Appeals court orders Tufts student Rumeysa Ozturk transferred to Vermont
The decision by the 2nd Circuit's three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals rejected the Trump administration's request for emergency relief in the challenge to Ozturk's detention and arrived after it heard arguments on Tuesday on the Justice Department's bid to pause a judicial order requiring Ozturk, a 30-year-old doctoral student, to be transferred to ICE custody in Vermont.
The three-judge 2nd circuit said the Trump administration has until May 14 to comply with the transfer order.
Ozturk was taken into custody by force by the armed agents near her Somerville, Mass., home on March 25, then sent to a Louisiana detention facility despite not being accused of a crime.
In early April, Tufts University officials demanded her release "without delay."
According to court documents, Ozturk was not notified beforehand.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Immigration Customs Enforcement claim she "had been involved in associations that 'may undermine U.S. foreign policy by creating a hostile environment for Jewish students and indicating support for a designated terrorist organization.'"
Ozturk, a Turkish national, co-wrote an op-ed critical of the university's administration and in support of three Tufts Senate resolutions demanding the university acknowledge "the Palestinian genocide" and divest from Israel.
The university said her op-ed didn't violate any policies, saying it did not "constitute a violation of the University's understanding of the Immigration and Naturalization Act."
Ozturk is currently being held at a Basile, Lou., immigration facility with a bail hearing scheduled Friday in a Vermont federal court in front of U.S. District Judge William K. Sessions III.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
15 minutes ago
- USA Today
As Netanyahu expands Gaza war, some reservists grow more disillusioned
JERUSALEM, Aug 19 (Reuters) - As Israel seeks to expand its offensive in Gaza, a measure of how the country's mood has changed in the nearly two-year-old conflict is the discontent evident among some reservists being called up to serve once again. Shortly after the October 7, 2023 attack on southern Israel by Palestinian militant group Hamas, Israelis dropped everything -- honeymoons, studies and new lives abroad -- to rush home and fight. Now, some voice disillusionment with political leaders sending them back into battle, as the military prepares to take control of Gaza City, the enclave's biggest urban centre. According to a study conducted by Agam Labs at the Hebrew University which measured sentiment about the new campaign among more than 300 people serving in the current war, 25.7% of reservists said their motivation had decreased significantly compared with the start of the campaign. Another 10% said their motivation slightly decreased. Asked to describe their feelings about the campaign, the biggest group -- 47% -- of responders expressed negative emotions towards the government and its handling of the war and hostage negotiations. In March, before the latest offensive was announced, the Israeli news outlet Ynet reported that the amount of reservists reporting for duty was 30 percent below the number requested by military commanders. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to destroy Hamas after it attacked Israel in Oct. 7, 2023 in the bloodiest single day for Jews since the Holocaust, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies. But the war has dragged on, with Hamas still putting up a fight and Israelis condemning their prime minister for failing to reach a deal with the militant group to win the release of hostages despite many mediation efforts. 'THIS WAR IS ENTIRELY POLITICAL' Reservists were among thousands of Israelis who took part in a nationwide strike on Sunday, one of the biggest protests in support of families of hostages, calling on Netanyahu to reach an agreement with Hamas to end the war and release the remaining captives. One of those angry protesters was Roni Zehavi, a reservist pilot who stopped serving out of principle after more than 200 days of service when the last ceasefire fell through. He said that when reservists were enlisted, they did everything required without saying a word. But then questions such as "where is this going?" started to pop up, he recalled. Reservists accused the government - the most far-right administration in Israel's history -- of perpetuating the war for political reasons. "This war is entirely political, it has no goal except to keep Benjamin Netanyahu as prime minister," he told Reuters. "He is willing to do everything necessary, to sacrifice the hostages, fallen soldiers, dead citizens - to do what he needs so that he and his wife will stay in power. It's the tragedy of the state of Israel and it's the reality". Asked for comment about the disenchantment voiced by some reservists, the Israeli military said it sees great importance in the reserve service and each case of absence is examined. "In this challenging