In Venezuela, Maduro claims landslide win in elections amid opposition boycott
As expected, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro secured a sweeping victory in the legislative and regional elections held on Sunday, May 25, which part of the opposition had called to boycott. With more than 90% of ballots counted, the Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela (PSUV, United Socialist Party of Venezuela) won 23 out of 24 governorships and a commanding majority in the Asamblea Nacional. Chavism, the political movement founded by Hugo Chávez, received 82.68% of the vote, winning 40 out of 50 seats in the national constituency – the regional constituencies have yet to be allocated. According to the Consejo Nacional Electoral (CNE, National Electoral Council), voter turnout reached 42.6%. The opposition, which advocated abstention, contested this figure, highlighting inconsistencies (the total number of votes cast does not match the reported turnout) and portrayed the low turnout observed on the ground as a victory for their movement.
This regional and legislative election was the first held since the contentious July 28, 2024, presidential election and the highly disputed re-election of Maduro. The victory claimed by Chavism could not erase the president's lack of legitimacy or the looming economic challenges he faced.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
LeMonde
3 days ago
- LeMonde
US Supreme Court lets Trump revoke legal protections from 500,000 migrants
The Supreme Court on Friday, May 30, again cleared the way for the Trump administration to strip temporary legal protections from hundreds of thousands of immigrants for now, pushing the total number of people who could be newly exposed to deportation to nearly 1 million. The justices lifted a lower-court order that kept humanitarian parole protections in place for more than 500,000 migrants from four countries: Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. The decision comes after the court allowed the administration to revoke temporary legal status from about 350,000 Venezuelan migrants in another case. The court did not explain its reasoning in the brief order, as is typical on its emergency docket. Two justices publicly dissented. The administration filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court after a federal judge in Boston blocked the administration's push to end the program. The Justice Department argues that the protections for people fleeing turmoil in their home countries were always meant to be temporary, and the Department of Homeland Security has the power to revoke them without court interference. Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, said the Biden-era policies weren't in line with immigration law. "We are confident in the legality of our actions to protect the American people and look forward to further action from the Supreme Court to vindicate us," she said. But Karen Tumlin, founder and director of Justice Action Center, said the decision has "effectively greenlit" deportation orders for a half-million people. "I cannot overstate how devastating this is," she said. The court "allowed the Trump Administration to unleash widespread chaos, not just for our clients and class members, but for their families, their workplaces, and their communities." Promise to deport millions of people Republican President Donald Trump promised on the campaign trail to deport millions of people, and in office has sought to dismantle Biden administration polices that expanded paths for migrants to live legally in the US. In a 2024 presidential debate, Trump amplified false rumors that Haitian immigrants in Ohio, including those with legal status under the humanitarian parole program, were abducting and eating pets, court documents note. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in dissent to Friday's ruling that the effect of the high court's order is "to have the lives of half a million migrants unravel all around us before the courts decide their legal claims." Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined the dissent. Jackson echoed what US District Judge Indira Talwani wrote in a ruling that ending the legal protections early would leave people with a stark choice: flee the country or risk losing everything. Her ruling came in mid-April, shortly before permits were due to be canceled. An appeals court refused to lift it. The Supreme Court's order is not a final ruling, but it means the protections will not be in place while the case proceeds. It now returns to the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. Talwani, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, did allow the Trump administration to revoke parole, but on a case-by-case basis. But the Trump administration argued the parole was granted en masse, and the law doesn't require ending it on an individual basis. Taking on each case individually would be a "gargantuan task," and slow the government's efforts to press for their removal, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued. The high court's decision could ultimately affect another ruling from Talwani this week in favor of other people covered by humanitarian parole policies, including Afghans, Ukrainians and children from Central America. Joe Biden used humanitarian parole more than any other president, employing a special presidential authority in effect since 1952. Home countries fraught with 'instability, dangers and deprivations' Beneficiaries included the 532,000 people who have come to the United States with financial sponsors since late 2022, leaving home countries fraught with "instability, dangers and deprivations," as attorneys for the migrants said. They had to fly to the US at their own expense and have a financial sponsor to qualify for the designation, which lasts for two years. The Trump administration's decision was the first-ever mass revocation of humanitarian parole, attorneys for the migrants said. They called the Trump administration's moves "the largest mass illegalization event in modern American history." The case is the latest in a string of emergency appeals the administration has made to the Supreme Court, many of them related to immigration. The court has sided against Trump in other cases, including slowing his efforts to swiftly deport Venezuelans accused of being gang members to a prison in El Salvador under an 18th-century wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act.
