DOGE Asks US Supreme Court to Block Access to Its Records
The Trump administration has asked the US Supreme Court to halt a judge's order that would force it to answer questions and turn over documents about Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency in a fight over public access to the office's records.
The Justice Department is challenging a ruling by a Washington federal judge, who said US DOGE Service must comply with demands for information about its structure and operations, including making administrator Amy Gleason available to testify under oath at a deposition. A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit on May 14 denied the government's request to intervene.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate Democrats demand probe of Ed Martin's pledge to 'shame' Trump's opponents, other actions at DOJ
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee are pushing for an investigation into top Justice Department official Ed Martin over his stated plans to "shame" political opponents of President Donald Trump who he's unable to charge criminally, as well as a host of other politically charged matters Martin has publicly pledged to pursue in his new position. "I write to express my grave concern about Ed Martin's stated intention to abuse his new roles as lead of the so-called 'Weaponization Working Group' you constituted at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and as DOJ's Pardon Attorney," Sen. Dick Durbin, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, said in a letter transmitted to the Justice Department, which was first obtained by ABC News. "Following his disgraceful tenure as Interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Mr. Martin apparently plans to continue his misconduct in his new roles at DOJ." The DOJ did not immediately respond to an ABC News request for comment on the letter. MORE: Ed Martin, Trump's DOJ pardon attorney, says he'll review Biden's outgoing pardons Martin's controversial tenure as the interim U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., in the opening months of Trump's presidency thrust the office into turmoil and led several Senate Republicans to state publicly they wouldn't support his permanent confirmation in the role. But once the White House announced they were pulling Martin's nomination, Trump said Martin would instead be appointed to several top positions working out of DOJ's main headquarters -- serving as an associate deputy attorney general, the U.S. pardon attorney and director of the so-called "Weaponization Working Group." Martin celebrated the news on his X account, posting 'Eagle Unleashed,' and in various interviews celebrated what he described as a mandate from Trump directly to target the alleged 'weaponization' of the department under the Biden administration. 'It's classic Donald Trump, right? That somebody tries to block him and block his pick, and he decides to double down,' Martin told Breitbart News last month. 'This is probably the greatest job I could ever envision.' MORE: Trump US attorney nominee distances himself from antisemitic Jan. 6 rioter he once praised In a news conference announcing his departure from the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office, Martin confirmed he planned to launch a probe of last-minute pardons issued by former President Joe Biden just before he left office -- and suggested that officials he's unable to charge would instead be publicly "shamed." "There are some really bad actors, some people that did some really bad things to the American people," Martin said. "And if they can be charged, we'll charge them. But if they can't be charged, we will name them ... And in a culture that respects shame, they should be people that are shamed. And that's a fact. That's the way things work. And so that's how I believe the job operates." The approach would directly conflict with longstanding DOJ policy that prohibits prosecutors from naming or disparaging individuals who they don't intend to charge criminally. When asked about that policy by ABC News during the news conference, Martin said he would "have to look at what the provision you're referring to, to see -- we want to square ourselves with doing the things correctly." The letter from Senate Democrats said Martin's statements "are a brazen admission that Mr. Martin plans to systematically violate the Justice Manual's prohibition on extrajudicial statements by shaming uncharged parties for nakedly partisan reasons. Weaponizing DOJ in this manner will further undermine the public's trust in the department in irreparable ways." MORE: Bondi, as new AG, launches 'Weaponization Working Group' to review officials who investigated Trump In his early days as pardon attorney, Martin said he advised the president in his pardon of former Virginia county sheriff Scott Jenkins, who had been sentenced to ten years in prison for a federal bribery conviction. "No MAGA left behind," Martin posted on X in response to the pardon. Durbin's letter further cited reports Martin has "personally advocated" fast-tracking pardons for members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers who were convicted of seditious conspiracy stemming from their roles leading up to the attack on the Capitol, after President Trump initially opted to commute their sentences in his sweeping clemency action for the nearly 1600 individuals charged in connection with Jan. 6. Durbin's letter requests Bondi provide a host of records related to Martin's appointment and early days as head of the Weaponization Working Group and Pardon Attorney's Office. It's unclear whether DOJ will ultimately respond to Durbin's demands given Democrats' minority position on the committee. Senate Democrats demand probe of Ed Martin's pledge to 'shame' Trump's opponents, other actions at DOJ originally appeared on
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The UK, Germany and Canada have slashed foreign aid this year, deepening damage done by US cuts, analysis shows
