Trump rips program to bring high-speed internet to rural areas as ‘racist' and ‘totally unconstitutional'
President Donald Trump lashed out on Thursday against legislation signed by former President Joe Biden aimed at increasing access to high-speed internet, arguing that it was 'racist' and 'unconstitutional.'
'I have spoken with my wonderful Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick, and we agree that the Biden/Harris so-called 'Digital Equity Act' is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL,' Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday afternoon.
It was a statement that made Trump's wish to dismantle the work of his predecessor clear. The legislation was part of the $1 trillion infrastructure bill Biden signed early in his term in office. It aims to improve access to high-speed internet in communities with limited access.
The legislation was enacted to help a number of groups, such as veterans, older people, the disabled, and rural communities. But Trump took aim at the law for also trying to boost internet access for ethnic and racial minorities.
'No more woke handouts based on race! The Digital Equity Program is a RACIST and ILLEGAL $2.5 BILLION DOLLAR giveaway. I am ending this IMMEDIATELY, and saving Taxpayers BILLIONS OF DOLLARS!' he added on Truth Social.
However, the legislation barely cites race, The New York Times noted. It only says that the program could cover racial minorities while also including a nondiscrimination clause which states that people cannot be excluded from the program 'on the basis of actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, or disability.' Such language was borrowed from the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
The Digital Equity Act delivers $60 million worth of grants to states and territories to aid them in creating plans to make internet access more equal. It also provides for $2.5 billion in grants to enact those plans. Some of those funds have already been approved and sent on to a number of states, including some conservative, rural states, such as Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, and Kansas. Hundreds of millions in further funding were approved during the final weeks of the Biden administration, but have yet to be disbursed, according to The New York Times.
Congressional appropriations commandeered the funds, and the initiative is overseen by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the Department of Commerce.
However, any cancellation of the funding would likely face pushback in the courts. The Trump administration has experienced some success in temporarily blocking challenges to its suspension of grants connected to programs focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion.
However, in late March, a federal appeals court left in place a ruling by a lower court that stopped the Office of Management and Budget from putting in place a freeze on federal funding to states. The court noted that the freeze posed a clear risk to states that depend on the financing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
6 minutes ago
- Politico
Negotiate or fight? Trump has colleges right where he wants them.
President Donald Trump's campaign against two of the planet's best-known universities is laying bare just how unprepared academia was to confront a hostile White House. Schools never imagined facing an administration so willing to exercise government power so quickly — targeting the research funding, tax-exempt status, foreign student enrollment and financial aid eligibility schools need to function. That's left them right where the president wants them. Even as Ivy League schools, research institutions, and college trade associations try to resist Trump's attacks in court, campus leaders are starting to accept they face only difficult choices: negotiate with the government, mount a painful legal and political fight — or simply try to stay out of sight. Groundbreaking scientific research, financial aid for lower-income students and soft power as an economic engine once shielded schools' access to federal funds. Trump has now transformed those financial lifelines into leverage. And the diversity and independence of U.S. colleges and universities — something they've seen as a source of strength and competition — is straining efforts to form a singular response to the president. 'Perhaps it's a failure of imagination on the part of universities,' said Lee Bollinger, the former president of Columbia University. 'It feels now like there has been a naïveté on the part of universities. There's been no planning for this kind of thing.' Schools are accustomed to tension with their faculty, governing boards, legislatures and governors. But punishments for resisting the Trump administration plumbed untested levels of severity this week when the president issued an executive order to bar foreign students from entering the country to study at Harvard University as his administration threatened Columbia's academic accreditation. Even though Project 2025 — The Heritage Foundation's roadmap for a second Trump administration — previewed some of the tactics the administration would use, many school leaders may have underestimated the president's determination. 'It just seemed inconceivable that we would be in this position of having massive amounts of federal funding withheld, threats to have legislation that attacks your tax status, and now these new issues with international students,' Bollinger said. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order Thursday night that blocked Trump's directive to restrict Harvard's access to international students. But the administration is brandishing its response to Harvard's resistance as a warning to other schools who might resist, as federal officials pressure schools to negotiate the terms of a truce over the administration's complaints about campus antisemitism, foreign government influence and its opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. 'We've held back funding from Columbia, we've also done the same thing with Harvard,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon told House lawmakers this past week. 'We are asking, as Columbia has done, to come to the table for negotiations,' she said, just hours before telling the school's accreditor it was violating federal anti-discrimination laws. 'We've also asked Harvard. Their answer was a lawsuit.' A Harvard spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. 'What we've seen so far when it comes to Harvard is the playbook for holding these radical schools accountable is way deeper than anyone anticipated or expected,' a senior White House official told POLITICO. 