France 24
3 days ago
- France 24
US Supreme Court gives Trump green light to strip legal status of 500,000 migrants
The Supreme Court on Friday again cleared the way for the Trump administration to strip temporary legal protections from hundreds of thousands of immigrants for now, pushing the total number of people who could be newly exposed to deportation to nearly 1 million. The justices lifted a lower-court order that kept humanitarian parole protections in place for more than 500,000 migrants from four countries: Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. The court has also allowed the administration to revoke temporary legal status from about 350,000 Venezuelan migrants in another case. Republican President Donald Trump promised on the campaign trail to deport millions of people, and in office has sought to dismantle Biden administration polices that created ways for migrants to live legally in the US Trump amplified false rumors that Haitian immigrants in Ohio, including those with legal status under the humanitarian parole program, were abducting and eating pets during a debate with then-President Joe Biden, according to court documents. His administration filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court after a federal judge in Boston blocked the administration's push to end the program. Justice Kentanji Brown Jackson wrote in dissent that the effect of the high court's order is 'to have the lives of half a million migrants unravel all around us before the courts decide their legal claims'. Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined the dissent. Jackson echoed what US District Judge Indira Talwani wrote in ruling that ending the legal protections early would leave people with a stark choice: flee the country or risk losing everything. Talwani, an appointee of former Democratic president Barack Obama, found that revocations of parole can be done, but on a case-by-case basis. Her ruling came in mid-April, shortly before permits were due to be canceled. An appeals court refused to lift her order. The Supreme Court's order is not a final ruling, but it means the protections will not be in place while the case proceeds. It now returns to the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. The Justice Department argues that the protections were always meant to be temporary, and the Department of Homeland Security has the power to revoke them without court interference. The administration says Biden granted the parole en masse, and the law doesn't require ending it on an individual basis. 'Gargantuan task' Taking on each case individually would be a 'gargantuan task,' and slow the government's efforts to press for their removal, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued. Biden used humanitarian parole more than any other president, employing a special presidential authority in effect since 1952. Beneficiaries included the 532,000 people who have come to the United States with financial sponsors since late 2022, leaving home countries fraught with 'instability, dangers and deprivations,' as attorneys for the migrants said. They had to fly to the US at their own expense and have a financial sponsor to qualify for the designation, which lasts for two years. The Trump administration's decision was the first-ever mass revocation of humanitarian parole, attorneys for the migrants said. They called the Trump administration's moves 'the largest mass illegalization event in modern American history'. The case is the latest in a string of emergency appeals the administration has made to the Supreme Court, many of them related to immigration. The court has sided against Trump in other cases, including slowing his efforts to swiftly deport Venezuelans accused of being gang members to a prison in El Salvador under an 18th century wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act.
Euronews
3 days ago
- Euronews
US court lets Trump end protections for nearly 1 million immigrants
The US Supreme Court has again cleared the way on Friday for the Trump administration to strip temporary legal protections from hundreds of thousands of immigrants, pushing the total number of people who could be newly exposed to deportation to nearly 1 million. The justices lifted a lower-court order that kept humanitarian parole protections in place for more than 500,000 migrants from four countries: Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. The court has also allowed the administration to revoke temporary legal status from about 350,000 Venezuelan migrants in another case. The administration filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court after a federal judge in Boston blocked the administration's push to end the protection programme. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in dissent that the effect of the high court's order is "to have the lives of half a million migrants unravel all around us before the courts decide their legal claims." Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined the dissent. Jackson echoed what US District Judge Indira Talwani wrote in ruling that ending the legal protections early would leave people with a stark choice: flee the country or risk losing everything. Talwani, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, found that revocations of parole can be done, but on a case-by-case basis. Her ruling came in mid-April, shortly before permits were due to be cancelled. An appeals court refused to lift her order. The Supreme Court's order is not a final ruling, but it means the protections will not be in place while the case proceeds. It now returns to the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. The Justice Department argues that the protections were always intended to be temporary, and the Department of Homeland Security has the power to revoke them without court intervention. The Trump administration claimed that Biden granted parole en masse, and the law does not require it to be ended on an individual basis. Taking on each case individually would be a "gargantuan task," and slow the government's efforts to press for their removal, Solicitor General D John Sauer argued. Biden used humanitarian parole more than any other president, employing a special presidential authority in effect since 1952. Beneficiaries included the 532,000 people who have come to the US with financial sponsors since late 2022, leaving home countries fraught with "instability, dangers and deprivations," as attorneys for the migrants said. They had to fly to the US at their own expense and have a financial sponsor to qualify for the designation, which lasts for two years. The Trump administration's decision was the first-ever mass revocation of humanitarian parole, attorneys for the migrants said. They called the Trump administration's moves "the largest mass illegalisation event in modern American history." The case is the latest in a string of emergency appeals the administration has made to the Supreme Court, many of them related to immigration. The court has sided against Trump in other cases, including slowing his efforts to swiftly deport Venezuelans accused of being gang members to a prison in El Salvador under an 18th-century wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act. Trump promised on the campaign trail to deport millions of people and, after taking office, has sought to dismantle Biden administration polices that created ways for migrants to live legally in the US.
