Latest news with #BerylHowell
Telegraph
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Trump is ruling America like a petty, vindictive mob boss
Is Donald Trump an American Hitler – or an American version of Lewis Carroll's Queen of Hearts? US District Judge Beryl Howell recently blocked an executive order by the President that targeted the Democratic-affiliated law firm of Perkins Coie. It would have banned its lawyers not only from doing business with the federal government, but even from entering federal buildings. Judge Howell observed: 'This may be amusing in 'Alice in Wonderland' where the Queen of Hearts yells, 'Off with their heads!' at annoying subjects … and announces a sentence before a verdict. But this cannot be the reality we are living under.' Ever since the celebrity property developer descended the golden escalator in Trump Tower on June 16 2015 to announce his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, many have warned he would become a fascist dictator and predicted that he and his followers would replace democracy in America with an authoritarian police state. But the comparison between Trump and dictators like Mussolini and Stalin was always absurd. Unusual as he is compared to other American presidents, Trump resembles a figure familiar in American local politics in all regions of the country: the sleazy city mayor who, without using direct coercion, strong-arms others into doing his will. Trump has yet to dissolve Congress with a whiff of grapeshot in the manner of Cromwell, or to send members of the opposition party, not just illegal immigrants, to the new 'Alligator Alcatraz' detention centre in Florida. The progressive Democrats and Never-Trump Republicans who think they live in Weimar America will continue to be disappointed when there is no Reichstag Fire or Enabling Act. At the same time, however, there are plenty of examples of Trump abusing his authority in petty and vindictive ways, to extort concessions, including cash, from rich and powerful institutions, or threatening to do so. On Sunday, July 21, the President of the United States, who apparently has nothing more important to deal with, threatened to withhold approval for a new stadium deal for Washington's National Football League team. In 2022, under pressure from woke progressives, the team changed its name from the Washington Redskins to the Washington Commanders (wits at the time suggested that the Washington Red Tapes would have been more appropriate). Trump ran as a foe of political correctness, so there is nothing wrong with him scoring points with his supporters by expressing his preference for the old name, and also for the Cleveland Indians, now the Cleveland Guardians. But Trump crossed a line when he announced on Truth Social, his personal social media site: 'I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington.' This kind of threat evokes crooked mayors, not fascist dictators, along the lines of: 'The city will be glad to grant the contract, if you do what I tell you to do.' And it is only a step removed from the more menacing deal offered by the local mafioso: 'Nice store you have there, it would be a pity if something happened to it.' Unfortunately in the first half year of his second presidential term, Trump has made many offers that evidently couldn't be refused. Trump has sued major media corporations for negative coverage or alleged election bias. With the implicit loss of their broadcast licenses and other privileges held above their heads, ABC News, Paramount, the parent company of CBS News, Meta, and X (formerly Twitter) have all agreed to settle Trump's lawsuits against them, reportedly by donating up to $63 million combined to the nonprofit fund for Trump's future presidential library, according to a CBS News calculation. Now Trump is suing the Wall Street Journal and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, for $20 billion, following the publication of a report that claimed he sent a bawdy birthday card to Jeffrey Epstein. He is even suing his own niece, Mary Trump, claiming she took part in an 'insidious plot' with the New York Times to report on his finances in 2018. In addition to harassing his critics and squeezing money for his Pharaonic monument out of major American media companies, the Mayor of America has shaken down major law firms for 'voluntary' donations to causes he and his allies favour. In the spring, abusing another tool of the presidency – the executive order – Trump threatened penalties against a number of law firms that were known for helping Democrats or that employed lawyers who had been used against Trump in federal or state litigation during the Biden years. On March 20 Trump announced on Truth Social: 'Today, President Donald J Trump agreed to withdraw his March 14, 2025 Executive Order regarding the Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP law firm ('Paul, Weiss'), which has entered into the following agreement with the President: … Paul, Weiss will dedicate the equivalent of $40 million in pro bono legal services over the course of President Trump's term to support the Administration's initiatives, including: assisting our Nation's veterans, fairness in the Justice System, the President's Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, and other mutually agreed projects.' To date, federal judges – including Judge Howell, the Lewis Carroll fan – have blocked the enforcement of Trump's executive orders against the law firms Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey. In his opinion striking down the order against WilmerHale, Judge Richard Leon, who was appointed by Republican president George W Bush, wrote: 'The order shouts through a bullhorn: If you take on causes disfavoured by President Trump, you will be punished!' Leon concluded that to rule that Trump's executive order was constitutional 'would be unfaithful to the judgement and vision of the founding fathers!' Undeterred by these legal setbacks, Trump has continued to do his imitation of the Queen of Hearts. Recently he has gone so far as to threaten to strip US citizenship from critics. When he broke in public with his former ally Elon Musk, Trump said that he would 'have to take a look' at denaturalising Musk, an immigrant from South Africa. Trump, who for years spread the baseless rumour that Barack Obama was not a legal American citizen by birth, has also questioned whether Zohran Mamdani, the Ugandan-born socialist who won the Democratic mayoral primary election, should be deported. 