World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares173 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump announces more than $200bn of deals between US and UAE

      by

      Donald Trump has announced deals totaling more than $200bn between the United States and the United Arab Emirates, including a $14.5bn commitment among Boeing, GE Aerospace and Etihad Airways, as he pledged to strengthen ties between the US and the Gulf state during a multiday trip to the Middle East.The White House said on Thursday that Boeing and GE had received a commitment from Etihad Airways to invest $14.5bn to buy 28 US-made Boeing 787 and 777X aircraft powered by GE engines.“With the inclusion of the next-generation 777X in its fleet plan, the investment deepens the longstanding commercial aviation partnership between the UAE and the United States, fueling American manufacturing, driving exports,” the White House said.Antonoaldo Neves, the CEO of Etihad, said last month that the airline planned to add 20 to 22 new planes to its fleet of roughly 100 aircraft this year, as it aims to expand to more than 170 planes by 2030 and boost Abu Dhabi’s economic diversification strategy.Etihad, which is owned by Abu Dhabi’s $225bn wealth fund ADQ, has been through a multiyear restructuring and management shake-up, but has expanded under Neves.He said that 10 of the new aircraft this year would be Airbus A321LRs, which the carrier launched on Monday and will start operating in August. The remainder include six Airbus A350s and four Boeing 787s.The news follows a Wednesday announcement that Boeing had landed its largest-ever deal for wide-body airplanes, after securing an order for $96bn worth of Boeing jets from Qatar.The deal-making comes as the US president nears the ends of his multiday tour in the Middle East. Controversy has dogged the visit after the president announced earlier this week that he planned to accept a $400m luxury jumbo jet from the government of Qatar, raising numerous ethical concerns.Trump has since doubled down on his plans to accept the airplane as the new Air Force One, and eventually transfer it to his presidential library. “We’re the United States of America. I believe we should have the most impressive plane,” he said on Wednesday. More

    • 113 Shares154 Views

      in US Politics

      Judge dismisses trespassing charges against immigrants crossing US-Mexico border

      by

      A federal judge in New Mexico on Thursday dismissed trespassing charges against dozens of immigrants caught in a new military zone on the US-Mexico border, marking a setback for Trump administration efforts to raise penalties for unlawful crossings into the US.Chief US magistrate judge Gregory Wormuth began filing the dismissals late on Wednesday, ruling that immigrants did not know they were entering the military zone in New Mexico and therefore could not be charged, according to court documents and a defense attorney.Assistant federal public defender Amanda Skinner said Wormuth dismissed trespassing charges against all immigrants who made initial court appearances on Thursday. The immigrants still face charges accusing them of crossing the border illegally.“Judge Wormuth found no probable cause,” Skinner said in an email.New Mexico US attorney Ryan Ellison, who filed the first trespassing charges against migrants on 28 April, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The so-called New Mexico national defense area was established in April along 180 miles (290km) of the border, and US army troops were authorized to detain immigrants entering the area from Mexico.A second buffer zone was set up in Texas this month. Defense secretary Pete Hegseth said in a social media post the military would continue to expand the zones to gain “100% operational control” of the border.US attorneys charged over 100 immigrants with crossing the border illegally and trespassing in the military zones in New Mexico and Texas. Potential combined penalties were up to 10 years imprisonment, according to Hegseth.But Wormuth pushed back against the charges for the immigrants in New Mexico, ordering Ellison on 1 May to show proof they were aware they entered the military zone unlawfully.Defense attorneys argued warning signs in the area were inadequate to inform immigrants they were committing a crime, a position Wormuth agreed with.“The criminal complaint fails to establish probable cause to believe the defendant knew he/she was entering” the military zone, Wormuth wrote in his orders dismissing charges.The Department of Defense did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment. More

    • 138 Shares173 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans say they want more American babies – but which kind?

