logo
Trump administration releases FBI records on MLK Jr. despite his family's opposition

Trump administration releases FBI records on MLK Jr. despite his family's opposition

The Mainichi5 days ago
The Trump administration has released records of the FBI's surveillance of Martin Luther King Jr., despite opposition from the slain Nobel laureate's family and the civil rights group that he led until his 1968 assassination.
The digital document dump includes more than 240,000 pages of records that had been under a court-imposed seal since 1977, when the FBI first gathered the records and turned them over to the National Archives and Records Administration.
In a lengthy statement released Monday, King's two living children, Martin III, 67, and Bernice, 62, said their father's assassination has been a "captivating public curiosity for decades." But the pair emphasized the personal nature of the matter, urging that "these files must be viewed within their full historical context."
The Kings got advance access to the records and had their own teams reviewing them. Those efforts continued even as the government granted public access. It was not immediately clear Monday whether the documents would shed any new light on King's life, the Civil Rights Movement or his murder.
"As the children of Dr. King and Mrs. Coretta Scott King, his tragic death has been an intensely personal grief -- a devastating loss for his wife, children, and the granddaughter he never met -- an absence our family has endured for over 57 years," they wrote. "We ask those who engage with the release of these files to do so with empathy, restraint, and respect for our family's continuing grief."
They also repeated the family's long-held contention that James Earl Ray, the man convicted of assassinating King, was not solely responsible, if at all.
Bernice King was 5-years old when her father was killed at the age of 39. Martin III was 10.
A statement from the office of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard called the disclosure "unprecedented" and said many of the records had been digitized for the first time. She praised President Donald Trump for pushing the issue.
Release is 'transparency' to some, a 'distraction' for others
Trump promised as a candidate to release files related to President John F. Kennedy's 1963 assassination. When Trump took office in January, he signed an executive order to declassify the JFK records, along with those associated with Robert F. Kennedy's and MLK's 1968 assassinations.
The government unsealed the JFK records in March and disclosed some RFK files in April.
The announcement from Gabbard's office included a statement from Alveda King, Martin Luther King Jr.'s niece, who is an outspoken conservative and has broken from King's children on various topics -- including the FBI files. Alveda King said she was "grateful to President Trump" for his "transparency."
Separately, Attorney General Pam Bondi's social media account featured a picture of the attorney general with Alveda King.
Besides fulfilling Trump's order, the latest release means another alternative headline for the president as he tries to mollify supporters angry over his administration's handling of records concerning the sex trafficking investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, who killed himself behind bars while awaiting trial in 2019, during Trump's first presidency. Trump last Friday ordered the Justice Department to release grand jury testimony but stopped short of unsealing the entire case file.
Bernice King and Martin Luther King III did not mention Trump in their statement Monday.
Some civil rights activists were not so sparing.
"Trump releasing the MLK assassination files is not about transparency or justice," said the Rev. Al Sharpton. "It's a desperate attempt to distract people from the firestorm engulfing Trump over the Epstein files and the public unraveling of his credibility among the MAGA base."
The King Center, founded by King's widow and now led by Bernice King, reacted separately from what Bernice said jointly with her brother. The King Center statement framed the release as a distraction -- but from more than short-term political controversy.
"It is unfortunate and ill-timed, given the myriad of pressing issues and injustices affecting the United States and the global society," the King Center, linking those challenges to MLK's efforts. "This righteous work should be our collective response to renewed attention on the assassination of a great purveyor of true peace."
Records mean a new trove of research material
The King records were initially intended to be sealed until 2027, until Justice Department attorneys asked a federal judge to lift the sealing order early.
Scholars, history buffs and journalists have been preparing to study the documents for new information about his assassination on April 4, 1968, in Memphis, Tennessee.
The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, which King co-founded in 1957 as the Civil Rights Movement blossomed, opposed the release. The group, along with King's family, argued that the FBI illegally surveilled King and other civil rights figures, hoping to discredit them and their movement.
It has long been established that then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was intensely interested if not obsessed with King and others he considered radicals. FBI records released previously show how Hoover's bureau wiretapped King's telephone lines, bugged his hotel rooms and used informants to gather information, including evidence of King's extramarital affairs.
"He was relentlessly targeted by an invasive, predatory, and deeply disturbing disinformation and surveillance campaign orchestrated by J. Edgar Hoover through the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)," the King children said in their statement.
"The intent ... was not only to monitor, but to discredit, dismantle and destroy Dr. King's reputation and the broader American Civil Rights Movement," they continued. "These actions were not only invasions of privacy, but intentional assaults on the truth -- undermining the dignity and freedoms of private citizens who fought for justice, designed to neutralize those who dared to challenge the status quo."
The Kings said they "support transparency and historical accountability" but "object to any attacks on our father's legacy or attempts to weaponize it to spread falsehoods."
Opposition to King intensified even after the Civil Rights Movement compelled Congress and President Lyndon B. Johnson to enact the Civil Right Act of 1964 and the Voting Right Act of 1965. After those victories, King turned his attention to economic justice and international peace. He was an outspoken critic of rapacious capitalism and the Vietnam War. King argued that political rights alone were not enough to ensure a just society. Many establishment figures like Hoover viewed King as a communist threat.
King's children still don't accept the original explanation of assassination
King was assassinated as he was aiding striking sanitation workers in Memphis, part of his explicit turn toward economic justice.
Ray plead guilty to King's murder. Ray later renounced that plea and maintained his innocence until his death in 1998.
Members of King's family, and others, have long questioned whether Ray acted alone, or if he was even involved. Coretta Scott King asked for the probe to be reopened, and in 1998, then-Attorney General Janet Reno directed the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division to take a new look. Reno's department said it "found nothing to disturb the 1969 judicial determination that James Earl Ray murdered Dr. King."
In their latest statement, Bernice King and Martin Luther King III repeated their assertions that Ray was set up. They pointed to a 1999 civil case, brought by the King family, in which a Memphis jury concluded that Martin Luther King Jr. had been the target of a conspiracy.
"As we review these newly released files," the Kings said, "we will assess whether they offer additional insights beyond the findings our family has already accepted."(AP)
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Japan, U.S. ministers reached trade agreement in mid-June: sources
Japan, U.S. ministers reached trade agreement in mid-June: sources

