by the federal judge made her “hopeful”. She added: “They’ve got our back. I have to trust that they want what is best for all of us.”A member of administrative staff, who lives on campus with international students and works to support them, added: “It’s horrific and almost certainly unlawful. There is a feeling of fear on campus. Normally, you just face typical, internal student problems, but when it is the outside world coming in it is hard to know how to help them.”She added that there was a “misunderstanding that all international students are wealthy” and can afford to have cancelled or disrupted studies. “I would say 50% of them need significant financial aid, and Harvard has a really robust system. They have already been so disrupted because of Covid. Maybe some students can transfer, but maybe they can’t afford to go. And they have lost this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Poof, gone.”Garber said in a letter to the Harvard community: “We condemn this unlawful and unwarranted action. It imperils futures of thousands of students and scholars across Harvard and serves as a warning to countless others at colleges and universities across the country who have come to America to pursue their education and fulfill their dreams.”The Guardian has contacted Harvard for comment. More

  • in

    Trump’s ambush of South Africa’s president shows how low the US has fallen | Justice Malala

    Donald Trump should really try harder.When the US president unexpectedly and dramatically dimmed the lights inside the Oval Office on Wednesday and played a video clip of the alleged burial site of white victims of “genocide”, he meant to embarrass and humiliate his guest, Cyril Ramaphosa, the president of South Africa. It was his “gotcha!” moment after four months of relentless social media attacks, executive orders, boycotts, and threats of economic and diplomatic sanctions.As the video played, a smug Trump claimed it was proof of “white genocide” in South Africa and mumbled: “It’s a terrible sight, never seen anything like it.”It was all lies. The crosses in the video did not mark actual graves. It was a memorial made in September 2020 after two white people were killed on their farm a week earlier. The crosses were meant to represent farmers who had been killed over the years. The idea that it is “genocide” has been debunked so many times over the past 10 years that it is extraordinary that the US president is not ashamed to repeat it in public. The state department under Trump released a report in late 2020 pointing out that, according to official South African statistics for the 2018-2019 period, “farm killings represented only 0.2 percent of all killings in the country (47 of 21,022)”.So here we have a man who has the mighty US state department, the wily Central Intelligence Agency and numerous other resources at his beck and call to help him discern the truth, relying on a badly made propaganda video sourced from a racist, rightwing, anonymous South African X account. Instead of embarrassing Ramaphosa on Wednesday, Trump merely illustrated just how low the US has fallen.His poorly produced Oval Office show, taken with the 28 February attempt to humiliate Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, demonstrates that the country is now run by a man so steeped in discredited online conspiracy theories, so uncritical in his thinking, so poor in his grasp of global affairs, so careless in his exercise of power, that it is incredible that he is one of the most powerful figures in the world today. Such a figure’s power heralds instability and even danger for the world.The ambush of Ramaphosa is therefore not just spectacle. It is illumination. It underlines and emphasizes that Trump’s US is a fact-free, science-free, reality-television production lot whose leader daily defies court orders, alienates supporters of democracy, and tries to dismantle key practices such as the right to due process. It is an ugly place in which facts mean nothing and lies reign supreme.I was born under apartheid and lived under that heinous system until it was defeated in 1994. Those first 24 years were lived in Pretoria, in an impoverished village just an hour from Musk’s sumptuous