'You're starting to get to the bone, so to speak, of holding these people accountable,' said the official, who was granted anonymity to freely discuss White House strategy. 'Harvard knows they cannot endure this for long, they just can't. They're going to have to come to the table, and we'll always be there to meet them. But this was a test case of what to do.' The university described Trump's latest foreign student order this week as 'yet another illegal retaliatory step.' A federal judge in May blocked a separate administration attempt to prevent Harvard from enrolling international students. Harvard is still locked in a legal fight over more than $2 billion in federal grants the White House blocked after the school refused to comply with demands to overhaul its admissions and disciplinary policies. Trump announced plans to cancel Harvard's tax-exempt status in early May, then later floated redistributing billions of dollars in university grants to trade schools. 'It is not our desire to bring these schools to their knees. The president reveres our higher educational facilities. He's a product of one,' the White House official said. 'But in order to hold these people accountable, we will be unrelenting in our enforcement of the law and hitting them where it hurts, which is their pocketbook.' Many institutions have chosen a more muted response following months of conflict, including major public institutions in states that have also grown reliant on the full-freight tuition paid by international students. 'Universities don't have as many degrees of freedom, at least in the public sector, as you might think they do,' said Teresa Sullivan, the former president of the University of Virginia. 'One reason they seem to be relatively slow to act is there's a certain disbelief — can this really be happening?' 'We seem to be in uncharted territory, at least in my experience,' Sullivan said. 'All of a sudden, the rules don't seem to apply. I think that's disconcerting. It shakes the ground beneath you, and you don't necessarily know what to do next.' Still, some higher education leaders are trying to confront the government. More than 650 campus officials have so far signed onto a joint statement that opposes 'the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education.' Sullivan and a group of other former presidents used an op-ed in The Washington Post to argue the Trump administration's offensive 'won't be confined to Harvard University.' Trade associations including the American Council on Education, Association of American Universities, and Association of Public and Land-grant Universities have joined schools in a lawsuit to block some of Trump's research funding cuts. The Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a collective of school leaders, has also sued to challenge the Trump administration's attempts to target the legal status of thousands of foreign students. 'Your first obligation as president is you don't want to hurt the institution you represent,' Sullivan said of the relative silence coming from non-Ivy League institutions. 'These days it's hard to tell what hurts and what doesn't. I think that's the motive. The motive is not cowardice.' Schools still face a choice between negotiating with the government — and risk compromising on their principles — or inviting Trump's rage by putting up a fight. 'Every school has had an option to correct course and work with the administration, or stand firm in their violations of the law,' the administration official said. 'They have an option, they know very well what to do.' The real question, according to Bollinger, the former Columbia president, is how far the White House will go and how much resistance the schools are willing to put up. 'The power of government is so immense that if they want to destroy institutions, they can,' he said. 'What you do in that kind of environment is you stand on principle.'
Newsweek
32 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Ted Cruz Urges Trump and Musk to 'Kiss and Make Up'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Senator Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, is calling for President Donald Trump and Elon Musk to "kiss and make up" as their public feud over Trump's signature legislation continues to escalate. Newsweek has reached out to the White House and Musk via email on Saturday for comment. Why It Matters Musk and Trump initiated a war of words this week after the tech mogul started attacking the House-approved spending bill, which the president has nicknamed the "One Big Beautiful Bill," that will help him launch a wider effort to implement some of his broader economic and social reforms. Musk, who spent four months rooting around the federal government with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to cut "waste, fraud, and abuse," criticized the bill as a "disgusting abomination" and that it was full of "pork," a reference to abundant discretionary spending in a bill, known as "pork barrel spending." Trump hit back on his own social media platform Truth Social by saying he had asked Musk to leave government because he was "wearing thin." Meanwhile, Musk gave over $200 million to Trump's 2024 presidential campaign and called himself his "first buddy." The breakdown between Trump and Musk threatens the unity of the Republican coalition, with Cruz warning that "every enemy of America, every Marxist, every person who hates our country" is cheering for the divide to be permanent. What To Know The Texas lawmaker made the comments on his podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz, revealing that he was inside the Oval Office when Musk began posting his criticism on X, formerly Twitter, and "the relationship between the billionaire CEO and Trump imploded." The feud centers on Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill Act," which would extend his 2017 tax cuts and boost spending on military and border security while making cuts to Medicaid and other assistance programs. Musk has called the legislation "a disgusting abomination," expressing concerns about its estimated $3.8 trillion addition to the federal debt over the next decade. On his podcast, Cruz described witnessing the breakdown firsthand: "These are two alpha males who are pissed off and, unfortunately, they're unloading on each other. And I wish that were not the case, because I think the country does better when these two amazing heroes are working side-by-side for the country." He warned that "every enemy of America, every Marxist, every person who hates our country, every person who