logo
No Kings protests to hit Chicago streets

No Kings protests to hit Chicago streets

Axiosa day ago

Protesters are taking to the streets in Chicago and the suburbs Saturday for what organizers are lauding as the largest single-day anti-President Trump rally since the start of the administration.
Why it matters: The widespread movement will run counter to Trump's multimillion-dollar military parade in D.C.
The big picture:"No Kings is a nationwide day of defiance," the group's website proclaims. "From city blocks to small towns, from courthouse steps to community parks, we're taking action to reject authoritarianism."
No Kings events adhere to a shared commitment to nonviolent protest and community safety. Organizers are trained in de-escalation and work closely with local partners to ensure peaceful and effective actions nationwide.
Zoom in: There's a rally in Daley Plaza at noon Saturday, but also events stretching from Beverly to Jefferson Park, and suburbs including Joliet, Oak Park, Evanston and Gurnee.
Protesters are planning to gather across the state, stretching from Rockford to Carbondale, according to No Kings.
Zoom out: Dozens of pro-democracy advocacy groups are partnering to organize the No Kings events.
What they're saying:"Donald Trump wants tanks in the street and a made-for-TV display of dominance for his birthday," the No Kings website said.
"A spectacle meant to look like strength. But real power isn't staged in Washington. It rises up everywhere else."
By the numbers: No Kings organizers are estimating protests in more than 1,500 cities across the country.
Context: Trump proposed a military parade on his 79th birthday and the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary.
The Army predicts it will spend between $25 million and $45 million on the plan, an estimate that doesn't include the costs of the Secret Service or law enforcement.
D.C. is not known for having military parades, but Trump has been vying for one since his first term.
Yes, but: No, Kings are not scheduled to have an organized protest in Washington, D.C.
"We want to create contrast, not conflict," said Leah Greenberg, co-executive director of Indivisible, one of the partner groups.
"The choice to hold No Kings events in every city but D.C. is a deliberate choice to keep the focus on contrast, and not give the Trump administration an opportunity to stoke and then put the focus on conflict."
Catch up quick: Within a month earlier this year, anti-Trump activists rallied during Hands Off!, 50501, May Day and Tesla Takedowns protests.
Plus: For anyone who wants some laughs and entertainment Saturday, The Free America Festival (Obviously) show takes the stage Saturday from noon—3pm at The Raven Theatre.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Come and get me': Gavin Newsom has entered the meme war
‘Come and get me': Gavin Newsom has entered the meme war

Washington Post

time25 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

‘Come and get me': Gavin Newsom has entered the meme war

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has found himself in the center of the internet's spotlight after squaring off with President Donald Trump on social media over the deployment of military troops to counter protesters in Los Angeles. While police deployed tear gas and shot at protesters in Los Angeles with rubber bullets on Monday, Newsom shared a screenshot on TikTok of a Washington Post headline reporting that California would sue Trump over the National Guard's presence, paired with a trending sound sampled from the movie 'Mean Girls. ' The video was captioned 'We will not stand while Donald Trump illegally federalizes the National Guard' and was liked more than 255,000 times.

Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, U.S. Appeals court decides
Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, U.S. Appeals court decides

Yahoo

time25 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, U.S. Appeals court decides

By Dietrich Knauth (Reuters) -A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on Tuesday while it reviews a lower court decision blocking them on grounds that Trump had exceeded his authority by imposing them. The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. means Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports from most U.S. trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and Mexico. The appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Trump cited to justify them, but it allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the appeals play out. The tariffs, used by Trump as negotiating leverage with U.S. trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. The ruling has no impact on other tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on May 28 that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress, not the president, the power to levy taxes and tariffs, and that the president had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during national emergencies. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling, and the Federal Circuit in Washington put the lower court decision on hold the next day while it considered whether to impose a longer-term pause. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 12 U.S. states. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The 1977 law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their assets. Trump is the first U.S. president to use it to impose tariffs. Trump has said that the tariffs imposed in February on Canada, China and Mexico were to fight illegal fentanyl trafficking at U.S. borders, denied by the three countries, and that the across-the-board tariffs on all U.S. trading partners imposed in April were a response to the U.S. trade deficit. The states and small businesses had argued the tariffs were not a legal or appropriate way to address those matters, and the small businesses argued that the decades-long U.S. practice of buying more goods than it exports does not qualify as an emergency that would trigger IEEPA. At least five other court cases have challenged the tariffs justified under the emergency economic powers act, including other small businesses and the state of California. One of those cases, in federal court in Washington, D.C., also resulted in an initial ruling against the tariffs, and no court has yet backed the unlimited emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed. Errore nel recupero dei dati Effettua l'accesso per consultare il tuo portafoglio Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati

Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members
Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members

Associated Press

time26 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members

A federal judge has tossed out a lawsuit over President Donald Trump's dismantling of a U.S. federal agency that invests in African small businesses. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington, D.C., dismissed the case on Tuesday, finding that Trump was acting within his legal authority when he fired the U.S. African Development Foundation's board members in February. In March, the same judge ruled that the administration's removal of most grant money and staff from the congressionally created agency was also legal, as long as the agency was maintained at the minimum level required by law. USADF was created as an independent agency in 1980, and its board members must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. In 2023, Congress allocated $46 million to the agency to invest in small agricultural and energy infrastructure projects and other economic development initiatives in 22 African countries. On Feb. 19, Trump issued an executive order that said USADF, the U.S. Institute of Peace, the Inter-American Foundation and the Presidio Trust should be scaled back to the minimum presence required by law. At the time, USADF had five of its seven board seats filled. A few days later, an administration official told Ward Brehm that he was fired, and emails were sent to the other board members notifying them that they had also been terminated. Those emails were never received, however, because they were sent to the wrong email addresses. The four board members, believing they still held their posts because they had not been given notice, met in March and passed a resolution appointing Brehm as the president of the board. But Trump had already appointed Pete Marocco as the new chairman of what the administration believed to now be a board of one. Since then, both men have claimed to be the president of the agency, and Brehm filed the lawsuit March 6. Leon said that even though they didn't receive the emails, the four board members were effectively terminated in February, and so they didn't have the authority to appoint Brehm to lead the board. An attorney for Brehm did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Another lawsuit over the dismantling of the agency is still pending before the same judge. In that case, two USADF staffers and a consulting firm based in Zambia that works closely with USADF contend that the Trump administration's efforts to deeply scale back the agency wrongly usurps Congress' powers. They also say Marocco was unlawfully appointed to the board, in part because he was never confirmed by the Senate as required. Leon's ruling in Brehm's case did not address whether the Trump administration had the power to install Marocco as board chair on a temporary basis.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store