family mansion in the suburb of Waterkloof. When I was teenager I walked the streets of Musk’s suburb, working as a “garden boy” or caddie, constantly harassed by police asking for my “pass book” – papers allowing me to be in the area designated “whites only”.I know apartheid. I grew up with it, breathed it and lived it every day. It is sickening to hear Trump compare the free, non-racist, democratic country that is South Africa today to the violent, murderous, hateful, system declared a “crime against humanity” by the United Nations in 1966.I know South Africa. I grew up in its brutal, cruel, divided past. I thrived in its hopeful democracy. I was one of the chroniclers of its political descent in the 2010s as its institutions came under assault from a leader with anti-democratic instincts. I visited my mother there last week. There is no genocide in South Africa. Yet, Trump recently posted on his Truth Social that he would not visit South Africa for the G20 summit when “white genocide” was happening there. Just more than 430,000 Americans visited South Africa in 2023, up 37.4% from 2022. I know of not a single one who can point to a genocide happening in the country.This is the president of the United States peddling lies.One is therefore not surprised by the numerous assaults on the American constitution by this administration. The kidnapping of student activists, the trampling upon of citizens’ constitutional rights, the assaults on institutions such as the judiciary, the shamelessness of politicians and their families and cronies enriching themselves – all this is typical of these kinds of corrupt regimes.What is going on in America? Kseniia Petrova, the Harvard Medical School researcher held for months in Louisiana for failing to declare samples of frog embryos she had carried from France at the request of her boss, told the New York Times: “I feel like something is happening generally in America … Something bad is happening. I don’t think everybody understands.”Petrova, who fled Putin’s murderous regime as darkness fell over Russia following the invasion of Ukraine, understands the profound cloud hanging over the US. Those of us who grew up in regimes such as apartheid understand this ominous period.Trump’s actions are scary enough. It is, however, the silence of the US as assaults on American constitutional principles unfold that is most disturbing.This is not a lament for South Africa and how badly it is being treated by the US. It is a lament for myself, for those of us who grew up under systems such as apartheid believing that the US would uphold the rule of law, stand up for truth and speak up for these principles, and for a better world. A monarchical Trump, defying the supreme court and abandoning fact-based decision-making, imperils it all. With every student bundled by masked men into a van, this vaunted republic becomes smaller, lesser. It becomes Putin’s Russia, it becomes something akin to the way I lived under apartheid – a place where a contrarian thought led to detention without trial, to disappearance and for many, to death.There was a telling moment in Wednesday’s interaction when Trump revealed himself. It was a moment which reminded one that corruption, or the smell of it, now sits in the White House. Trump had just referred to a reporter as a “jerk” and an “idiot” because he had confronted him about why he was accepting the “gift” of a jet from Qatar to use as Air Force One.“Why did a country give an airplane to the United States air force? So they could help us out, because we need an Air Force One,” Trump fumed.Ramaphosa quipped: “I’m sorry I don’t have a plane to give you.”Trump didn’t detect the disdain in Ramaphosa’s voice and doubled down on the corruption inherent in accepting such a gift.“I wish you did. I would take it. If your country offered the United States air force a plane, I would take it,” Trump said.And there was the emperor, naked: an unethical leader who worships the dollar and has no concept of how corrupt his actions look to the rest of the world. This is what Wednesday was all about: an America led by a man susceptible to lies and lacking in a moral centre.Wednesday was not about South Africa. It was all about America today.

