Chicago mayor's office facing backlash after allegedly attempting to censor City Council meeting video
The Brief
The mayor's office is accused of attempting to censor video footage from a controversial City Council meeting about censorship.
A video of the meeting, featuring a chaotic exchange between aldermen over controversial artwork, was taken down and later restored by City Clerk Anna Valencia.
A mayoral staffer allegedly requested edits to the video, prompting concerns about transparency, which Valencia later addressed by re-uploading it.
CHICAGO - Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson's office is under fire for allegedly trying to censor video of a contentious City Council meeting.
What we know
The mayor's office is facing accusations of trying to censor a meeting about censorship.
This comes after City Clerk Anna Valencia said a video of the meeting was improperly removed from public view.
The video in question shows Tuesday's City Council hearing on controversial artwork at the Cultural Center. The meeting turned chaotic when 25th Ward Ald. Byron Sigcho-Lopez appeared to call 34th Ward Ald. Bill Conway a "white supremacist."
This followed a heated debate over controversial artwork at the Cultural Center, which some aldermen have condemned as anti-Semitic.
Conway and Sigcho-Lopez were arguing over Sigcho-Lopez's involvement in a protest before the DNC that included a burned American flag.
After a few moments, 41st Ward Ald. Anthony Napolitano and 38th Ward Ald. Nick Sposato called out Sigcho-Lopez for his remarks and removed him from the meeting.
"You gotta go," shouted Sposato. "You can't call someone a white supremacist. You gotta go."
Videos of all City Council proceedings are posted on the City Clerk's website. But last night, the video of Tuesday's hearing was missing.
Valencia said a mayoral staffer improperly contacted her office, asking a staff member to edit the video. The clerk's office employee declined, instead removing the video entirely.
What they're saying
Valencia stated she did not approve the removal and restored the video on Wednesday.
"I am, always have been, and always will be, committed to building transparency and trust with our residents, and will ensure this does not happen again," Valencia said in a statement. "We are here as public servants to ensure our residents have complete access to their government and as long as I am here, that will remain."
As soon as the meeting recessed, Sigcho-Lopez and Conway went into a private room with top mayoral advisor Jason Lee to clear the air.
The backstory
Thirty people spoke about an art exhibit at Chicago's Special Events committee meeting this week.
The piece is controversial, and 27 council members have already called for its removal.
The protest puppet is in the Chicago Cultural Center. It portrays Uncle Sam and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as murderers, calling out U-S support of Israel's involvement in Gaza. The exhibit was titled "U.S.-Israel War Machine."
The alderpersons signed a letter calling on leaders to remove it because it was offensive.
Some members of the public agreed with calls to remove the artwork.
"As a citizen of Chicago, this is dangerous for my community. It is harmful and it is not something that should be displayed in a public building. Bigotry like this actively harms the Jewish community, which has a large presence in Chicago," a representative from the American Jewish Committee said.
The other side
Others said that censorship of public art is not something that Chicago's elected officials should get involved in.
"To hear that there has been such an uproar about this puppet is shocking and honestly, a waste of everyone here's time," one resident said. "The demand to remove this puppet sets a dangerous precedent that Chicago elected officials can dictate which artwork is allowed to be displayed in our city and which is not, based on whether they agree with the artist's politics. As a proud member of Chicago's Jewish community, I urge you to spend your time actually governing our city."
Changes were made to the display. Officials added a warning that the exhibition contains sensitive content.
