Latest news with #NateRaymond
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump cannot proceed with gutting US Education Department, court rules
By Nate Raymond BOSTON (Reuters) -A federal appeals court on Wednesday declined to lift a judge's order blocking President Donald Trump's administration from carrying out his executive order to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and requiring it to reinstate employees who were terminated in a mass layoff. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Trump administration's request to put on hold an injunction issued by a lower-court judge at the urging of several Democratic-led states, school districts and teachers' unions. The U.S. Department of Justice had asked for a swift ruling from the 1st Circuit so that it could promptly take the case up to the 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court if the appeals court did not rule in its favor. But Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, writing for a panel of three judges who were all appointed by Democratic presidents, said a stay was not warranted given the extensive findings a trial judge made about the impact mass firings at the department would have on its ability to function. "What is at stake in this case, the district court found, was whether a nearly half-century-old cabinet department would be permitted to carry out its statutorily assigned functions or prevented from doing so by a mass termination of employees aimed at implementing the effective closure of that department," he said. The Education Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The lawsuits were filed after Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in March announced plans to carry out a mass termination of over 1,300 employees, which would cut the department's staff by half as part of what it said was its "final mission." Those job cuts were announced a week before Trump signed an executive order calling for the department's closure, following a campaign promise to conservatives aimed at leaving school policy almost entirely in the hands of states and local school boards. Trump later announced plans to transfer the department's student loan portfolio to the Small Business Administration and its special education, nutrition, and related services to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In combination with 600 employees who took buyout offers, the Education Department said the job cuts once implemented would leave it with 2,183 workers, down from 4,133 when Trump took office on January 20. Affected employees were placed on administrative leave on March 21 and were told they would continue receiving full pay and benefits until June 9. The administration argued the cuts were a lawful effort to streamline the agency and cut bloat. But U.S. District Judge Myong Joun on May 22 concluded that the job cuts were in fact an effort by the administration to shut down the department without the necessary approval of Congress, which created the agency in 1979. The Education Department subsequently notified those employees about the judge's ruling in an effort to comply with it. The administration also appealed, saying that while Trump has made no secret of his desire to abolish the department, his administration understood that only Congress could do so and that the case ultimately concerned a personnel action.
Yahoo
a day ago
- General
- Yahoo
Trump's birthright citizenship order to face first US appeals court review
By Nate Raymond (Reuters) -The constitutionality of President Donald Trump's executive order to curtail automatic birthright citizenship is set to be considered by a U.S. appeals court for the first time on Wednesday, even as the U.S. Supreme Court weighs his administration's request to let it begin to take effect. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is slated to hear arguments in Seattle in the administration's appeal of a judge's ruling blocking enforcement nationwide of the executive order, which is a key element of the Republican president's hardline immigration agenda. Seattle-based U.S. District Judge John Coughenour issued his preliminary injunction on Feb. 6 after declaring Trump's action "blatantly unconstitutional" and accusing the Republican president of ignoring the rule of law for political and personal gain. Federal judges in Massachusetts and Maryland also have issued similar orders blocking the directive nationwide. Democratic attorneys general from 22 states and immigrant rights advocates in lawsuits challenging Trump's directive argued that it violates the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, long been understood to recognize that virtually anyone born in the United States is a citizen. Trump signed his order on January 20, his first day back in office. It directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. The administration contends that the 14th Amendment's citizenship language does not extend to immigrants in the country illegally or immigrants whose presence is lawful but temporary, such as university students or those on work visas. The 9th Circuit panel is scheduled to consider the constitutional questions regarding Trump's action. The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, heard arguments on May 15 in the administration's bid to narrow the three injunctions. Those arguments did not center on the legal merits of Trump's order, instead focusing on the issue of whether a single judge should be able to issue nationwide injunctions like the ones that have blocked Trump's directive. The Supreme Court, which has yet to rule, could allow the directive to go into effect in large swathes of the country. More than 150,000 newborns would be denied citizenship annually if Trump's order takes effect nationally, according to the plaintiffs. Coughenour, an appointee of Republican President Ronald Reagan, has presided over a legal challenge brought by the states of Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon and several pregnant women. The 9th Circuit panel hearing arguments on Wednesday includes two judges appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton and one appointed by Trump during his first presidential term.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Trump administration scraps Biden-era policy on emergency abortions
By Nate Raymond (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump's administration on Tuesday rescinded guidance issued during his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden's tenure requiring hospitals to provide abortions to women in medical emergencies regardless of various state bans on the procedure. The U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services said the 2022 guidance, which interpreted a federal law that ensures patients can receive emergency "stabilizing care" as preempting state abortion bans, did not reflect the policy of the Trump administration. The agency, which is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said it "will work to rectify any perceived legal confusion and instability created by the former administration's actions." The Biden administration issued the guidance in July 2022 weeks after the 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court overturned its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that had recognized a nationwide right of women to obtain abortions. The 2022 guidance reminded healthcare providers across the country of their obligations under a 1986 federal law called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) to ensure Medicare-participating hospitals offer emergency care stabilizing patients regardless of their ability to pay. Medicare is the government healthcare program for the elderly. Hospitals that violate EMTALA risk losing Medicare funding. The 2022 guidance aimed to make clear that under EMTALA, physicians must provide a woman an abortion if needed to resolve a medical emergency and stabilize the patient even in states where the procedure is banned and that the federal law preempted any state laws that offer no exceptions for medical emergencies. After issuing the guidance, the U.S. Department of Justice sued the state of Idaho in a bid to stop it from enforcing its near-total abortion ban in medical emergencies. A federal judge at the Justice Department's urging blocked the Idaho from enforcing the ban during medical emergencies, but the Trump administration in March dropped that lawsuit, resulting in that injunction being lifted. The ban still remains blocked in emergencies due to a similar lawsuit brought by a hospital system.
Japan Today
7 days ago
- Politics
- Japan Today
Judge blocks Trump ban on Harvard's international students
By Nate Raymond A federal judge said on Thursday she would extend an order blocking President Donald Trump's administration from immediately revoking Harvard University's ability to enroll international students, a victory for the Ivy League school that is entangled in multiple battles with the administration. U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston announced her intention to issue a preliminary injunction, six days after she first granted Harvard a temporary order blocking the Trump administration's move. As the court hearing unfolded on Thursday morning, thousands of Harvard students were receiving their degrees at the school's commencement ceremony on campus about 8 km away. University President Alan Garber, who received a standing ovation, welcomed graduating students "from down the street, across the country and around the world," drawing applause for the last words. "Around the world - just as it should be," he added. The Trump administration has launched a multifront attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions of dollars in grants and other funding, proposing to end its tax-exempt status and opening an investigation into whether it discriminated against white, Asian, male or straight employees or job applicants. Revoking Harvard's ability to enroll international students would be damaging, the school says. More than a quarter of the student body is international; nearly 60% of the graduate students at the prestigious Harvard Kennedy School hail from other countries. The attack on Harvard is part of the administration's broader effort to pressure higher education institutions to align with its policy agenda. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the administration would start "aggressively" revoking visas issued to Chinese students attending U.S. schools, including those with ties to the Chinese Communist Party and those studying in critical fields, which he did not specify. More than 275,000 Chinese students are enrolled in hundreds of U.S. colleges, providing a major source of revenue for the schools and a crucial pipeline of talent for U.S. technology companies. The decision prompted despair and frustration among students who have offers to attend next year. Prior to Rubio's announcement, the offensive against U.S. colleges had largely been confined to Ivy League schools such as Harvard, Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania, which it has accused of left-wing bias and antisemitism. Lynn Pasquerella, president of the advocacy group American Association of Colleges and Universities, said the Trump administration's targeting of international students would have negative consequences for schools and the U.S. "Chinese students, in particular, now that they're being faced with hyper-scrutiny, are looking elsewhere," she said. "That is a huge loss for us. It's a brain drain." JUDGE SKEPTICAL The court hearing before Burroughs took place shortly after the administration softened its stance in an apparent effort to refute Harvard's legal arguments in advance. Late Wednesday night, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security sent a notice to Harvard saying