    Justice Malala is a political commentator and author of The Plot To Save South Africa: The Week Mandela Averted Civil War and Forged a New Nation More

  • in

    This doctor calls LGBTQ+ rights ‘satanic’. He could now undo healthcare for millions

    Steven Hotze, a Republican donor from Texas, has spent decades fighting against LGBTQ+ rights, with campaigns seeking to roll back protections for people he has deemed “termites”, “morally degenerate” and “satanic”.The Houston-area physician is not well-known in mainstream politics, and his efforts targeting queer and trans people have generally been local, with limited impact.His latest cause could be different. Hotze, 74, has sued the federal government to roll back healthcare coverage for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), the HIV prevention medication. The case is now before the US supreme court, which is expected to rule in the coming weeks. A decision in his favor could upend healthcare access for LGBTQ+ people across the country – and derail a wide array of preventive treatments for tens of millions in the process.“People will die,” said Kae Greenberg, staff attorney with the Center for HIV Law and Policy, which filed a brief in the case. “Preventive healthcare saves lives, and this case is about whose lives we consider worth protecting. It’s about cutting off people’s care based on them being gay or substance users or living their lives in a way the plaintiffs do not approve of. It’s using the law to legitimize bigotry.”The case, Kennedy v Braidwood, originated with Hotze’s Christian healthcare firm, Braidwood Management, which filed a lawsuit in 2020 objecting to the federal requirement that his company’s insurance plan cover PrEP. Braidwood, another Christian business and two individuals argued the daily PrEP medications “facilitate and encourage homosexual behavior”, saying the government violated their religious beliefs by making them support “sexual promiscuity”.Braidwood challenged the requirement under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, that insurers and group health plans cover preventive services, a provision that includes diabetes and cancer screenings, medications to reduce heart disease risks, contraception and vaccinations. Along with opposing PrEP, Hotze explicitly objected to STI screenings, counseling for alcohol use and childhood obesity interventions.A Texas district court sided with Braidwood, saying the US violated the firm’s religious freedom. The ruling also found that a taskforce of medical experts that recommended the preventive services covered by the ACA was unconstitutional because the experts hadn’t been confirmed by the Senate, and therefore health plans should not be required to cover the care.The US government appealed the ruling on the taskforce, which is the issue now before the supreme court. The coverage mandates have remained in effect as the case has progressed, though the individual plaintiffs have been shielded from covering the services. The Trump administration has continued to defend the taskforce’s constitutionality, and the supreme court is not weighing religious objections.If the supreme court sides with Braidwood, it could lead to widespread loss of access to free preventive healthcare, with one study finding 39 million people received the threatened services. A 2023 Yale study estimated the loss of free PrEP could result in more than 2,000 preventable HIV infections within one year.The outcome of the case could threaten coverage for every service recommended by the taskforce, not just the provisions opposed by the right. “We’re talking about people who cannot afford this care, who will have to choose between a mammogram and rent,” added Susan Polan, associate executive director of the American Public Health Association.A decades-long missionThe high-stakes case, and Hotze’s role in it, have flown under the radar. But research from the progressive watchdog organization Accountable.US, which shared its findings with the Guardian, reveal the rightwing activist’s long history of pushing fringe ideologies before getting a signature cause before the supreme court.Hotze and his lawyers did not respond to requests for comment.In 1982, 31-year-old Hotze launched a petition in the city of Austin to legalize housing discrimination against gay people, the AP reported at the time. Heading a group called Austin Citizens for Decency, Hotze called gay residents “criminals” and “sodomites”, saying: “The issue is not housing. The issue is whether we allow our city council to grant public sanction to homosexual activity.” He said protecting LGBTQ+ people from discrimination is “like thieves or murderers trying to gain political power”. Hotze said in one interview he was less concerned about “property rights” and more worried about the “deviant, perverted lifestyle”. Voters overwhelmingly rejected his referendum.In 1985, Hotze backed a group of eight “anti-homosexual” Houston city council candidates identified as the “straight slate”. On ABC News, he stated, “We’re intolerant of those who participate in homosexual activity.” All eight candidates lost.Hotze runs the Hotze Health & Wellness Center, which has been in operation since 1989; Braidwood is his management firm that employs the center’s staff. He has marketed hormone therapies to treat a wide range of conditions and sold a vitamin product called Skinny Pak, the New York Times reported. Over the years, he has donated extensively to the Republican party and Texas politicians, including Senator Ted Cruz.Hotze’s public anti-LGBTQ+ activism picked up after the supreme court legalized gay marriage nationwide