'A lot of people are saying he's here illegally,' Trump said, and promised that the administration would 'look at everything'. Then there's Rosie O'Donnell, a media celebrity with whom Trump has feuded in public for two decades. After O'Donnell declared that she had moved to Ireland and was seeking Irish citizenship to protest Trump's second election to the presidency, Trump told his followers via Truth Social: 'Because of the fact that Rosie O'Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship. She is a Threat to Humanity, and should remain in the wonderful Country of Ireland, if they want her. GOD BLESS AMERICA!' Trump doesn't have to resemble Hitler for a statement by a president that an individual American citizen 'is not in the best interests of our Great Country' and is 'a Threat to Humanity' to be chilling. In reality, the president of the United States under the American constitution does not have the power to strip any US citizen of citizenship. At the same time, of course, the president almost certainly does not have the power under the constitution to use executive orders to pressure law firms into paying for pro bono projects he favours, or to use lawsuits to raise money for his presidential library from media corporations. Nor is there any law that authorises the president to block a stadium deal for a National Football League team unless it adopts the name he prefers. All of these petty, personal abuses of power fall in the crooked-mayor category, not the authoritarian dictator category. Genuine tyrants do not sue their critics, who are silenced by more effective methods. And the use of threats by officials at all levels and all branches to extort campaign donations or other favours from firms is as old as the American republic and not unknown in other democracies. Even so, the plurality of the electorate who put Trump into the White House for a second time deserve better than this. They voted for a president – not a Queen of Hearts.
The Hill
30-06-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Trump administration appeals judge's ruling blocking Perkins Coie executive order
The Justice Department on Monday appealed a federal judge's order blocking President Trump's executive order against the law firm Perkins Coie aimed at undercutting its business as retribution for ties to his political adversaries. The notice of appeal comes nearly two months after U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell deemed the order unlawful, suggesting it 'draws from a playbook as old as Shakespeare, who penned the phrase: 'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.'' It could become an appeals court's first chance to weigh Trump's punitive orders against the Big Law firms. Perkins Coie was one of six law firms targeted by Trump, having long drawn his ire for advising Hillary Clinton during her 2016 presidential campaign and working with an opposition research firm tied to the discredited Steele dossier. The orders, said to be 'addressing risks' to the country posed by the firms, cut off employees' security clearances, access to federal government facilities and directed his administration to review any contracts the government has with the law firm. At a hearing in April, Howell suggested the executive order was a 'throwback to the McCarthy era and the Red Scare era,' a reference to the mid-20th century moral panic about communist and Soviet influence on American institutions that the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.) spearheaded. Her May ruling was the first to strike down one of Trump's executive orders against the firms. Three other federal judges have since handed decisive victories to the law firms Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey, each deeming Trump's orders unconstitutional. The Trump administration has argued that it's within the president's discretion to decide who to trust with the nation's secrets and that the order was designed to assuage his concerns about the firms. The executive orders have fractured the legal industry, as not all firms have fought back, instead opting to strike deals with Trump or remain mum. While Covington & Burling signed onto a friend-of-the-court brief in support of Perkins Coie, it has not mounted any legal challenge to Trump's executive order against the firm. The order against Paul, Weiss was rescinded after the firm agreed to dedicate the equivalent of $40 million in pro bono legal services to support Trump administration initiatives; eliminate any diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies; and not deny representation to clients based on their political views. At least eight other firms struck deals with Trump, despite no executive orders issued against them: Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Willkie Farr & Gallagher; Kirkland & Ellis; Latham & Watkins; Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft; A & O Shearman; Simpson Thacher & Bartlett; and Milbank.
