Sen. Jon Ossoff responds to recent Trump cuts
WSAV joined Ossoff during an afternoon meeting.
'I believe that this is urgent,' he said. 'I believe that we face an imminent deepening of the foster care crisis in Georgia as a result of the Trump Administration's inexplicable decision to gut critical support services for the most vulnerable kids in our state'
In 2024, Ossoff released a 64-page report detailing his 13-month investigation into Georgia's foster care system, uncovering neglect and abuse. He said federal cuts could make the crisis even worse.
'Senior personnel suggested locking up foster children in detention centers because of a lack of adequate foster care placements,' he said. 'We already face in Georgia a deep crisis and deep long-term mismanagement that has left Georgia's foster children desperately vulnerable to harm, abuse and exploitation.'
Kate Blair, executive director of CASA also known as Brightside Child and Family Advocacy is feeling the impacts. With over 200 volunteers, they serve more than 300 children. The non-profit relies heavily, nearly 80 percent on federal funding.
'Never would I have expected that I'd wake up and 24 hours later, $110,000 was cut from our budget,' Blair said. 'This decision has created a 90,000 deficit in my budget and has forced us to eliminate a key staff position and shut down a pilot program both of which directly supported children in foster care, ensuring that they have that safe, consistent adult.'
She continued, 'it has forced us to redirect unrestricted funds that were being used to expand our Bright House program, which provides supervised visitation, and our Brighter Futures program, which supports youth aging out of foster care, which is so incredibly important because the outcomes for youth that age out of foster care are so poor in our community.'
Ossoff told WSAV that he will rally members of both parties in congress to oppose what he calls the gutting of support for vulnerable foster children.
'Here we have volunteers who want to be there for those kids, look out for those kids, provide support for those kids, advocate for those kids in court, and that is what we're destroying,' he said. 'It is inexplicable. It is indefensible.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Judge denies Trump administration request to end a policy protecting immigrant children in custody
ImmigrationFacebookTweetLink Follow A federal judge ruled Friday to deny the Trump administration's request to end a policy in place for nearly three decades that is meant to protect immigrant children in federal custody. US District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles issued her ruling a week after holding a hearing with the federal government and legal advocates representing immigrant children in custody. Gee called last week's hearing 'déjà vu' after reminding the court of the federal government's attempt to terminate the Flores Settlement Agreement in 2019 under the first Trump administration. She repeated the sentiment in Friday's order. 'There is nothing new under the sun regarding the facts or the law. The Court therefore could deny Defendants' motion on that basis alone,' Gee wrote, referring to the government's appeal to a law they believed kept the court from enforcing the agreement. In the most recent attempt, the government argued they made substantial changes since the agreement was formalized in 1997, creating standards and policies governing the custody of immigrant children that conform to legislation and the agreement. Gee acknowledged that the government made some improved conditions of confinement, but wrote, 'These improvements are direct evidence that the FSA is serving its intended purpose, but to suggest that the agreement should be abandoned because some progress has been made is nonsensical.' Attorneys representing the federal government told the court the agreement gets in the way of their efforts to expand detention space for families, even though Trump's tax and spending bill provided billions to build new immigration facilities. Tiberius Davis, one of the government attorneys, said the bill gives the government authority to hold families in detention indefinitely. 'But currently under the Flores Settlement Agreement, that's essentially void,' he said last week. The Flores agreement, named for a teenage plaintiff, was the result of over a decade of litigation between attorneys representing the rights of migrant children and the US government over widespread allegations of mistreatment in the 1980s. The agreement set standards for how licensed shelters must provide food, water, adult supervision, emergency medical services, toilets, sinks, temperature control and ventilation. It also limited how long US Customs and Border Protection could detain child immigrants to 72 hours. The Department of Health and Human Services then takes custody of the children. The Biden administration successfully pushed to partially end the agreement last year. Gee ruled that special court supervision may end when HHS takes custody, but she carved out exceptions for certain types of facilities for children with more acute needs. In arguing against the Trump administration's effort to completely end the agreement, advocates said the government was holding children beyond the time limits. In May, CBP held 46 children for over a week, including six children held for over two weeks and four children held 19 days, according to data revealed in a court filing. In March and April, CPB reported that it had 213 children in custody for more than 72 hours. That included 14 children, including toddlers, who were held for over 20 days in April. The federal government is looking to expand its immigration detention space, including by building more centers like one in Florida dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz,' where a lawsuit alleges detainees' constitutional rights are being violated. Gee still has not ruled on the request by legal advocates for the immigrant children to expand independent monitoring of the treatment of children held in Customs and Border Protection facilities. Currently, the agreement allows for third-party inspections at facilities in the El Paso and Rio Grande Valley regions, but plaintiffs submitted evidence showing long detention times at border facilities that violate the agreement's terms.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Intel stock jumps on report Trump admin. is considering stake