in 2015, with Hotze launching a “Faith Family Freedom Tour” and using the same homophobic language from his activism decades prior. Hotze said he was fighting a “wicked, evil movement” that celebrates anal sex, telling the Houston Chronicle: “Kids will be encouraged to practice sodomy in kindergarten.”View image in fullscreenDuring the tour, he said “satanic cults” were behind gay rights, brandished a sword during a speech, and likened his fight to battling Nazis, the Texas Observer reported. That year, he and other rightwing activists successfully campaigned to repeal an equal rights Houston ordinance.At a 2016 evangelical conference, Hotze was filmed describing the LGBTQ+ rights movement as “termites [that] get into the wood of the house and … eat away at the moral fabric”. In 2017, Hotze rallied for Roy Moore, the failed Alabama senate candidate accused of sexually coercing teenagers in the 1970s.Hotze has also recently promoted anti-trans causes, testifying in 2023 in favor of a school district policy requiring staff to notify parents if students change their names or pronouns. Trans people, he said, “have a reprobate, perverted and morally degenerate mind”.His ACA case was not his first effort to undo federal civil rights protections. In a case that began in 2018, Braidwood sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), challenging a ban on anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination in the workforce. Braidwood said it enforces a “sex-specific dress code that disallows gender-non-conforming behavior”, the courts summarized, prohibiting women from wearing ties and men from wearing nail polish. Hotze said he would not employ candidates engaged in “sexually immoral” behaviors.In 2023, an appeals court ruled that a religious freedom law protected Hotze’s rights to enforce dress codes and refuse to hire LGBTQ+ people.In that case, and in the one now before the supreme court, Hotze has been represented by America First Legal, the rightwing legal group co-founded by Stephen Miller, Donald Trump’s influential adviser. The organization has brought a string of lawsuits, including efforts to undo trans rights and complaints accusing companies of discriminating against white men.Hotze has also been represented by Jonathan Mitchell, an anti-abortion lawyer behind Texas’s so-called “bounty hunter law” that allows private citizens to sue providers or people who “aid or abet” the procedure.America First Legal and Mitchell did not respond to inquiries.Gabbi Shilcusky, Accountable.US senior investigative specialist, noted that Hotze’s supreme court case was founded on hypotheticals: “He’s not hiring men who wear nail polish or are asking for PrEP. This is manufactured to build upon his most fringe beliefs and not about actual issues he’s being confronted with in his company.”Hotze has in recent years made headlines outside of anti-LGBTQ+ advocacy. In 2020, during George Floyd protests, he left a voicemail for the Texas governor urging that he “kill the son of a bitches”, referring to demonstrators. Later that year, the Food and Drug Administration sent his company a warning advising it was promoting “unapproved and misbranded products” for Covid.In 2022, Hotze was charged with unlawful restraint and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in an elections dispute. Hotze hired a contractor who claimed a local air conditioner repairman was holding fraudulent ballots in his truck. The contractor ran his vehicle into the man’s car and held him at gunpoint, according to prosecutors, who said the voter fraud claims were false. Hotze was later charged with aggravated robbery and organized criminal activity from the incident.View image in fullscreenHotze pleaded not guilty, and this week, a newly elected DA dropped the charges, accusing his predecessor of bringing a politically motivated case. The criminal case did not stop his attacks on voting rights; in October, just before the election, he filed a lawsuit against the local registrar seeking to invalidate tens of thousands of voters.It’s unclear if Hotze will succeed at the supreme court. In oral arguments last month, some justices, including conservatives, appeared skeptical of the arguments by Hotze’s lawyers. The case hinges on whether the taskforce members who make ACA recommendations are akin to department heads requiring Senate approval or are “inferior” officers. Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett at times appeared sympathetic to the notion that the experts are not sufficiently independent so as to merit a congressional vote.The case is part of longstanding attacks against the ACA, with legal strategies focused on religious claims as well as objections to how the law was crafted. Hotze previously challenged the ACA in a failed lawsuit that began in 2013, an effort he promoted with a bizarre original song called God Fearing Texans Stop Obamacare.Even if Hotze fails, the threats to PrEP and LGBTQ+ healthcare will continue, said Jeremiah Johnson, executive director of advocacy group PrEP4All, noting the Trump administration’s continued funding cuts and dismantling of HIV prevention, and ongoing rightwing efforts to attack civil rights under the guise of religious liberty.The case also comes as the FDA is considering a new injectable PrEP considered a major prevention breakthrough, he said. “We’re at the precipice of science delivering real pathways to ending this epidemic, but if we turn our backs now on all these protections, including private insurance through the ACA, we’re not just going to backtrack on progress, we’re going to lose out on that promise for the future.” More