      by

      Some of the children were too young to stand on their own. Instead, they sat on their parents’ knees or in their parents’ arms, waving American flags. Many of them seemed confused about what, exactly, was even happening.But these kids were in the midst of making history: their families were among the first to take advantage of Donald Trump’s February executive order granting white South Africans refugee status in the United States, on the grounds that Afrikaner landowners – who make up just 7% of South Africa’s population yet, decades after the end of apartheid, control about half of its land – are facing persecution. While the doors to the US refugee program have been slammed shut to virtually everyone else, these Afrikaners showed up in the US earlier this week, their refugee status promising a path to US citizenship.Days later, the Trump administration took a far narrower view of who deserves access to the American polity. On Thursday morning, a lawyer for the Trump administration argued in front of the US supreme court that the 14th amendment does not guarantee citizenship to the American-born children of “illegal aliens” – a view contradicted by more than a century of legal precedent.This split screen raises a vital question: is the Trump administration really interested in helping children and families flourish – or only the “right” families?Over the last several months, the Trump administration’s policies on immigration, families, and children have been pockmarked by all kinds of contradictions. The administration is reportedly considering numerous policies to convince people to have more children, such as “baby bonuses” of $5,000 or medals for mothers who have six or more kids. The Department of Transportation has issued a memo directing the agency to “give preference to communities with marriage and birth rates higher than the national average”. And JD Vance has proclaimed: “I want more babies in the United States of America.”These moves are, in part, fueled by the growing power of the pronatalism movement, which believes that the declining birthrate in the US is an existential threat to its workforce and its future.Why, then, does the government want to exclude an estimated 150,000 babies born every year?“It’s hard to look at any of these policies and not believe that they’re created for the purpose of satisfying a political base that was promised some sort of notions of recreating a nostalgia for a white Christian nationalist nation,” said P Deep Gulasekaram, a professor of immigration law at the University of Colorado Law School.If the fate of the US workforce is really of concern, experts say immigration could help grow it – but the Trump administration has taken a hardline stance against immigrants from the Global South and their children. The administration has not only reportedly turned the refugee agency responsible for caring for children who arrive in the US alone into an arm of Ice, but also slashed funding for legal representation of children in immigration proceedings. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are trying to block parents who lack Social Security Numbers – such as undocumented people – from benefiting from the child tax credit, even in cases where their children are US citizens.The Trump administration has also unveiled new screening protocols that make it far more difficult for undocumented people to “sponsor”, or take custody of, children who enter the US alone. Just last week, the National Center for Youth Law and the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward sued the Trump administration over the changes, which they say have forced kids to languish in government custody. Between December 2024 and March 2025, kids went from spending an average of two months in government custody to spending an average of six.“This administration has compromised the basic health and safety of immigrant children in egregious ways,” Neha Desai, managing director of children’s human rights and dignity at the National Center for Youth Law, said in an email.In March, KFF, a charity that conducts health policy research, conducted focus groups of Hispanic adults who are undocumented or likely living with someone who is undocumented. Many spoke of the effect that the Trump administration’s policies are having on their families and kids.“I have a six-year-old child. Honestly, I’m afraid to take him to the park, and he asks me, ‘Mom, why don’t we go to the park?’” one 49-year-old Costa Rican immigrant woman told KFF. “How do I tell him? I’m scared.”“Even the children worry. ‘Mom, did you get home safely?’ They’re already thinking that something is going to happen to us on the street,” added a 54-year-old Colombian immigrant woman. “So that also makes me very nervous, knowing that there might come a time when they could be left here alone.”The supreme court arguments on Thursday centered not on the constitutionality of birthright citizenship, but on the legality of lower court orders in the case. Still, some of the justices expressed concerns about what the case could mean for children.Eliminating birthright citizenship, Justice Elena Kagan suggested, could render children stateless. The high court needed a way to act fast, she said.If the justices believe that a court order is wrong, she asked, “why should we permit those countless others to be subject to what we think is an unlawful executive action?”Both the historical and legal record make clear that the 14th Amendment encapsulates birthright citizenship, Gulasekaram said. But, he said, predicting the supreme court’s moves is a “fool’s errand”.“There’s really no way of getting around the the conclusion that this is a call to some form of racial threat and racial solidarity as a way of shoring up support from a particular part of the of the of the Trump base,” Gulasekaram said. “Citizenship and the acquisition of citizenship has always been racially motivated in the United States.” More

    • 188 Shares154 Views

      in US Politics

      This pregnant woman sued Trump over birthright citizenship. Now it’s up to the supreme court