READ MORE HERE
The Source
FOX 32's Paris Schutz reported on this story.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
27 minutes ago
- CBS News
University of California researchers face uncertain future over possible federal funding cuts
Thousands of University of California and California State University system workers are unsure about their jobs and the future of their research after reports that President Donald Trump is going after the federal funding for California. In response, Gov. Gavin Newsom has threatened to stop paying the state's federal taxes. Tanzil Chowdhury is a graduate student researcher at UC Berkeley with the Materials Science and Engineering Department. He works on semiconductors and is researching how to create more efficient batteries and better solar panels. His academic future, however, is in limbo. "I really want to make a difference with the work that I do, I want to help transition off of fossil fuels and create greener and more efficient energy grid for everyone. With these cuts, I don't know if I'll be able to continue doing that," Chowdhury told CBS News Bay Area. That's because Mr. Trump is considering pulling funding for both the UC and Cal State University systems. "This would just be catastrophic to my work, the work of all my coworkers and the amazing research that happens here in the state of California at the UC and CSU," he said. "We can't access the materials that we need, we can't get the lab space that we need, we can't run our experiments if there's no money coming in." A recent report shows the UC system received more than $4 billion for academic research during the 2024 fiscal year. Schools, including UC San Francisco, rely on those grants. "This is one of the biggest recipients of National Institute of Health's funds, which are some of the funds that the Trump administration is reportedly going to cut," Chowdhury said. He helps lead UAW Local 4811, a union of 48,000 academic workers in the UC system. Chowdhury said about 15,000 of those academic workers are from UC San Francisco and UC Berkeley. "It is one of the nation's leaders in biomedical and biological research. So, groundbreaking treatments in cancer, heart disease, diabetes, all that stuff happens right here," he said. "The patient who needs that sort of groundbreaking research to get better, get healthier, that work stops." One infectious disease doctor and UC San Francisco professor agrees. "We receive 30% of all NIH funding in this country. And that's not because just that we are a more populous state, but because we have fantastic universities here, really high-level academics," Dr. Monica Gandhi told CBS News Bay Area. She added that funding cuts will have a dire impact on the patient level. "It would mean the complete slowing of any progress in biomedical research that is actually fueling American lives, health," she added. "People who are living in California, their health will absolutely be affected. We won't get novel medications, we won't get therapeutics for cancer, for diabetes, for HIV, for infectious diseases." Dr. Gandhi said that a recent analysis showed that three out of 365 medications that had been approved from 2010 to 2019 were from NIH-funded research. "It would be disastrous for California to not be able to continue the lifesaving, NIH-funded research that it does," she added. Meanwhile, Chowdhury hopes that Governor Gavin Newsom can help by rescinding academic budget cuts on the state level. "He should work with the California legislature to ensure that we have job security, and we're able to continue doing the research that we need to do, and fill in the gaps left behind by the federal government," Chowdhury said. While the future remains uncertain, the battle for academia continues. "The administration needs to not do this, because we don't want to mess with American lives and American health," Dr. Gandhi said. "Maybe we need to re-evaluate how much money we give to the federal government from California taxpayer dollars, because I know what my California taxpayer dollars to go to. I want them to go to life-saving medical research to extend human life," she added.
an hour ago
Travel ban may shut door for Afghan family to bring niece to US for a better life
IRMO, S.C. -- Mohammad Sharafoddin, his wife and young son walked at times for 36 hours in a row over mountain passes as they left Afghanistan as refugees to end up less than a decade later talking about their journey on a plush love seat in the family's three-bedroom suburban American home. He and his wife dreamed of bringing her niece to the United States to share in that bounty. Maybe she could study to become a doctor and then decide her own path. But that door slams shut on Monday as America put in place a travel ban for people from Afghanistan and a dozen other countries. 'It's kind of shock for us when we hear about Afghanistan, especially right now for ladies who are affected more than others with the new government,' Mohammad Sharafoddin said. 'We didn't think about this travel ban.' President Donald Trump signed the ban Wednesday. It is similar to one in place during his first administration but covers more countries. Along with Afghanistan, travel to the U.S. is banned from Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Trump said visitors who overstay visas, like the man charged in an attack that injured dozens of demonstrators in Boulder, Colorado, earlier this month, are a danger to the country. The suspect in the attack is from Egypt, which isn't included in the ban. The countries chosen for the ban have deficient screening of their citizens, often refuse to take them back and have a high percentage of people who stay in the U.S. after their visas expire, Trump said. The ban makes exceptions for people from Afghanistan on Special Immigrant Visas who generally worked most closely with the U.S. government during the two-decade war there. Afghanistan was also one of the largest sources of resettled refugees, with about 14,000 arrivals in a 12-month period through September 2024. Trump suspended refugee resettlement on his first day in office. It is a path Sharafoddin took with his wife and son out of Afghanistan walking on those mountain roads in the dark then through Pakistan, Iran and into Turkey. He worked in a factory for years in Turkey, listening to YouTube videos on headphones to learn English before he was resettled in Irmo, South Carolina, a suburb of Columbia. His son is now 11, and he and his wife had a daughter in the U.S. who is now 3. There is a job at a jewelry maker that allows him to afford a two-story, three-bedroom house. Food was laid out on two tables Saturday for a celebration of the Muslim Eid al-Adha holiday. Sharafoddin's wife, Nuriya, said she is learning English and driving — two things she couldn't do in Afghanistan under Taliban rule. 