it would now give the university 30 days to submit evidence contesting the administration's plan to revoke Harvard's right to enroll non-U.S. students. The notice signaled a change in course for DHS, which had said last week that the revocation was effective immediately. In its lawsuit challenging the move, Harvard argued that DHS had violated federal administrative procedure. During the court hearing, U.S. Department of Justice attorney Tiberius Davis argued there was now no need for a court order blocking the administration's actions, since Harvard could challenge them via an administrative process. But Burroughs, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, said she believed a broad preliminary injunction protecting Harvard and students was necessary while that process played out. She expressed skepticism that Harvard's fate would be any different at its conclusion, saying, "Aren't we still going to end up back here at the same place?" She also questioned whether the administration had fully complied with her temporary restraining order, pointing to a declaration Harvard submitted on Wednesday that said visas for incoming students had been recently revoked. Burroughs said the temporary order would remain in effect while lawyers for both sides negotiate over the terms of the injunction. Harvard has called DHS's action part of an "unprecedented and retaliatory attack on academic freedom." The school is pursuing a separate lawsuit challenging the administration's decision to terminate nearly $3 billion in federal research funding. Harvard argues the Trump administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to its demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. In announcing the initial decision to revoke Harvard's certification, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, without providing evidence, accused the university of "fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party." She accused the school of refusing to comply with wide-ranging requests for information on its student visa holders, including whether they engaged in any activity that was illegal, violent or subjected them to discipline. The department's move would prevent Harvard from enrolling new international students and require existing ones to transfer to other schools or lose their legal status. © Thomson Reuters 2025.
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Harvard to urge judge to extend block on Trump's effort to bar foreign students
By Nate Raymond BOSTON (Reuters) -A federal judge will consider on Thursday whether to further block U.S. President Donald Trump's administration from revoking Harvard University's ability to enroll international students, a move the Ivy League school said would impact about a quarter of its student body and devastate the school. At a hearing in Boston, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs will weigh whether to extend a temporary order she issued on Friday that blocked the U.S. Department of Homeland Security from carrying out the revocation it issued a day earlier. The department's move was an escalation of the Trump administration's attack on Harvard. It has accused the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university of bias against conservatives and of fostering antisemitism on its campus. The school's lawyers argued the agency's action was part of an "unprecedented and retaliatory attack on academic freedom at Harvard," which is pursuing a separate lawsuit challenging the administration's decision to terminate nearly $3 billion in federal research funding. Harvard argues the Trump administration is retaliating against it for refusing to cede to its demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the 'ideology' of its faculty and students. The case before Burroughs, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, was filed after Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem last week revoked the school's certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, which gives it the ability to allow enrollment of non-U.S. students. In announcing the decision, Noem, without providing evidence, accused the university of "fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party." In a letter that day, she accused the school of refusing to comply with wide-ranging requests for information on its student visa holders, including about any activity they engaged in that was illegal or violent or that would subject them to discipline. "As I explained to you in my April letter, it is a privilege to enroll foreign students, and it is also a privilege to employ aliens on campus," she said. Harvard said the decision was "devastating" for the school and its student body. The university, the nation's oldest and wealthiest, enrolled nearly 6,800 international students in its current school year, about 27% of its total enrollment. The department's move would prevent Harvard from enrolling new international students and require existing ones to transfer to other schools or lose their legal status. Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Wednesday that Harvard University should have a 15% cap on the number of non-U.S. students it admits. "Harvard has got to behave themselves," he said. Harvard argues that the revocation of its ability to enroll international students violated its free speech and due process rights under the U.S. Constitution as well as the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs agency actions. Its lawyers say Harvard's certification was revoked abruptly without complying with federal regulations requiring the department to provide a legitimate reason for its actions and advance notice and an opportunity to address any issues. Under DHS regulations, the department was required to provide it at least 30 days to present evidence to challenge the agency's allegations and provide the school an opportunity to pursue an administrative appeal, they said.