      by

      With the highest court in the US poised to hear her case – and decide her family’s future – Monica was keeping busy babyproofing her house.Monica is a plaintiff in one of three lawsuits challenging Donald Trump’s birthright citizenship order, a case that is being heard before the nation’s highest court on Thursday. She’s expecting her first child in early August.The Guardian first spoke with her in January, not long after Trump took office and signed an executive order seeking to end the constitutionally recognized right of birthright citizenship. Since then, she said, her belly has grown bigger, her feet more swollen. And she is still waiting to see whether her baby will be born as a citizen, or stateless.“We can only wait and hope,” she said. “Let’s wait in faith and trust in the laws of this country.”The Guardian is not publishing Monica’s surname, to protect her from retribution. She and her husband fled political persecution in Venezuela in 2019, and came to the US seeking asylum. The couple had been waiting for their immigration court hearing when they found out, in early January, that Monica was pregnant.“We were so excited,” she said. Just two weeks later, news of Trump’s executive order landed like a blow. Acquiring Venezuelan citizenship for their child would be impossible – both Monica and her husband were outspoken critics of their country’s autocratic leader, Nicolás Maduro – and contacting the government could put them in danger.“I had to fight for my baby,” she said.She had been a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (Asap), a non-profit group that advocates for immigrant rights, and when lawyers from the group reached out to expecting parents to see if any would like to join a lawsuit challenging Trump’s order, Monica felt compelled to respond.Two immigration advocacy groups, Asap and Casa, are named as plaintiffs alongside Monica and four other mothers in one of three cases challenging the executive order. A second case was filed by four states and pregnant women, and a third by 18 states, the District of Columbia and San Francisco. The supreme court is hearing these cases consolidated as one.Other than her mother and a few close relatives, nobody knows that she is involved in one of the most closely watched cases to come before the supreme court this year. She has concealed her identity and tried to maintain a low profile, to avoid biasing her family’s asylum case, and to protect her family in Venezuela.But the topic of birthright citizenship and the administration’s intention to end it often comes up in her conversations with friends – especially with immigrant mothers who, like her, worry about their babies’ futures. “We are all on standby,” she said.They worry, too, about news that mothers are being separated from their babies – or being deported alongside their children. “Every day there are new changes, there are new executive orders about us immigrants,” she said. “Every day there is more fear in immigration conditions.”In the meantime, she said, there’s nothing to do but focus on the day to day. Monica and her husband have kept busy getting their home baby-ready, purchasing and assembling cribs and car seats. Now that she’s in her third trimester, she’s packed a go-bag with a change of clothes and other essentials – ready in case she needs to rush to the hospital. “We’re really down to the last few weeks already,” she said.Recently, they settled on a name. More

    • 200 Shares136 Views

      in US Politics

      Keep calm (but delete your nudes): the new rules for travelling to and from Trump’s America