'I'm very happy to be here now, because my son is very good at school and my daughter also. I think after 18 years they are going to work, and my daughter is going to be able to go to college,' she said. It is a life she wanted for her niece too. The couple show videos from their cellphones of her drawing and painting. When the Taliban returned to power in 2021, their niece could no longer study. So they started to plan to get her to the U.S. at least to further her education. Nuriya Sharafoddin doesn't know if her niece has heard the news from America yet. She hasn't had the heart to call and tell her. 'I'm not ready to call her. This is not good news. This is very sad news because she is worried and wants to come,' Nuriya Sharafoddin said. While the couple spoke, Jim Ray came by. He has helped a number of refugee families settle in Columbia and helped the Sharafoddins navigate questions in their second language. Ray said Afghans in Columbia know the return of the Taliban changed how the U.S. deals with their native country. But while the ban allows spouses, children or parents to travel to America, other family members aren't included. Many Afghans know their extended families are starving or suffering, and suddenly a path to help is closed, Ray said. 'We'll have to wait and see how the travel ban and the specifics of it actually play out,' Ray said. 'This kind of thing that they're experiencing where family cannot be reunited is actually where it hurts the most.' The Taliban have criticized Trump for the ban, with their top leader Hibatullah Akhundzada saying the U.S. was now the oppressor of the world. 'Citizens from 12 countries are barred from entering their land — and Afghans are not allowed either,' he said on a recording shared on social media. 'Why? Because they claim the Afghan government has no control over its people and that people are leaving the country. So, oppressor! Is this what you call friendship with humanity?'
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
As his trade war faces legal pushback, Trump has other tariff tools he could deploy
WASHINGTON - U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs are facing legal headwinds for the first time — but he has other tools he could deploy in his quest to realign global trade. A federal appeals court is still deciding whether there will be a stay on Trump's universal tariffs enacted through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled the duties were unlawful last month. IEEPA is a national security statute that gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. It had never previously been used for tariffs. Trump declared emergencies at the United States' northern and southern borders linked to the flow of fentanyl and migrants in order to hit Canada and Mexico with economywide tariffs. He later declared an emergency over trade deficits to impose his retaliatory 'Liberation Day' duties on most nations. The trade court found Trump exceeded presidential powers by using IEEPA to broadly implement the duties. The Trump administration quickly appealed the decision and the White House said it would take the case to the Supreme Court. Following the ruling, White House Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett said he was confident the court ultimately would decide in Trump's favour. Hassett said that if it doesn't, 'we'll have other alternatives that we can pursue as well to make sure that we make American trade fair again.' While the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress, Greta Peisch, the former general counsel for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said it passed laws over the last century that allow the president some control in certain situations. Trump is now looking to use those laws — some of them for the first time. The president may be considering Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. It allows a president to hit countries with tariffs of up to 50 per cent if the country 'is treating products of the United States disfavourably, compared to products of another foreign country,' said Peisch, a partner at Wiley Rein in Washington, D.C. Section 338 has never been used by a president before and Peisch said it might be difficult for the administration to make a case for it. Trump also might look to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows a president to take trade actions if an investigation finds a trading partner's policies are unreasonable and discriminatory. Trump used this law during his first administration to impose tariffs on some Chinese imports and European Union goods. But Section 301 requires country-by-country investigations of trade policy before a tariff can be imposed — investigations that could take weeks or months and would include a period for public comment. That certainly would slow down Trump's efforts to target the world with tariffs. If the president is looking for speed, Peisch said, he might try to use Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 — another law that has never before been used. Section 122 allows a president to implement tariffs of up to 15 per cent to address large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits. But those duties can only stay in place for a maximum of 150 days before they need Congressional approval to continue. That reduces Trump's leverage if his goal is to pressure countries to sign trade deals — those countries could simply decide to wait the president out. Trump also has said tariffs will help pay down the deficit; the short-term Section 122 power is unlikely to work as a long-term revenue strategy. Ultimately, Peisch said, none of the replacement statutes could easily build Trump's universal tariff wall around the United States. 'Nothing is a great fit without a lot of work,' she said. 'So I think it's potentially going to be a challenge.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 7, 2025.
