Latest news with #NationalCouncilofNonprofits
Yahoo
24-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Oklahoma school districts should resist efforts to cut back needed programs
Marnie Taylor, the president & CEO of the Oklahoma Center for Nonprofits, recently explained how nonprofits that often receive support from federal grants, are contributing critical services for families, schools and our social infrastructure. However, due to presidential executive orders, they could face a 'sweeping funding freeze for nonprofit work.' In partnership with other organizations, the National Council of Nonprofits ― of which the center is a member ― filed an injunction to pause the funding freeze. In my opinion, it would be impossible to stabilize and then improve our state's urban schools without the holistic, research-based contributions from nonprofits. That is one reason why I admire the Oklahoma center, and the National Council of Nonprofits, for resisting the funding freeze. I also would be surprised if high-challenge school districts took the risk of standing up for what works for children. Not surprisingly, but understandably, the Tulsa Public Schools (TPS) will be reducing its partnerships that provide essential services for its poorest children of color, in order to focus on 'critical grade-level benchmarks.' For instance, Tulsa will be reducing high-impact tutoring, even though it is far more effective than the approaches, like benchmark testing, that Tulsa seems to be prioritizing. In other words, the Tulsa district seems to be giving into pressure to jack up test scores, regardless of whether those scores reflect real, long-term learning. At a time when chronic absenteeism is out of control, the Tulsa district will reduce the number of campuses served by City Year by 50%, thus shifting away from tackling 'learning loss,' and Growing Together, which coordinates and manages wraparound services for students. It will cut the Whole School-Whole Child program, which 'provides targeted supports for students who are identified by teachers and school staff as at risk for dropping out.' Yes, Tulsa has to struggle with managing multiple initiatives in order to effectively promote student achievement metrics. But why would it cut proven policies in order to expand policies that are likely to improve accountability metrics but are much less likely to increase meaningful student learning? I agree with school board member Jennettie Marshall that these changes will reduce both teacher and student retention in high-challenge schools. We should also note that while the Tulsa district is reducing its investments in Reading Partners, Union Public Schools in Tulsa, which is praised across the nation for its full-service community schools, has no plans to reduce its relationships with them. More: Poor math and reading skills in our public schools must improve — and quickly | Opinion I also agree with James Heckman, a Nobel Prize laureate in economics at the University of Chicago, who grew up in Oklahoma City. In 2013, Heckman warned against the standardized test-driven policies that had been taking off across the nation, especially in Tulsa. As I explained in 2014, in "The Myth of Achievement Tests," Heckman, and his co-authors, John Eric Humphries and Tim Kautz, showed that "faith in tests deceives students and policy makers and conceals major social problems.' Instead of test-driven school improvement efforts, they call for programs to support families and parenting. In 2025, Heckman and his co-author, Alison Baulos, published "Instead of Panicking over Test Scores, Let's Rethink How We Measure Learning and Student Success.' They urge us to 'pause some tests and redirect resources toward more meaningful ways to promote and assess student learning.' They don't oppose the use of tests as one measure when used for diagnostic purposes; those metrics 'may be valuable for tracking large-scale trends — such as monitoring recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.' However, 'the current overreliance on tests is costly in many ways and is not an effective strategy for improving education as a whole.' And, 'standardized tests often conceal more than they reveal.' Heckman and Baulos explain that each year, 'America spends roughly $2 billion on standardized achievement tests at the national and state levels.' Testing consumes 'millions of hours of school time' and produces 'waves of stress, as well as increasing students' skepticism regarding school, and 'burnout.' And, they 'often prompt low student motivation.' Moreover, 'this focus on standardized testing reduces education to a technocratic exercise, overlooking the complexity of how students truly learn and grow.' And they 'crowd out curiosity, engagement and socioemotional development.' Again, I don't want to be too critical of Tulsa and other districts who are reluctant to resist state schools Superintendent Ryan Walters and the Trump administration in a meaningful way. When the Tulsa district, and to a somewhat lesser extent Oklahoma City Public Schools, complied with teach-to-the-test mandates, I didn't know anyone in OKCPS who didn't expect that high-stakes testing would cause more harm than good. In my frequent trips to Tulsa, almost every expert and teacher who I met had deep misgivings about their teacher evaluation tests, driven by Value-Added Models (VAMS) that used invalid and unreliable metrics to punish or even fire teachers. Sure enough, research documented the failure of those VAM models. There was hope that 'benchmark tests,' especially in the early years, could be used for diagnostic, not accountability, purposes. But by increasing the number of tests, benchmark testing could further undermine learning cultures; they also might jack up test scores while undermining reading for comprehension, even lowering long-term outcomes. And that brings me back to the need for all of us to stand with nonprofits. In my experience, only they can bolster the