      by

      Kindness doesn’t cost a thing. Putting up a big “no foreigners welcome” sign, threatening to annex your neighbour, and throwing visitors to your country into detention for minor visa infractions, however? Such actions are expensive. The United States is on track to lose $12.5bn (£9.4bn) in international travel spending this year, according to a study published on Tuesday by the World Travel and Tourism Council.If the Trump administration is concerned that its aggressive rhetoric is costing tourist dollars, it’s not showing it. During a recent press conference about the 2026 Fifa World Cup, which will be jointly hosted by the US, Mexico and Canada, vice president JD Vance joked about deporting football fans who outstay their welcome. “We’ll have visitors from close to 100 countries. We want them to come…” Vance said. “But when the time is up, they’ll have to go home, otherwise they’ll have to talk to [Homeland Security] secretary Noem.” That’s Kristi Noem, the woman who shot her own dog. Not someone you want to talk to when she’s in a bad mood.Judging by the drop-off in visitors, many people have decided that a trip to the US just isn’t worth the risk right now. As a green card holder – and someone with family in the UK who have been thoroughly put off coming to visit the US – this is a question I’ve been wrestling with for the past few months. So, for somewhat selfish reasons, I spoke to a number of immigration lawyers and civil rights experts to try to figure out the new rules, across different demographics, for travelling to and from Trump’s America.View image in fullscreenFirst, though: the big picture. It is hard to quantify exactly how much things have changed at the border since the start of Trump’s second term. There have been plenty of scary stories in the news but that might not reflect a policy shift – it could just mean the media is paying more attention to the subject. Murali Bashyam, an immigration lawyer based in North Carolina, believes that while “there are more issues at the port-of-entry than before”, fears of being detained “are overblown to some extent”.Other immigration lawyers are more worried. Camille Mackler, executive director of a legal service provider collaborative called Immigrant Arc, stresses: “Things have fundamentally shifted – although whether that shift is happening systematically at the airport level or on an individual officer level is harder to say.” But, she says, there seems to be a clear trend: “The Trump administration wants to increase deportation numbers, and they’re going after any case they can. Enforcement has become much more aggressive.”According to Golnaz Fakhimi, legal director of Muslim Advocates, one of the biggest shifts is “the targeting of non-citizens based on viewpoints and ideology”. There are two executive orders that set the stage for this targeting: EO 1461 Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats, and EO 14188, Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism. The first EO lays the groundwork to deport or deny entry to foreigners based on their political and cultural views. The second uses a broad definition of antisemitism that includes criticism of Israel’s policies or government.Since Trump passed those orders, says Fakhimi, “there’s been a lot of rhetoric reinforcing those policies and we’ve seen actual instances of what looks like viewpoint-based scrutiny. All of this points to a kind of risk that non-citizens – including lawful permanent residents – should be aware of, especially when it comes to ideological expression.”View image in fullscreenCriticism of the Israeli government or support for Palestinian rights seems to be at the “forefront of what’s being targeted” now, says Fakhimi. “But many of us worry that the scrutiny won’t stay limited to those viewpoints. It may already be expanding. There was one case reported in the media involving a French researcher who was denied entry, possibly because of content on their phone that was critical of the US president. Inside the US, we’ve also seen targeting of immigrant-rights activists – Jeanette Vizguerra in Colorado for example.”Kseniia Petrova, a Russian-born researcher at Harvard Medical School who has been detained since February, may have been targeted because of her political views. “So it’s important for non-citizens to be clear-eyed about what viewpoints they’ve publicly expressed – especially online – when considering the risks of international travel.”View image in fullscreenIt’s also prudent to assume that your social media activity has been examined. “Social media identifiers are now required on forms like the visa application or Esta [for the visa waiver programme],” says Sophia Cope, senior staff attorney on the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s civil liberties team. “We’ve heard anecdotal reports of agents referencing social media during questioning.”It is not only non-citizens who should be worried. Hasan Piker, a left-wing YouTuber and US citizen, was recently held and questioned for hours by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials in Chicago after returning from France. In a video, Piker says the agents seemed to know who he was and asked about his political beliefs, including repeated questions about his views of Hamas. A CBP official called the suggestion that Piker was targeted for his political views “baseless”.View image in fullscreenAmir Makled, a Lebanese-American lawyer representing one of the University of Michigan pro-Palestine campus protesters, was recently stopped at Detroit Metro airport and interrogated by a tactical terrorism response team agent. Makled has said the agents knew exactly who he was; his phone was searched and they asked about his contacts. Eventually, he was allowed to go home.The Makled case was very troubling, says Cope, because it suggests targeting based on political association. “CBP denied this, but during the inspection, they asked to see his contact list. That implies they weren’t interested in him, but in who he knew. That’s outrageous. We litigated a case on this for four years – unfortunately, the courts didn’t rule in our favour – but we learned that CBP believes it has the authority to search devices not just when the traveller is a suspect, but also to gather intelligence on someone else the traveller may be connected to … It’s a form of dragnet intelligence gathering.”When it comes to intelligence gathering at the border, officials have carte blanche. After your international flight lands on US soil and before you clear customs, you are in something of a no man’s land in relation to civil rights. “The normal fourth amendment requirement of a warrant or individualised suspicion doesn’t apply,” says Nate Freed Wessler, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union. Some states offer slightly more protection than others, however. In the ninth circuit, which covers the western US, the rules are “most protective”, says Wessler. “For a manual search (where an agent is just scrolling through your phone), no individual suspicion is needed, but the search must be for digital contraband – like classified documents.