Here's what journalists in our network saw at Indiana 'No Kings' protests
Mass protests took place in cities across Indiana as part of the nationwide "No Kings" movement.
The movement focuses on actions of President Donald Trump's administration that protesters believe are authoritarian and threaten democracy, including tariffs, immigration policy, spending cuts and reproductive rights.
Here's a look at what happened around the state.
Indy's protest was organized by the volunteer-led 50501 movement, which organizes peaceful national protests across all states on the same day. Amid Saturday's rain and humidity, which included a downpour in the afternoon, thousands of attendees flocked to the Indiana Statehouse.
Police detained one protester during the event after a scuffle with a counter-protester over a pro-Trump flag.
'No Kings': Thousands attend rain-soaked Indianapolis Anti-Trump protest
In Bloomington, protesters gathered on the Monroe County Courthouse square on Saturday afternoon. During the first two hours, there were no major incidents, according to Herald-Times reporting.
Herald-Times staff reported that at 1:40 p.m., a vehicle stopped near the site of the protest. After talking with some protesters, the man got out of the car and smashed a window of his own car with a large stick. He got back into the car, according to journalists on the scene, and threw a backpack outside, causing protesters to back away.
He exited the car again, and one protester restrained him until police officers arrived, according to the Herald-Times.
According to South Bend Tribune reporting, the Michiana Alliance for Democracy organized a rally in the northern Indiana city.
Saturday's event included a moment of silence for Minnesota Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband, who were killed that morning in a shooting at their home. Minnesota state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife were also shot and wounded at their home.
Thousands of demonstrators came out for a Tippecanoe County rally, not deterred by an incident at a previous rally in April, according to Lafayette Journal & Courier reports. At the April 4 "Hands Off" protest, bystanders said a man retrieved a gun after an altercation with a protester.
Protesters at the June 14 event criticized their representatives with a chant that interchanged the names of U.S. Rep. Jim Baird and U.S. Sens. Todd Young and Jim Banks, according to the Journal & Courier.
"What's Baird doing? Kissing the ring," protesters chanted. "What do we say? We have no king."
Hundreds came out in the rain in Evansville, the Courier & Press reported, to protest outside the Winfield K. Denton Federal Building & U.S. Courthouse. Two advocacy groups, Indivisible Evansville and Evansville Resistance, organized the protest.
In Muncie, activists gathered on the Fallen Heroes Bridge on Wheeling Avenue over the White River, the Star Press reported. Traffic was not blocked by the protest, according to a journalist on the scene, and motorists honked and interacted with protesters as they drove by.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
9 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Israel's Dermer: Want to Remove Iran's Ballistic Threat
US President Donald Trump says Iran wants to talk about de-escalating the conflict with Israel even as the two sides exchanged deadly fire for the fourth consecutive day. Israeli National Security Minister Ron Dermer, a key ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his main liaison with the US, speaks with Bloomberg Television about the conflict. (Source: Bloomberg)
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New Travel Ban Could Target Dozens of Countries, U.S. Memo Reveals
The U.S. government is reportedly considering a dramatic expansion of its travel restrictions, which could bar citizens from 36 more countries from entering the United States. According to an internal State Department cable obtained by Reuters, the potential expansion hinges on national security concerns and cooperation benchmarks. The memo, signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, outlined a 60-day window for these countries to address U.S. concerns or face partial or full travel suspensions. The list includes nations across Africa, the Caribbean, and parts of Asia, such as Angola, Ghana, Cambodia, and Syria. Citing issues like unreliable identity documentation, lack of cooperation in deportation cases, and visa overstays, the document emphasized the need to maintain the integrity of U.S. borders and public safety. The State Department pointed to passport security and anti-American activity as additional risk factors. While not all concerns apply equally to each country, the message is clear: cooperate or face consequences. If enacted, this would mark one of the largest expansions of U.S. travel restrictions in recent memory. Earlier this month, a proclamation suspended entry from 12 countries under similar national security justifications. Now, with this latest proposal, that number could more than triple. A senior State Department official declined to discuss the specifics of the memo but emphasized that visa policies are under constant review to ensure the safety of Americans. For travelers with ties to any of the listed nations, or for global mobility at large, the potential fallout could be significant. Business trips, academic visas, family reunifications, and tourism could all be impacted by this travel ban expansion depending on how the final policy takes shape. As the 60-day clock begins to tick, all eyes are on diplomatic responses and whether these countries will meet the U.S. government's requirements, or risk being shut Travel Ban Could Target Dozens of Countries, U.S. Memo Reveals first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 15, 2025