Kyodo News

time4 hours ago

  • Kyodo News

Japan, U.S. ministers reached trade agreement in mid-June: sources

TOKYO - Japan's chief negotiator reached an agreement with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in mid-June on a deal offering massive Japanese investment in the United States in exchange for a reduction in tariffs, sources close to the matter said Saturday. Over the following month, Japan focused on convincing U.S. President Donald Trump through Lutnick of the advantages of the agreement, with the proposal of expanding imports of U.S.-grown rice used as the final bargaining chip. The trade deal, announced by Trump on July 23, includes tariffs on Japanese cars set at 15 percent -- lower than the 27.5 percent that was to have been levied -- in exchange for $550 billion of Japanese investment in the United States. During the course of the negotiations, which spanned around three months from mid-April, Japan identified Lutnick as the only person who could communicate "directly and on a deep level" with Trump due to their close friendship of over 30 years, and directed its efforts on him, according to one of the sources. Ryosei Akazawa, Japan's chief tariff negotiator, built trust with Lutnick not only through in-person talks but also through dozens of phone calls, the source said. Believing that Lutnick placed a high priority on economic security amid China concerns, Japan emphasized its willingness to contribute to strengthening U.S. domestic supply chains and eventually reached an understanding with him. Trump, however, maintained a hardline stance even in late June, venting frustration that Japan does not import significant amounts of American cars and rice. "I'm not sure we're going to make a deal. I doubt it," he had said, while demanding additional concessions in exchange for lowering tariffs. The tide turned on July 22 immediately following Japan's upper house election. A sudden meeting was arranged for the following day between Trump and Akazawa, who was in Washington for an eighth round of talks. Akazawa and Lutnick began to "rehearse" in preparation for the talks, with Lutnick suggesting that a total investment of $400 billion be proposed in the expectation that Trump would ask for $500 billion. A board was prepared by U.S. officials to clearly show Trump how much Japan would investment. But Trump demanded even more, leaving Akazawa no choice but to agree to $550 billion. A senior official of the prime minister's office acknowledged that the deal does not align with World Trade Organization rules or the Japan-U.S. trade agreement that took effect in January 2020, but also conceded that Trump "is a president who genuinely believes in protecting his country through tariffs."