“For a forensic search, where they plug your phone into a device to extract and analyse the entire contents, there must be reasonable suspicion that the phone contains digital contraband. And if the purpose is anything else, like gathering intelligence or helping another domestic agency, then a warrant would be required.”For most of the country, however, it’s anything goes. “The only minimal protection CBP has in their policy is distinguishing between manual and forensic searches. For a forensic search, they say they need reasonable suspicion, but they don’t define what that means. For a manual search, there are no guardrails. They argue it’s less invasive, but that’s just not true. They can still do keyword searches and spend hours combing through your device.”View image in fullscreenThey don’t have access to everything on your phone, however. Customs and Border Protection policy requires agents to put devices in flight mode before searching, to avoid accessing cloud data. It’s not a bad idea to put your phone in flight mode before you travel to understand what is stored on the cloud and what is local.What if you refuse to give your passcode to officers or say you don’t consent to a search? Consequences differ depending on your immigration status. If you’re a green card holder or citizen they can still take your phone. “They can’t compel you to give your passcode, but they can seize the phone and send it to a forensic lab, where it might sit for weeks or months while they try to break into it,” says Wessler. “For visa holders, it’s trickier. If you refuse to unlock your phone, they may just deny you entry, claiming you’re not cooperating in assessing admissibility.” And in the very worst scenario they might throw you into a detention centre before sending you home.Searches, to be clear, are still very rare. “Claims that CBP is searching more electronic media due to the administration change are false,” CBP assistant commissioner of public affairs Hilton Beckham said in a statement last month. “CBP’s search numbers are consistent with increases since 2021, and less than 0.01% of travellers have their devices searched … Allegations that political beliefs trigger inspections or removals are baseless and irresponsible.”If you’re worried these allegations aren’t quite as baseless as CBP insists, Wessler says: “The safest approach is not to travel with data you wouldn’t want the US government to access.”Let’s say you’re a British citizen who has been outspoken, on social media and elsewhere, about your pro-Palestinian or anti-Trump views. Would it be a foolish idea to travel to the US right now? “I wouldn’t say ‘don’t come,’ but I’d say evaluate your risk and risk tolerance,” says Wessler. “The government is being extremely aggressive with students and activists, and there’s always a chance a border agent might act on something they find politically disagreeable. Most travellers are still fine – but the risk is real and well above zero.” So, basically, nothing is very clear? Pretty much, says Wessler. “The law is a complete mess, and people’s options are a complete mess. People just have to make a risk assessment based on extremely imperfect information.”The first step in making that risk assessment is to thoroughly understand the rules for the specific visa you’ll be travelling on or your immigration status. “The Foreign Affairs Manual is a great resource,” says immigration lawyer Tahmina Watson. “It’s what consular officers use, and it’s publicly accessible. It lays out what officers are looking for, visa by visa. We’re now advising clients more than ever to understand the B1/B2 visa rules. B1 is for business, B2 for tourism. When CBP asks why you’re here, they’re listening for key phrases – ‘I’m visiting my grandmother,’ ‘I’m going to Disneyland,’ etc. The manual also talks about proof of ties to your home country – job, house, bills. That stuff matters.”Having any sort of criminal record or contact with the criminal legal system is a major part of a risk assessment. “I just spoke with a US citizen who had married a green card holder,” says Watson. “They were returning from their honeymoon when he was detained. He had a conviction from when he was 18, served his time, and had travelled internationally for more than 30 years since without issue. But this time, he was detained, and it will be very difficult to get him out.”If you’re a green card holder with a criminal record, Watson strongly advises against leaving the country. “Not until you’ve spoken with a lawyer. Even a long-ago conviction can result in detention now.” If you’ve ever overstayed a visa, even for a day, you should also speak to a lawyer before travelling.Students have their own set of issues to look for. “For students or others with campus affiliations, we’d want to know if there’s been any scrutiny or disciplinary action at the university level,” says Fakhimi. “Another factor is whether any third parties have tried to spotlight or mischaracterise your views to attract federal attention. Groups like Betar US, for example, have devoted resources to building lists of political protesters they want deported.”And then, of course, you’ve got to think about any public statements you’ve made and whether you can or should delete them. “For some, minimising the visibility of their views might feel like the right way to reduce risk,” says Fakhimi. “For others, staying publicly vocal and visible with their beliefs might feel too important to compromise. It’s really about what trade-offs someone is willing to make, and what decision they can live with.”One thing that sustains Fakhimi, she says, is how many people are unwilling to censor themselves for their safety. “I’ve been incredibly moved and inspired by the courage of non-citizens – people with precarious status, even undocumented – who continue to speak out on a range of injustices. They see these issues as interconnected, and despite the risks, they’re standing firm.” Sometimes, staying true to your beliefs is more important than a trip to Disney World. More