Washington Post
27-06-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Appeals court puts peace institute back in Trump administration hands with stay of lower court
WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court panel on Friday stayed a lower court ruling that blocked the Trump administration from moving forward with dismantling the U.S. Institute of Peace , an organization taken over in March by the Department of Government Efficiency, then led by Elon Musk. The three-judge panel with the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit issued the stay, saying the Trump administration's appeal of U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell's opinion would likely succeed on the merits. The stay added that the president would face 'irreparable harm from not being able to fully exercise his executive powers.'
Associated Press
27-06-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Appeals court puts peace institute back in Trump administration hands with stay of lower court
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court panel on Friday stayed a lower court ruling that blocked the Trump administration from moving forward with dismantling the U.S. Institute of Peace, an organization taken over in March by the Department of Government Efficiency, then led by Elon Musk. The three-judge panel with the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit issued the stay, saying the Trump administration's appeal of U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell's opinion would likely succeed on the merits. The stay added that the president would face 'irreparable harm from not being able to fully exercise his executive powers.' The judges said in their decision that the nonprofit think tank that focuses on peace initiatives engaged in activities that fall under the purview of the executive branch. The appeal's court action is the latest turn in the government's shutdown of the USIP, which had been turned back over to the organization's board and acting president following Howell's May 19 ruling. It also places the staff's attempt at restarting its operations in limbo. President Donald Trump issued the executive order in February that targeted the institute and three other agencies for closure in an effort to deliver on campaign promises to shrink the size of the federal government. The first attempt by DOGE to take over the headquarters led to a standoff. Members of Musk's DOGE group returned days later with the FBI and Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police to help them gain entry. The institute and many of its board members sued the Trump administration March 18, seeking to prevent their removal and to prevent DOGE from taking over its operations. The firing of the board was followed by a Friday night mass firing by email on March 28, which threw the workforce into turmoil. DOGE transferred the administrative oversight of the organization's headquarters and assets to the General Services Administration that weekend. Howell, in a lengthy opinion in May, reversed the action when she determined the organization was not part of the executive branch and therefore Trump did not have authority to fire its board and acting president. She ruled that all subsequent actions, including the firing of most of the staff, the cessation of operations and the takeover of its headquarters and assets, were illegal as well. Howell denied a government request for a stay of her opinion while the government appeals, a move that led acting president George Moose and others to reclaim the headquarters and begin trying to ramp USIP's operations back up. Those efforts have been slow going, with much of the staff still furloughed and operations in parts of the world shut down. It was unclear Friday if there would be another change of hands of the headquarters. The White House was not immediately available for comment. A press statement from the organization said 'we will continue to fight for USIP's right to fulfill its commitment to our congressional mandate and to control USIP's headquarters, funds, and operations to the fullest extent of the law. We remain confident we will prevail in this case and we look forward to continuing our critical work both at our headquarters in Washington, DC and in conflict zones around the world.'
Arab News
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Arab News
Judge denies stay request, lets ruling stand blocking DOGE efforts to shut down peace institute
WASHINGTON: A federal judge on Friday denied the Trump administration's request that she stay her May 19 ruling that returned control of the US Institute of Peace back to its acting president and board. In a seven-page ruling, US District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell said the government did not meet any of the four requirements for a stay, including a 'strong showing' of whether its request could succeed on the merits. Howell reiterated her finding that the Institute is not part of the executive branch and is therefore beyond President Donald Trump's authority to fire its board. She added that the firings also did not follow the law for how a board member of the Institute might be removed by the president. Most of the board was fired in March during a takeover of the Institute by the Department of Government Efficiency. That action touched off the firing of its acting president, former ambassador George Moose, and subsequently most of the staff. The organization's headquarters, funded in part by donors, was turned over to the General Services Administration. In her ruling May 19, Howell concluded that the board was fired illegally and all actions that followed that were therefore 'null and void.' In Friday's ruling Howell also rejected the government's argument that the organization had to fall into one of the three branches of government and since it does not legislate, nor is it part of the judicial branch, it must be part of the executive branch. 'As the Court has previously pointed out, other entities also fall outside of this tripartite structure,' she wrote. Howell also said that the government did not 'describe any cognizable harm they will experience without a stay, let alone an irreparable one.' However, 'as plaintiffs explain, every day that goes by without the relief this Court ordered, the job of putting (USIP) back together by rehiring employees and stemming the dissipation of USIP's goodwill and reputation for independence will become that much harder.' Moose reentered the headquarters Wednesday without incident along with the organization's outside counsel, George Foote. The White House was not immediately available for comment. In requesting the stay the government also requested a two-business-day stay to allow for an appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Howell denied that request.
