Latest news with #USConstitution
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- General
- Yahoo
Harvard agrees to transfer photos of enslaved people to black history museum
Harvard University has agreed to hand over a set of historic photos believed to be among the earliest depicting enslaved people in the United States. The agreement ends a long legal battle between the institution and Tamara Lanier, an author from Connecticut who argues she is a descendant of two people shown in the photos. The images, taken in 1850, will be transferred to the International African American Museum in South Carolina, where the people shown in the photos were enslaved. Harvard said it had always hoped the photos would be given to another museum. Ms Lanier said she was "ecstatic" with the result. The images are daguerreotypes, a very early form of modern-day photographs and were taken 15 years before the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution abolished slavery. The photos were rediscovered in storage at Harvard's Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology in 1976. The 15 images feature people identified by the Peabody Museum as Alfred, Delia, Drana, Fassena, Jack, Jem, and Renty. According to Ms Lanier, the settlement would mean the transfer of all the images not just the ones about Renty and Delia. The photos were commissioned by Harvard professor and zoologist Louis Agassizm as part of discredited research to prove the superiority of white people. He espoused polygenism, a now debunked belief that human races evolved separately. The case formed part of public debate around how America's universities should respond to their historic links to slavery. In 2016, Harvard Law School agreed to change a shield that was based on the crest of an 18th Century slaveholder. Harvard did not comment on the details of the settlement but a university spokesperson said it "has long been eager to place the Zealy Daguerreotypes with another museum or other public institution to put them in the appropriate context and increase access to them for all Americans." The spokesperson added that Ms Lanier's "claim to ownership of the daguerreotypes created a complex situation, especially because Harvard has not been able to confirm that Ms Lanier is related to the individuals in the daguerreotypes." Ms Lanier sued Harvard in 2019, arguing the images were taken without consent and accusing the university of profiting from them through large licensing fees. In 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld an earlier ruling that dismissed Ms Lanier's claim to ownership. She was, however, allowed to claim damages for emotional distress. It ruled Harvard had "complicity" in the "horrific actions" surrounding the creation of the images. "Harvard's present obligations cannot be divorced from its past abuses," it added. Ms Lanier told the BBC, she was "ecstatic" about the settlement. "I have always known first of all that I could never care for the daguerreotypes at the level they would require," she said. "There are so many ties that bind Renty and Delia and the other enslaved people to that particular part of South Carolina that to repatriate them there would be like a homecoming ceremony." The South Carolina museum helped Ms Lanier with her genealogy claims but was not involved in the legal battle. Its president said they intend to hold and display the images "in context with truth and empathy." "These are not gentle images and the story behind how they came to be is even more difficult to hear," Tonya Matthews told the BBC. "So to be in a space that has already created room for conversations about the inhumanity of slavery and enslavement and how far those implications echo even to today is what we do and it's our mission." Harvard sued over 'slave ancestor' photos The awkward questions about slavery from US tourists The hidden links between slavery and Wall Street
Sydney Morning Herald
21 hours ago
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Trump has declared war on Harvard, but there are degrees of concern in Australia
On April 11, Harvard received a letter from the Trump administration with a series of demands, ordering them to cancel diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, allow in an external auditor to vet the political views of staff and students, and to bar any students found to be 'hostile to the American values and institutions inscribed in the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence.' The question then, is if 'American values' are considered to be the same as Trumpian values. What about freedom of speech? Harvard refused. Other universities lined up to support them. Since then, Trump has moved to cancel Harvard's federal contracts, ban foreign students and threatened to cancel the university's tax-exempt status. A temporary order has paused the foreign student ban, but a chill has gone through all future and current Ivy League students. Many Australians are scratching their heads at what seems like, at its heart, a further muffling of any potential critics, along with the media, the courts, various experts and veteran bureaucrats. Why wouldn't you want the best minds in the world working on your problems? Cramping – let alone ideologically controlling – higher research simply undercuts potential economic growth and leadership, productivity, innovation, scientific