    • 188 Shares185 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: President shrugs off Qatar jet fury, announces $96bn Boeing deal

      by

      As Donald Trump brushed off fierce criticism over his plan to accept a $400m luxury jet from the Qatari government, the president announced a lucrative deal for Boeing to supply the Gulf nation with 210 planes.Trump announced the $96bn contract – the largest-ever order of widebody Boeing planes – during a trip to Doha on Wednesday. The White House claims the aviation agreement will support 154,000 American jobs annually, though it was unclear how those figures were calculated.Trump has said Qatar’s offer for a Boeing 747-8 jetliner to use as Air Force One was too good to refuse, complaining the current presidential aircraft in underwhelming.“The plane that you’re on is almost 40 years old,” Trump told the Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview on Air Force One. “When you land and you see Saudi Arabia, you see UAE and you see Qatar, and they have these brand-new Boeing 747s, mostly. You see ours next to it – this is like a totally different plane.”US-Qatar strike deals worth $243bnThe Qatar Airways purchase of Boeing jets formed the centrepiece of several economic agreements signed in Doha valued at more than $243bn. Trump also secured a statement of intent for more than $38bn in future defense investments from Qatar, further intertwining America’s economic and security relationships with the Gulf state now offering him a luxury aircraft.Read the full storyTrump meets Syria’s ‘attractive’ president Trump met Syria’s president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, in Saudi Arabia, telling the former jihadist he had an “extraordinary opportunity” and said Washington is exploring normalizing ties with Damascus. His comments come a day after he announced all US sanctions on Syria would be lifted.Read the full storyRFK Jr tells Congress ‘people shouldn’t take medical advice from me’The US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, refused to say whether he would vaccinate his children if he had to choose today, and defended Republicans’ proposal to cut healthcare to fund tax cut extensions.While he said he would “probably” vaccinate his children for measles, he added that his “opinions about vaccines are irrelevant … I don’t want to seem like I’m being evasive, but I don’t think people should be taking advice, medical advice, from me.”Read the full storyJudge orders release of Indian academic held by IceA Virginia federal judge has ordered the immediate release of Georgetown academic Badar Khan Suri from Ice detention during a hearing. Khan Suri was among several individuals legally studying in the US who have been targeted by the Trump administration for pro-Palestinian activism. He has spent two months in detention.Read the full storyTrump official scrutinized for links to El Salvador crypto Trump administration’s commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, and his family have had extensive business interests linked to El Salvador, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and Office of Government Ethics, as well as public records in the US and El Salvador. The country’s authoritarian leader, Nayib Bukele, has grown close to the White House and has courted controversy by allowing the imprisonment of people deported in the US’s immigration crackdown to a notorious Cecot prison.Read the full storyRepublican tax bill may exclude millions of families from creditsRepublicans’ newest tax bill threatens to exclude millions of families from a tax credit meant to ease household financial burdens, even as conservatives are increasingly claiming policies designed to entice families to have more babies.Read the full storyLindsey Graham to brief European leaders on Russia sanctionsUS senator, Lindsey Graham, a close ally of Donald Trump, is expected to brief European leaders on Thursday in Antalya on his plans to push through Congress sanctions designed to devastate the Russian economy if Vladimir Putin does not show a willingness to negotiate the future of Ukraine in good faith.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      California’s governor wants his state to stop enrolling more low-income immigrants without legal status in a state-funded healthcare program in 2026.

      A former special counsel prosecutor invoked the fifth amendment during a deposition before a Republican-led committee probing alleged politicization in Trump’s prosecutions.

      The Trump administration’s transportation secretary switched his wife’s flight to help her avoid flying out of troubled Newark Liberty airport, one of the busiest in the New York area.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 13 May 2025. More

    • 188 Shares156 Views

      in US Politics

      Elon Musk shows he still has the White House’s ear on Trump’s Middle East trip

      by

      Over the course of an eight-minute interview, Elon Musk touted his numerous businesses and vision of a “Star Trek future” while telling the crowd that his Tesla Optimus robots had performed a dance for Donald Trump and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, to the tune of YMCA. He also announced that Starlink, his satellite internet company, had struck a deal for use in Saudi Arabia for maritime and aviation usage; looking to the near future, he expressed his desire to bring Tesla’s self-driving robotaxis to the country.“We could not be more appreciative of having a lifetime partner and a friend like you, Elon, to the Kingdom,” Saudi Arabia’s minister of communications and IT, Abdullah Alswaha, told Musk.Although Musk has pivoted away from his role as de facto leader of the so-called “department of government efficiency” and moved out of the White House, the Saudi summit showed how he is still retaining his proximity to the US president and international influence. As Musk returns to his businesses as his primary focus, he is still primed to reap the rewards of his connections and political sway over Trump.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionStarlink diplomacyMusk’s Starlink announcement comes after a spate of countries have agreed to allow the satellite communications service to operate within their borders. Several countries that have approved Starlink did so after US state department officials mentioned the company by name or pushed for increased satellite services in negotiations over Trump’s sweeping tariffs, according to internal memos obtained by the Washington Post.Concerns over whether Musk and the Trump administration are leveraging their power to force countries into adopting Starlink has prompted calls for a state department inspector general investigation into whether there is undue influence at play in these agreements. On Wednesday, a group of Democratic senators issued a letter requesting a broad review of the state department’s alleged efforts to assist Starlink.“These reports indicate that Mr Musk may be using his official role and his proximity to the President as leverage for his own personal financial benefit – even if it comes at the expense of American consumers and the nation’s foreign policy interests,” the senators wrote.Musk’s empire expands in Saudi ArabiaThe Saudi-US Investment Forum summit was held in Riyadh and featured top ministers from the kingdom’s government as well as US cabinet secretaries Scott Bessent and Howard Lutnick. Saudi Arabia has been sinking billions into tech and artificial intelligence in recent years as it expands its portfolio of investments, in addition to its already extensive deals in industries such as defense and energy. The White House and Saudi government announced an arms deal worth $142bn following the event.Musk was one of a long list of Silicon Valley moguls and top executives of major US companies to attend the summit. The CEO of Palantir and Musk ally, Alex Karp, took part, as did the OpenAI CEO and Musk rival, Sam Altman. Amazon’s chief executive, Andy Jassy, and Nvidia’s CEO, Jensen Huang, were some of the other tech leaders present. The list also included CEOs from a range of boldface names such as Boeing, Coca-Cola and Halliburton.Earlier on Tuesday, Musk talked with Trump and Prince Mohammed inside the Saudi Royal Court and warmly greeted both leaders. Weeks before Musk’s arrival in Riyadh, his Twitter/X social media platform had managed to refinance some of its billions in debt with help from a Saudi fund. Tesla also launched in Saudi Arabia last month, opening a new showroom in the capital. More

