Brazil's Top Court Defies Trump, Signals No Retreat on Bolsonaro
The top court is in recess during July — not all its judges were even in the country — making it difficult to convene to formulate a response. But a group of justices including Alexandre de Moraes, who is overseeing the former president's case, immediately began discussing a response aimed more at asserting national sovereignty than easing tensions with the US.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
27 minutes ago
- CNN
Bondi briefed Trump that his name was in Epstein files
When Attorney General Pam Bondi briefed President Donald Trump in May on the Justice Department's review of the documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case, she told him that his name appeared in the files, sources familiar with the discussion told CNN. The conversation, which also included Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, was characterized by two White House officials as a 'routine briefing' that covered the scope of the Justice Department's findings. Trump's name appearing in the files, they said, was not the sole focus of the discussions. Bondi also raised in the meeting that several names of high-profile figures were also mentioned, and that investigators did not find evidence of a so-called client list or evidence refuting that Epstein died by suicide, the officials said. The sources familiar with the department's review said the files appeared to include several unsubstantiated claims that the Justice Department found not to be credible, including those relating to Trump. It wasn't clear in what context Trump's name appeared in the files. Like many high-powered people in 1990s New York, Trump was an associate of Epstein's, who worked to cultivate celebrities to burnish his business. The revelation that his name appears in the documents does little to advance previous knowledge about his ties to the late sex offender. 'The White House is not surprised by this – Trump's name was present in the binders that Bondi produced and handed out,' one of the White House officials said, adding that many of the materials already released by the Justice Department had included mention of the president's name. 'The White House does not view this as groundbreaking or new or surprising at all,' the official said, adding that there is no evidence that Trump was involved in any wrongdoing. 'The fact is that the President kicked him out of his club for being a creep,' White House communications director Steven Cheung said in a statement to CNN, referring to Epstein. 'This is nothing more than a continuation of the fake news stories concocted by the Democrats and the liberal media, just like the Obama Russiagate scandal, which President Trump was right about.' The Wall Street Journal first reported that Bondi informed Trump in May about his name appearing in the documents. The revelations about the meeting contradict Trump's more recent denials that he was told he was in the files. Pressed last week on whether Bondi had told him he was named in the documents, he said, 'No, no. She's given us just a very quick briefing.' Trump has struggled to tamp down weeks of backlash over the administration's decision not to release more documents related to the Epstein investigation — a move that infuriated a vocal segment of the MAGA base and put the president at odds with some of his most ardent supporters. Inside the White House, officials were outraged that Bondi did not redact Trump's name from publicly available materials contained in Epstein binders distributed to influencers in February, sources said. Her failure to protect the president during the episode has been a longstanding point of contention between the DOJ and the White House. 'The DOJ and FBI reviewed the Epstein Files and reached the conclusion set out in the July 6 memo,' Bondi and Blanche said in a statement. 'Nothing in the files warranted further investigation or prosecution, and we have filed a motion in court to unseal the underlying grand jury transcripts. As part of our routine briefing, we made the President aware of the findings.' The White House has dismissed the ongoing focus on the Epstein files, arguing that it's distracting from the administration's accomplishments and aiding Democrats' efforts to damage the president. But a growing and bipartisan chorus of lawmakers have since called for a full release of the documents, forcing Republican leaders on Capitol Hill to cut short their legislative session to avoid taking a series of votes on the matter. A Wall Street Journal report last week – about a letter bearing Trump's name and the outline of a naked woman that was included in an album given to Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2023 – has also ratcheted up the pressure on Trump. Trump denied writing the letter and has since sued the Wall Street Journal over its publication of that article.
