Latest news with #Trump-administration
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Averting a Worst-Case Scenario in Los Angeles
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. In Los Angeles, federal agents carrying out deportations on behalf of the Trump administration are clashing with protesters, some lawful, others unlawfully disruptive and even violent. The Trump administration has ordered in the National Guard and threatened to send in the Marines. Governor Gavin Newsom calls this willful escalation. Trump-administration officials say they must protect federal agents engaged in lawful immigration actions––enforcement that some protesters regard as cruel and immoral, regardless of legality. Anytime that American citizens clash in the streets with armed agents of the state, something has gone wrong. Today's civil unrest risks expanding into the sort of violence that kills lots of people and strains civic bonds for decades. And every time looting and rioting occur in Los Angeles, the city's poorest neighborhoods suffer the aftereffects for years. Stepping back from the brink is in America's interest, regardless of where one attributes blame. As a Californian, I am especially dismayed to see this happen in L.A., a city I adore, where I long lived and where I have many friends and loved ones. For all Angelenos, so recently traumatized by this year's devastating wildfires, and for the many Americans who feel dismay when watching their fellow citizens clash, I pray the turmoil ends without loss of life. My fear that it may instead intensify is informed by several background conditions. Among them are President Donald Trump's incentives. On X, many of his supporters are gleeful about the prospect of a clash that ends in bloodied leftists wearing handcuffs and facing felonies. Even setting aside the most negatively polarized segment of the Republican base, Trump has a strong incentive to redirect public attention away from his feud with Elon Musk, his underwater approval rating on the economy, and the fight over a spending bill that divides his coalition, and toward immigration enforcement, an issue on which his approval rating is still positive. What's more, this clash concerns deportation actions that are apparently lawful, as opposed to Trump's unconstitutional deportations of foreigners to a Salvadoran prison. Newsom has urged nonviolence, but California officials also have incentives to focus on opposing Trump rather than restoring calm to protect innocents. Golden State polls show not only that Trump is more unpopular in the state than he is in the nation, but that immigration is a bad issue for him locally. Regarding undocumented immigrants, the Public Policy Institute of California finds that 'overwhelming majorities of adults (73%) and likely voters (71%) say that there should be a way for them to stay in the country legally, if certain requirements are met'; that 'eight in ten adults (79%) and likely voters (80%) favor the protections given by DACA—Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals—to undocumented immigrants brought into the US as children'; and that 'about six in ten adults (63%) and likely voters (62%) favor the California state and local governments making their own policies and taking actions, separate from the federal government, to protect the legal rights of undocumented immigrants in California.' Sentiments in Los Angeles are surely even more antagonistic to Trump's position, and the stakes for Angelenos with family members and friends who live there without legal status are high––in protesting, within or outside of the law, many seek to preserve their communities or perhaps their very families. And Trump, by his own unlawful actions, has made many fear that their intimates may not be simply deported back to their home country but instead disappeared into the prison system of an authoritarian regime. Federal and local cops have cause to feel threatened, too. More than 900 suffered injuries during the 2020 unrest that followed the killing of George Floyd. Multiple federal, state, and local agencies trying to keep order, while federal, state, and local officials fight rather than coordinate, only raises the probability of bad outcomes. And today's social-media environment facilitates the rapid communication of where deportation raids are occurring, enabling not just peaceful protesters but also, potentially, nihilistic inciters of chaos to rush to the scene. Immigration-enforcement raids will continue so long as Trump is president and the law of the land is unchanged. Opponents of such actions, even those that are entirely lawful, have every right under the Constitution to peaceably assemble to protest them. Farsighted protest leaders should do everything in their power to keep those demonstrations law-abiding. Under the Trump administration, the rule of law is among the most precious safeguards Americans possess. Appealing to it, Trump critics have repeatedly prevailed in courtrooms, where Trump is least likely to succeed with his most dangerous gambits. In contrast, street violence gives Trump the ability to fight his enemies with the law on his side and with trained, armed personnel to enforce it. In such a fight, Trump may well prevail in the court of public opinion. But if he is seen as needlessly escalating the dispute, and bloodshed follows, more Americans may come to reflect that the same man was president during the civil unrest of summer 2020; the civil unrest of January 6, 2021; and the civil unrest of today. Whether one attributes blame to Trump himself or to so-called Trump derangement syndrome, the sad and dangerous spectacle of Americans fighting one another happens alarmingly often when Trump is in the White House. A president attuned to America's long-term interests and the many global challenges our nation confronts would try to lower the temperature, rather than inflame a clash that could have deadly results. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Atlantic