    • 138 Shares107 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘So many are devastated’: Trump’s federal firings and their ripple effect

      by

      Naomi Anderson was on leave looking after her young baby when she was told her US Department of Agriculture job helping farmers in developing countries was being cut. A former volunteer with the Peace Corps, which sends young Americans overseas to projects in emerging economies, Anderson had expected to spend her whole career in international development.“I had taken this job two years ago expecting to stay here for at least 10 years, and you know, we had started to make a community and build up our life here. In January, we had started looking at buying a home,” she says.Now Anderson is having to consider giving up the apartment in the Washington DC commuter town of Reston, Virginia, that she shares with her husband and their four-month-old baby and almost two-year-old toddler.“Financially, it’s a little bit precarious, and honestly we’re not sure what we’re going to do,” says Anderson, who is also an activist with the local branch of the AFSCME union and dabbles in selling political merchandise. “We’re thinking about moving back to Ohio, where I’m from, where my family is. You know, it’s a lot cheaper there.”Anderson is far from alone. “In our apartment complex, there’s been lots of yard sales, people selling things and moving away. It really does seem like people are just picking up and leaving, because it’s too expensive to live here without a job,” she says.Tough life-decisions like these have been forced on hundreds of thousands of former federal employees in the past couple of months, as the so-called department of government efficiency (Doge), which is headed up by Donald Trump’s favourite tech billionaire, Elon Musk, has slashed jobs in a cost-cutting spree.Data from the latest monthly Challenger jobs report suggests Doge has been responsible for 281,452 job cuts so far – almost eight times the number of workers the government let go in the entire year to April 2024.Brendan Demich is among those to be dismissed, losing his job as an engineer at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. All his colleagues working on mine safety, as well as those in their sister laboratory testing equipment such as respirators, are also leaving – more than 200 in total – as part of a wave of cuts initiated by Trump’s health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr.“So many people are devastated,” says Demich, chief steward of the local AFGE union branch. He says so many workers have been removed at once that their colleagues have barely been able to give them any kind of send-off. “It’s just unceremoniously leaving, because they had their package processed and they had to walk out the door.”Each of these cuts has its own human impact, but experts are warning of a growing risk that they combine to trigger an economic retrenchment – particularly in areas with a heavy concentration of government jobs.View image in fullscreenLiz Shuler, the president of the AFL-CIO federation of 63 trade unions, which together represent more than 15 million US workers, is trying to build a nationwide campaign to highlight the devastating impact.“The trick is connecting the dots because there’s already a national narrative around what’s happening but it’s not quite being felt yet,” Shuler says. “Elon [Musk] has his ‘department of government efficiency’. We established the ‘department of people who work for a living’. That’s kind of cheeky, but it’s kind of serious, because we’re saying we’re the ones working on the frontlines. We know what’s efficient and what’s not.“Obviously as the labour federation we’re worried about jobs and people’s livelihoods, but it’s also connected to community, and the fact the economy is being impacted in such a stark way, that ripples out across all of the industries that we represent,” she adds.These ripples are being felt especially strongly in the towns and counties around Washington DC, where job losses and government cuts crop up constantly in conversation.Kate Bates is the president of the chamber of commerce in affluent Arlington, Virginia, across the Potomac River from the US capital. She compares the current uncertainty to the pandemic, “but during Covid, the federal government was the backstop, whereas right now it’s the federal government that’s causing a lot of this,” she says.Bates reports that her members are warning of a slowdown across real estate and hospitality, as well as among government contractors, with several reporting they have already had to make job cuts.“What we hear from a lot of people is that if they could plan for the cuts, they would be in an OK position, right? But because things are changing, going back and forth, that’s causing a lot of stress,” she says.View image in fullscreenBusinesses that rely on government workers for custom are also feeling the chill. Saamir Nizam, the general manager of Arlington’s Barley Mac restaurant, which is part of a small family-owned chain, has noticed trade declining in just about every one of their usual customer groups.The nearby hotels are less occupied; bookings for “happy hour parties” by the accountants and consultants who serve the federal government are down by two-thirds; and many older local residents have been spooked by market volatility.