US-Japan: Reimagining an alliance for a fractured world
US-Japan: Reimagining an alliance for a fractured world

The Mainichi

time7 hours ago

  • The Mainichi

US-Japan: Reimagining an alliance for a fractured world

The following is a contribution to the Mainichi Shimbun from Michael Schiffer, who served as assistant administrator of the Bureau for Asia at the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which was dismantled by the Donald Trump administration. In his contribution, Schiffer discusses the future of the Japan-U.S. alliance. -- In the first six months of the second Trump administration, the U.S.-Japan alliance has been rocked by renewed uncertainty. Although the July 22 tariff agreement has relieved some of the immediate pressure, the negotiations were contentious and drawn-out, with the White House's threats to impose fresh tariffs on Japanese automobiles and agriculture, coupled with demands that Tokyo increase its host-nation support for U.S. forces and step up its security commitments in the region -- demands that may have contributed to the "postponement" of a planned 2+2 meeting earlier this month -- reviving painful memories of the trade wars and alliance strains of the 1980s. Trump's public questioning of whether the United States will live up to its alliance commitments, alongside his erratic posture on Ukraine and unilateral cuts to foreign assistance programs -- including those supporting Indo-Pacific infrastructure and governance -- have further shaken confidence in the reliability of American leadership. At a time when the foundational pillars of the post-war world are cracking under the combined weight of technological upheaval, environmental crisis, demographic transformation, and a new era of great-power rivalry, these moves have undermined the sense of strategic stability that has long defined an alliance that has served as the cornerstone for peace, security and prosperity for Tokyo and Washington alike. In the face of these structural changes, alliance managers must move beyond the conceptual mainstream, and seek to imagine a new world rather than continue to act as custodians of a fading order, attempting to solve 21st-century problems with 20th-century blueprints and defending the sanctity of an alliance built for a world that no longer exists. And yet, Japan remains one of America's most capable, trusted, and forward-looking allies. With its advanced economy, technological prowess, and increasingly assertive defense policy, Japan is uniquely positioned to work with the United States on the basis of shared interests and shared values to navigate the strategic challenges of a more contested Indo-Pacific -- and the generational challenge of a more assertive and aggressive China, with its own vision for what the regional and global order should look like. Neither the U.S. or Japan are likely to be successful in this undertaking alone, and even less so if Washington and Tokyo are working at cross-purposes. Doing so will also require more than a reaffirmation of old commitments. The rapidly changing global geostrategic and geoeconomic landscapes demand a fundamental reimagining of the alliance -- across economic, technological, diplomatic, and military domains. The rise of a more assertive China -- militarizing the South and East China Seas, threatening Taiwan, weaponizing economic coercion, and seeking to shape global norms to its advantage -- has made clear that alliances anchored in Cold War-era assumptions about roles, missions and capabilities are no longer sufficient. Tokyo recognizes this: Japan has undertaken a historic defense build-up, doubled its defense budget, and committed to acquiring counterstrike capabilities, signaling a Japan that is ready to be not just a junior partner, but a co-equal shaper of regional stability. The United States must meet this moment with strategic imagination, not just a narrowly construed "America First" transnationalism. That means moving beyond instrumental debates over cost-sharing to deepen integration across defense planning, technological innovation, and economic resilience. The U.S.