security reality, the contribution of the reservists is essential to the success of missions and to maintaining the security of the country," it said. The prime minister's office was not immediately available for comment. Netanyahu has so far resisted calls to establish a state inquiry - in which he could be implicated - into the security failures of the October 7 attack. He has said such an investigation should not be launched as long as the war is still under way. Some of his far-right coalition partners have threatened to bring down the government should the war end without meeting all its stated goals. When Israel called up 360,000 reservists after the October 7 attack, the largest such compulsory mobilisation since the 1973 Yom Kippur War, it received an enthusiastic response. The mood among some reservists appears different now. 'I will not be part of a system that knows that it will kill the hostages. I'm just not prepared to take that. And I really fear that, to the point where it keeps me up at night," one combat medic told Reuters. He asked not to be identified as he was not authorized to speak. According to Israel's Channel 12, the military plans to call up 250,000 reservists for the Gaza City offensive. Israel has lost 898 soldiers and thousands have been wounded in the Gaza war, the country's longest conflict since the 1948 war that accompanied its creation. Its military response to the Hamas attack has killed over 61,000 people in Gaza, including many children, according to Gaza health authorities. 'LACK OF VISION' Military service is mandatory in Israel, a small nation of fewer than 10 million people, but it relies heavily on reservists in times of crisis. Reserve duty is technically mandatory, though penalties for evasion often depend on the willingness of the direct commander to enforce punishment. Reuters interviewed 10 Israeli reservists for this story. Like many other reservists, special forces Sergeant Major A. Kalker concluded that Israel's military and political leadership has failed to formulate a sound day-after plan for the war. "There's a lack of vision, both in the political and the senior military leadership, a real lack of vision," he said, but added that shouldn't amount to refusing to serve. "Bibi (Netanyahu) is the king of not making decisions … like treading water." Reservist Brigadier General Roi Alkabetz told Reuters that the military and Israel's Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir had transitioned to using the reservists in a "measured way", because Zamir understood the hardship for reservists and had put much of the hard work on soldiers in mandatory service. "He's doing it in a logical way," Alkabetz said. "The reservists will come." (Writing by Michael Georgy, Editing by William Maclean)
San Francisco Chronicle
15 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
NATO defense chiefs hold virtual meeting on Ukraine security guarantees
NATO defense chiefs were due to hold a virtual meeting Wednesday, a senior alliance official said, as countries pushing for an end to Russia's war on Ukraine devise possible future security guarantees for Kyiv that could help forge a peace agreement. Italian Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone, chair of NATO's Military Committee, said that 32 defense chiefs from across the alliance would hold a video conference as a U.S.-led diplomatic push seeks to end the fighting. U.S. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, NATO's supreme allied commander Europe, will take part in the talks, Dragone said on social platform X. U.S. President Donald Trump met last Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska and on Monday hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and prominent European leaders at the White House. Neither meeting delivered concrete progress. Trump is trying to steer Putin and Zelenskyy toward a settlement more than three years after Russia invaded its neighbor, but there are major obstacles. They include Ukraine's demands for Western-backed military assurances to ensure Russia won't mount another invasion in coming years. 'We need strong security guarantees to ensure a truly secure and lasting peace,' Zelenskyy said in a Telegram post Wednesday after Russian missile and drone strikes hit six regions of Ukraine overnight. Kyiv's European allies are looking to set up a force that could backstop any peace agreement, and a coalition of 30 countries, including European nations, Japan and Australia, have signed up to support the initiative. Military chiefs are figuring out how that security force might work. The role that the U.S. might play in is unclear. Trump on Tuesday ruled out sending U.S. troops to help defend Ukraine against Russia. Attacks on civilian areas in Sumy and Odesa overnight into Wednesday injured 15 people, including a family with three small children, Ukrainian authorities said. Zelenskyy said the strikes 'only confirm the need for pressure on Moscow, the need to introduce new sanctions and tariffs until diplomacy works to its full potential.'