confidence of leaders in the Tulsa and OKC districts, so they could commit to the team efforts required to improve schools with intense concentrations of extreme poverty, as opposed to low-incomes, who have endured multiple traumas, and come from neighborhoods that lack social capital. More: Let's celebrate what's right with Oklahoma's public schools I understand today's schools face a combination of challenges: years of failed corporate reforms, the legacy of COVID, the rise of social media, underfunding, and right-wing attacks. Some say today's urban schools may be facing challenges that are as intimidating as those we faced in the crack-and-gangs era in the 1980s. But at some point, education leaders must openly join with nonprofits, and treat the poorest children of color as students, not test scores. John Thompson is a former Oklahoma City Public Schools teacher. This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: School programs essential despite threats of federal cuts | Opinion
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Marguerite Casey Foundation dips into endowment to grant out $130M this year
The Marguerite Casey Foundation plans to significantly increase donations this year to $130 million to help nonprofits respond to policy changes from the Trump administration, especially federal funding cuts and what it calls threats to the independence of civil society organizations. 'We're doing this very specifically to ensure that organizations across our country have the full weight of our resources to serve communities that are actively under attack from the administration,' said Ian Fuller, chair of the foundation's board and an investment advisor. It's important to act now to protect their freedom to give and their grantees' rights to freedom of speech and assembly, he said. The Seattle-based foundation donated between $23 and $57 million annually since 2019, making this commitment a major expansion. Additionally, it's giving to organizations it hasn't previously supported, including $3 million to the National Council of Nonprofits, which has sued the Trump administration over its proposed federal funding freeze. 'We are stepping in to provide resources where organizations see an opportunity to fill in an information and an organizing void,' said Carmen Rojas, president and CEO of the foundation. The foundation was created in 2001 with funds from Jim Casey, the founder of United Parcel Service. In general, it provides grantees 25% of their budgets for five years and does not accept unsolicited applications for funding. Rojas said the foundation supports community-led organizations and movements that ensure the government works for everyone — not just the rich and powerful. It's already granted out $40 million this year, mostly to organizations it previously supported, she said, though about half of the year's donations overall will go to new grantees. A particular focus will be on journalism organizations like More Perfect Union, Deep South Today and National Trust for Local News. Balancing future funding with current needs Several foundations have also pledged to increase donations this year, including the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and Freedom Together Foundation. Recently, the Northwest Area Foundation, which serves states and Native American tribes from Minnesota to Washington, announced it would double their grantmaking this year. However, most foundations have not and it is unusual for them to donate money directly from their endowments, which are usually created to sustain the foundation's future operations through investments. The Internal Revenue Service requires foundations to spend the equivalent of 5% of their endowments annually. George Suttles, executive director of Commonfund Institute, encouraged all foundations to at least ask their investment advisors what the impact would be of spending more now. 'What are we really called to do as a philanthropic community?" he asked. 'Effectively manage assets as long-term institutional investors or show up for grantees and communities that we care about? I think the answer is both.' White House pushes to control nonprofits The Trump administration has challenged the independence of nonprofit organizations and sought to discourage organizations from carrying out programs that include LGBTQ+ people or that benefit specific groups based on race or other protected characteristics. Last week, Department of Government Efficiency staff asked the Vera Institute of Justice about installing a team at the nonprofit. President Donald Trump also specifically questioned the basis for Harvard University's tax-exempt status, complaining about what it teaches. Before he was elected, Vice President JD Vance attacked foundations who fund movements for social justice in a 2021 speech. 'We should eliminate all of the special privileges that exist for our nonprofit foundation class,' Vance said. 'If you're spending all your money to teach racism to our children in their schools, why do we give you special tax breaks instead of taxing you more?' In February, the White House directed federal agencies to review all funding for nonprofits because it said many 'actively undermine the security, prosperity, and safety of the American people.' Other initiatives helping grantees Giving more money is not the only way that funders and foundations can respond to funding cuts and uncertainty. The Trust-Based Philanthropy Project, along with other sponsors, asked funders to commit to moving in solidarity with nonprofits, meaning to listen, be transparent about their funding decisions and offer other support like legal, financial or communication resources. The Council on Foundations, a membership organization, has asked foundations to sign onto a statement advocating to protect the freedom of donors to give. More than 430 have, with the statement reading in part, 'We don't all share the same beliefs or priorities. Neither do our donors or the communities we serve. But as charitable giving institutions, we are united behind our First Amendment right to give as an expression of our own distinct values.' ___ Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP's philanthropy coverage, visit Sign in to access your portfolio