  • in

    Trump’s barbarism is turning his biggest strength into a liability | Osita Nwanevu

    If you can bear to hear it, there are still more than 1,300 days remaining in the Trump administration. That’s an interminably long time given all the havoc the president has been able to wreak since January alone; the chaos and cruelty of the term so far also happen to have used up his political capital remarkably quickly. The New York Times average of polls, which found him at 52% approval on inauguration day, had him at 51% disapproval on Wednesday. That collapse is less a problem for Trump specifically ⁠– assuming, perhaps optimistically, that he won’t appear on a ballot again ⁠– than it is for the Republican party, which will have to answer for the mess he’s made in next year’s midterms and beyond. And one of the challenges they seem likely to face is a changed public opinion landscape on immigration ⁠– a strength that Trump’s barbarism, just as in his first term, seems to be turning into a liability.While it remains his strongest issue, polls have shown the public’s confidence in Trump on immigration declining steadily since January ⁠– averages suggest the public is newly and evenly split on his handling of it and some polls taken around the 100-day mark even found an outright majority of Americans disapproving. It’s no mystery why. The shock-and-awe campaign the administration is waging against immigrants legal and not has produced a steady stream of headlines that sound awful to all but Stephen Miller and the nativist fanatics driving Trump’s agenda. The deportation of a four-year-old citizen suffering from a rare form of cancer. The end of temporary protected status for 9,000 Afghan refugees even as the administration welcomes Afrikaners supposedly fleeing “white genocide”, a myth most voters who don’t frequent white supremacist forums are probably unfamiliar with. The use of the immigration enforcement apparatus to pursue and persecute critics of Israel’s war in Gaza. Even as voters succumbed to a panic over the migrant surge under Biden, moves like this under Trump and a public backlash to them were inevitable.What should be especially dismaying to the president’s supporters ⁠– and especially heartening to the rest of us ⁠– is the administration’s absolute failure to win over the public on the Kilmar Ábrego García case. That battle was probably lost as soon as it was conceded that he was deported by mistake, but it’s notable that none of the efforts to muddy the waters and obfuscate the main issues at hand with lies and character assassination have worked. The escalatory rhetoric ⁠– Ábrego García is not an innocent man but a member of MS-13, not merely a member of MS-13 but one of “the top MS-13 members”, not merely one of “the top MS-13 members” but a terrorist ⁠– has been almost comic. The complaints that the media has been stretching the facts of the case have been pathetic. “Based on the sensationalism of many of the people in this room,” the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, fumed last month, “you would think we deported a candidate for father of the year”.The administration was surely pleased when the domestic violence claims made by Ábrego García’s wife several years ago, which she dismisses now, began picking up traction in the press. And it is just as surely disappointed that a majority of Americans believe Ábrego García should be returned to America anyway ⁠– which suggests that the principles at stake in the case matter more and matter to more people than cynics might assume. Wholly irrespective of who Ábrego García is ⁠or what he might have done – and there remains no solid evidence at all that he belongs to MS-13 – he is entitled to due process under the law and fair treatment by our government. The fact that many Americans remain committed to this ideal here ⁠– despite the president’s best efforts to render Ábrego García unsympathetic, despite all that’s been done to frame undocumented immigration as an invasion and a society-breaking crisis ⁠– is one of the brightest glimmers of light against the pall Donald Trump and the right have cast over this country.Bright as it is, there are Democrats who are determined not to see it. Infamously in Axios last month, one anonymous House member ⁠– some nameless, brainless invertebrate, croaking from the bottom of a boot ⁠– warned the party against defending immigrants like Ábrego García or the makeup artist Andry Hernández Romero, also deported as a gang member for having tattoos. Trump, they said, was “setting a trap for the Democrats, and like usual we’re falling for it […] we’re going to go take the bait for one hairdresser”. In an appearance on Fox News Radio, the Democratic congressman Henry Cuellar argued that Ábrego García, in particular, was “not the right case” for Democrats to take up. “This is not the right issue to talk about due process,” he said. “This is not the right person to be saying that we need to bring him back to the United States.”Fortunately, most Americans disagree. And there is an opportunity here, for those with the good sense and courage to take it, to use the public’s dismay at the Ábrego García case and the realities of Trump’s immigration agenda to sell it on an alternative vision for our immigration policy and an alternative set of culprits for the problems immigrants have proven easy scapegoats for.Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents supposedly on the prowl for the thugs and thieves who’ve ruined communities and degraded our public infrastructure would be better off kicking down the doors of Congress than smashing the windows of asylum seekers. And, of course, if preserving law and order means that criminals who are sucking our public resources dry and who pose a danger to women ought to be dealt with harshly, we should insist on bringing the convict, grifter, and accused rapist in the White House to justice. The chief priority of his administration is terrorizing people for committing the crime of coming to this country and working harder for it than he ever has. His agenda here is corrosive to our values. It is degrading to our society. It materially profits no one. In important ways, it hurts us all.More and more Americans are wising up to this. Fewer and fewer are willing to stand for it.

    Osita Nwanevu is a Guardian US columnist More

  • in

    Republicans are dodging fired federal staff: ‘They will not even look in our direction’