advances, and a free contest of ideas essential in any pluralistic democracy. Harvard has seeded breakthroughs in health, artificial intelligence, astronomy, and epidemiology, and educated the thinkers and dreamers who have shaped the way we see the world. Loading Harvard has educated eight presidents, Republican and Democrat, as well as Bill Gates, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Mark Zuckerberg, T. S. Eliot, Helen Keller, Robert Oppenheimer, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Margaret Atwood, Michael Bloomberg and Ben Shapiro. Australians who have studied there have gone on to be cabinet ministers, premiers, silks, magazine editors, authors, economists, corporate leaders, a president of the World Bank. We cannot be naive about how this might affect us. America is also our most significant research partner, especially in STEM. Last year, Australian research partnerships with the US drew almost $400 million in biomedical and clinical science funding. Ten Australian universities have already had US federal funding for research cut off, following Trump's declaration in March that support must go only to researchers who promote 'American influence, trust, and reputation'. Numerous Australian academics across a range of disciplines have cancelled trips to academic conferences in the US. Loading Here, the problem is not contempt for universities – in the main we do not, thankfully, have the same culture wars – but an erosion of quality and lack of funding. Overall, we spend significantly less than other countries on R&D. The OECD average is 2.7 per cent of GDP – we spend 1.7 per cent. It's not enough. Academics report being stretched, with months regularly wasted crafting research proposals that are routinely rejected, fighting for a narrow pool of funds. Morale is low. Have we too forgotten this is our future? That these are the minds we rely on to cure cancer, combat climate change, forge new ways to solve problems? As the US grows more insular and antagonistic towards creative, diverse global research, we should be throwing open our doors and inviting the brightest minds into our labs, libraries and lecture halls, and creating a climate in which they, and we, can flourish. And we can't flourish if we treat the curious, clever and hungry with suspicion. This week, Chinese graduate Yurong 'Luanna' Jiang, who studied international development, spoke at the Harvard graduations. She said she grew up believing that the 'world was becoming a small village' and that she could become part of the generation that would 'end hunger and poverty for humankind.' At Harvard, surrounded by students from countries around the world, 'global challenges suddenly felt personal'. But now, she said: 'We're starting to believe those who think differently, vote differently or pray differently – whether they are across the ocean or sitting right next to us – are not just wrong: we mistakenly see them as evil,' she said. 'But it doesn't have to be this way.'
The Age
21 hours ago
- Politics
- The Age
Trump has declared war on Harvard, but there are degrees of concern in Australia
On April 11, Harvard received a letter from the Trump administration with a series of demands, ordering them to cancel diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, allow in an external auditor to vet the political views of staff and students, and to bar any students found to be 'hostile to the American values and institutions inscribed in the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence.' The question then, is if 'American values' are considered to be the same as Trumpian values. What about freedom of speech? Harvard refused. Other universities lined up to support them. Since then, Trump has moved to cancel Harvard's federal contracts, ban foreign students and threatened to cancel the university's tax-exempt status. A temporary order has paused the foreign student ban, but a chill has gone through all future and current Ivy League students. Many Australians are scratching their heads at what seems like, at its heart, a further muffling of any potential critics, along with the media, the courts, various experts and veteran bureaucrats. Why wouldn't you want the best minds in the world working on your problems? Cramping – let alone ideologically controlling – higher research simply undercuts potential economic growth and leadership, productivity, innovation, scientific advances, and a free contest of ideas essential in any pluralistic democracy. Harvard has seeded breakthroughs in health, artificial intelligence, astronomy, and epidemiology, and educated the thinkers and dreamers who have shaped the way we see the world. Loading Harvard has educated eight presidents, Republican and Democrat, as well as Bill Gates, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Mark Zuckerberg, T. S. Eliot, Helen Keller, Robert Oppenheimer, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Margaret Atwood, Michael Bloomberg and Ben Shapiro. Australians who have studied there have gone on to be cabinet ministers, premiers, silks, magazine editors, authors, economists, corporate leaders, a president of the World Bank. We cannot be naive about how this might affect us. America is also our most significant research partner, especially in STEM. Last year, Australian research partnerships with the US drew almost $400 million in biomedical and clinical