Stockholm City Council rejects US Embassy demands to end DEI programming
STOCKHOLM (AP) — The Stockholm City Council has rejected the U.S. Embassy's demands that it comply with the Trump administration's rollback of diversity, equity and inclusion policies.
It's the latest in U.S. President Donald Trump's efforts to terminate such programs within the federal government — and beyond — in what he described in his inauguration speech as a move to end efforts to 'socially engineer race and gender into every aspect of public and private life.'
Countries and cities across Europe have received similar outreach from U.S. embassies, including France, Belgium and the city of Barcelona, all of which lashed out at the U.S. efforts to expand its anti-DEI policies to the continent.
In an email to the city's planning office, dated April 29, the U.S. Embassy in Stockholm asked that Stockholm officials sign a certification that their contractors do not operate any programs promoting DEI that would violate U.S. anti-discrimination law.
The city council said Friday that it will not comply with the embassy's demands or respond officially.
'We were really surprised, of course,' Jan Valeskog, vice mayor for city planning, told The Associated Press. 'We will not sign this document at all, of course not.'
Valeskog said that while the city wants to continue its good relationship with the embassy, it will follow Swedish law and city policies to include DEI practices.
The Associated Press
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Associated Press
33 minutes ago
- Associated Press
The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
WASHINGTON (AP) — Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs, deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations, Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. Growing concerns over actions The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump frequently sites 1977 law to justify actions Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has ceded its power to the presidency Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Trump's allies support his moves Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.'


Washington Post
38 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Protests erupt in Los Angeles after dozens detained in immigration raids
Multiple ICE raids in Los Angeles on Friday set off a wave of protests, as the Trump administration's sweeping crackdown on border control escalates. Aerial video footage from local media showed officers outside clothing wholesaler Ambiance Apparel, one of the reported locations of the raids, putting handcuffed individuals into white vans, with protesters trying to stop them. Later footage shows officers in what appear to be tactical gear riding armored vehicles as flash-bangs go off around the crowds.


CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
How Kilmar Abrego Garcia's case became a political flashpoint
Kilmar Abrego Garcia's case started quietly, boiling down to a clerical error that moved him up on a list to land on a deportation flight destined to El Salvador in March. And then a court filing from the Trump Justice Department acknowledging the mistake brought it to the national forefront – culminating in a fraught legal battle and heated political debate. On Friday, the Trump administration announced that Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national who had resided in Maryland until he was mistakenly deported to his home country, landed in the United States, and was facing criminal charges. It was an extraordinary development in a case that's come to define the president's hardline immigration policies and a striking about-face from the Trump administration, which had maintained he would not return to the US. At the start of the legal battle, nearly three months ago, both sides agreed that Abrego Garcia's deportation to El Salvador – and subsequent imprisonment in the country's notorious mega-prison – was a mistake. In 2019, an immigration judge granted Abrego Garcia withholding of removal, meaning he couldn't be removed to El Salvador over fear of persecution. A senior Immigration and Customs Enforcement official called his removal an 'administrative error' in a March court declaration, appearing to mark the first time the administration had conceded an error over the controversial flights to El Salvador that resulted in the detention of hundreds of migrants in the CECOT prison. But then, Trump administration officials publicly abandoned that position and called Abrego Garcia 'a terrorist,' because they allege he is a member of MS-13, which the US has designated as a terrorist organization. His attorneys and family maintain that he was not a member of MS-13 and have argued that he is still entitled to due process. Here's how Abrego Garcia's case played out over the last few months. Abrego Garcia, who came to the United States illegally in 2012, first had an encounter with immigration authorities in 2019 after an arrest. At the time, the government similarly argued that Abrego Garcia was a gang member while he made the case that he feared a possible return to El Salvador. The immigration judge presiding over the case sided with Abrego Garcia and ruled that he may not be deported back to El Salvador. Years later, on March 12, 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement pulled over Abrego Garcia and arrested him, which came as the Trump administration continued its aggressive crackdown on immigration. Abrego Garcia was then mistakenly put on a deportation flight three days later and sent to CECOT. It took the Trump administration weeks to concede that it mistakenly deported the Maryland father to El Salvador 'because of an administrative error.' But while doing acknowledging the mistake, the administration said in court filings on March 31 that it could not return him