-Japan alliance faces a precarious security landscape, one demanding immediate and decisive action. From China's assertive military expansion and "gray zone" tactics in the East and South China Seas, particularly around the Senkaku Islands and Taiwan, to North Korea's relentless pursuit of nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities, the Indo-Pacific is increasingly volatile, all part and parcel of an international system that is rapidly evolving from X to Y. Given the scope and scale of these challenges, we cannot afford complacency. It is imperative that Washington and Tokyo accelerate our joint development of next-generation defense technologies -- AI-enabled command systems, autonomous platforms, cyber defense -- and fast-tracking the co-development and deployment of advanced technologies, strengthening integrated air and missile defense systems, and ensuring seamless interoperability of our forces across all domains. This will help the alliance to deter aggression and operate effectively in an era defined by multi-domain conflict. The time to act is now, not only to safeguard our shared security interests but to uphold regional stability and to set the rules for the evolving international order against growing authoritarian challenges. Economically, the alliance must focus on shaping the rules of the road for the 21st century. With the Trans-Pacific Partnership long abandoned, the U.S. and Japan should spearhead digital trade agreements, investment screening regimes, and supply chain partnerships that insulate both economies from coercive pressures. Initiatives like the U.S.-Japan Economic Policy Consultative Committee (EPCC) should be scaled up into a formal economic dialogue akin to the 2+2 defense framework, driving coordination on geoeconomic strategy. While headlines may be dominated by tariffs and calls for economic rebalancing, it's crucial to recognize these discussions as echoes of a bygone era. While there are valid arguments for rebalancing, obsessing over trade deficits and protectionist measures risks diverting our focus from the true challenges and opportunities of the 21st century. The global economic landscape has fundamentally shifted, and our attention must pivot from the battles of the past to the imperative of co-leading the future. This means looking beyond traditional trade in goods to foster deeper collaboration and shared investments in areas like the governance of emerging technologies, resilient supply chains, and the green economy, ensuring our alliance is not just economically balanced but future-proofed. Finally, Japan and the United States should jointly invest in regional capacity-building -- from infrastructure finance to maritime domain awareness to climate resilience. This means reconsidering cuts to foreign assistance and treating development as a strategic instrument. Japan's extensive development networks and America's innovation ecosystem can be combined to offer a robust alternative to China's Belt and Road. To meet the test of this moment, the U.S.-Japan alliance must become more than a security arrangement. It must be a platform for shared strategy, innovation, and governance in the Indo-Pacific. The future of the U.S.-Japan alliance hinges on our willingness to confront the present with clear eyes and bold action. This isn't a moment for nostalgia; it's a demand for strategic reimagining. We must move beyond outdated notions of stability and influence to rebuild an alliance fit for a fragmented and fast-moving world. This means prioritizing investment beyond military modernization to include the governance of emerging technologies. It requires us to fully integrate climate adaptation and economic competitiveness as core pillars of national security. And critically, it compels us to evolve the institutions and coalitions -- both formal and informal -- that are essential for managing geopolitical volatility and for competing effectively with the PRC. The past six months have been challenging for Tokyo and Washington. But we have an opportunity to seize the moment to forge an alliance that is not just resilient, but truly transformative for the 21st century. Profile: Michael Schiffer has served as U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia, senior advisor and counselor on the Democratic Staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and assistant administrator of the USAID Bureau for Asia. His areas of expertise include U.S. foreign and defense policy, and security in the Indo-Pacific region.

