Latest news with #UnitedStatesSupremeCourt
Scroll.in
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Scroll.in
How Bengali Harlem's lost history challenges America's immigration certainties
As immigration enforcement intensifies across the United States, Alaudin Ullah finds himself immersed in a history most Americans have never heard about. The New York-based comedian-turned-actor and playwright has spent over 25 years documenting the forgotten story of his father and thousands of other Bengali Muslim seamen who jumped ship at American ports in the late 19th and early 20th century. Facing exclusion laws similar to today's deportation drives under President Donald Trump, these sailors embedded themselves in New York's Black and Latino communities in Harlem, opened some of America's first South Asian restaurants and rubbed shoulders with participants in radical political movements that would reshape the US. What Ullah discovered challenged everything he thought he knew and formed a new conception of South Asian immigration to the United States: it placed Bengali Muslims from present-day Bangladesh and India's West Bengal as the central protagonists in the narrative. An unknown chapter Ullah knew none of this history when he was growing up in an East Harlem housing project in the 1980s. Like many rebellious second-generation immigrants, he spent years rejecting his Bengali identity and distancing himself from the world of his father Habib Ullah. But in 1998, a decade after his father's death, Ullah began sharing fragmented stories of his father's arrival in New York with the academic and filmmaker Vivek Bald. Bald, whose own family had arrived after the 1965 Immigration Act opened doors for educated South Asian professionals to move to the United States, realised they were uncovering an older and unknown chapter of South Asian immigration. If Habib had arrived in the 1920s, he would have entered America when immigration from most of Asia was banned in the country and when the United States Supreme Court ruled that Asians were 'not free, not white'. Yet thousands of men like Habib found ways around the ban. When his ship docked in Boston, Habib stayed behind and eventually made his way to New York, where he found a job as a dishwasher in upscale hotels like The Commodore (a former name for the Hyatt Grand Central). 'He worked in the kitchens of these hotels alongside Black and Puerto Rican workers,' explained Alaudin Ullah. Habib Ullah's story and the history of other Bengali Muslim men like him is the focus of the documentary In Search of Bengali Harlem, completed in 2022 by Vivek Bald which features Ullah as the narrator. Play Habib Ullah married a woman named Victoria Echevarria, an immigrant from Puerto Rico. After Victoria's untimely death, Habib raised their son, Habib Jr, but sent their daughter to live with her mother's relatives and friends. In the 1960s, Habib returned to his village, Noakhali in present-day Bangladesh, for the first time in 40 years. It was no longer under British colonial rule. Partition had made Noakhali a part of East Pakistan. Habib married a young Bengali woman named Mohima. The two moved to Harlem and had two sons. The younger of the two, Alaudin Ullah was in his early teens when his father died. 'I had known little of him and blamed him for abandoning my half-sister,' said Ullah. 'And I didn't get a lot of answers about our past from my mother.' Mohima was isolated in the public housing complex they lived in, and struggled to raise her sons, said Ullah. Unlike neighbourhoods like Jackson Heights in New York today, where it is possible to live surrounded by people from your home country, Mohima was living in ethnically diverse Harlem where her family was among the only Bengalis in a Black and Puerto Rican neighborhood. In the early 20th century, Harlem became a hub for African American communities arriving from the American South, as well as immigrants from the Black, Hispanic and Asian diasporas. Bengali seafarers such Habib Ullah moved from the Lower East Side, where they initially worked, to Harlem, where undocumented immigrants like him could blend in and stay undetected by authorities. By the 1950s and '60s, many of those families had moved to other parts of New York or even farther away. The stories of these vibrant communities have faded in New York today. Perhaps, that process was accelerated by a 1965 change in US immigration law that drove a new wave of South Asians, particularly highly educated people, to the United States. These immigrations were often perceived as 'model minorities' who overshadowed undocumented working-class immigrants from the subcontinent. Stories like Habib Ullah's were largely unheard of when Bald and Ullah began their research. They dug up newspaper clippings, ship records and cross-checked marriage certificates to discover waves of Bengali immigration going back to the 1880s. By the 1940s, Habib Ullah and Victoria Echevarria ran the Bengal Garden restaurant in Midtown Manhattan, a precursor to the South Asian restaurants that would later dominate New York's Sixth Street. One thread running through the documentary is Ullah's search for a dimly remembered family photograph. It was said to show Ibrahim Choudry, a Bengali immigrant, standing with Malcolm X, the African-American leader who was prominent in the civil rights movement, surrounded by African American and South Asian Muslims. The photograph has acquired near-mythical status – a missing link that could cement the presence of Bengali migrants firmly in Black American history. Ullah is still hoping to find that photograph one day. 'What we do know is that Malcolm X and other contemporaries like Felipe Luciano from the Young Lords [a radical 1960s group led by Puerto Rican youth] would often eat at South Asian restaurants run by my father and his contemporaries,' said Ullah. These Bengali-owned establishments served some of the only halal food available in the city, drawing African American converts to Islam. Choudry and his contemporaries, including Ullah's father Habib Ullah, maintained an interest in subcontinental nationalism, forming social-cum-political clubs such as the Pakistan League of America. The League's membership – predominantly former seamen, along with their African American and Puerto Rican wives and children – embodied a very different model of community building from the other South Asian immigrant organisations that were to follow. In recent decades, New York's South Asian community has been transformed by newer waves of immigration settling in several parts of the city. It is easier for married couples to immigrate together, reducing the need to find partners in the US. 'Today's South Asian community has the luxury of numbers that my father's generation didn't have,' Ullah noted. 'But with that has come a kind of insularity. I think we've lost something important about what it means to be part of broader justice movements.'