4 hours ago
- Politics
- Atlantic
The Case for Cooler Heads in Los Angeles
In Los Angeles, federal agents carrying out deportations on behalf of the Trump administration are clashing with protesters, some lawful, others unlawfully disruptive and even violent. The Trump administration has ordered in the National Guard and threatened to send in the Marines. Governor Gavin Newsom calls this willful escalation. Trump-administration officials say they must protect federal agents engaged in lawful immigration actions––enforcement that some protesters regard as cruel and immoral, regardless of legality. Anytime that American citizens clash in the streets with armed agents of the state, something has gone wrong. Today's civil unrest risks expanding into the sort of violence that kills lots of people and strains civic bonds for decades. And every time looting and rioting occur in Los Angeles, its poorest neighborhoods suffer the aftereffects for years. Stepping back from the brink is in America's interest, regardless of where one attributes blame. As a Californian, I am especially dismayed to see this happen in L.A., a city I adore, where I long lived and where I have many friends and loved ones. For all Angelenos, so recently traumatized by this year's devastating wildfires, and for the many Americans who feel dismay when watching fellow citizens clash, I pray the turmoil ends without loss of life. My fear that it may instead intensify is informed by several background conditions. Among them are President Donald Trump's incentives. On X, many of his supporters are gleeful about the prospect of a clash that ends in bloodied leftists wearing handcuffs and facing felonies. Even setting aside the most negatively polarized segment of the Republican base, Trump has a strong incentive to redirect public attention away from his feud with Elon Musk, his underwater approval rating on the economy, and the fight over a spending bill that divides his coalition, and toward immigration enforcement, an issue on which his approval rating is still positive. What's more, this clash concerns deportation actions that are apparently lawful, as opposed to Trump's unconstitutional deportations of foreigners to a Salvadoran prison. Newsom has urged nonviolence, but California officials also have incentives to focus on opposing Trump rather than restoring calm to protect innocents. Golden State polls show not only that Trump is more unpopular in the state than he is in the nation, but that immigration is a bad issue for him locally. Regarding undocumented immigrants, the Public Policy Institute of California finds that 'overwhelming majorities of adults (73%) and likely voters (71%) say that there should be a way for them to stay in the country legally, if certain requirements are met'; that 'eight in ten adults (79%) and likely voters (80%) favor the protections given by DACA—Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals—to undocumented immigrants brought into the US as children'; and that 'about six in ten adults (63%) and likely voters (62%) favor the California state and local governments making their own policies and taking actions, separate from the federal government, to protect the legal rights of undocumented immigrants in California.' Sentiments in Los Angeles are surely even more antagonistic to Trump's position, and the stakes for Angelenos with family members and friends who live there without legal status are high––in protesting, within or outside of the law, many seek to preserve their communities or perhaps their very families. And Trump, by his own unlawful actions, has made many fear that their intimates may not be simply deported back to their home country but may instead be disappeared into the prison system of an authoritarian regime. Federal and local cops have cause to feel threatened, too. More than 900 suffered injuries during the 2020 unrest that followed the killing of George Floyd. Multiple federal, state, and local agencies trying to keep order, while federal, state, and local officials fight rather than coordinate, only raises the probability of bad outcomes. And today's social-media environment facilitates the rapid communication of where deportation raids are occurring, enabling not just peaceful protesters but also, potentially, nihilistic inciters of chaos to rush to the scene. Immigration-enforcement raids will continue so long as Trump is president and the law of the land is unchanged. Opponents of such actions, even those that are entirely lawful, have every right under the Constitution to peaceably assemble to protest them. Farsighted protest leaders should do everything in their power to keep those demonstrations law-abiding. Under the Trump administration, the rule of law is among the most precious safeguards Americans possess. Appealing to it, Trump critics have repeatedly prevailed in courtrooms, where Trump is least likely to succeed with his most dangerous gambits. In contrast, street violence gives Trump the ability to fight his enemies with the law on his side and with trained, armed personnel to enforce it. In such a fight, Trump may well prevail in the court of public opinion. But if he is seen as needlessly escalating the dispute, and bloodshed follows, more Americans may come to reflect that the same man was president during the civil unrest of summer 2020; the civil unrest of January 6, 2021; and the civil unrest of today. Whether one attributes blame to Trump himself or so-called Trump derangement syndrome, the sad and dangerous spectacle of Americans fighting one another happens alarmingly often when Trump is in the White House. A president attuned to America's long-term interests and the many global challenges our nation confronts would try to lower the temperature, rather than inflame a clash that could have deadly results.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kilmar Abrego Garcia Was Never Coming Back. Then He Did.