hates freedom, is cheering for this divide to be real, to be deep, to be lasting, to be permanent." The senator added: "Everyone who loves our country is cheering for Elon and President Trump to kiss and make up." The lawmaker expressed hope the relationship could be repaired quickly, saying: "I hope it goes back to zero just as quickly" and comparing the situation to "the kids of a bitter divorce where you're just saying, 'I really wish mommy and daddy would stop screaming.'" Amid their fiery dispute on Thursday, Trump warned that the "easiest way" to save billions in the budget was to "terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts." Musk responded by saying SpaceX, which he is the CEO of, will "begin decommissioning its Dragon spacecraft immediately," although he has since walked that threat back. Cooler heads prevailed Friday, with Musk and Trump refraining from slinging direct insults at each other. However, when asked by a reporter on Air Force One if he planned to follow through on his threat to cut Musk's government subsidies, Trump did not rule it out. "We'll take a look at everything," he said. "It's a lot of money. It's a lot of subsidy. So, we'll take a look at that, only if it's fair for him and for the it has to be fair." Elon Musk speaks with then-President-elect Donald Trump and guests including Donald Trump Jr., Senator Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, and Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican, at a viewing of the launch of the sixth... Elon Musk speaks with then-President-elect Donald Trump and guests including Donald Trump Jr., Senator Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, and Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican, at a viewing of the launch of the sixth test flight of the SpaceX Starship rocket on November 19, 2024, in Brownsville, Texas. MoreWhat People Are Saying Elon Musk wrote on X on Thursday: "Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate." President Donald Trump on Thursday: "Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore. I was surprised. You were here. Everybody in this room practically was here as we had a wonderful send-off. He said wonderful things about me. You couldn't have nicer-said the best things. He's worn the hat. Trump was right about everything, and I am right about the 'Great Big Beautiful Bill.'" Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, wrote earlier this month on X: "I do support President Trump, and I support most of the bill. I'm his biggest defender on foreign policy. But at the same time, I want conservative government, so I have to fight for what I believe in." Senator Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, to Fox News' Sean Hannity on Thursday: "I think it's incredibly unfortunate. You and I are both good friends with President Trump and we're both good friends with Elon Musk. They're both extraordinary men, and they've both done extraordinary things for our country." He added: "Elon is an incredible inventor and business leader. His buying Twitter was massively important, his leadership of DOGE for President Trump was massively important. President Trump is doing phenomenal work every single day. His victory pulled this country back from the abyss. I'll tell you Sean, I was in the Oval Office with the president when this back-and-forth began, and it's really unfortunate. They are both, I think, American heroes. They are both incredibly strong leaders. And listen, it's obvious they are both pissed off right now." House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, on Friday: "Do not doubt and do not second-guess and don't ever challenge the president of the United States, Donald Trump. He is the leader of the party." What Happens Next It was not clear whether Trump and Musk would meet or call to discuss the fallout over the bill, which Trump has suggested the Senate should pass by July 4.
CNBC
33 minutes ago
- CNBC
Trump says he thinks the government has a 'very easy case' against Kilmar Abrego Garcia
President Donald Trump on Saturday said that it wasn't his decision to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, back to the U.S. to face federal charges, saying the "Department of Justice decided to do it that way, and that's fine." "That wasn't my decision," Trump said of Abrego Garcia's return in a phone call with NBC News on Saturday. "It should be a very easy case" for federal prosecutors, the president added. Trump added that he did not speak with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele about Abrego Garcia's return, even though the two men spoke about Abrego Garcia during an April meeting in the Oval Office. His remarks came after Abrego Garcia arrived back in the U.S. on Friday and was charged in an indictment alleging he transported people who were not legally in the country. The indictment came amid a protracted legal battle over whether to bring him back from El Salvador that escalated all the way up to the Supreme Court. Abrego Garcia's family and lawyers have called him a family man, while Trump and his administration have alleged that he is a member of the gang MS-13. The case drew national attention amid the Trump administration's broader push for mass deportations. After Abrego Garcia's deportation, lawyers for the Trump administration said he was deported in an "administrative error," as Abrego Garcia had previous legal protection from deportation to El Salvador. Still, the Trump administration did not attempt to bring Abrego Garcia back, even as the Supreme Court ruled that it had to "facilitate" his return to the U.S. Democrats, including Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., had for weeks said that Abrego Garcia was denied due process when he was detained and deported, arguing that he should have been allowed to defend himself from deportation before he was sent to El Salvador. Trump on Saturday called Van Hollen, who went to visit Abrego Garcia in jail in El Salvador in April, a "loser" for defending the man's right to due process. "He's a loser. The guy's a loser. They're going to lose because of that same thing. That's not what people want to hear," the president said about Van Hollen. "He's trying to defend a man who's got a horrible record of abuse, abuse of women in particular. No, he's a total loser, this guy." On Friday, Attorney General Pam Bondi alleged that Abrego Garcia "was a smuggler of humans and children and women. He made over 100 trips, the grand jury found, smuggling people throughout our country." In a statement Friday, Abrego Garcia's lawyer called Bondi's move "an abuse of power, not justice." —
