logo
ENع
Harvard Judge Says Foreign Student Ban Likely to Harm School

Harvard Judge Says Foreign Student Ban Likely to Harm School

Bloomberg4 hours ago

A federal judge said that Harvard University is likely to show that it will suffer irreparable harm if the government is able to stop international students from attending the Ivy League school.
US District Judge Allison Burroughs said at a hearing Monday that the government has an 'uphill battle' on the issue, a key factor in whether she will extend her temporary order preventing the Trump administration from refusing to give foreign students visas to attend the university. Burroughs said she would rule on whether to issue a preliminary injunction by June 23.

Hashtags

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Analysis: Lisa Murkowski's red flag on Trump and authoritarianism
Analysis: Lisa Murkowski's red flag on Trump and authoritarianism

CNN

time22 minutes ago

  • CNN

Analysis: Lisa Murkowski's red flag on Trump and authoritarianism

This past weekend's nationwide 'No Kings' protests were the strongest signal yet that many Americans are concerned about their government drifting toward authoritarianism under President Donald Trump. This was greeted by ridicule from the right, which accused the left of being characteristically melodramatic. But even as all that was happening came something notable: For perhaps the first time since Trump reclaimed office and began testing the limits of his power, a prominent Republican officeholder publicly wrestled with the idea that maybe the protesters are on to something – that maybe Trump is guiding the country toward authoritarianism. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska has been one of the most prominent GOP critics of Trump's actions for years – most recently on issues ranging from his second-term Cabinet nominees to the war in Ukraine to the Department of Government Efficiency. But what makes her comments to The New York Times notable is that she doesn't just stop at criticizing the actions, as Trump's few public GOP critics often do; she also delves into his possible motivations. And while she didn't call Trump an authoritarian, she made clear she views that interpretation as a legitimate one. Murkowski questioned Trump's decision to send the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles, amid other protests against the administration's deportation policies. Trump became the first president in about 60 years to send the Guard without the approval of the governor, and a district judge late last week ruled Trump had illegally federalized the troops. (That ruling is paused while it's being appealed.) 'I think it's fair to say [Trump's actions are] unprecedented in terms of a response and one that I find deeply concerning,' Murkowski told the Times. 'We do have provisions, we have laws, we have an understanding that our military is not to be used on our own people.' Then Murkowski went there on Trump's motivations. 'So is this a test from President Trump in terms of his authorities?' she said. 'One has to wonder.' When asked more directly if Trump aims to be an authoritarian leader, Murkowski allowed for that possibility. 'I don't know if he is looking to be an authoritarian leader or if it is Donald Trump being Donald Trump and that we as a country have said that's the type of leader that we want right now,' she said. Murkowski also said the 'equilibrium' between the executive branch and other branches is 'out of balance.' Trump has made several moves that have sidelined the GOP-controlled Congress, including on issues like cutting spending and tariffs, which the Constitution puts under the legislative branch's purview. In his first 100 days, Congress passed record-few bills while Trump set a record for unilateral executive actions. 'I refuse to believe that we are not able to regain' equilibrium, Murkowski said. 'But I think it's dangerous for us in the legislative branch right now, when we are not standing up for our roles under the Constitution, and we effectively cede to the executive.' The senator's comments might sound mealy-mouthed to some Trump critics who want office-holders to more directly call out his authoritarian tendencies. But they do break some real ground in lending credence to that argument from the right. Here is one of 53 Republican senators at least raising the prospect that we're headed down a path that our democracy can't quickly recover from. And she linked it to no less than the domestic mobilization of troops. She isn't the first Republican to link Trump to the a-word or fascism. Then-Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah said in late 2023 that Trump had 'authoritarian … interests and notions which he will try and impose.' (Murkowski and Romney both previously voted for Trump to be convicted of impeachment – Romney twice.) Around the same time, former House speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin called Trump 'a populist, authoritarian narcissist.' Three generals who served in high-profile roles under Trump during his first term have since likened him to a fascist. And former Trump Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Trump 'certainly' has authoritarian 'inclinations.' But all of that came out during the 2024 campaign, when the comments could have been dismissed as overheated political rhetoric meant to prevent Trump from regaining office. Today, Murkowski is speaking after Trump has taken bona fide action to consolidate power on a number of fronts. She also attached her fears to specific Trump moves that have raised the salience of the authoritarian question for many of Trump's strongest critics. (And just to emphasize: This isn't some fringe idea. Nearly half of voters in the 2024 election said they were 'very concerned' that another Trump presidency would bring the country closer to authoritarianism, according to AP data.) The Alaska Republican also suggested her fears might be more widespread than people realize among GOP lawmakers. Murkowski previously made big news in April by saying lawmakers are often 'afraid' to speak out against the administration for fear of retaliation. And she again pointed in that direction. 'Some of my colleagues may disagree when we're in quiet conversation but are not willing to say it out loud,' she said, after the Times' Lulu Garcia-Navarro asked her why she gave a long pause before answering a question. In other words, we shouldn't expect a bunch of Republicans to start entertaining the question Murkowski just did. But the fact that she did, at least, is significant in this moment in time.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store