Western countries have slashed foreign aid budgets this year and reductions will steepen in 2026, with the United States, United Kingdom, Germany and Canada cutting the most, according to a new analysis from the Center for Global Development (CGD). The aid cuts will mean 'significant losses' for many developing nations, according to the analysis from the DC-based think tank, shared exclusively with CNN. Ethiopia is projected to lose the most aid in nominal terms, with Jordan, Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of Congo also hit particularly hard. Smaller nations will also be hammered by the reduction in foreign aid, with Lesotho, Micronesia and Eswatini each losing around 50% of their aid. 'It's setting fire to the bold ambitions to solve poverty and transform developing countries,' Lee Crawfurd, one of the authors of the report, told CNN. 'It's some of the poorest, most fragile places in the world that are going to be hardest hit.' The analysis looked at projections of bilateral aid – money provided directly to another country rather than routed through multilateral organizations such as United Nations agencies or the World Bank – for 2025 and 2026. The US is projected to cut the most, with a projected 56% reduction compared to levels two years ago. The Trump administration's gutting of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) earlier this year has already left a hole in many international aid budgets, and several other Western nations are following suit rather than filling the void. 'A big, big chunk of overall cuts in the next couple of years are going to be from the US pulling out, rather than other countries. But these other countries are making things worse,' said Crawfurd, a senior research fellow at the CGD. The UK aid cuts are estimated to represent a roughly 39% reduction compared to 2023 levels of spending. Meanwhile, Germany is cutting about 27%, Canada 25% and France 19% of their international aid budgets. The true level of aid cuts remains unclear, as the Trump administration's proposed budget and other government proposals are still making their way through legislatures. But some funding cuts are almost guaranteed. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced in February that his government would increase the UK's defense spending by cutting its aid budget to 0.3% of gross national income in 2027, its lowest level since 1999. Many organizations and aid workers have raised alarm about European governments pitting aid budgets against defense spending. 'Cutting the already lean aid budget is a false economy and will only increase division and amounts to a betrayal of the world's most vulnerable people,' said Halima Begum, head of Oxfam GB. 'It is a false dichotomy to pit international cooperation to tackle poverty against national security interests in order to avoid tax increases.' Crawfurd said that bilateral aid is a 'really small part of government budgets' and the money for defense or security could be found elsewhere. 'It's a choice… it's a political choice,' he added. The think tank wrote in its analysis that 'one striking takeaway is that some countries are projected to lose large amounts of ODA (official development assistance) simply because of who their main donors are – while others are projected to lose very little' – a game of chance, with losses not matching up to the recipient country's needs. Yemen, for example, is projected to experience a 19% fall in its bilateral funding compared to 2023, while its 'comparable' neighbor country Somalia is projected to lose about 39%. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has also warned that multilateral aid cuts are threatening efforts to tackle 44 of the highest-priority, protracted humanitarian crises. As of April, only 11.9% of the funding for UN response plans had been covered. 'Every year, the UN has been helping more than 100 million people in the world as they go through the worst time of their lives in wars and disasters. But let's be clear: we won't reach the level of funding in 2025 that we've seen in previous years,' Anja Nitzsche, OCHA's chief of partnerships and resource mobilization told CNN in a statement. 'Vulnerable families are being left without food, clean water, healthcare, shelter or protection in places such as Sudan, Yemen, Ukraine, Myanmar and Afghanistan.' The CGD is urging Western donors to reallocate aid to the poorest countries to try to 'ensure that resources are directed to populations in greatest need.' Western countries also need to improve coordination to mitigate further damage, especially as they are withdrawing from countries receiving aid, the think tank said. In some countries, the cuts will change who the largest donor is, which 'can lead to major shifts in what gets funded and how,' according to the CGD. For example, Portugal will likely overtake the US in aid to Angola, and Japan is projected to overtake France in Egypt. 'A new lead donor may not continue the same programs' or may take time to get up and running, according to the analysis. Giving a larger share of aid to multilateral organizations can also help improve international cooperation and cut down on duplication of aid efforts. 'Coordination is an ongoing challenge,' Crawfurd told CNN. 'The easiest way to do that is just to fund big multilateral funds like the World Bank.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
US files lawsuit against New York for blocking immigration officials near court
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Justice Department said on Thursday that it has filed a lawsuit challenging a New York state law that blocks immigration officials from arresting individuals at or near New York courthouses. "Specifically, the complaint challenges a law, called the Protect Our Courts Act, that purposefully shields dangerous aliens from being lawfully detained at or on their way to or from a courthouse and imposes criminal liability for violations of the shield," the Justice Department said in a statement. Attorney General Pamela Bondi said New York was employing policies similar to those used by California to prevent "illegal aliens from apprehension." "This latest lawsuit in a series of sanctuary city litigation underscores the Department of Justice's commitment to keeping Americans safe and aggressively enforcing the law," she said. Demonstrators once again took to the streets in major U.S. cities on Thursday to protest President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. A federal judge in San Francisco will hear arguments later in the day as part of California's lawsuit against Trump's deployment of U.S. troops in Los Angeles.
