logo
California officials are using taxpayer money for 'political purposes,' says Dr. Houman Hemmati

California officials are using taxpayer money for 'political purposes,' says Dr. Houman Hemmati

Fox News2 days ago
'Fox News @ Night' panelists Julie Hamill and Dr. Houman Hemmati discuss California officials' legal wins against the Trump administration and a federal funding freeze to UCLA.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Congress members trying to see ICE detainees at MDC Brooklyn jail barred from entry
Congress members trying to see ICE detainees at MDC Brooklyn jail barred from entry

Yahoo

time4 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Congress members trying to see ICE detainees at MDC Brooklyn jail barred from entry

NEW YORK — Officials at MDC Brooklyn barred three Democrat members of Congress from conducting an oversight visit of the jail's ICE detention operation, sparking a brief lockdown that led to cancelled legal visits for inmates seeing their defense lawyers. The Congress members, Reps. Adriano Espaillat, Nydia Velazquez and Dan Goldman, showed up at the notorious Sunset Park jail Wednesday morning, but were blocked at the door, then were briefly trapped between the iron gate in front of the jail and its entrance doors. Inside, about 20 defense attorneys visiting their clients abruptly had those visits cut short, multiple lawyers told the Daily News. Jail staff recalled those inmates back to their housing units, and wouldn't let their lawyers leave the MDC for about a half hour as the drama unfolded outside, the attorneys said. Those lawyers included Marc Agnifilo, who represents Sean 'Diddy' Combs and alleged healthcare CEO killer Luigi Mangione, both of whom are housed in MDC, sources said. Agnifilo did not return messages seeking comment Wednesday. 'We were trapped between the gate and the building,' Velazquez told The News. She said that the lawmakers entered the gate and approached the place's front door, and Espaillat asked a masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent outside to show his face. 'He [the agent] immediately jumped in front of the gate and locked us inside, and then went upstairs, climbed the steps for the federal building and locked the door so we could not get out to the street,' Velazquez said. 'We couldn't get into the building.' New York Immigration Coalition President Murad Awawdeh, who accompanied the lawmakers, said the ICE agent immediately confronted them, asking for ID, then triggered a lockdown and disappeared into the building. 'It was a circus that the federal prison bureau created,' he said. 'Why is the federal government going so far out of its way to prohibit anyone from seeing what's happening inside their facilities?' Eventually, an assistant to the warden came out, 'and he said what we knew he would say, that we have to request seven days in advance for a permit to allow us to go inside,' Velazquez said. That's against federal law, which gives Congress members the right to make unannounced visits, she said. Starting in June, MDC Brooklyn began holding more than 100 ICE detainees as part of an interagency agreement between ICE and and the Bureau of Prisons to use eight federal facilities across the country to hold immigrants ensnared in Donald Trump's mass deportation machine. 'Denying Members of Congress access to a federal detention facility is outrageous and unacceptable,' Espaillat said in a statement later Wednesday. 'MDC Brooklyn has a well-documented record of abuse. ICE should not be allowed to expand its reach through backdoor deals with federal prisons. This contract must be terminated now.' BOP spokeswoman Randilee Giamusso said Wednesday that the prison system would be happy to accommodate Congress member visits if they give advance notice. 'However, as a law enforcement entity, we must prioritize the safety of our staff, inmates and our facilities. We remain committed to working with our congressional partners,' Giamusso said. 'With proper notice, the BOP is happy to accommodate a request for a site visit from any congressional member.' Espaillat and several other Congress members sued the Trump administration last week, arguing that federal law specifically prohibits immigration detention facilities from requiring prior notice before members of Congress can make oversight visits. 'The Trump administration's lawless efforts to defy that constitutional authority are a gross abuse of power,' Goldman said, 'and we're taking them to court in defense of that principle and to find out what they're hiding.' _____

UCLA says Trump administration has frozen $584 million in grants, threatening research
UCLA says Trump administration has frozen $584 million in grants, threatening research

Chicago Tribune

time5 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

UCLA says Trump administration has frozen $584 million in grants, threatening research