The Independent
23-04-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Marguerite Casey Foundation dips into endowment to grant out $130M this year
The Marguerite Casey Foundation plans to significantly increase donations this year to $130 million to help nonprofits respond to policy changes from the Trump administration, especially federal funding cuts and what it calls threats to the independence of civil society organizations. 'We're doing this very specifically to ensure that organizations across our country have the full weight of our resources to serve communities that are actively under attack from the administration,' said Ian Fuller, chair of the foundation's board and an investment advisor. It's important to act now to protect their freedom to give and their grantees' rights to freedom of speech and assembly, he said. The Seattle-based foundation donated between $23 and $57 million annually since 2019, making this commitment a major expansion. Additionally, it's giving to organizations it hasn't previously supported, including $3 million to the National Council of Nonprofits, which has sued the Trump administration over its proposed federal funding freeze. 'We are stepping in to provide resources where organizations see an opportunity to fill in an information and an organizing void,' said Carmen Rojas, president and CEO of the foundation. The foundation was created in 2001 with funds from Jim Casey, the founder of United Parcel Service. In general, it provides grantees 25% of their budgets for five years and does not accept unsolicited applications for funding. Rojas said the foundation supports community-led organizations and movements that ensure the government works for everyone — not just the rich and powerful. It's already granted out $40 million this year, mostly to organizations it previously supported, she said, though about half of the year's donations overall will go to new grantees. A particular focus will be on journalism organizations like More Perfect Union, Deep South Today and National Trust for Local News. Balancing future funding with current needs Several foundations have also pledged to increase donations this year, including the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and Freedom Together Foundation. Recently, the Northwest Area Foundation, which serves states and Native American tribes from Minnesota to Washington, announced it would double their grantmaking this year. However, most foundations have not and it is unusual for them to donate money directly from their endowments, which are usually created to sustain the foundation's future operations through investments. The Internal Revenue Service requires foundations to spend the equivalent of 5% of their endowments annually. George Suttles, executive director of Commonfund Institute, encouraged all foundations to at least ask their investment advisors what the impact would be of spending more now. 'What are we really called to do as a philanthropic community?" he asked. 'Effectively manage assets as long-term institutional investors or show up for grantees and communities that we care about? I think the answer is both.' White House pushes to control nonprofits The Trump administration has challenged the independence of nonprofit organizations and sought to discourage organizations from carrying out programs that include LGBTQ+ people or that benefit specific groups based on race or other protected characteristics. Last week, Department of Government Efficiency staff asked the Vera Institute of Justice about installing a team at the nonprofit. President Donald Trump also specifically questioned the basis for Harvard University's tax-exempt status, complaining about what it teaches. Before he was elected, Vice President JD Vance attacked foundations who fund movements for social justice in a 2021 speech. 'We should eliminate all of the special privileges that exist for our nonprofit foundation class,' Vance said. 'If you're spending all your money to teach racism to our children in their schools, why do we give you special tax breaks instead of taxing you more?' In February, the White House directed federal agencies to review all funding for nonprofits because it said many 'actively undermine the security, prosperity, and safety of the American people.' Other initiatives helping grantees Giving more money is not the only way that funders and foundations can respond to funding cuts and uncertainty. The Trust-Based Philanthropy Project, along with other sponsors, asked funders to commit to moving in solidarity with nonprofits, meaning to listen, be transparent about their funding decisions and offer other support like legal, financial or communication resources. The Council on Foundations, a membership organization, has asked foundations to sign onto a statement advocating to protect the freedom of donors to give. More than 430 have, with the statement reading in part, 'We don't all share the same beliefs or priorities. Neither do our donors or the communities we serve. But as charitable giving institutions, we are united behind our First Amendment right to give as an expression of our own distinct values.' ___ Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP's philanthropy coverage, visit
Associated Press
23-04-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Marguerite Casey Foundation dips into endowment to grant out $130M this year