Newsweek
15 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Nikki Haley: Trump Needs To Rebuild U.S.-India Relationship
In July 1982, President Ronald Reagan welcomed Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to a state dinner at the White House. Toasting the friendship between our "two proud, free peoples," he said: "although our countries may travel separate paths from time to time, our destination remains the same." Four decades later, the U.S.-India relationship is at a troubling inflection point. To achieve the Trump administration's foreign policy goals—outcompeting China and achieving peace through strength—few objectives are more critical than getting U.S.-India relations back on track. The last few weeks have seen an explosive series of events. The Trump administration has threatened India with 25 percent tariffs for purchasing Russian oil, on top of the 25 percent President Donald Trump already slapped on Indian goods. These developments followed months of rising tension, including over the U.S. role in India-Pakistan ceasefire negotiations. Trump is right to target India's massive Russian oil purchases, which are helping to fund Vladimir Putin's brutal war against Ukraine. India has also traditionally been among the most protectionist economies in the world, with an average tariff rate more than five times the U.S. average in 2023. But India must be treated like the prized free and democratic partner that it is—not an adversary like China, which has thus far avoided sanctions for its Russian oil purchases, despite being one of Moscow's largest customers. If that disparity does not demand a closer look at U.S.-India relations, the realities of hard power should. Scuttling 25 years of momentum with the only country that can serve as a counterweight to Chinese dominance in Asia would be a strategic disaster. WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 22: Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley announced that she would vote for former President Donald Trump during an event at the Hudson Institute on May 22, 2024 in Washington, DC. WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 22: Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley announced that she would vote for former President Donald Trump during an event at the Hudson Institute on May 22, 2024 in Washington, the short term, India is essential in helping the United States move its critical supply chains away from China. While the Trump administration works to bring manufacturing back to our shores, India stands alone in its potential to manufacture at China-like scale for products that can't be quickly or efficiently produced here, like textiles, inexpensive phones, and solar panels. When it comes to defense, India's expanding military ties with the United States, Israel, and other American allies make it a crucial asset to the free world's security, and a rapidly growing market for U.S. defense equipment and cooperation. India's growing clout and security involvement in the Middle East could prove essential in helping to stabilize the region as America seeks to send fewer troops and dollars there. And India's location at the center of China's vital trade and energy flows could complicate Beijing's options in the case of a major conflict. In the longer term, India's significance is even more profound. Home to more than a sixth of humanity, India surpassed China as the world's most populous country in 2023, with a young workforce that contrasts with China's aging one. It is the world's fastest-growing major economy—soon to eclipse Japan as the world's fourth largest. India's rise represents the most significant geopolitical event since China's, and is among the greatest obstacles to China's goal of reshaping the global order. Simply put, China's ambitions will have to shrink as India's power grows. Yet, unlike Communist-controlled China, the rise of a democratic India does not threaten the free world. Partnership between the U.S. and India to counter China should be a no-brainer. India and China are unfriendly neighbors that have conflicting economic interests and ongoing territorial disputes, including a lethal skirmish over contested borders as recently as 2020. It would serve America's interests to help India stand up to its increasingly aggressive northern neighbor, both economically and militarily. And it would be a massive—and preventable—mistake to balloon a trade spat between the United States and India into an enduring rupture. If that were to happen, the Chinese Communist Party would be quick to play India and the United States against one another. For its part, India must take Trump's point over Russian oil seriously, and work with the White House to find a solution. As for the United States, the most urgent priority should be to reverse the downward spiral, which will require direct talks between President Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The sooner the better. The administration should focus on mending the rift with India and giving the relationship more high-level attention and resources—approaching what the U.S. devotes to China or Israel. Decades of friendship and good will between the world's two largest democracies provide a solid basis to move past the current turbulence. Navigating challenging issues like trade disagreements and Russian oil imports demand hard dialogue, but difficult conversations are often the sign of a deepening partnership. The United States should not lose sight of what matters most: our shared goals. To face China, the United States must have a friend in India. Nikki Haley, the Walter P. Stern Chair at the Hudson Institute, was US ambassador to the United Nations and governor of South Carolina. Bill Drexel is a fellow at the Hudson Institute. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