Chicago Tribune
28 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Supreme Court allows Trump to remove 3 Democrats on the Consumer Product Safety Commission
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed the Trump administration to remove three Democratic members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, who had been fired by President Donald Trump and then reinstated by a federal judge. The justices acted on an emergency appeal from the Justice Department, which argued that the agency is under Trump's control and the president is free to remove commissioners without cause. That's what Trump did in May, providing no reason for removing all three Democratic commissioners on the five-person board, despite a federal law that allows commissioners to be fired only for 'neglect of duty or malfeasance.' The court provided a brief, unsigned explanation that the case is similar to earlier ones in which it allowed Trump to fire board members of other independent agencies, whom Congress protected from arbitrary dismissals. The three liberal justices dissented. 'By means of such actions, this Court may facilitate the permanent transfer of authority, piece by piece by piece, from one branch of Government to another,' Justice Elena Kagan wrote for herself, as well as Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The commission helps protect consumers from dangerous products by issuing recalls, suing errant companies and more. The fired commissioners had been serving seven-year terms after being nominated by President Joe Biden. U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox in Baltimore ruled in June that the dismissals were unlawful. Maddox sought to distinguish the commission's role from those of other agencies where the Supreme Court has allowed firings to go forward. A month earlier, the high court's conservative majority declined to reinstate members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board, finding that the Constitution appears to give the president the authority to fire the board members 'without cause.' The administration has argued that all the agencies are under Trump's control as the head of the executive branch. Maddox, a Biden nominee, noted that it can be difficult to characterize the product safety commission's functions as purely executive. The fight over the president's power to fire could prompt the court to consider overturning a 90-year-old Supreme Court decision known as Humphrey's Executor. In that case from 1935, the court unanimously held that presidents cannot fire independent board members without cause. The decision ushered in an era of powerful independent federal agencies charged with regulating labor relations, employment discrimination, the airwaves and much else. But it has long rankled conservative legal theorists who argue the modern administrative state gets the Constitution all wrong because such agencies should answer to the president. Kagan wrote that the court already has 'all but overturned Humphrey's Executor.' Other removals are making their way to the high court, including the firing of a member of the Federal Trade Commission, the very agency at issue in Humphrey's Executor. Last week, a federal judge ordered Rebecca Slaughter reinstated as a commissioner. Slaughter returned to work Friday. By Tuesday, she had been sidelined again after an appeals court temporarily blocked the judge's order. The Consumer Product Safety Commission was created in 1972. Its five members must maintain a partisan split, with no more than three representing the president's party. They serve staggered terms. That structure ensures that each president has 'the opportunity to influence, but not control,' the commission, attorneys for the fired commissioners wrote in court filings. They argued the recent terminations could jeopardize the commission's independence.
USA Today
28 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump illegally held up funding for Head Start preschool program, watchdog says
The Health and Human Services Department disputed the findings. WASHINGTON – The Trump administration spent three months illegally holding up federal funding for Head Start, a preschool and early childhood education program that hundreds of thousands of low-income families rely on, according to an independent government watchdog. The conclusion came in a July 23 decision from the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan oversight group. The GAO found that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees Head Start, broke the law by withholding previously approved funds for the program between January and mid-April. In doing so, the administration violated the Impoundment Control Act, which requires presidents to spend money allocated by Congress. Read more: A 'constitutional crisis?' Democrats, Republicans spar over Donald Trump's spending order HHS slashed Head Start's funding by more than $825 million compared to the same period last year, the GAO said, amounting to a 65% funding cut. It's the third such violation uncovered by the watchdog since the start of President Donald Trump's second term in the White House in January. In April, the Trump administration was considering zeroing out funding for Head Start altogether for the next fiscal year, USA TODAY first reported. After nationwide backlash and legal challenges, HHS reversed course on the budget proposal in May. Read more: Dem AGs sue White House to counter cuts to Head Start, Medicaid for immigrants Andrew Nixon, the chief spokesman for HHS, said the agency disputes the GAO's findings but did not explain why. "HHS did not impound Head Start funds," he said in a statement to USA TODAY. Despite the earlier issues, recent disbursements for Head Start have improved and are now comparable to the same time last year, said Yasmina Vinci, executive director for the National Head Start Association. In a statement, she did not comment directly on the GAO's impoundment accusations. "We're grateful that so many are standing up for Head Start, recognizing the vital role it plays in communities across the country," she said. Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @
