Latest news with #FirstAmendment-protected
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
White House ban on Associated Press can continue, appeals court rules
A federal appeals court will allow the White House to exclude the Associated Press from access to the Oval Office, Mar-a-Lago and Air Force One if it chooses, according to a new court order in the ongoing legal battle over press access. The decision hangs on a court finding that some White House spaces are not open to the broader public or large groups of press, and so the White House can choose which journalists it chooses to admit. A lower court judge previously blocked the administration from excluding the Associated Press, and the appeals court has sided with the White House at this time. The decision could bring about more appeals over the White House press corps and its access around the president. 'These restricted presidential spaces are not First Amendment fora opened for private speech and discussion,' DC Circuit Judge Neomi Rao wrote Friday. 'No one suggests the Oval Office is a traditional public forum such as a park or sidewalk held in trust for expressive activity.' The court, in a split 2-1 decision Friday, didn't include excluding the AP from the larger East Room space. CNN has reached out to the White House and AP for comment. The AP has claimed the White House is discriminatory against it because of a First Amendment-protected viewpoint –specifically not changing its editorial style guide to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America, as President Donald Trump has directed. CNN's Brian Stelter and Samantha Waldenberg contributed to this report.
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Marco Rubio Sure Has a Weird Definition of Free Speech
On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that foreign citizens who engage in online censorship of Americans' speech will be barred from obtaining visas to travel to the U.S. The announcement is the latest in a series of muddled moves on free speech, with the Trump administration gleefully attempting to punish individuals for their speech all while making overtures at protecting Americans from censorship. "Even as we take action to reject censorship at home, we see troubling instances of foreign governments and foreign officials picking up the slack. In some instances, foreign officials have taken flagrant censorship actions against U.S. tech companies and U.S. citizens and residents when they have no authority to do so," Rubio said in a Wednesday press release. "It is unacceptable for foreign officials to issue or threaten arrest warrants on U.S. citizens or U.S. residents for social media posts on American platforms while physically present on U.S. soil. It is similarly unacceptable for foreign officials to demand that American tech platforms adopt global content moderation policies or engage in censorship activity that reaches beyond their authority and into the United States." Rubio's announcement is relatively vague, though Rubio noted that the policy is aimed at foreign officials who attempt to force U.S.-based tech companies to censor speech that would be First Amendment-protected in America. Foreign censorship—especially in Europe—has been a frequent concern for the Trump administration. In February, Vice President J.D. Vance highlighted laws in several European countries that levy harsh criminal penalties for speech acts like anti-abortion protests or offensive social media posts. Of course, this latest announcement is no indication that the Trump administration really cares about protecting the right to free speech on American soil. So far, the Trump administration has gleefully targeted visa holders for their speech, detaining international students and university employees for everything from attending a pro-Palestine demonstration to penning an anti-Israel op-ed. Just last week, Rubio announced that visa interviews for prospective international students would temporarily pause while the State Department figures out how to conduct greater scrutiny of students' social media postings. This hypocrisy is seemingly lost in Rubio. "Foreigners who work to undermine the rights of Americans should not enjoy the privilege of traveling to our country," he wrote on X this week. "Whether in Latin America, Europe, or elsewhere, the days of passive treatment for those who work to undermine the rights of Americans are over." The Trump administration is more than happy to participate in viewpoint discrimination—and censorship of private news organizations that use disfavored terminology or colleges that fail to capitulate to absurd demands—as long as it benefits their interests. The post Marco Rubio Sure Has a Weird Definition of Free Speech appeared first on
Epoch Times
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
Intel Officials Warned COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates Could Spur Violence: Declassified Report