Miami Herald
3 days ago
- Politics
- Miami Herald
We're pro-choice Floridians — and we trust David Jolly to defend our rights
We are Floridians who are actively committed to securing reproductive rights in Florida, and we are enthusiastically supporting David Jolly for governor. He strongly believes: 'Reproductive health care decisions should be made between women and their doctors, not politicians.' He wants to bring back the protections of Roe v. Wade, as do the over 57% of Florida voters who voted for Amendment 4 last November. David Jolly told us: 'I voted for Amendment 4. As governor, I would work to enact Amendment 4 into law. I support Roe. I am pro-choice. And as your governor I would veto any legislation that would restrict reproductive healthcare in the state of Florida.' Roe is the United States Supreme Court case that originally established the right to an abortion and was overruled by a 2023 Supreme Court decision. Jolly was not always a supporter of abortion rights. When he was in Congress many years ago, he did support anti-abortion positions. But since then, he has changed his mind. After all, he was raised in a culture that deplored abortion. However, when faced with the tangible and tragic harms resulting from restrictive abortion policies, his view changed. Informed by empathy, ethical considerations and his views on the appropriate role of government, he is now solidly pro-choice. What? A politician who changes his mind to do the right thing? Is that not what we all want? Well, it certainly is what we want. Jolly's positions track exactly the language of Amendment 4: 'No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient's health, as determined by the patient's healthcare provider.' That language is the same codification of Roe v. Wade that Jolly supports. We find it admirable that Jolly is someone who was willing to change his mind after being confronted with the realities of the anti-abortion movement and its devastating impact on those who need abortions but cannot get them. None of us would be supporting him today unless he had realized his past stance on reproductive choice was wrong. Jolly pledges that he will govern according to his values, which are based on 'love, kindness, respect and dignity.' He says that there are three basic principles that govern his decisions: ▪ Florida's economy should work for everyone in the state. ▪ Florida's laws and policies should apply equally to all. ▪ The personal freedoms of all Floridians must be protected. Those values and principles point only to support for reproductive rights. We trust David Jolly on reproductive rights. But this is not a one-issue race. We also support his positions on other issues that he and we consider critical to Florida: addressing the affordability of housing, property insurance and health care, strengthening and improving public education and allowing our public universities to thrive without government interference. If we cannot accept that politicians can change their minds when they realize they were wrong, we are in for governance that none of us want. Jolly is a person who will live and govern by the same values and principles we all support. That's why dedicated pro-choice women leaders across Miami-Dade like Maribel Balbin, Cindy Lerner and Jennifer Stearns Buttrick are joining reproductive freedom champions throughout our state like Mona Reis, Susan Windmiller, former member of Congress Gwen Graham and former Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Barbara Pariente in saying: We trust David Jolly on reproductive rights. Ellen Freidin is a lawyer and sponsor of Florida's Constitutional Equal Protection Clause and leader of the Fair Districts Florida movement. Jane Moscowitz is a former federal prosecutor. Donna Shalala is a former member of Congress and former president of the University of Miami. Barbara Zdravecky is the retired CEO of Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida.
The Hill
15-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Trump: McMahon will begin process of dismantling Education Dept after Supreme Court win
President Trump on Monday said that Education Secretary Linda McMahon will begin the process of dismantling the Education Department in the wake of the Supreme Court decision that allows the administration to resume layoffs at the agency. 'The United States Supreme Court has handed a Major Victory to Parents and Students across the Country, by declaring the Trump Administration may proceed on returning the functions of the Department of Education BACK TO THE STATES. Now, with this GREAT Supreme Court Decision, our Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon, may begin this very important process,' Trump said on Truth Social. The high court's decision is a victory for Trump, enabling him to move forward with fulfilling one of his major campaign promises, which was the end of the federal agency's work. Trump continued, 'The Federal Government has been running our Education System into the ground, but we are going to turn it all around by giving the Power back to the PEOPLE. America's Students will be the best, brightest, and most Highly Educated anywhere in the World. Thank you to the United States Supreme Court!' The Supreme Court issued its decision earlier on Monday, in a 6-3 vote along ideological lines. Since taking office, the administration has sought to lay off half of the agency's workforce and transfer some of its core functions, such as managing student loans, to other federal departments. U.S. District Judge Myong Joun blocked those efforts in May and ruled that Trump needed congressional authorization, ordering him to reinstate the roughly 1,400 workers who had been laid off two months prior. The ruling on Monday lifts Joun's injunction as the litigation proceeds in the lower courts, but it is not a final decision. The majority did not explain its reasoning, as is typical in emergency decisions, while the three Democratic-appointed justices publicly dissented and called the ruling 'indefensible.'