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. After insisting again and again that they would not bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the United States, Trump-administration officials flew the 29-year-old Maryland man back from El Salvador today to face a grand-jury criminal indictment in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia's return doesn't mean he can go free. He now faces federal charges for human trafficking, according to the indictment unsealed today, and the Trump administration will get its opportunity to prove what it has long alleged about Abrego Garcia's membership in the gang MS-13. Even if prosecutors fail to convict him, the government could attempt to deport him to a third country—just not back to El Salvador. But by bringing him back to the United States, the Trump administration has climbed down from the court-defying pedestal where Vice President J. D. Vance, the adviser Stephen Miller, and Cabinet officials perched for months, claiming that Abrego Garcia's deportation was not, in fact, a mistake, and that he would never be allowed to set foot in the country again. Their obstinacy led to warnings of a constitutional crisis. Abrego Garcia's wife, a U.S. citizen, sued the government in March after he was deported to his native country in violation of a 2019 court order protecting him from being sent back to face likely harm. U.S. officials initially acknowledged that they'd made an 'administrative error,' then shrugged and said that the matter was out of their hands. White House officials remained dug in even as the Supreme Court ordered the administration to facilitate Abrego Garcia's return. 'There is no scenario where Abrego Garcia will be in the United States again,' Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem testified to lawmakers last month. Now, by bringing Abrego Garcia back to face criminal charges, the administration can quiet the constitutional concerns about his due-process rights and lay out the evidence it claims to possess showing that he is not a benign sheet-metal worker and devoted father but a gang leader and human trafficker. Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters that Abrego Garcia 'played a significant role in an alien-smuggling ring.' The criminal charges, filed in the Middle District of Tennessee, allege that Abrego Garcia participated in a nine-year conspiracy that moved thousands of people to destinations across the United States and totaled more than 100 trips. The indictment also accuses him of gun running and drug smuggling. According to ABC News, which first reported on Abrego Garcia's return and the trafficking charges, the chief of the criminal division in the U.S. attorney's office in Nashville resigned after the indictment was filed. The attorney, Ben Schrader, declined to comment when I reached out to him this evening. Senator Chris Van Hollen, who traveled to El Salvador in April and was allowed by the country's authorities to meet with Abrego Garcia, said in a statement that the administration has 'finally relented to our demands for compliance with court orders and with the due process rights afforded to everyone in the United States.' 'As I have repeatedly said, this is not about the man, it's about his constitutional rights—and the rights of all,' Van Hollen said in the statement. 'The Administration will now have to make its case in the court of law, as it should have all along.' [Read: An 'administrative error' sends a Maryland father to a Salvadoran prison] This is the second time in a week that Trump officials have relented on one of the cases in which federal judges ordered the government to bring back a deportee removed from the country without due process. A gay Guatemalan asylum seeker known in court documents as O.C.G., who was wrongly deported to Mexico, was allowed to return and pursue his protection claim on Wednesday. The Trump administration remains defiant elsewhere, however, holding a group of men from Laos, Vietnam, Cuba, and other nations in a shipping container on a U.S. military base in Djibouti while it attempts to deport them to South Sudan. Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, an attorney for Abrego Garcia, told me the administration's decision to bring his client back is a sign that 'they were playing games with the court all along.' Standard legal procedure would entail filing criminal charges against an alleged perpetrator and convicting them prior to a deportation—not the other way around, as the Trump administration is now attempting, Sandoval-Moshenberg said. 'Due process means the chance to defend yourself before you're punished, not after,' he said. 