DC prepares for Trump's military parade with 18 miles of fencing and 175 magnetometers
WASHINGTON (AP) — As the nation's capital cleans up from the culmination of World Pride this past weekend, focus now shifts to a very different massive event — Saturday's military parade to honor the 250th birthday of the Army and the 79th birthday of President Donald Trump.
'We're preparing for an enormous turnout,' said Matt McCool of the Secret Service's Washington Field office, who said more than 18 miles of 'anti-scale fencing' would be erected and 'multiple drones' would be in the air. The entire District of Columbia is normally a no-fly zone for drones.
Army officials have estimated around 200,000 attendees for the evening military parade, and McCool said he was prepared for 'hundreds of thousands' of people.
'We have a ton of magnetometers,' he said. 'If a million people show up, then we're going to have some lines.'
A total of 175 magnetometers would be used at security checkpoints controlling access to the daytime birthday festival and the nighttime parade. Metropolitan Police Department chief Pamela Smith predicted 'major impacts to traffic' and advised attendees to arrive early and consider forgoing cars for the Metro.
'This is a significant event with a large footprint,' she said. 'We're relying on the public to be an extra set of ears and eyes for us.'
The military parade has been designated a National Special Security Event — similar to a presidential inauguration or state funeral. That status is reserved for events that draw large crowds and potential mass protests. It calls for an enhanced degree of high-level coordination among D.C. officials, the FBI, Capitol Police and Washington's National Guard contingent — with the Secret Service taking the lead.
The Army birthday celebration had already been planned for months. But earlier this spring, Trump announced his intention to transform the event — which coincides with his 79th birthday — into a massive military parade complete with 60-ton M1 Abrams battle tanks and Paladin self-propelled howitzers rolling through the city streets.
Multiple counter-protests of varying sizes are planned for Saturday, with the largest being a mass march to the White House dubbed the No Kings rally. Officials say they are also on alert for signs that the immigration-related clashes between law enforcement and protesters currently roiling Los Angeles would spread.
'We're paying attention, obviously, to what is happening there. We'll be ready,' McCool said. 'We have a robust plan for civil disobedience.'
Agent Phillip Bates of the FBI's Washington Field office, which is tasked with counterterrorism and crisis management, said there were 'no credible threats' to the event at the moment.
Lindsey Appiah, the deputy mayor for public safety, told The Associated Press last week that the city had longstanding plans for the Army birthday celebration. But those plans 'got a lot bigger on short notice' when Trump got involved.
Still, Appiah said the city has grown 'very flexible, very nimble' at rolling with these sort of changes.
____
For more details, including road closures and security restrictions, go to: www.nsse.dc.gov.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
20 minutes ago
- CTV News
CTV National News: More U.S. troops deployed in L.A. than in Syria and Iraq
Watch U.S. President Trump has ordered more troops into Los Angeles than are currently serving in Syria and Iraq. Joy Malbon has the latest.
Winnipeg Free Press
21 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Big changes are being proposed for a US food aid program. Here's a breakdown by the numbers
TPresident Donald Trump's plan to cut taxes by trillions of dollars could also trim billions in spending from social safety net programs, including food aid for lower-income people. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Here's a look at the food aid program, by the numbers: Year: 2008 The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law took effect eliminating a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. Number: 42 million A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the county. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. Dollars: $295 billion Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion of federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come by shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come by expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. Ages: 7 and 55-64 To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents would need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't do so are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. The combined effect of those changes is projected by the CBO to reduce SNAP participation by a monthly average of 3.2 million people. Percentages: 5% – 25% The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures are unlikely to serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. Margin: 1 House Resolution 1, containing the SNAP changes and tax cuts, passed the House last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food aid and Medicaid and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it.
Vancouver Sun
36 minutes ago
- Vancouver Sun
Court rules Trump's tariffs can stay in effect while appeal proceeds
WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court agreed on Tuesday that U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs will remain in place while a case is heard — extending an emergency stay granted after a lower court found the devastating duties unlawful. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found 'a stay is warranted under the circumstances.' It provides a temporary victory for the Trump administration as it hits its first legal barriers for realigning global trade. The U.S. Court of International Trade last month said Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, is a national security statute that gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. The ruling from the three-judge panel at the New York-based federal court in May said 'any interpretation of IEEPA that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional.' It said 'the challenged tariff orders will be vacated,' representing a nationwide injunction against any further imposition of the duties. Trump administration quickly was granted an emergency motion, essentially freezing the decision by the trade court that blocked the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs. The appeals court upheld that stay but noted the need for an expedited hearing, saying 'these cases present issues of exceptional importance warranting expedited en banc consideration.' A proposed schedule says arguments are expected in court by July 31. That means that countries will continue to be hit by those duties, for now. Stock markets have been in turmoil and supply chains have been upended as Trump used unprecedented presidential power to enact his tariffs. Up until Trump's return to the White House, IEEPA had never been used by a president to impose tariffs. Trump hit Canada with economywide duties in March after he declared an emergency at the northern border related to the flow of fentanyl. He partially paused levies a few days later for imports that comply with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. Trump took his trade war to the world in April with duties on nearly every country saying America's trade deficits amounted to a national emergency. The president walked back the most devastating duties a few hours later but left a 10 per cent universal tariff in place for most countries. Trump said the 90-day pause would give countries time to negotiate a deal. The president said if countries didn't comply he would simply set tariff rates himself. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said that the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this' and called the lower court's decision 'judicial overreach.' The appeal ruling will consider two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One included five American small businesses against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other stemmed from 12 states arguing against both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs. At least seven lawsuits are challenging the tariffs. Lawyers for the businesses say IEEPA does not mention tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. They say Trump is misusing the statute. Lawyers for Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont argued that tariffs make U.S. trade policy dependent on Trump's whims. Thirty-three senators also filed an amicus brief — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — in the case, saying the duties would cause harm to small- and medium-sized businesses while also grabbing powers that should be assigned to Congress. 'Small businesses do not have cash-on-hand or capital reserves to pay the increased tariffs, nor can they quickly adapt to them by modifying supply chains,' it said. 'If they cannot pass on the tariff costs to consumers — which would create additional harms for… constituents — many face letting employees go or filing for bankruptcy. Even a few weeks of additional tariffs means small businesses will suffer irreparable harm.' Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties.
