|
|
|
Partial shutdown seems increasingly likely as Democrats demand ICE changes
Legal Business |
2026/01/28 21:13
|
With a partial government shutdown looming, Senate Democrats laid out a list of demands Wednesday for the Department of Homeland Security, including an enforceable code of conduct for federal agents conducting immigration arrests and a requirement that officers show identification as the country reels from the deaths of two protesters at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis.
It remained unclear if President Donald Trump and Republicans would be willing to meet those demands, even as funding for DHS and a swath of other government agencies was at risk of expiring Saturday. Irate Democrats have pledged to block a spending bill unless their demands for reforms are met.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday that the legislation won’t pass until U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is “reined in and overhauled.”
“The American people support law enforcement, they support border security, they do not support ICE terrorizing our streets and killing American citizens,” Schumer said.
With an uncertain path ahead, the standoff threatened to plunge the country into another shutdown just two months after Democrats blocked a spending bill over expiring federal health care subsidies, a dispute that closed the government for 43 days as Republicans refused to negotiate. That shutdown ended when a small group of moderate Democrats broke away to strike a deal with Republicans, but Democrats are more united this time after the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by federal agents.
There’s a lot of “unanimity and shared purpose” within the Democratic caucus, Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith said after a lunch meeting Wednesday.
“Boil it all down, what we are talking about is that these lawless ICE agents should be following the same rules that your local police department does,” Smith said. “There has to be accountability.”
As the administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement surge goes on, Schumer said Democrats are asking the White House to “end roving patrols” in cities and coordinate with local law enforcement on immigration arrests, including requiring tighter rules for warrants.
Democrats also want an enforceable code of conduct so agents are held accountable when they violate rules. Schumer said agents should be required to have “masks off, body cameras on” and carry proper identification, as is common practice in most law enforcement agencies.
The Democratic caucus is united in those “commonsense reforms” and the burden is on Republicans to accept them, Schumer said. He has asked Republicans to separate out the Homeland Security bill from the others to avoid a broader shutdown.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has said he was waiting for Democrats to outline what they want, and he suggested that they need to be negotiating with the White House. He indicated that he might be open to some of their demands, but encouraged Democrats and the White House to talk and find agreement.
It was unclear whether Trump would weigh in, or how seriously the White House was engaged — or whether the two sides could agree on anything that would satisfy Democrats.
The White House had invited some Democrats for a discussion to better understand their positions and avoid a partial government shutdown, a senior White House official said, but the meeting did not happen. The official requested anonymity to discuss the private invitation.
With no serious negotiations underway, a partial shutdown appeared increasingly likely starting Saturday.
The House passed the six remaining funding bills last week and sent them to the Senate as a package, and that makes it difficult to strip out the homeland security portion as Democrats are demanding. Republicans could break the package apart with the consent of all 100 senators, which would be complicated, or through a series of votes that would extend past the Friday deadline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal data website outage raises concerns among advocates
Legal Business |
2025/08/22 06:15
|
A federal website that informs the public about what information agencies are collecting and allows for public comment went down last weekend, and it has only been partially restored. The outage has raised concerns among advocates who already were troubled by the disappearance of data sets from government websites after President Donald Trump began his second term.
The https://www.reginfo.gov/public/ website went offline at the end of last week and was partially restored this week. Data was missing after Aug. 1, according to dataindex,us, a collective of data scientists and advocates who monitor changes in federal data sets.
As of Thursday, the website’s landing page said, it was “currently undergoing revisions.” Emailed inquiries to the Office of Management and Budget and General Services Administration weren’t returned on Thursday.
In February, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s official public portal for health data, data.cdc.gov, was taken down entirely but subsequently went back up. Around the same time, when a query was made to access certain public data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s most comprehensive survey of American life, users for several days got a response that said the area was “unavailable due to maintenance” before access was restored.
Researchers Janet Freilich and Aaron Kesselheim examined 232 federal public health data sets that had been modified in the first quarter of this year and found that almost half had been “substantially altered,” with the majority having the word “gender” switched to “sex,” they wrote last month in The Lancet medical journal.
Former Census Bureau official Chris Dick, who is part of the dataindex.us team, said Thursday that no one is quite sure what is going on with the regulatory affairs website, whether there was an update with technical difficulties because of staffing shortages from job cuts or something more nefarious.