'This is an abuse of power, not justice. The government should put him on trial, yes—but in front of the same immigration judge who heard his case in 2019, which is the ordinary manner of doing things.' After Abrego Garcia's return, government attorneys told U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis that they intend to file a motion to dismiss the case challenging his unlawful deportation. Abrego Garcia was stopped for speeding by Tennessee state troopers in December 2022 while driving a Chevy Suburban with nine male passengers, none of whom carried identification, according to the indictment. Abrego Garcia was cited for an expired license, but he was not arrested or charged with a crime, even though troopers flagged the incident as a potential trafficking case. Abrego Garcia told officers that he'd been sent by his employer to pick up the men for a construction job, and his family has said that he would sometimes drive workers between job sites. They have denied the government's claims that Abrego Garcia was an MS-13 member. Driving passengers for money wouldn't be a crime unless the government can prove that Abrego Garcia knew he was transporting passengers who were unlawfully present, Andrew Rankin, an immigration attorney in Memphis, told me. Participating in a criminal conspiracy to bring them across the U.S.-Mexico border, as the government alleges, would bring severer penalties. 'What did he know? Did he have actual knowledge? What was the discussion between each person and Abrego?' Rankin said. 'And if these people were in violation of the law, the government could offer immunity to testify against him.' The indictment identifies six unnamed co-conspirators and says that Abrego Garcia transported MS-13 gang members on the trips. One of the co-conspirators told investigators that Abrego Garcia 'abused some of the female undocumented aliens' and was ordered to stop because it was 'bad for business.' Rankin said it was highly unusual for the government to deport someone and then begin building a criminal indictment. 'Now that the government has had to essentially bend the knee to bring Mr. Abrego back, the government is upset, and they can't just let him go,' Rankin told me. 'They can't just let him out and just let him walk around like he did before.' Article originally published at The Atlantic
Atlantic
2 days ago
- Politics
- Atlantic
Kilmar Abrego Garcia Was Never Coming Back. Then He Did.
After insisting again and again that they would not bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the United States, Trump-administration officials flew the 29-year-old Maryland man back from El Salvador today to face a grand-jury criminal indictment in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia's return doesn't mean he can go free. He now faces federal charges for human trafficking, according to the indictment unsealed today, and the Trump administration will get its opportunity to prove what it has long alleged about Abrego Garcia's membership in the gang MS-13. Even if prosecutors fail to convict him, the government could attempt to deport him to a third country—just not back to El Salvador. But by bringing him back to the United States, the Trump administration has climbed down from the court-defying pedestal where Vice President J. D. Vance, the adviser Stephen Miller, and Cabinet officials perched for months, claiming that Abrego Garcia's deportation was not, in fact, a mistake, and that he would never be allowed to set foot in the country again. Their obstinacy led to warnings of a constitutional crisis. Abrego Garcia's wife, a U.S. citizen, sued the government in March after he was deported to his native country in violation of a 2019 court order protecting him from being sent back to face likely harm. U.S. officials initially acknowledged that they'd made an 'administrative error,' then shrugged and said that the matter was out of their hands. White House officials remained dug in even as the Supreme Court ordered the administration to facilitate Abrego Garcia's return. 'There is no scenario where Abrego Garcia will be in the United States again,' Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem testified to lawmakers last month. Now, by bringing Abrego Garcia back to face criminal charges, the administration can quiet the constitutional concerns about his due-process rights and lay out the evidence it claims to possess showing that he is not a benign sheet-metal worker and devoted father but a gang leader and human trafficker. Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters that Abrego Garcia 'played a significant role in an alien-smuggling ring.' The criminal charges, filed in the Middle District of Tennessee, allege that Abrego Garcia participated in a nine-year conspiracy that moved thousands of people to destinations across the United States and totaled more than 100 trips. The indictment also accuses him of gun running and drug smuggling. According to ABC News, which first reported on Abrego Garcia's return and the trafficking charges, the chief of the criminal division in the U.S. attorney's office in Nashville resigned after the indictment was filed. The attorney, Ben Schrader, declined to comment when I reached out to him this evening. Senator Chris Van Hollen, who traveled to El Salvador in April and was allowed by the country's authorities to meet with Abrego Garcia, said in a statement that the administration has 'finally relented to our demands for compliance with court orders and with the due process rights afforded to everyone in the United States.' 'As I have repeatedly said, this is not about the man, it's about his constitutional rights—and the rights of all,' Van Hollen said in the statement. 