The Trump administration has suspended $584 million in federal grants for the University of California, Los Angeles, nearly double the amount that was previously thought, the school's chancellor announced Wednesday. UCLA is the first public university whose federal grants have been targeted by the administration over allegations of civil rights violations related to antisemitism and affirmative action. The Trump administration has frozen or paused federal funding over similar allegations against private colleges. 'If these funds remain suspended, it will be devastating for UCLA and for Americans across the nation,' Chancellor Julio Frenk said Wednesday in a statement, noting the groundbreaking research that has come out of the university. The departments affected rely on funding from the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy, Frenk said. The U.S. Department of Education did not immediately respond to an email from The Associated Press requesting comment. The Trump administration recently announced the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division found UCLA violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 'by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students.' The announcement came as UCLA reached a $6 million settlement with three Jewish students and a Jewish professor who sued the university, arguing it violated their civil rights by allowing pro-Palestinian protesters in 2024 to block their access to classes and other areas on campus. The university has said that it is committed to campus safety and inclusivity and will continue to implement recommendations. The new UC president, James B. Milliken, said in a statement Wednesday that it has agreed to talks with the administration over the allegations against UCLA. 'These cuts do nothing to address antisemitism,' Milliken said. 'Moreover, the extensive work that UCLA and the entire University of California have taken to combat antisemitism has apparently been ignored.' Milliken said the 'cuts would be a death knell for innovative work that saves lives, grows our economy, and fortifies our national security. It is in our country's best interest that funding be restored.' As part of the lawsuit settlement, UCLA said it will contribute $2.3 million to eight organizations that combat antisemitism and support the university's Jewish community. It also has created an Office of Campus and Community Safety, instituting new policies to manage protests on campus. Frenk, whose Jewish father and grandparents fled Nazi Germany to Mexico and whose wife is the daughter of a Holocaust survivor, launched an initiative to combat antisemitism and anti-Israeli bias. Last week, Columbia agreed to pay $200 million as part of a settlement to resolve investigations into the government's allegations that the school violated federal antidiscrimination laws. The agreement also restores more than $400 million in research grants. The Trump administration plans to use its deal with Columbia as a template for other universities, with financial penalties that are now seen as an expectation.

Trump accuses banks of political discrimination. Here's what to know
Trump accuses banks of political discrimination. Here's what to know

Fast Company

time5 minutes ago

  • Fast Company

Trump accuses banks of political discrimination. Here's what to know

The White House was preparing to act against banks for allegedly dropping customers for political reasons, as President Donald Trump said he believes that banks, including JPMorgan and Bank of America, had discriminated against him and his supporters. A draft of the executive order, which was reviewed by Reuters, instructs regulators to review banks for 'politicized or unlawful debanking' practices. The order could authorize monetary penalties or other disciplinary measures against violators. It is likely to be announced as early as this week, two industry sources said. The White House had no immediate comment on the reported order. Trump's criticism adds pressure on America's largest lenders, but it also shows how the president's personal slights and business interests are getting reflected in the administration's policies — something that critics say raises issues of conflicts of interest. The sprawling Trump business empire has been placed into a trust, but it is still ultimately owned by the president. An executive order against the banks would come after Trump said in a CNBC interview on Tuesday that the country's top two lenders had previously rejected his deposits. Trump said, without providing evidence, that the banks' refusal to take his deposits indicated that the administration of former President Joe Biden had encouraged regulators to 'destroy Trump.' 'They did discriminate,' Trump said of actions taken by JPMorgan after his first term in office. 'I had hundreds of millions, I had many, many accounts loaded up with cash … and they told me, 'I'm sorry sir, we can't have you. You have 20 days to get out.' 'They totally discriminate against, I think, me maybe even more, but they discriminate against many conservatives,' he said. Trump said he subsequently tried to deposit funds with Bank of America and was also refused, and eventually split the cash. 'I ended up going to small banks all over the place,' he said. 'I was putting $10 million here, $10 million there, did $5 million, $10 million, $12 million,' he said, without naming the lenders. In a statement, JPMorgan did not address the president's specific claims about his account. 'We don't close accounts for political reasons, and we agree with President Trump that regulatory change is desperately needed,' JPMorgan said. 'We commend the White House for addressing this issue and look forward to working with them to get this right.' BofA also did not address Trump's specific claims. 'Reputational risk' issue During Biden's administration, regulators were able to scrutinize banks' decisions on the basis of reputational risks, a source familiar with the matter said. Lenders were under intense scrutiny and pressure to weigh reputational risks when dealing with Trump because of his legal woes, another source familiar with the situation said. JPMorgan continues to have a banking relationship with members of the Trump family that dates back years, and it also banks a number of campaign accounts linked to Trump, the source said. After Trump took power, the Federal Reserve announced in June it was directing its supervisors to no longer consider reputational risk when examining banks, a metric that had been a focus of industry complaints. 'What the White House is doing is telling the banks not to hide behind regulations to deny loans or banking relationships,' said Wells Fargo bank analyst Mike Mayo. 'Banks can use their normal underwriting standards and deny services, but not blame regulators or use reputational risk as a justification.' BofA said it welcomed the administration's efforts to clarify the policies. 'We've provided detailed proposals and will continue to work with the administration and Congress to improve the regulatory framework,' the bank said. Trump in January admonished the CEOs of JPMorgan and BofA for denying services to conservatives. At the time, the two banks denied making banking decisions based on politics. 'Regulatory overreach' Banks have consistently argued that any complaints about 'debanking' should be aimed at regulators, as they argue onerous rules and overzealous bank supervisors can discourage them from engaging in certain activities. 'The heart of the problem is regulatory overreach and supervisory discretion,' the Bank Policy Institute, an industry group, said in a statement. Lenders have held discussions around debanking and weighed scenarios around a potential order, the first source said. Banks are also hopeful the administration may change anti-money laundering laws that they say are outdated and burdensome, the source added.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store