‘Incredibly sad' Supreme Court allowing mass layoffs at Education Dept. : Union official
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Judge Boasberg should appoint a special counsel to investigate Bondi and her DOJ
Two recent revelations — a memorandum from El Salvador to the United Nations about its detention of migrants from the U.S., and a fired Justice Department attorney's whistle-blower report — cry out for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate and prosecute criminal contempt violations against the top three officials in the Department of Justice. There is sufficient evidence that these leaders — Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove — committed criminal contempt. They acted in an apparently concerted effort to stonewall the court in the civil case brought against the government by Venezuelan migrants who, as described by the Supreme Court, were sent to El Salvador in violation of their due process rights. Chief Judge James E. Boasberg, the federal district court judge presiding over that case, has the power to initiate such an investigation and prosecution with the appointment of a private attorney to act as special counsel. Such a judicial appointment is not unprecedented. In 1987, the Supreme Court — in a case called Young v. U.S. ex rel. Vuitton et Fils, now codified in Rule 42 of the federal criminal rules — empowers federal district courts, based on probable cause, to appoint a private attorney as special counsel to investigate and prosecute criminal contempt. The newly revealed evidence overwhelmingly supports Judge Boasberg in appointing a special counsel. Indeed, at the time that Archibald Cox was appointed Watergate Special Prosecutor, there was far less evidence known about the criminal activity of President Richard Nixon's two former attorneys general, John Mitchell and Richard Kleindienst. After a thorough investigation, both were later convicted of serious federal crimes. Bondi, Blanche and Bove appear to have directly supervised the Justice Department's defense of this case from the start. On Mar. 19, all three signed the government's motion to stay Boasberg's request to detail 'the movements of aircraft' that transported Venezuelans to El Salvador after the judge had famously ordered planes to be turned around so they could be brought back to the U.S. Normally, documents filed with a court are only signed by the line attorneys and their direct supervisors. On Apr. 16, Bondi responded to the Justice Department's admission that Kilmar Abrego Garcia had been sent to El Salvador as a result of an 'administrative error.' She stated in an interview that the government would only fly him back if Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele wanted to return him. Bondi emphasized that 'President Bukele said he was not sending him back. That's the end of the story.' Bondi's statement was consistent with those of others in the administration, including President Trump, who claimed that the government lacked the authority to return Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national. Justice Department line attorneys also argued Bondi's position to Boasberg, that 'both 'detention' and 'ultimate disposition'' of the Venezuelan migrants 'are matters within the legal authority of El Salvador.' But Bondi's statement is contradicted by a newly released document, dated March 26, provided by El Salvador to the U.N. in response to an inquiry into the deportations. El Salvador admitted that 'the jurisdiction and legal responsibility for these persons lie exclusively with the competent foreign [i.e., American] authorities, by virtue of' their agreements with the Trump administration. The memorandum reflects that the U.S. government received a copy of this document. Bondi's credibility is further undermined by the Justice Department's miraculous return of Abrego Garcia to the U.S. to stand trial on criminal charges based on what a Tennessee magistrate judge found was the unreliable testimony of two cooperating witnesses in his case. The truth of the Salvadoran document is additionally supported by the $6 million the U.S. reportedly paid to El Salvador for imprisoning the Venezuelans. This astonishing document is compounded by the recent whistle-blower revelations by a fired Justice Department attorney named Erez Reuveni, who recounted a meeting of Justice Department attorneys on March 14. Bove presided over the meeting and 'stressed to all in attendance that the plane [with Venezuelan migrants] needed to take off no matter what.' Addressing a 'possibility that a court order would enjoin these removals,' Bove stated that the Justice Department 'would need to consider telling the courts 'f— you' and ignore any such court order.' Reuveni's statements are corroborated by his release of internal Justice Department communications among various lawyers who were at the March 14 meeting and other lawyers at the Department of Homeland Security. Blanche denied Reuveni's account, as reported by The New York Times, 'asserting he was at the same meeting and never heard Mr. Bove suggest the department disregard court orders.' Reuveni countered that Blanche only 'briefly entered the conference room' during the meeting 'to speak privately to Bove.' Blanche 'did not participate in the meeting,' he claimed, and it was immediately after Blanche left that Bove spoke to the other Justice lawyers about ignoring court orders. In contravention of Boasberg's order, on the next day, March 15, the planes did take off and did not return the Venezuelan migrants to the U.S. Before these two startling revelations, Judge Boasberg fo u nd on June 4 that 'while it is a close question, the current record does not support Plaintiffs' [the Venezuelans'] assertion that they are in the constructive custody' of the U.S., meaning that the government had the authority to order them returned to America. Boasberg held that the Venezuelans 'failed to overcome a sworn declaration from a knowledgeable government official attesting' that the 'ongoing detention' of the Venezuelans 'is a question of Salvadoran law.' But El Salvador's document to the U.N. puts the lie to that official's claims. Based on the Salvadoran government's document and the whistle-blower's revelations, there is more than adequate probable cause for Judge Boasberg to appoint a special counsel to investigate the top leadership of Trump's Justice Department for criminal contempt. A grand jury investigation could clarify who knew what and when and identify those at the Justice Department who knowingly were part of an effort to obstruct the court's orders. Nick Akerman, a former assistant special Watergate prosecutor and a former assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York, is an attorney in New York City.