“This is key infrastructure that needs to come back,” Dick said. “Usually, you can fix this quickly. It’s not super normal for this to go on for days.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge bars deportations of Venezuelans from Texas under the Alien Enemies Act
Legal Business |
2025/05/04 10:50
|
A federal judge on Thursday barred the Trump administration from deporting any Venezuelans from South Texas under an 18th-century wartime law and said President Donald Trump’s invocation of it was “unlawful.”
U.S. District Court Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr. is the first judge to rule that the Alien Enemies Act cannot be used against people who, the Republican administration claims, are gang members invading the United States. Rodriguez said he wouldn’t interfere with the government’s right to deport people in the country illegally through other means, but it could not rely on the 227-year-old law to do so.
“Neither the Court nor the parties question that the Executive Branch can direct the detention and removal of aliens who engage in criminal activity in the United States,” wrote Rodriguez, who was nominated by Trump in 2018. But, the judge said, “the President’s invocation of the AEA through the Proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and is contrary to the plain, ordinary meaning of the statute’s terms.”
In March, Trump issued a proclamation claiming that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua was invading the U.S. He said he had special powers to deport immigrants, identified by his administration as gang members, without the usual court proceedings.
“The Court concludes that the President’s invocation of the AEA through the Proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and, as a result, is unlawful,” Rodriguez wrote.
In an interview on Fox News, Vice President JD Vance said the administration will be “aggressively appealing” the ruling and others that hem in the president’s deportation power.
“The judge doesn’t make that determination, whether the Alien Enemies Act can be deployed,” Vance said. “I think the president of the United States is the one who determines whether this country is being invaded.”
The chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Rep. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., said in a statement the judge had made clear “what we all knew to be true: The Trump administration illegally used the Alien Enemies Act to deport people without due process.”
The Alien Enemies Act has only been used three times before in U.S. history, most recently during World War II, when it was cited to intern Japanese-Americans.
The proclamation triggered a flurry of litigation as the administration tried to ship migrants it claimed were gang members to a notorious prison in El Salvador.
Rodriguez’s ruling is significant because it is the first formal permanent injunction against the administration using the AEA and contends the president is misusing the law. “Congress never meant for this law to be used in this manner,” said Lee Gelernt, the ACLU lawyer who argued the case, in response to the ruling.
Rodriguez agreed, noting that the provision has only been used during the two World Wars and the War of 1812. Trump claimed Tren de Aragua was acting at the behest of the Venezuelan government, but Rodriguez found that the activities the administration accused it of did not amount to an invasion or “predatory incursion,” as the statute requires.
“The Proclamation makes no reference to and in no manner suggests that a threat exists of an organized, armed group of individuals entering the United States at the direction of Venezuela to conquer the country or assume control over a portion of the nation,” Rodriguez wrote. “Thus, the Proclamation’s language cannot be read as describing conduct that falls within the meaning of ‘invasion’ for purposes of the AEA.”
If the administration appeals, it would go first to the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That is among the nation’s most conservative appeals courts and it also has ruled against what it saw as overreach on immigration matters by both the Obama and Biden administrations. In those cases, Democratic administrations had sought to make it easier for immigrants to remain in the U.S.
The administration, as it has in other cases challenging its expansive view of presidential power, could turn to appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, in the form of an emergency motion for a stay pending an appeal.
The Supreme Court already has weighed in once on the issue of deportations under the AEA. The justices held that migrants alleged to be gang members must be given “reasonable time” to contest their removal from the country. The court has not specified the length of time.
It’s possible that the losing side in the 5th Circuit would file an emergency appeal with the justices that also would ask them to short-circuit lower court action in favor of a definitive ruling from the nation’s highest court. Such a decision likely would be months away, at least.
The Texas case is just one piece of a tangle of litigation sparked by Trump’s proclamation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trump’s tariffs expose Ukraine’s steel industry to another war
Legal Business |
2025/02/17 10:26
|
The steel mill in a partially occupied region of Ukraine is a dystopian maze of flames, chutes and tentacled pipes, vast enough to be a small city. Thunderous blazes of sparks flash above the open furnaces where workers smelt iron ore into streams of molten metal day and night.
The Zaporizhstal Iron and Steelworks, one of Ukraine’s largest steel plants, lies in the country’s industrial east, where Russia’s 3-year invasion of its neighbor threatens to throttle production at any moment. Daily battles unfold along a front line 40 kilometers (25 miles) away as the plant churns out materials for military equipment and for foreign manufacturers to use in cars, appliances, and construction.
“Morale is not as high as it was before. We are pretty tired here,” plant supervisor Serhii Zhyvotchenko said, reflecting on the hardships. “But there is no way to go back; the only way is forward.”