The Marguerite Casey Foundation plans to significantly increase donations this year to $130 million to help nonprofits respond to policy changes from the Trump administration, especially federal funding cuts and what it calls threats to the independence of civil society organizations. 'We're doing this very specifically to ensure that organizations across our country have the full weight of our resources to serve communities that are actively under attack from the administration,' said Ian Fuller, chair of the foundation's board and an investment advisor. It's important to act now to protect their freedom to give and their grantees' rights to freedom of speech and assembly, he said. The Seattle-based foundation donated between $23 and $57 million annually since 2019, making this commitment a major expansion. Additionally, it's giving to organizations it hasn't previously supported, including $3 million to the National Council of Nonprofits, which has sued the Trump administration over its proposed federal funding freeze. 'We are stepping in to provide resources where organizations see an opportunity to fill in an information and an organizing void,' said Carmen Rojas, president and CEO of the foundation. The foundation was created in 2001 with funds from Jim Casey, the founder of United Parcel Service. In general, it provides grantees 25% of their budgets for five years and does not accept unsolicited applications for funding. Rojas said the foundation supports community-led organizations and movements that ensure the government works for everyone — not just the rich and powerful. It's already granted out $40 million this year, mostly to organizations it previously supported, she said, though about half of the year's donations overall will go to new grantees. A particular focus will be on journalism organizations like More Perfect Union, Deep South Today and National Trust for Local News. Balancing future funding with current needs Several foundations have also pledged to increase donations this year, including the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and Freedom Together Foundation. Recently, the Northwest Area Foundation, which serves states and Native American tribes from Minnesota to Washington, announced it would double their grantmaking this year. However, most foundations have not and it is unusual for them to donate money directly from their endowments, which are usually created to sustain the foundation's future operations through investments. The Internal Revenue Service requires foundations to spend the equivalent of 5% of their endowments annually. George Suttles, executive director of Commonfund Institute, encouraged all foundations to at least ask their investment advisors what the impact would be of spending more now. 'What are we really called to do as a philanthropic community?' he asked. 'Effectively manage assets as long-term institutional investors or show up for grantees and communities that we care about? I think the answer is both.' White House pushes to control nonprofits The Trump administration has challenged the independence of nonprofit organizations and sought to discourage organizations from carrying out programs that include LGBTQ+ people or that benefit specific groups based on race or other protected characteristics. Last week, Department of Government Efficiency staff asked the Vera Institute of Justice about installing a team at the nonprofit. President Donald Trump also specifically questioned the basis for Harvard University's tax-exempt status, complaining about what it teaches. Before he was elected, Vice President JD Vance attacked foundations who fund movements for social justice in a 2021 speech. 'We should eliminate all of the special privileges that exist for our nonprofit foundation class,' Vance said. 'If you're spending all your money to teach racism to our children in their schools, why do we give you special tax breaks instead of taxing you more?' In February, the White House directed federal agencies to review all funding for nonprofits because it said many 'actively undermine the security, prosperity, and safety of the American people.' Other initiatives helping granteesGiving more money is not the only way that funders and foundations can respond to funding cuts and uncertainty. The Trust-Based Philanthropy Project, along with other sponsors, asked funders to commit to moving in solidarity with nonprofits, meaning to listen, be transparent about their funding decisions and offer other support like legal, financial or communication resources. The Council on Foundations, a membership organization, has asked foundations to sign onto a statement advocating to protect the freedom of donors to give. More than 430 have, with the statement reading in part, 'We don't all share the same beliefs or priorities. Neither do our donors or the communities we serve. But as charitable giving institutions, we are united behind our First Amendment right to give as an expression of our own distinct values.' ___ Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP's philanthropy coverage, visit
Yahoo
27-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
A Guide To The Many, Many Lawsuits Against Donald Trump And Elon Musk
The unprecedented barrage of executive orders President Donald Trump has signed in his first weeks in office has been met with resistance from ordinary citizens all the way up to coalitions of state attorneys general. The lawsuits were to be expected: The state of California convened a special legislative session at the end of last year just to approve additional funding for legal resources that would be needed at the dawn of the second Trump Age. But if you're finding it difficult to keep track of all the legal filings against Trump, you're not alone. Here we aim to help you make sense of the sheer volume of chaos that has surrounded the Oval Office since Jan. 20, with more details in the links provided. This is by no means an exhaustive list. The Trump administration has attacked the federal and civil service relentlessly by taking a hacksaw approach to slashing funding. The chaos kicked into high gear when the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo that froze all federal grants, ostensibly to allow the new administration