“We can only do so much to turn things around: we can’t pull people to Washington, or convince companies to go out and do things,” Nizam says. “Barley Mac serves great food, it gives great service, but it exists, like many restaurants, on the financial margin. And if the whole year is on the margin then restaurants like ours will go under, because we’re not part of a huge national chain which has deep pockets.”View image in fullscreenJess Miller, who set up Rock Spring Real Estate Solutions a couple of years ago, has been hosting a breakfast roundtable for clients, on the top floor of an as yet unoccupied new office block in Arlington.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionShe has noticed clients responding to the shifting climate, pulling out of deals and hoping to negotiate unusually short leases. The owners of this building are splitting the floors instead of looking for one anchor tenant.“Just how they’re making decisions is different – the cutbacks we’re seeing,” Miller says. “It hit the NGOs first and then it hit, you know, the corporations and the contractors, and it’s a lot of the senior management.”Katherine D’Zmura Friedman is a co-founder and the chief executive of Thumbprint, an Arlington-based startup offering an artificial intelligence platform for designing office layouts.View image in fullscreen“There’s no universe in which something like the last few months happens and there’s not serious consequences,” she says. “We’ve had family friends, we’ve had neighbours lose their jobs, and these are not people who would normally be subject to layoffs. These are people who are at the peak of their career, and hyper-specialised.”As far as the business effects are concerned, D’Zmura Friedman says: “Certainly on the commercial side, there’s been hesitancy about launching into things.”At her office nearby, Renata Briggman, a residential estate agent, plays down the idea that the housing market in Arlington could be hit, pointing to the many local employers broadly unaffected by federal spending – such as Amazon, which is headquartered here.However, she does acknowledge signs of change. “It’s definitely shifting. We’re not seeing any fire sales, it’s too soon for that. It’s very, very slow, and we’re just going to start seeing it, it’s just on the cusp … end of June, we’ll have a better idea.”View image in fullscreenSuch challenges are being replicated across the region. Jimmy Olevson, the president and chief executive of National Capital Bank, which serves Washington DC and the surrounding areas, says the bank is not yet seeing signs of financial distress, such as rising arrears, but the mood is “uneasy”. Many customers who have had a recent mortgage application approved seem to have put house-hunting on hold.Some experts fear this widespread mood of unease bodes badly for the coming months. Analysis by Dr João Ferreira, an expert in regional economics at the University of Virginia, suggests more than 320,000 people in the state are employed directly by the federal government – and another 441,000 jobs depend on taxpayer-funded contracts, of the kind that are being cut.In some sectors – construction, for example – the same firms fretting about whether their contract will be cut are also contending with the rising price of materials, as a result of tariffs. Although some of the border taxes have been paused or reduced, those restrictions that remain mean costs are still far higher than at the start of the year.In theory, the Trump administration could lift the gloom by drawing a line under budget cuts as Musk heads back to his day job running the electric carmaker Tesla. But key members of the cabinet, including Kennedy and the defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, have boasted of how much they plan to slash from their budgets – and White House trade policy continues to see-saw.Ferreira says: “I think, as an economist, I’ve never seen so many things happening at the same time. But they all lead to the same direction, and that’s a recession.”He says Virginia has often been cushioned from economic downturns in the past by federal funding, but in this cycle he expects the state to lead the way. “We definitely might see that Virginia, and other regions like Maryland, will be the frontrunners in this recession period,” Ferreira says.Meanwhile, for many of the affected individuals, the future looks highly uncertain – despite the US treasury secretary Scott Bessent’s suggestion they should go work in manufacturing. “For us on our team, we work in international development,” says Anderson. “We have a background in humanitarian work, and the Trump administration is trying to cut international foreign aid. So where do you go from there?” More