science funding. Ten Australian universities have already had US federal funding for research cut off, following Trump's declaration in March that support must go only to researchers who promote 'American influence, trust, and reputation'. Numerous Australian academics across a range of disciplines have cancelled trips to academic conferences in the US. Loading Here, the problem is not contempt for universities – in the main we do not, thankfully, have the same culture wars – but an erosion of quality and lack of funding. Overall, we spend significantly less than other countries on R&D. The OECD average is 2.7 per cent of GDP – we spend 1.7 per cent. It's not enough. Academics report being stretched, with months regularly wasted crafting research proposals that are routinely rejected, fighting for a narrow pool of funds. Morale is low. Have we too forgotten this is our future? That these are the minds we rely on to cure cancer, combat climate change, forge new ways to solve problems? As the US grows more insular and antagonistic towards creative, diverse global research, we should be throwing open our doors and inviting the brightest minds into our labs, libraries and lecture halls, and creating a climate in which they, and we, can flourish. And we can't flourish if we treat the curious, clever and hungry with suspicion. This week, Chinese graduate Yurong 'Luanna' Jiang, who studied international development, spoke at the Harvard graduations. She said she grew up believing that the 'world was becoming a small village' and that she could become part of the generation that would 'end hunger and poverty for humankind.' At Harvard, surrounded by students from countries around the world, 'global challenges suddenly felt personal'. But now, she said: 'We're starting to believe those who think differently, vote differently or pray differently – whether they are across the ocean or sitting right next to us – are not just wrong: we mistakenly see them as evil,' she said. 'But it doesn't have to be this way.'
Business Times
a day ago
- Politics
- Business Times
PBS sues Trump to reverse funding cuts
Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) sued Donald Trump on Friday (May 30) over the US president's executive order to cut its federal funding, calling it an unconstitutional attack that would 'upend public television.' In a complaint filed in the Washington, DC federal court, PBS and a public TV station in Minnesota said Trump's order violated the US Constitution's First Amendment by making the president the 'arbiter' of programming content, including by attempting to defund PBS. The May 1 order 'makes no attempt to hide the fact that it is cutting off the flow of funds to PBS because of the content of PBS programming and out of a desire to alter the content of speech,' PBS said. 'That is blatant viewpoint discrimination.' Its programming has included 'Sesame Street,' 'Mister Rogers' Neighborhood,' 'Frontline' and several Ken Burns documentaries including 'The Civil War.' Member stations also broadcast public affairs shows such as 'Washington Week.' Trump's order demanded that the taxpayer-backed Corporation for Public Broadcasting cut federal funding to PBS and NPR, short for National Public Radio. All three entities are nonprofits. PBS said the Corporation for Public Broadcasting provides 16 per cent of its US$373.4 million annual budget. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up It also said the funding ban would apply to local member stations, which provide 61 per cent of its budget through dues, including millions of dollars in federal funds. In a statement, White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was 'creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayers' dime. Therefore, the President is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding to NPR and PBS.' NPR filed its own lawsuit on May 27 to block Trump's order. Formed in 1969, PBS has 336 member stations including the plaintiff Lakeland PBS, which serves about 490,000 people in northern and central Minnesota. The executive order was part of Trump's effort to sanction entities he believes are opposed to his political agenda. Trump said that by funding PBS and NPR, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting ignored Americans' right to expect that taxpayer dollars going to public broadcasting 'fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage.' The White House separately accused PBS and NPR of using taxpayer money to spread 'radical, woke propaganda disguised as 'news.'' In its complaint, PBS said Trump's order 'smacks of retaliation for, among other things, perceived political slights in news coverage.' The Corporation for Public Broadcasting receives funding from Congress two years in advance, to shield it from political interference. It sued Trump last month after he sought to fire three of its five board members. REUTERS
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
China shifts supply chains away from Kansas