9 minutes ago
Judge extends block on Trump ban prohibiting Harvard students from entering US
A temporary restraining order on President Donald Trump barring foreign Harvard University students from entering the U.S. will remain in effect until next Monday while a federal judge considers arguments made for a preliminary injunction. The temporary block was due to expire on Thursday before being extended Monday by U.S. District Court Judge Allison Burroughs. Harvard's lawyers argued Trump's proclamation violates its First Amendment rights and is outside the authority of the executive branch. Listing the actions taken by the government against Harvard in recent weeks, attorney Ian Gershengorn argued in a court hearing Monday in Boston that the move was retaliation and viewpoint discrimination against the institution. Gershengorn argued the president is not restricting entry, but instead limiting what you do and who you associate with after you enter. The permissible way to classify a class of aliens is based on the character of the alien, he argued. The government pushed back, arguing the administration does not "trust" Harvard and that it did not monitor the "aliens" that it brought into the U.S. The government said bringing in foreigners is a privilege not a right, according to Tiberius Davis, counsel to the assistant attorney general. "We don't trust Harvard to vet, host, monitor or discipline" foreigners, Davis argued. Davis also raised concerns about Harvard's "foreign entanglements" with the Chinese government and said it did not provide sufficient information to the government on foreign students -- which Harvard has denied. Harvard University filed the lawsuit against the government after U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced it was canceling Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, which would bar the school from enrolling foreign students. The suit was later amended to include the proclamation and Harvard moved to request a second block on Trump's proclamation. That would have gone into effect for at least six months before it was blocked by Burroughs. The judge questioned arguments made by the government over its concerns about Harvard that motivated the proclamation. "I can't imagine that anything that you just described applies only to Harvard," Burroughs said. Davis argued the government is free to investigate other institutions and said that "a lot of these other universities are willing to" do more to address issues on campus. Davis also argued that different government agencies chose to terminate grants with Harvard because they believed the institution was not following the law, saying that move was not retaliation either. Davis also said Harvard is not being singled out with grant terminations because other institutions have suffered the same. The government argued it is not singling out Harvard, but rather other institutions have been more willing to take action to address issues on campus, while Harvard has not, Davis said. "There's a lack of evidence of retaliation here," Davis said in court. Burroughs said if the point is to root out antisemitism, "Why aren't we letting in people from Israel?" Davis argued antisemitism was just one part of the issue, along with foreign entanglements and not providing sufficient information to the government. Because of their other conduct on campus and their inattentiveness to it "we don't trust them," Davis said. "They don't have to pull over everybody who's speeding. Frankly they can't do that," Davis said. Pushing back on arguments that it did not monitor its students, Harvard said it is the government's responsibility to vet students being allowed into the country. "The vetting is done by the State Department in their visa process," Gershengorn said. At one point in the Monday hearing, the judge asked Harvard's attorneys why it did not name the president in its lawsuit, asking if he needed to appear in this case. Gershengorn said it sued the people who are tasked with implementing the proclamation. Gershengorn argued Trump's usage of the proclamation to block entry of foreign Harvard students is a "vast new authority to regulate the domestic conduct of domestic institutions," a departure from how this proclamation has been used in the past. Gershengorn said it has been used to block the entry of individuals or nationals of a country that have "done something bad." The question is not whether the action is lawful or not, Gershengorn argued. If lawful action is taken as a First Amendment-motivated action, it is no longer lawful, he added. Gershengorn said what Harvard has suffered over the last two months is probably the most "irregular" and "improper" action any institution has suffered. Harvard pushed back against claims there is widespread violence on campus, saying the story the government cites identified two incidents of violence on the basis of religion. The government is "throwing things at the wall to see what sticks," Gershengorn said. Harvard has alleged that the administration is in an "escalating campaign of retaliation" against the school. After Harvard publicly refused to comply with demands made by the Trump administration, the administration responded by freezing more than $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts to the school.