A U.S. intelligence document declassified on May 23 shows the government warned that COVID-19 vaccine mandates could lead to violence. The FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and National Counterterrorism Center 'Given these conditions, DVEs would most likely plot violent acts to intimidate healthcare workers and officials charged with implementing COVID-19 mitigation measures as well as, possibly, killings or kidnappings of state, local, or federal government personnel,' the officials stated. Plotting had already occurred in the United States and other countries, according to the intelligence agencies. That included a plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, although some of the men charged in that matter were acquitted after they argued they were entrapped. The joint assessment also said that COVID-19 vaccines becoming available for children 'might spur conspiracy theories and perceptions that schools will vaccinate children against parents' will and may increase the potential for violence.' Some health care workers did vaccinate children despite opposition from parents, including in Related Stories 5/16/2025 4/24/2025 U.S. intelligence agencies The assessment said in a footnote that U.S. individuals opposing COVID-19 mandates were 'likely engaging in First Amendment-protected activities, unless they are acting in concert with a threat actor,' and that related topics 'should not be assumed to reflect DVE activity, absent information specifically attributing the content to DVE threat actors.' Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard ordered the declassification of the document. 'It really talks about people who may likely turn out to be domestic violent extremists or those who may turn to violence because of these specific 'ideologies' that they hold. And there's a consistent thread through here that these ideologies that they are characterizing as potentially turning into potentially violent activities happen to be people who were using their First Amendment rights to oppose certain policies of the Biden Administration,' Gabbard said during an appearance on Fox News. 'Some of the examples that are focused on there have to do with those who oppose the COVID vaccine mandates, those who oppose the mask mandates, parents who were concerned that their children going to school may be forcibly vaccinated with the COVID vaccine without the consent or awareness of parents.' The FBI and Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comment.
Time of India
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
The Trump-Harvard showdown: Can US govt halt a university from enrolling international students? What the law says
What is SEVIS and why does it matter? Live Events Legal uncertainty and potential retaliation In an unprecedented escalation, the Trump administration has moved to block Harvard University from enrolling international students by revoking a critical federal certification, a move that could leave thousands of students in legal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has stripped Harvard, an Ivy League school, of its ability to access SEVIS, the federal Student and Exchange Visitor Information System, which schools are required to use in order to host international is a DHS-run database that colleges and universities must use to maintain the legal status of foreign allows schools to log enrollment information for each international student, verifying their eligibility to remain in the United States on student visas. Without access to SEVIS, institutions like Harvard cannot certify that students are enrolled full-time, which is a basic requirement of visa terms.(Join our ETNRI WhatsApp channel for all the latest updates)'Effective immediately,' Homeland Security said, Harvard is no longer certified to use SEVIS. While the students may still technically hold valid visas, Harvard is unable to update their status in the system — making them, in the eyes of immigration enforcement , immediately deportable unless they transfer to another institution or obtain legal relief from the move, as reported by The New York Times, appears to be a direct pressure tactic by the administration to force Harvard into alignment with its policy priorities. Legal experts say the action could trigger a major court battle.'Harvard will argue that the actions of the secretary are arbitrary and capricious,' Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond told NYT. 'A court is likely to find that she lacks the power to eliminate its program for international students.'Stacy Tolchin, an immigration attorney who represents international students, suggested that Harvard may also have grounds for a First Amendment retaliation claim: 'The university would have a clear case challenge for retaliation from DHS based on First Amendment-protected activities.'As of now, Harvard has not publicly announced whether it will sue. The university's spring term ends Monday, leaving international students and faculty scrambling to determine what options over 6,800 international students — more than a quarter of its total student body — Harvard's global academic standing is directly threatened by this move. Whether the courts will side with the university or uphold the federal government's expansive immigration powers remains to be seen.