CBS News
30 minutes ago
- CBS News
Brazil prosecutor says ex-President Jair Bolsonaro, a Trump ally, guilty of violent coup plot
Brasilia — A prosecutor asked Brazil's Supreme Court on Tuesday to find ex-president Jair Bolsonaro guilty of plotting a coup, in closing arguments after a trial that saw President Trump try to intervene on behalf of his right-wing ally. Bolsonaro is accused of seeking to overturn the 2022 election won by his left-wing opponent, current President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. The prosecution told the court that Bolsonaro, a former army officer, and seven others were guilty of participating in "armed criminal association" and had sought to "violently overthrow the democratic order." After the defense presents its closing arguments, a five-justice panel will decide the fate of the former president. If found guilty, Bolsonaro and his co-defendants could face up to 40 years in prison. Bolsonaro says he is the victim of political persecution, echoing Mr. Trump's defense when he faced criminal charges before his White House return. "It's not about imprisoning me; they want to eliminate me," Bolsonaro told news website Poder360 on Tuesday. Prosecutors say Bolsonaro tried to overturn his 2022 loss in a plot that only failed because the military did not side with him. The plan allegedly included dozens of people and involved a plot to poison Lula and shoot a Brazilian Supreme Court justice. Bolsonaro's defense team has vehemently denied the charges. Bolsonaro has also been barred from running for office until 2030, after casting doubt on the country's electronic voting machines. After the plot failed, violent Bolsonaro supporters rioted, rampaging through government buildings in the capital Brasilia in scenes that echoed the Jan. 6, 2021 assault on the U.S. Capitol by Mr. Trump's supporters after the Republican lost to Democrat Joe Biden in 2020. The trial has attracted attention from Mr. Trump, who returned to power in the 2024 election and continues to claim — despite this being rejected repeatedly by the courts — that he won in 2020. Mr. Trump has repeatedly called on social media for Bolsonaro's trial to be stopped, accusing the authorities in Brazil of mounting a "witch hunt" and a "disgrace." On July 9, he took his campaign to extraordinary new levels by announcing plans to tariff Brazilian imports to the U.S. at 50%, again citing what he called a "witch hunt" against Bolsonaro. And on Tuesday, Washington said it was opening an investigation into "unfair trading practices" by Brazil, a move that could provide a legal basis to justify imposing tariffs on South America's largest economy. Unlike the tariffs that Mr. Trump is slapping on countries around much of the world, including top U.S. allies, the measures against Brazil — which are set to take effect on August 1 — were announced in openly political terms. Mr. Trump cited "Brazil's insidious attacks on Free Elections," among other issues, warning of further escalation if the country retaliated — something Lula indicated would happen. Unlike many other countries that have been threatened with tariff hikes, the U.S. runs a trade surplus with Brazil, meaning Brazil buys more American goods than the U.S. buys from Brazil. Last year, the U.S. exported about $49 billion worth of goods to Brazil, and Brazil exported just over $42 billion in goods to the U.S., according to Census Bureau figures. On Friday, Mr. Trump reiterated his claim that Bolsonaro was being unfairly treated. "They're treating President Bolsonaro very unfairly," Mr. Trump told reporters, calling him "a good man." "I know the honest ones, and I know the crooked ones," he added. Lula has hit back at Mr. Trump's "interference," insisting that "no one is above the law."
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Tells Education Chief to Get Cutting After SCOTUS Victory
Donald Trump has hailed a court ruling greenlighting 1,300 job cuts at the Department of Education as a 'major victory' for parents and students that will allow him to press on with shuttering the department completely. Trump took to Truth Social to thank the Supreme Court for its 'GREAT' ruling after it overruled a lower court injunction issued by a federal judge in May that had paused his staff cuts. Those cuts are part of the president's plan to gut the education department and return its functions back to individual states, with no federal funding. The department, which enforces civil rights in schools, supports students with disabilities and handles students loans among its duties, has been in MAGA crosshairs all year but Trump did not have the power to shut it himself. Because an act of Congress established the Department of Education in 1979, the same process must be followed to dismantle it. There is still a legal challenge in the lower courts against Trump's plans, but the president and Education Secretary Linda McMahon are forging ahead with abolishing the department that she leads. In March, McMahon, a former WWE CEO, called out 'radical anti-American ideology' in schools and said, 'We must start thinking about our final mission at the department as an overhaul—a last chance to restore the culture of liberty and excellence that made American education great." On Monday, Trump posted: 'The United States Supreme Court has handed a Major Victory to Parents and Students across the Country, by declaring the Trump Administration may proceed on returning the functions of the Department of Education BACK TO THE STATES. Now, with this GREAT Supreme Court Decision, our Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon, may begin this very important process. 'The Federal Government has been running our Education System into the ground, but we are going to turn it all around by giving the Power back to the PEOPLE. America's Students will be the best, brightest, and most Highly Educated anywhere in the World.' McMahon now has the power to cut more staff and outsource DEO functions to other federal agencies. CNN reported DEO staff started receiving emails two hours after the court decision, notifying them they would lose their jobs on Aug. 1. In a statement McMahon said, it was a 'shame that the highest court in the land had to step in to allow President Trump to advance the reforms Americans elected him to deliver using the authorities granted to him by the U.S. Constitution.' Moving forward, McMahon is cutting seven of the 12 offices of the DOE's Office for Civil Rights, while the Treasury Department is expected to take over federal student loans—a debt which is set at $1.6 trillion. In a statement, DNC Chair Ken Martin criticized the attacks on the Department of Education. 'Donald Trump handpicked radical, out-of-touch Supreme Court justices to clear the path for his reckless agenda and today they delivered another blow to the millions of American families who rely on public education,' Martin said. Martin added, 'Trump and his billionaire donor Secretary of Education Linda McMahon have made it crystal clear they don't give a damn about America's public school students. Defunding public schools won't make America smarter or stronger—it will set back our kids and leave future generations worse off.' Unusually, the court order was unsigned and no vote count was released, however Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, joined by fellow liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Sotomayor wrote in her 19-page dissent, 'Only Congress has the power to abolish the department.' She added, 'The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive, but either way the threat to our Constitution's separation of powers is grave.'