    Workers hit by the Trump administration’s sweeping cuts of federal government jobs, programs and services turned to congressional Republicans for help. But Republicans don’t want to talk about it, according to people who have tried to reach the politicians.Sabrina Valenti, a former budget analyst for the Coastal Wetland Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), was fired in February, then reinstated, and fired again weeks later.She started contacting Republicans in the Senate and the House of Representatives to express concern. “They represent hundreds of thousands or millions of people and those people deserve a safe and healthy life,” said Valenti. “They are allowing the people who create that safe and healthy life to be fired.”But as she worked with other fired federal workers in the Fork Off Coalition to reach members of Congress, the responses ranged “from indifference and being ignored to outright hostility”, Valenti claimed.Senators Josh Hawley and Chuck Grassley “just will not even look in our direction” in the hallways, she said. Hawley and Grassley’s offices did not respond to requests for comment.The House of Representatives narrowly passed Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful” budget bill on Thursday, which would extend tax cuts for individuals and corporations; sunset clean energy incentives enacted under Joe Biden; relieve taxes on tips, overtime and car loan interest; and fund construction of a wall along the border with Mexico, and facilities for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.To offset its costs, the GOP has approved funding cuts and new work requirements for Medicaid, which provides healthcare for poor and disabled Americans, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as Snap, which provides food benefits to low-income families. Analysts fear these changes will bar millions from these benefits.Jeanne Weaver worked as an aide for 35 years at the Ebensburg Center in Ebensburg, Pennsylvania, one of two state-operated facilities for adults with intellectual disabilities, and is worried about the facility’s future .But when Weaver, now president of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Retiree Chapter 13, tried to reach her representative in Congress, the Republican John Joyce, she had no luck. Even when she traveled to Washington, she was unable to get a meeting.View image in fullscreen“I’ve called, I’ve left him messages,” Weaver told the Guardian. “If he votes for cuts for Medicaid, I will make sure everyone knows him, because they don’t know him now. He’s hiding out, not doing what his constituents want him to do.”After the Guardian went to Joyce for comment, Weaver heard from a member of his staff. His office declined to comment. On Sunday, after House Republicans advanced Trump’s tax cut and spending package out of a key committee, Joyce claimed the legislation would “strengthen, secure, and preserve” Medicaid for “future generations of Americans who need and deserve these benefits”.John Kennedy, senator for Louisiana, did speak with Valenti – a graduate of Louisiana State University – about her program at Noaa, and its impact on Louisiana’s coast.“He seemed really certain that if there was any, if any mistakes were made in the past, that they would be able to go back and reverse them,” Valenti said. Kennedy’s office did not respond to requests for comment.Other workers reliant on federal funds that have been cut, or are facing cuts, have also been pressuring their elected officials to address their worries.Jesse Martinez, a teacher and co-president of the La Crosse Education Association in La Crosse, Wisconsin, expressed concern about cuts to education, Medicaid and Snap benefits to staff working for the Republican representative Derrick Van Orden.The staff claimed Van Orden would not vote for cuts to Medicaid or Snap benefits, according to Martinez – but he voted for a budget blueprint that included cuts.“In the school district of La Crosse, we receive approximately $500,000 per year in Medicaid funding. We use that to pay for speech and language pathologists in our schools, occupational and physical therapists across the district and school nurses in our schools,” said Martinez. “Losing that funding would be devastating to our kids.”Van Orden argued in a statement that “being fiscally responsible and protecting benefits for vulnerable Americans can exist in the same universe”, and a spokesperson for Van Orden denied the budget bill cuts Medicaid.Stephanie Teachman, an administrative assistant at the State University of New York at Fredonia, and president of Suny Fredonia Local 607, an affiliate union of AFSCME, fears that cuts could threaten the future of the only hospital in her rural area, Brooks Memorial, and the university, which is one of the largest employers in the area.But attempts to speak with her congressional representative, the Republican representative Nick Langworthy, have not elicited any responses, she said.“I’ve been to Langworthy’s office and he’s never there. We’ve written letters to him, and he doesn’t respond,” she added. “All of us deserve to have a voice and be heard. It’s unfortunate the people we vote for aren’t listening to us and they don’t seem to care what people of their districts are up to or what life is like for us.”View image in fullscreenA spokesperson for Langworthy claimed his office did not hear from Teachman until a few hours before a debate on the budget bill. “Not one penny is being cut from eligible Americans who rely on Medicaid,” the spokesperson claimed in an email, accusing Democrats of “dishonest fearmongering”.In Washington, those urging Republicans to resist cuts to key services have struggled to make headway. Senator Bill Cassidy’s office “kicked us out”, said Valenti, who noted the senator Katie Britt of Alabama called Capitol police on some fired federal workers, and that the Indiana Republican senator Jim Banks called a fired health and human services worker, Mack Schroeder, a “clown” who “probably deserved it”.Senators Britt, Cassidy and Banks’s respective offices did not respond to requests for comment. Senator Banks declined to apologize for his remarks following the incident and said he “won’t back down”.Four of the largest public sector unions in the US – AFSCME, the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the Service Employees International Union, collectively representing 8.3 million workers – have launched a new campaign to target GOP representatives over the cuts.The drive includes a $2m ad campaign across 18 congressional districts held by Republicans, including in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa and Arizona.“Their goal is the gutting of the schools and hospitals that help working Americans have a shot at a better life. And for what? To pay for tax cuts for billionaires,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the AFT. “These ads send a message to Congress about the human toll of the administration’s attacks.” More