time to review spending and ensure it aligns with its priorities. The idea was to weed out funding acknowledging environmental issues, diversity or social justice issues. Two lawsuits were filed in close succession aiming to fight the general funding freeze. One was filed in Washington by the National Council of Nonprofits, and the other in Rhode Island by a coalition of state attorneys general. The former secured a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration, while the latter produced a temporary restraining order, which should have allowed federal money to flow as usual. But evidence suggestsfunding is stillbeing held back. District Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island accused the Trump administration of violating 'the plain text' of an order to halt the freeze, deeming the move by the administration 'likely unconstitutional.' District Judge Loren AliKhan called a second memo purporting to rescind the first memo essentially 'meaningless.' Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) joined the fight with a lawsuit alleging the Trump administration jeopardized some $2.2 billion worth of funds allocated to Pennsylvania for various projects. The president also specifically targeted foreign aid: A Jan. 20 executive order placed a 90-day freeze on foreign aid while purporting to 'reevaluate' where it goes. Not only does the move impact thousands of American jobs, but critics say the freeze threatens to erode the 'soft power' that bolsters global public opinion of the United States. A lawsuit filed by public health groups concerned about the demolition of the U.S. Agency for International Development prompted a federal judge in Washington to order the immediate release of humanitarian relief while the suit plays out in court. The judge ruled last week that the administration has failed to comply, and this week ordered the funds to be released. There are at least 14 active lawsuits right now against the Trump administration involving civil service workers, or people who have made careers for themselves working on behalf of the American public. The suits allege some workers have been unlawfully removed from their jobs and that improper access has been given to billionaire Elon Musk's government auditing agency, DOGE. For the past several weeks, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency — an unofficial organization that has amassed unprecedented power with little oversight — has been meddling in the operations of numerous official agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service and the Social Security Administration. Many claims were filed on behalf of workers by representatives of the National Treasury Employees Union, the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility and the AFL-CIO. At least 14 states have also filed suit in Washington federal court alleging that the powers Trump has given to Musk are unconstitutional. They say DOGE's rummaging through sensitive records at OPM, the Department of Labor and other institutions runs afoul of privacy laws. Responding to the states' lawsuit last week, the White House made the odd claim that Musk is not actually the head of DOGE, but rather a 'special government employee.' Nonetheless, Judge Tanya Chutkan did not issue a temporary restraining order, finding the state's attorneys general had failed to prove they would suffer irreparable harm without it. Similarly, a group of anonymous USAID workers sued Musk on unconstitutionality grounds, arguing that his 'de facto' status as the administrator of DOGE isn't enough to grant him sweeping access to private information. Other groups to sue over privacy and data security concerns include the AFGE and the Service Employees International Union, who allege DOGE was given improper access to the federal government's payment systems. The American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations have so far failed to keep DOGE out of student loan data at the University of California. A Washington federal judge ruled against them, saying he saw no evidence to suggest DOGE's access would directly cause the disclosure of sensitive data or borrower information. The judge allowed time for DOGE to explain itself in more detail, however. Still more lawsuits are aiming to halt mass firings. Federal workers' unions including the AFGE sued the OMB Monday in response to its email demanding federal workers justify their continued employment or else face termination. The National Treasury Employees Union said in a lawsuit that the attempted dismantling of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and firing of its director and staff violates separation of powers rules enshrined in the Constitution, prompting a federal judge to order a pause on the administration's takedown of the agency. In a lawsuit brought by five unions against Trump and a number of federal agencies, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper denied the unions' bid to secure a restraining order to halt any more firings. Cooper said the unions lacked jurisdiction and would need to go before the Federal Labor Relations Board. Career intelligence officials, including CIA employees, have also sued to stop their removal under the administration's executive order purporting to end 'illegal DEI' initiatives. Thanks to a judge's order, they are allowed to remain on the job, for now. A coalition of 22 state attorneys general led a lawsuit in Massachusetts federal court arguing that a new rule implemented by the National Institutes of Health impacted billions in funding that had already been pledged for life-saving research. Judge Angel Kelley has granted the coalition a temporary restraining order that she agreed to keep in place until further notice. Trump campaigned hard on rolling back rights for transgender Americans. Last month, he signed an executive order targeting institutions that provide gender-affirming care for people under age 19 — including 18-year-old adults. In response, some hospitals around the country stopped providing that care. The American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal filed suit in Maryland federal court on behalf of transgender youth who have seen their appointments and therapies canceled. Judge Brendan Hurson temporarily blocked Trump's executive order. Meanwhile, in Washington, a group of trans service members and prospective recruits sued the administration over an order banning transgender people from the military, alleging Trump is violating equal protection laws. During a hearing, a judge delivered a thundering rebuke of one Justice Department lawyer who was forced to concede that 'the government is not going to speculate on what Jesus would say about these things.' 