Latest news with #Orders
The Sun
13 hours ago
- General
- The Sun
Fahmi congratulates sign language interpreter Tan Lee Bee
KUALA LUMPUR: Minister of Communications Datuk Fahmi Fadzil extended his congratulations to sign language interpreter, Tan Lee Bee, who was awarded the Bintang Ahli Mangku Negara (AMN) by His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia, on Monday. Fahmi also shared a photo with Tan and Deputy Minister of Communications Teo Nie Ching on his Facebook post. 'Met Lee Bee at the Royal Tea Reception in Istana Negara earlier today. May you continue to excel. Thank you for being a 'silent hero' who always inspire and enrich our TV screens with full dedication and spirit,' the post read. The Royal Tea Reception was a specially arranged event in conjunction with His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia's Official Birthday. Tan, 64, was among 16 individuals who received the AMN award at the Federal Awards, Orders, and Medals Investiture Ceremony in conjunction with His Majesty, Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia's Official Birthday at Istana Negara on Monday. Bernama had earlier reported that Tan began her work as a sign language interpreter out of love for her hearing-impaired younger sibling. She learned sign language to help her sibling and also served as a teacher for 17 years for the hearing impaired. Since 1994, Tan has been the first sign language interpreter at the Federal Court of Malaysia, while her involvement in broadcasting began around 1985, through the program Selamat Pagi Malaysia on RTM, and later also became a sign language interpreter for RTM news broadcasts and official communication videos.
Axios
3 days ago
- Politics
- Axios
Critics warn of loyalty test in new White House hiring guidelines
New White House hiring guidelines sent out to federal agencies last week include what looks like a presidential loyalty test, say current and former federal employees and Trump administration critics. Why it matters: Meant to serve as guidelines to focus hiring on merit, the memo is the latest move from the Trump administration to politicize the civil service, eroding, more than a century of law and tradition meant to insulate career employees from politics, critics say. Where it stands: Candidates for civil service jobs — including janitors, nurses, surgeons, engineers, lawyers and economists — are to be asked four questions on their level of patriotism and support for the president's policies. They are to answer in essay form, at a maximum of 200 words, and certify that they did not use help from artificial intelligence. How it works:"How would you help advance the President's Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role?" reads the third question, which is garnering a lot of attention. It continues: "Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired." Zoom out: These questions have nothing to do with a candidate's merit or skills, says Jeri Buchholz, a former chief human capital officer who led HR at NASA and ran HR at other federal agencies for decades. "When you're doing hiring, traditionally by law, you have to focus on the knowledge, skills and abilities required for the position," she says. The questions "are philosophical. They're not even aptitude related. And I'm very unclear how you score that." Dealing with these questions could slow the hiring process, running counter to the stated intent of the guidelines to speed it up, Buchholz says. Taken together these plans "will make it more difficult to hire, not less," a current federal HR official told Government Executive. "A merit-based civil service that took generations to build is being dismantled via memo," writes Stanford University political scientist Adam Bonica in a Substack post on Sunday. The other side: An official from the Office of Personnel Management defended the questions as legal and within the bounds of presidential authority. " The President has the power of superintendence over the Executive Branch and clear statutory authority to ask these questions of prospective employees. He is not imposing a loyalty test by doing so," they say. The law requires those who work for agencies to act consistently with the president's lawful executive orders and policy priorities, they say, making it reasonable to ask for examples that candidates are excited about. Agencies will decide whether and how to use the questions. The big picture: The White House has already fired or pushed out more than 100,000 federal workers, chasing away a lot of talent from the government. Now it looks like they'll be replacing those folks with partisans, says Max Stier, president of the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service. "They're emptying the shelves of the existing nonpartisan expert civil servants, and they're restocking with the loyalists," he says. The bottom line: Trump bristled at the pushback he received from "deep-state" federal employees in his first term, and a focus this term is ensuring that does not happen again.