'The Administration will now have to make its case in the court of law, as it should have all along.' This is the second time in a week that Trump officials have relented on one of the cases in which federal judges ordered the government to bring back a deportee removed from the country without due process. A gay Guatemalan asylum seeker known in court documents as O.C.G., who was wrongly deported to Mexico, was allowed to return and pursue his protection claim on Wednesday. The Trump administration remains defiant elsewhere, however, holding a group of men from Laos, Vietnam, Cuba, and other nations in a shipping container on a U.S. military base in Djibouti while it attempts to deport them to South Sudan. Simon Sandoval-Mosenberg, an attorney for Abrego Garcia, told me the administration's decision to bring his client back is a sign that 'they were playing games with the court all along.' Standard legal procedure would entail filing criminal charges against an alleged perpetrator and convicting them prior to a deportation—not the other way around, as the Trump administration is now attempting, Sandoval-Mosenberg said. 'Due process means the chance to defend yourself before you're punished, not after,' he said. 'This is an abuse of power, not justice. The government should put him on trial, yes—but in front of the same immigration judge who heard his case in 2019, which is the ordinary manner of doing things.' After Abrego Garcia's return, government attorneys told U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis that they intend to file a motion to dismiss the case challenging his unlawful deportation. Abrego Garcia was stopped for speeding by Tennessee state troopers in December 2022 while driving a Chevy Suburban with nine male passengers, none of whom carried identification, according to the indictment. Abrego Garcia was cited for an expired license, but he was not arrested or charged with a crime, even though troopers flagged the incident as a potential trafficking case. Abrego Garcia told officers that he'd been sent by his employer to pick up the men for a construction job, and his family has said that he would sometimes drive workers between job sites. They have denied the government's claims that Abrego Garcia was an MS-13 member. Driving passengers for money wouldn't be a crime unless the government can prove that Abrego Garcia knew he was transporting passengers who were unlawfully present, Andrew Rankin, an immigration attorney in Memphis, told me. Participating in a criminal conspiracy to bring them across the U.S.-Mexico border, as the government alleges, would bring severer penalties. 'What did he know? Did he have actual knowledge? What was the discussion between each person and Abrego?' Rankin said. 'And if these people were in violation of the law, the government could offer immunity to testify against him.' The indictment identifies six unnamed co-conspirators and says that Abrego Garcia transported MS-13 gang members on the trips. One of the co-conspirators told investigators that Abrego Garcia 'abused some of the female undocumented aliens' and was ordered to stop because it was 'bad for business.' Rankin said it was highly unusual for the government to deport someone and then begin building a criminal indictment. 'Now that the government has had to essentially bend the knee to bring Mr. Abrego back, the government is upset, and they can't just let him go,' Rankin told me. 'They can't just let him out and just let him walk around like he did before.'
Miami Herald
4 days ago
- Business
- Miami Herald
Iran's Khamenei spurns ‘arrogant' US nuclear-deal proposal
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei criticized a U.S. proposal for a nuclear deal and called American officials "arrogant" for expecting the Islamic Republic to cease uranium enrichment. Iran and the U.S. have been engaged in negotiations since April in a bid to end a tense, years-long standoff over Tehran's nuclear program and have so far had five rounds of talks mediated by Oman. Addressing crowds of worshipers in the capital Tehran, Khamenei said the latest U.S. plan presented to Iranian diplomats was "100% against our 'can do'" spirit. "The arrogant U.S. leaders keep repeating this demand in various ways. They oppose Iran's progress," he said in the televised speech, adding that Iran's nuclear sector was a "foundation industry" that would be rendered "useless" without uranium enrichment. His comments reinforce Iran's position that it won't bow to U.S. demands that Tehran entirely give up its ability to enrich uranium on its own soil. He didn't give any details about what was in the Trump-administration proposal and while he was heavily critical of the U.S., Khamenei didn't spurn the negotiating process itself or the ultimate goal of brokering a deal. The details of the U.S. proposal haven't been made public. Axios reported on Monday that it allowed some limited, low-level uranium enrichment for a set period of time. On Tuesday, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Washington's ideas had "many ambiguities" and lacked clarity. "The U.S.'s main demand is that Iran shouldn't have any nuclear industry at all, to be dependent on them in dozens of important fields, and have no nuclear industry of our own," Khamenei said. Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