'I'm sorry,' the lawyer added. One of Trump's first executive orders aimed to end birthright citizenship, a right enumerated in the Constitution since 1868. According to Trump's order, if a child's father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident and the child's mother is 'unlawfully present' in the country, the child is not automatically granted citizenship. The same goes for a mother who is lawfully in the country but only on a temporary basis, such as someone with a student visa. Four federal judges have put a temporary stop to the order while legal challenges wind their way through the court system on behalf of sets of plaintiffs including several pregnant women, immigrant advocacy groups, state attorneys general and others. Maryland's Judge Deborah Boardman said in her ruling that 'no court in the country has ever endorsed the president's interpretation,' and added, 'This court will not be the first.' The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt the administration a significant setback last week when a panel of judges unanimously denied Trump's emergency request seeking to unwind an injunction by a Washington state judge. The judges admonished the administration for trying to rush through 'substantive issues' and treating every one of their requests as urgent. Decisions, the panel said, need to be free from 'ideology or political preference,' or the public may question 'whether we are politicians in disguise.' The Trump administration is pushing the limits of the executive branch, attempting to fire officials tasked with conducting critical oversight of the government. In one case, what started out as a curt email attempt to fire a federal official who oversees the enforcement of anti-corruption laws morphed into the Trump administration's first full-blown appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel, was notified that he had been fired in early February despite being confirmed by the Senate for a five-year term last March. Federal law says anyone working as special counsel can only be removed for negligence of duty or malfeasance. A federal judge reinstated Dellinger and Trump appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court agreed to temporarily let Dellinger stay in his role while a lower court considered whether to extend a halt to his dismissal. The lower court said Wednesday that Dellinger can stay at least through March 1 as the case progresses. Another lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and a slew of administration officials. Eight inspectors general — representing the departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, State, Agriculture, Education, and Labor, and the Small Business Administration — say they were unlawfully removed from their posts en masse and that a more thorough review must be conducted before they are terminated. A hearing is slated for March. A new era has descended on the Justice Department amid legal battles over freedom of the press and privacy. Last week, The Associated Press sued three Trump administration officials over access to presidential press conferences and other events. The AP's reporters have been barred from taking part in the White House press pool for two weeks due to the outlet's refusal to solely refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the 'Gulf of America,' the name Trump chose for the body of water by executive order. On Monday, a federal judge declined to order the White House to reverse course, although he urged officials to reconsider their ban. A group of FBI agents who fear retaliation by the Trump administration are in the midst of a legal battle to keep their names private. The agents sued the Justice Department in early February saying they are being targeted for termination because they worked on investigations tied to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol as well as Trump's Mar-a-Lago documents case. Part of that retaliation, they fear, will eventually include the administration's publication of a list with their names and other identifying information. Lawyers for the agents say some FBI personnel have already seen their information circulating on the dark web and that appetites are whetted for their harassment. For now, a federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order barring any release of FBI staff names or case assignments publicly without the government first asking the court for permission and with at least 48 hours' notice. Meanwhile, after case records associated with a Jan. 6 defendant mysteriously vanished, a group of 14 media organizations blew the dust off a 2021 court order directing the preservation of evidence and other key records associated with the attack on the Capitol. A federal judge has directed the government not to delete or remove any further records from a portal accessible to lawyers and journalists until further notice. The Justice Department had a deadline Wednesday to identify any other records it has removed and explain why. White House Kicks Out HuffPost Reporter From Press Pool Trump Backs Musk As He Roils The Federal Workforce With Demands And Threats House Adopts Republican Budget That Calls For Medicaid Cuts