Daily Record
7 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Record
Douglas Ross booted out of Scottish Parliament for heckling John Swinney during FMQs
The former Scottish Conservatives leader was asked to leave by Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone. Douglas Ross was booted out of the Scottish Parliament debating chamber today for heckling John Swinney during First Minister's Questions. The former leader of the Scots Tories was asked to leave by Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone after he was heard repeatedly disagreeing while the First Minister was speaking. Under parliament rules, MSPs are expected not to interrupt proceedings when they are sitting down. Swinney was in the process of answering a question from Scottish Conservatives leader Russell Findlay when Johnstone interjected. "Mr Ross, you have persistently refused abide by our Standing Orders, and I would ask you to leave this Chamber, and you are excluded for the rest of the day," the Presiding Officer said. It came after Swinney was repeatedly pressed by Findlay over the Scottish Government's climate change targets. The Scottish Conservatives leader told MSPs: "The Climate Change Committee's new report sets out what this Government needs to do to reach its 2045 Net Zero target. "They would have to reduce oil and gas production by 91 per cent, which would devastate the industry and our economy. "They would have to ask homeowners to meet stringent and expensive new energy standards. They would have to get more than half of the population to drive electric cars or vans by 2035. "This report lays bare the crippling costs to hardworking families and businesses. Does John Swinney think the committee's proposals are realistic?" We're also on Facebook - your must-see news, features, videos and pictures throughout the day from the Daily Record, Sunday Mail and Record Online Get all the big headlines, pictures, analysis, opinion and video on the stories that matter to you.
Business Insider
7 days ago
- Business
- Business Insider
U.S. trade court blocks Trump's global tariffs
The U.S. Court of International Trade has ruled that President Trump does not have the authority under economic emergency legislation to impose sweeping global tariffs. 'There is no question here of narrowly tailored relief; if the challenged Tariff Orders are unlawful as to Plaintiffs they are unlawful as to all,' the court's opinion reads. Confident Investing Starts Here:
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Judge Uses 26 Exclamation Points to Express How Bad Trump Order Is
The president's attack on Big Law is so outrageous that it's made at least one judge raise his voice, even on paper. U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia Richard Leon struck down Donald Trump's executive order targeting law firm WilmerHale Tuesday, describing the entire directive as 'unconstitutional.' In a 73-page opinion, Leon took the time to explain the principles of democracy to the president, illustrating how his political retribution campaign is quintessentially antithetical to the foundational principles of the U.S. government. 'The cornerstone of the American system of justice is an independent judiciary and an independent bar willing to tackle unpopular cases, however daunting. The Founding Fathers knew this!' Leon wrote. 'Accordingly, they took pains to enshrine in the Constitution certain rights that would serve as the foundation for that independence. Little wonder that in the nearly 250 years since the Constitution was adopted no Executive Order has been issued challenging these fundamental rights.' 'Now, however, several Executive Orders have been issued directly challenging these rights and that independence,' Leon continued. 'One of these Orders is the subject of this case. For the reasons set forth below, I have concluded that this Order must be struck down in its entirety as unconstitutional. Indeed, to rule otherwise would be unfaithful to the judgment and vision of the Founding Fathers!' It's highly unusual for judges to use even one exclamation point in their rulings. Leon used a total of 26. The decision blocks Trump's March 27 order, which instructed federal agencies to throw out WilmerHale's government contracts and nix the firm's federal building access along with their security clearances. It was just one of many law firms targeted by the Trump administration for representing individuals that Trump has categorized as his political enemies, or for refusing to represent him during his monumental legal struggles last year. WilmerHale's supposed crime—per the White House—was the fact that they 'rewarded' Robert Mueller by keeping him on payroll after he investigated Trump's ties to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. But not every law firm was willing to ride out the wave of Trump's encroaching federal directives. Several major law firms had caved to Trump by April, committing to provide the convicted felon with up to $600 million in 'pro bono' legal services. But the original deal, as written, may not shake out for the famed dealmaker the way he'd hoped: earlier this month, several firms argued that the capitulation had only stipulated 'specified areas' that they needed to provide legal services for, effectively giving them free range to pick their own clients.