Context: Video aired May 20. KANSAS (KSNT) – The U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) briefly blocked President Donald Trump from imposing certain tariffs under an emergency powers law. 27 News spoke to University of Kansas Distinguished Professor Raj Bhala on Thursday about the impact on Kansans. Bhala said the Court of International Trade was concerned that President Trump was acting beyond the scope of authority delegated to him under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The CIT found that the reasons for the tariffs were not considered 'an unusual and extraordinary threat'. 'Now the president has already appealed; there are some good grounds for appeal,' Bhala said. 'In addition, the president has other statutes available to him, and furthermore, Congress may pass certain bills authorizing him to oppose these reciprocity tariffs.' Fans travel all over Kansas for high school sports postseason The CIT's ruling on Wednesday came from a concern for unbounded presidential power amidst the reality that the US Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate trade, not the president. The court found that Trump had abused the IEEPA language. On Thursday, a federal appeals court delayed the CIT order to block President Donald Trump's tariffs, reinstating them for the time being. For Kansas businesses, Bhala said they should plan to continue the changes made following the tariffs in supply chain management, finding export markets, holding cash for tariffs and their use of warehouses. He recommended that businesses continue with their plans as if those tariffs were still in place. 'I should not assume the reciprocity tariffs are going to go away,' Bhala said. 'They may be postponed for a while but they will not go away. And we know this administration is dogged about its tariff policy and rectifying what it feels are injustices inflicted on the U.S., rightly or wrongly.' 27 News asked what can be expected for the appeal timeline. Bhala said it wouldn't take years, but could take months. Despite back and forth on the reciprocal tariffs, the steel and aluminum tariffs, the automotive tariffs and the first round of tariffs placed on China during Trump's first term are still in effect. There were more than 180 countries on the reciprocity tariff list. Those tariffs haven't been imposed yet, they were supposed to go into effect on July 8. Skull of one-ton ground sloth found in Kansas 'This is me speaking, the fundamental problem with Trump tariff policy is its lost the plot,' Bhala said. 'The plot has always been China. That's the strategic threat. And the first Trump administration was correct in focusing on China and igniting the trade war and the Biden administration continued its prosecution.' When President Donald Trump was inaugurated for the second time, he vastly expanded the trade war from being a China-US one to a global war. 'We see this pattern in other wars like Iraq, right?' Bhala said. 'I mean, mission creep, what's this about? WMDs or about building a democracy? In other words, he's taken on too much and then lost the key focus of what the real strategic threat is. And, in the process, alienated the very allies we need to isolate and decouple from China.' Regarding Kansas's agricultural exports to China, Bhala said that China has been diversifying its sources away from Kansas and the rest of the US. 'China is substituting Kansas wheat or Kansas soybeans or Kansas meat and finding suppliers in Brazil for example,' Bhala said. 'In other words, third-country exporters that produce what Kansas or Missouri produce. China is finding them and gradually shifting its supply chains to those other third countries. So, Kansas and Missouri farmers are losing market share in China.' According to the Kansas Department of Commerce, China was Kansas' fourth-largest export destination in 2023. The country imported $722 million in Kansas products in 2023. Between 2022 and 2023, China decoupled from Kansas exports by 35%, returning to 2021 levels. Topeka bridge to shut down for months China has imposed counter-tariffs on US goods, putting Midwest farmers at a disadvantage compared to countries that don't pay the extra cost of tariffs, according to Bhala. He said it puts Kansas in an unfair playing field. 27 News asked if Kansas could pick up the slack by exporting to other nations. 'Good luck in the short term,' Bhala responded. 'What's your only other billion-person market? Now, India is a good bet. But India is a much different kind of export proposition, you have high tariff barriers in India to protect small-scale Indian farmers.' Exporting to India faces economic trade barriers, cultural barriers, and there could be distribution difficulties in India due to its poor infrastructure. The state government can help by setting up trade missions and trade delegations to India to bring them to Kansas, but India isn't going to replace the Chinese market overnight. Bhala said it will probably take the state government and state industry associations to work on particular countries to piece together some of the lost market to China. 'Where else are you looking at that has a burgeoning population, with growing purchasing power, that wants to improve its diet? The answer is sub-Saharan Africa… Now how are we doing with our relationships with many sub-Saharan countries? Well, you know what they were branded the first term,' Bhala said. 'The expletive, and you know what's happened in the Oval Office with South Africa.' For more Kansas news, click here. Keep up with the latest breaking news in northeast Kansas by downloading our mobile app and by signing up for our news email alerts. Sign up for our Storm Track Weather app by clicking here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