Trump Administration Releases Billions It Withheld from Schools
Trump Administration Releases Billions It Withheld from Schools

Yomiuri Shimbun

time13 hours ago

  • Yomiuri Shimbun

Trump Administration Releases Billions It Withheld from Schools

The Trump administration plans to release more than $5 billion in funding to public schools that it has withheld for nearly a month, a senior administration official said Friday, ending weeks of anxiety and uncertainty for school leaders who had said the freeze jeopardized programs and staffing for the upcoming academic year. The government placed nearly $7 billion in funding under review June 30, then released $1.3 billion of it last week. The administration's review of the remaining funding has ended, the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Nebraska) confirmed the move on social media, saying that he pushed for the money to be released. 'Exciting news to announce! All frozen education funding for the upcoming school year have been released,' he wrote on X. Lawmakers from both parties had lobbied to release the money, which funds six grant programs related to English-language-learning programs, teacher training, support for children of migrant workers and academic enrichment activities. The freeze was also being challenged in court by states and school districts. States expected the funding to be released July 1, as normally happens each year. Instead, the Education Department notified states June 30 that the money was under review for compliance with President Donald Trump's priorities. The Office of Management and Budget said it was investigating whether any of the grant money had in the past been used for a 'radical left-wing agenda.' The administration official said Friday that 'guardrails' will be in place 'to ensure these funds will not be used in violation of executive orders or administration policy.' It was not immediately clear what those guardrails will be or when school districts will see the funds. Public education supporters credited pressure from educators and advocates for helping to unfreeze the funding but criticized the administration for withholding the money in the first place. 'This administration deserves no credit for just barely averting a crisis they themselves set in motion,' Sen. Patty Murray (D-Washington) said in a statement. 'You don't thank a burglar for returning your cash after you've spent a month figuring out if you'd have to sell your house to make up the difference.' Holding back the funding was the latest attempt by the administration to disrupt federal support for K-12 public schools. Since taking office, Trump has instructed the education secretary to move toward shutting down the Education Department and to find ways to transfer some of its duties to other governmental agencies. The Education Department has also moved to cancel billions of dollars in K-12 grants and contracts and to reduce its workforce by half. Trump has portrayed the department as 'failing' and asserts that he wants to 'return education to the states,' but the administration's moves have outraged public education advocates who say cutting off federal support does nothing to help students learn. Speaking at the National Governors Association summer meeting in Colorado Springs on Friday, Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the freezing and thawing of the funding was part of 'the transition aspect' for a new administration. She added that it took some time for the Office of Management and Budget to 'look at all the programs' before the funding was released. 'Now those funds are going to be going out,' she told Gov. Jared Polis (D-Colorado), who was leading a panel discussion. 'I would think now that we've reviewed them, looked at that process, so that a year from now, we wouldn't find ourselves in the same situation.' A group of 24 states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration last week over the decision to freeze nearly $7 billion, arguing that it violated the Constitution and federal law, in part because the money had been appropriated by Congress. A group of school districts, parents, teachers unions and nonprofits filed a separate lawsuit. More than 200 superintendents have gone to senators' offices on Capitol Hill to plead their case, and some lawmakers worked to pressure the administration to release the funding. The Trump administration last Friday said it would release one of the streams of frozen funding, allowing $1.3 billion for after-school and summer programs to flow to schools. Educators continued lobbying for all the money to be restored. 'This is a major victory for public education and the communities it serves,' said Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the school districts and others. 'While this development shows that legal and public pressure can make a difference, school districts, parents, and educators should not have to take the administration to court to secure funds for their students.' In its original message to state education agencies, the Education Department said the funding was being reviewed 'given the change in Administrations.' Later, an OMB spokesperson told reporters that the administration was investigating whether the funds had been used by any school districts for purposes such as scholarships for undocumented immigrant students or teachings on LGBTQ+ topics. The Democratic states that sued the government contended that the administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to offer 'a reasoned explanation' for the funding review. Nearly three-quarters of superintendents who responded to a mid-July survey by AASA, the School Superintendents Association, said they would have to eliminate academic services for students if the rest of the federal funding were not restored. Eighty-five percent of the superintendents said they have contracts that are supposed to be paid with the funds in question. Half said they would have to lay off staff and teachers without the money, including those who work with English-language learners and special education students, according to AASA, which collected responses from more than 600 superintendents in 43 states. 'We are pleased public schools will receive the funding as appropriated by Congress for the 2025-26 school year,' AASA Executive Director David Schuler said in a statement Friday, noting 'how disruptive withholding these funds would be for our nation's students.' Superintendents in multiple states told The Washington Post this week that the withholding of the money would probably result in cuts in their districts and said that they were holding out hope that the Trump administration would reverse course. For some, the effects of the lost funding would have been severe – particularly in areas where many students are learning English. In Marshalltown, Iowa, where a pork plant draws migrant agricultural workers and immigrants from dozens of countries, the school district was facing a 'devastating blow,' said Theron Schutte, superintendent of the Marshalltown Community School District. Schutte had contacted all his congressional representatives asking for help. District programs like swim lessons for summer school students – started after children drowned several years ago, Schutte said – were on the chopping block so money could be moved to support English-language and other services. 'You have to prepare for the worst-case scenario,' Schutte said Thursday, before the money was unfrozen. 'But … you're still hoping they'll do the right thing and release those funds.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store