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Activist flouts decorum with protest at school board meeting
Shaun Porter, a confrontational activist, walked up to the Frederick County Board of Education dais at a meeting on Wednesday, turned around so that his butt faced them and pulled his shorts down, as part of a protest of recent board actions. As he addressed the board during a public comment period, Porter used vulgarities while expressing his disapproval for the school district's gender identity policy. School board member Janie Inglis Monier said in an interview on Thursday that Porter did not also pull his underwear down, and board members 'just saw his gray boxer briefs.' Porter said in an interview on Thursday that his goal was to draw attention to First Amendment rights regarding the district's gender identity policy, the removal of a school board candidate from a recent meeting and an investigation into a school board member's language from earlier this year. 'An outrageous First Amendment-protected demonstration of my artistic free expression was needed, and that is exactly what transpired last evening,' he said. Katie Robine, a spokesperson for the Frederick County Sheriff's Office, wrote in a text message on Thursday that the sheriff's deputy at the school board meeting did not take any action against Porter. She wrote that under current legal standards, 'exposing one's buttocks in public is not considered a criminal offense under state law.' 'However, exposing one's genitalia in public is against the law and can result in criminal charges,' Robine wrote. Heather Fletcher, a registered school board candidate for the 2026 election, at a May 7 board meeting, was removed by a Frederick County Sheriff's Office deputy for sitting at the dais and claiming to be an elected school board member. FCPS requested a trespass order against her because of the incident, but the order was lifted after one day by the Sheriff's Office because Fletcher did not have ongoing charges. At the school board meeting on Wednesday, Porter greeted the board members by calling them 'c---suckers' and 'carpet munchers.' Porter scolded school board members for the Title IX investigation into a comment that board member Colt Black made in January of this year regarding the gender identity policy for Frederick County Public Schools. Policy 443 was created to 'prevent discrimination, stigmatization, harassment, and bullying of students who are transgender or gender nonconforming' and to 'create school cultures that are safe, welcoming, and affirming for all students.' The policy compels students, staff members and teachers to use students' preferred names and pronouns, and allows students to use restrooms, changing facilities and be on sports teams that match their gender identity. This week, the board's Policy Committee said it is considering amending the policy to no longer compel the use of preferred pronouns. Referring to compelled speech, Black at a Jan. 8 school board meeting said about transgender and gender non-conforming students: 'Just as much as you have a right to be you, we have our right to be free from you.' FCPS received 32 Title IX Discrimination and Harassment complaints that alleged Black's comment violated the policy and law. But an independent investigation — which other board members said was necessary due to the volume of complaints — found that Black's comments from that meeting did not violate Title IX. At Wednesday's meeting, Porter said the independent investigation 'backfired' on the school board members. 'Why don't you just let us do whatever the hell we want, as long as we're not breaking the law?' he said. 'And stop telling us what to do.' Calling the school board 'stupid' and 'childish' for 'going after' Black, Porter said he was going to 'artistically' express his disapproval of the investigation and of Policy 443. 'It's real simple,' he said. 'I am not going to use they/them pronouns, and you can't make me.' 'I'm going to do something really stupid and childish, too,' he added while approaching the dais. Porter then pulled his shorts down in front of the school board members and Superintendent Cheryl Dyson. Black said in an interview on Thursday that he supports Porter's rights and anyone else's right to 'redress grievance with government under the First Amendment.' He said he laughed when Porter pulled his shorts down because he found Porter's freedom of expression 'rather amusing.' 'I found his particular antics humorous and within reason under the First Amendment,' Black said. 'I think it's wonderful that individuals have that right in our country.' School board Vice President Dean Rose said in an interview on Thursday that it was a 'shame' that students, parents and staff members were at the meeting to get work done. 'There are a few individuals who are only interested in how many clicks, likes, views and retweets they get on social media,' he said. 'It's just a distraction.' Rose said he supports First Amendment rights, but does not 'support the way they're going about it.' 'I think it's important that we continue, as board members, to talk about decorum,' he said. Porter said he splits his time between Frederick and Washington counties. The Herald-Mail in April reported that three Washington County employees filed for peace orders against Porter because of his use of profanity at Washington County Board of Commissioners meetings. A Washington County District Court judge ruled against the request for peace orders. Porter has also confronted Washington County Board of Education members in similar ways by speaking at their meetings. He said in the interview that 'everything I do is stupid, childish, and most people find it hilarious.' Porter said 'it doesn't get any dumber than' what he did at Wednesday's meeting. 'But if you get upset about it, I win,' he said.