because he was in Salvadoran custody. Later that week, Judge Paula Xinis of the US District Court in Maryland ordered the Trump administration to return Abrego Garcia to the US, kicking off a monthslong legal battle in which the Trump administration has argued that courts cannot intervene in the foreign policy decision-making of the United States. In her April 4 order, Xinis gave a deadline of April 7 to bring back Abrego Garcia but the Supreme Court paused the deadline. Days later, the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration must 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia's return but stopped short of requiring the government to return him. In recent weeks, Xinis has accused the Trump administration of repeated stonewalling and intentional noncompliance with its obligation to produce information related to how it has been facilitating Abrego Garcia's return. President Donald Trump, in an interview with ABC News in April, acknowledged that he could secure Abrego Garcia's return, contradicting previous remarks made by him and his his top aides who said the US did not have the ability to return Abrego Garcia because he was in the custody of a foreign government. When asked by ABC's Terry Moran why he can't just pick up the phone and secure Abrego Garcia's return, Trump said: 'And if he were the gentleman that you say he is, I would do that. But he is not.' The president went on to accuse Abrego Garcia of being a MS-13 member, pointing to his tattoos, which experts say are not by themselves proof he's a gang member. And just days later, the White House and El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele made clear during an Oval Office meeting that Abrego Garcia would not be returned to the US. Democratic lawmakers have been critical of how the Trump administration handled the Abrego Garcia case and continued to call for him to be brought back. One Democratic senator, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, flew down to El Salvador to meet with his constituent. After initially not being allowed to meet him, Van Hollen had a sit down with Abrego Garcia on April 17 and in a press conference a day later, the senator said Abrego Garcia told him he was traumatized. 'He said he was not afraid of the other prisoners in his immediate cell but that he was traumatized by being at CECOT and fearful of many of the prisoners in other cell blocks who called out to him and taunted him in various ways,' Van Hollen said. Van Hollen added that Abrego Garcia was moved a week earlier from the maximum-security prison to another detention center where 'conditions are better.' The Trump administration slammed the senator's visit, claiming Democrats and the media painted an overly rosy picture of Abrego Garcia. Meanwhile, the administration continued to portray him as a violent and dangerous criminal, releasing previously unshared documents stemming from two interactions Abrego Garcia had with law enforcement and the courts system: a 2019 arrest that didn't lead to charges or a conviction, but did result in his detention by immigration officials, and a 2021 protective order his wife filed against him alleging domestic violence, which she later decided against pursuing further after she said the couple had resolved their issues. Sources told CNN in late April that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had been in touch with Bukele about the detention of Abrego Garcia. A US official told CNN the Trump administration was working closely with El Salvador and asked for Abrego Garcia's return but insisted that Bukele had made clear that he was not returning him to the US. In early May, Tennessee state law enforcement released a video of a November 2022 traffic stop involving Abrego Garcia – an incident that US officials argue supports their claims that Abrego Garcia was a member of MS-13 and involved in human trafficking. The video showed Abrego Garcia being stopped for speeding. When asked about other passengers in the car, Abrego Garcia tells the trooper he and the others are workers returning from a construction project in St. Louis, Missouri. When the trooper asked for his documents, Abrego Garcia explains in the video that his driver's license was expired and that he is waiting for immigration documents to renew it. He tells the officer the vehicle, which had a Texas license plate, belonged to his boss. The trooper then searches the car with a police canine. They do not appear to find anything suspicious, according to the video. Abrego Garcia was not detained during the stop and no charges were filed. Nearly three months after he was deported, Abrego Garcia on Friday returned to the US to face federal criminal charges. Abrego Garcia has been indicted on two criminal counts in the Middle District of Tennessee: conspiracy to unlawfully transport illegal aliens for financial gain and unlawful transportation of illegal aliens for financial gain. Trump administration officials pointed to the charges as justifying their effort to remove Abrego Garcia from the United States. Meanwhile, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, an attorney for Abrego Garcia, accused the Trump administration of 'playing games' with the legal system and said his client should appear in immigration court, not criminal court. 'The government disappeared Kilmar to a foreign prison in violation of a court order. Now, after months of delay and secrecy, they're bringing him back, not to correct their error but to prosecute him. This shows that they were playing games with the court all along,' Sandoval-Moshenberg said in a statement to CNN. 'Due process means the chance to defend yourself before you're punished, not after. This is an abuse of power, not justice.' Abrego Garcia will be in custody for at least a week, followed by an arraignment and detention hearing, the Associated Press reported.