Last week, though, a second war came to the doorstep of the hulking factory complex: the possible trade war that U.S. President Donald Trump has provoked since returning to office four weeks ago. Trump imposed tariffs of at least 25% on all imported steel and aluminum, a decision that could hurt an essential sector of Ukraine’s battered economy.
Last week, though, a second war came to the doorstep of the hulking factory complex: the possible trade war that U.S. President Donald Trump has provoked since returning to office four weeks ago. Trump imposed tariffs of at least 25% on all imported steel and aluminum, a decision that could hurt an essential sector of Ukraine’s battered economy.
The tariff order was not the only action by the president or his administration to cause alarm in Kyiv last week. Trump signaled changing winds in U.S. policy by having a direct call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom former President Joe Biden and other Western leaders had tried to isolate since Putin sent troops into Ukraine.
Trump also said that he would “probably” meet in person with the Russian leader in the near future, heightening concerns that Kyiv would be left out of or undermined in any ceasefire talks. Comments by both the president and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth rejecting NATO membership for Ukraine further reinforced the fear that the country no longer had Washington in its corner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Giuliani says he's a victim of 'political persecution' as he's told again to give up assets
Legal Business |
2024/11/04 08:19
|
A defiant Rudy Giuliani was ordered Thursday to quickly turn over prized assets including a car and a watch given to him by his grandfather as part of a $148 million defamation judgment, leading the former New York City mayor to emerge from court saying he expects to win on appeal and get everything back.
After the hearing in Manhattan federal court, Giuliani said he was the victim of a “political vendetta” and he was “pretty sure” the judgment could be reversed.
“This is a case of political persecution,” he told reporters, citing the size of what he described as a punitive judgment. “There isn’t a person (who) doesn’t know the judgment is ridiculous.”
Judge Lewis J. Liman ordered the one-time presidential candidate to report to court after lawyers for the two former Georgia election workers who were awarded the massive judgment visited Giuliani’s Manhattan apartment last week only to discover it had been cleared out weeks earlier.
Lawyers for Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, say Giuliani has mostly dodged turning over assets by an Oct. 29 deadline, enabling the longtime ally of once-and-future President Donald Trump to hang on to many of his most treasured belongings.
The possessions include his $5 million Upper East Side apartment, a 1980 Mercedes once owned by movie star Lauren Bacall, a shirt signed by New York Yankees legend Joe DiMaggio, dozens of luxury watches and other valuables.
During Thursday’s hearing, Giuliani attorney Kenneth Caruso said he believed the plaintiffs were being “vindictive” in demanding that items to be turned over include a watch that belonged to Giuliani’s grandfather.
That comment drew a scoff and rebuke from Liman, who said individuals are forced to give up family heirlooms all the time to satisfy debts.
“They have to pay the debt. It doesn’t matter that it’s in the form of a watch or a watch that somebody passes down to him,” the judge said.
Caruso also claimed that the car was worth less than $4,000, an amount that might exempt it from the turnover order. But the judge said he’d already ordered that the car be turned over.
“Your honor has ample discretion to change an order,” Caruso said. When he arrived at the courthouse, Giuliani told reporters that he has not stood in the way of the court’s orders.
“Every bit of property that they want is available, if they are entitled to it,” he said. “Now, the law says they’re not entitled to a lot of them. For example, they want my grandfather’s watch, which is 150 years old. That’s a bit of an heirloom. Usually you don’t get those unless you’re involved in a political persecution. In fact, having me here today is like a political persecution.”
Aaron Nathan, an attorney for the election workers, told Liman that most of the New York apartment’s contents, including art, sports memorabilia and other valuables, had been moved out about four weeks prior to an attempt to recover the materials. Some of was believed stored on Long Island in a container Giuliani’s lawyer said they could not access.
At the hearing, Nathan complained that efforts to get assets were met by “delay and then evasion” and that Giuliani had only recently revealed the existence of new bank accounts containing about $40,000 in cash.
Giuliani spoke directly to the judge at one point, saying he’d been “treated rudely” by those trying to take control of his assets.
His lawyers have so far argued unsuccessfully that Giuliani should not be forced to turn over his belongings while he appeals the judgment.
Giuliani was found liable for defamation for falsely accusing Freeman and Moss of ballot fraud as he pushed Trump’s unsubstantiated election fraud allegations during the 2020 campaign.
The women said they faced death threats after Giuliani accused the two of sneaking in ballots in suitcases, counting ballots multiple times and tampering with voting machines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