Shares of Intel (INTC) jumped 7% following a Bloomberg report that the Trump administration is considering taking a stake in the chip giant. The report states that the size of the stake the government would take is unclear, with one of the outlet's sources stressing that talks were fluid. Market Domination Overtime Anchor Josh Lipton reports the breaking details, and Investopedia editor in chief Caleb Silver weighs in. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination Overtime. the Trump administration considering taking a stake in chipmaker Intel. This is going to bloomberg news. That deal would help shore up intel's plan factory hub in Ohio, according to the report. Company had once promised to turn that site, remember, into the world's largest chip making facility. It's unclear the size of this potential stake the US would have, but the plans seem to have stemmed from a meeting this week, remember between President Trump and Intel's chief executive officer. The ideas for the US government to pay for the stake, details being sorted out. Caleb, headlines coming fast and furious. The stock reacting about two percent in the after hours. What do you make of it? Yeah. Well, things have really changed for the Putan, the CEO of Intel because just a week, week and a half ago. Trump was saying you're out. He wanted his ouster. He called for his head. Yeah. Right. So this is administration getting very deep into the private sector into some of the most important companies in the market, doing some of the most important things. And the reality for Intel is they have the manufacturing base here more than any other chip maker in the US to produce a lot of chips. And if we're going to become a chip producing nation, we're going to need Intel. We're going to need its foundry. We're going to need all of its factories all over the southwest and everywhere else to make as many chips as possible. The fact that the US might take a stake, that's an interesting conflict of interest, but everything is interesting these days with this administration. You know, the reports saying this is fluid. It sounds like we don't have a lot of details yet. So we'll see how this all flushes out and works out. It is interesting though, Caleb, as a long time market watcher that you are, when we talk about Intel, and here you have this, this storied American company. But on this show, listen, we talk about Nvidia and AMD, and Broadcom, and Micron, and you name it. Intel is not discussed all that much. It is not in the bloodstream like it used to be. Because it missed arguably the AI chip making wave. It's catching up to it, but it got, it missed the head start that Nvidia was on to, that AMD was on to, that a lot of these other chip makers have invested in tens and hundreds of billions of dollars over the last few years, and they've been rewarded for it. So it missed that. It's losing a big customer in Apple who's going to be making its own chips, and it lost its way arguably for a while. But it does have the infrastructure in place in this country to do a lot of chip manufacturing if it had the investment. So far, it doesn't have any big customers for its foundry business, which it invested a lot of money, and that was supposed to be the future. Maybe this, if it's true, turns things around a little bit, but we haven't mentioned Intel in a while. We had mentioned Cisco in a while, and Cisco on the program earlier today. These are like partying, like it's 1999 all over again. It sounds like Intel's declined comment on the discussions. Just sounds like the White House not immediately responding to request for comment either, but we'll keep you posted on headlines as they come.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Judge denies Trump administration request to end a policy protecting immigrant children in custody
McALLEN, Texas (AP) — A federal judge ruled Friday to deny the Trump administration's request to end a policy in place for nearly three decades that is meant to protect immigrant children in federal custody. U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles issued her ruling a week after holding a hearing with the federal government and legal advocates representing immigrant children in custody. Gee called last week's hearing 'déjà vu' after reminding the court of the federal government's attempt to terminate the Flores Settlement Agreement in 2019 under the first Trump administration. She repeated the sentiment in Friday's order. 'There is nothing new under the sun regarding the facts or the law. The Court therefore could deny Defendants' motion on that basis alone," Gee wrote, referring to the government's appeal to a law they believed kept the court from enforcing the agreement. In the most recent attempt, the government argued they made substantial changes since the agreement was formalized in 1997, creating standards and policies governing the custody of immigrant children that conform to legislation and the agreement. Gee acknowledged that the government made some improved conditions of confinement, but wrote, 'These improvements are direct evidence that the FSA is serving its intended purpose, but to suggest that the agreement should be abandoned because some progress has been made is nonsensical.' Attorneys representing the federal government told the court the agreement gets in the way of their efforts to expand detention space for families, even though Trump's tax and spending bill provided billions to build new immigration facilities. Tiberius Davis, one of the government attorneys, said the bill gives the government authority to hold families in detention indefinitely. 'But currently under the Flores Settlement Agreement, that's essentially void,' he said last week. The Flores agreement, named for a teenage plaintiff, was the result of over a decade of litigation between attorneys representing the rights of migrant children and the U.S. government over widespread allegations of mistreatment in the 1980s. The agreement set standards for how licensed shelters must provide food, water, adult supervision, emergency medical services, toilets, sinks, temperature control and ventilation. It also limited how long U.S. Customs and Border Protection could detain child immigrants to 72 hours. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services then takes custody of the children. The Biden administration successfully pushed to partially end the agreement last year. Gee ruled that special court supervision may end when HHS takes custody, but she carved out exceptions for certain types of facilities for children with more acute needs. In arguing against the Trump administration's effort to completely end the agreement, advocates said the government was holding children beyond the time limits. In May, CBP held 46 children for over a week, including six children held for over two weeks and four children held 19 days, according to data revealed in a court filing. In March and April, CPB reported that it had 213 children in custody for more than 72 hours. That included 14 children, including toddlers, who were held for over 20 days in April. The federal government is looking to expand its immigration detention space, including by building more centers like one in Florida dubbed ' Alligator Alcatraz,' where a lawsuit alleges detainees' constitutional rights are being violated. Gee still has not ruled on the request by legal advocates for the immigrant children to expand independent monitoring of the treatment of children held in U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities. Currently, the agreement allows for third-party inspections at facilities in the El Paso and Rio Grande Valley regions, but plaintiffs submitted evidence showing long detention times at border facilities that violate the agreement's terms. Valerie Gonzalez, The Associated Press