The Sun
11-07-2025
- Politics
- The Sun
German coalition crisis as top judge vote postponed over plagiarism claims
BERLIN: A planned vote on appointing three new judges to Germany's Constitutional Court was shelved on Friday, as conservative Chancellor Friedrich Merz's coalition struggled to muster a parliamentary majority for the second time in three months. Other parties, including his Social Democrat coalition partners, charged the Christian Democrats with bringing Germany's highest court into disrepute and using spurious plagiarism allegations as a pretext for shelving a vote the coalition would not have won. The conservatives had initially sought to postpone a vote only on appointing Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, a law professor and the Social Democrats' nominee, who was opposed by many conservatives because of her support for abortion rights. 'I never imagined we'd see debates in our country reminiscent of those on appointing justices to the United States Supreme Court,' the SPD's Dirk Wiese told parliament. 'The kind of witch hunt we've seen against a distinguished law professor this week should make us fear for the state of democracy in our country,' he added. The failure to muster a majority is an embarrassment for Merz and for his ally Jens Spahn, the conservatives' parliamentary leader, whose job it is to ensure his legislators toe the coalition line - something he had been confident of achieving as recently as Monday. The conservatives blamed their volte-face on allegations published on Thursday evening by Stefan Weber, a self-proclaimed 'plagiarism hunter' who has claimed a string of politicians' scalps despite widespread doubts over his methods. Brosius-Gersdorf did not immediately respond to an e-mailed request for a comment on Weber's allegations, which appeared to accuse her of plagiarising footnotes in her thesis from one published after her own. 'This man brings plagiarism charges against half the republic,' said the Green's Britta Hasselmann, calling the conservatives' decision a disaster that would harm the court's reputation. Weber later backtracked, telling the Sueddeutsche Zeitung that he had merely flagged 'possible unethical authorship' and had not accused Brosius-Gersdorf of plagiarism. The Constitutional Court is one of Germany's most respected and powerful institutions. Its decision to overturn a budget helped trigger the collapse of the last government. While judges often have open party affiliations, public disagreements over topical cultural issues are rare. Its members speak with pride about its political neutrality, frequently comparing it favourably with the U.S. Supreme Court. - Reuters
Time of India
10-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
US Supreme Court hits out at Donald Trump, puts Florida law jailing undocumented immigrants on the backburner for now
Donald Trump's harsh immigration agenda faced some pushback from the United States Supreme Court, which ruled against a contentious Florida law passed by Governor Ron DeSantis that attempted to outright criminalize undocumented immigrants who set foot in the state. Ron DeSantis had passed the law earlier in the year, which instituted a mandatory minimum nine-year sentence if an undocumented immigrant committed the misdemeanor offense of entering the state for the first time. Repeated re-entry into the state would be treated as felony offenses that would mandate escalating prison sentences. This law was legally challenged by two individual immigrants, as well as two immigrant advocacy groups. As a result, its enforcement was blocked by Judge Kathleen Williams of the Federal District Court in Miami. When Florida's Government attempted to appeal this block by escalating things to the Supreme Court, their efforts ultimately failed, with Supreme Court responding: "The application for stay presented to Justice [Clarence] Thomas and by him referred to the Court is denied." The Supreme Court refuses to revive Florida immigration law By refusing to stay the Federal District Court order blocking the Florida law's enforcement, the Supreme Court has dealt a blow to Donald Trump's ambitions of instituting the largest immigration crackdown in American history. As a consequence of this decision, Florida currently will not be able to bring up state charges against undocumented immigrants who enter the state, resulting in immigration enforcement remaining strictly under federal jurisdiction. Supreme Court declines to let Florida enforce its new immigration law Donald Trump has been heavily pushing for states to comply with his anti-immigration platform, to the point of deploying the National Guard and United States Marines to California in response to protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. As this Supreme Court decision shows, however, even states willing to cooperate with President Trump's agenda will have legal hurdles to face. The Supreme Court has a mixed record on Donald Trump's policies While the Supreme Court has hindered Trump's agenda with its recent ruling, it has also enabled it on other occasions. On June 23, the Supreme Court stayed a federal judge's order that blocked the Trump administration from deporting immigrants to South Sudan. BREAKINGThe Supreme Court green lights the Trump admin sending immigrants to war-torn and human-rights abusing South Sudan without process, even though most aren't from there. Doc Background While the Supreme Court's recent decision will be taken as a victory by immigration advocates and Donald Trump's opponents, the long-term legal ramifications of these immigration cases remain unclear.
