Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Trump and Bukele must think Americans are either ignorant or incredibly gullible

Published

on

Trump and Bukele must think Americans are either ignorant or incredibly gullible

Late Thursday, a unanimous Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garciathe Salvadoran citizen who was in the United States legally but illegally rendered to a Salvadoran prison over what the administration admits was an “administrative error.” Now the same administration that claims the U.S. can take over Greenland and Canada is pretending it can’t dictate policy to another country. “If they want to return him, we would facilitate it, meaning provide a plane,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said Monday during an Oval Office meeting between Trump and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele. “That’s up for El Salvador if they want to return him,” she argued.

Bukele, for his part, completed the shell game: “I don’t have the power to return him to the United States,” he insisted. But the U.S. can do far more than “provide a plane” to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return. When the White House asserts it is out of ideas for how to bring him back, don’t believe it.

The White House has deployed a wide range of tactics to secure the compliance of those over which it has little direct or legitimate authority.

The Trump administration has attempted — not very successfully — to use on-again-off-again tariffs to try to bend foreign governments to its will. It has attacked law firms to punish them for past perceived slights of the president, to get them to refrain from suing the administration in the future and to force them to serve the policy goals of the administration. It has slashed billions of dollars in contracts with and grants to America’s most prestigious research universities for not serving the Trump administration’s interests.

In other words, the White House has deployed a wide range of tactics — mostly on dubious legal grounds — to secure the compliance of those over which it has little direct or legitimate authority. As the Trump administration suddenly draws a blank on how it could pressure the Salvadoran government to return Abrego Garcia, then, no one should take such claims seriously.

If the administration’s position is that once anyone is outside U.S. territory and custody, courts cannot order their return — no matter how illegal or unconstitutional that rendition — what would stop the federal government from sending anyone, citizen and noncitizen alike, to a prison camp in some other part of the world without recourse? To put it bluntly: nothing. Under this logic, if the administration could do this to this individual, literally no one is safe, provided they are whisked out of U.S. government custody and control.

With its ruling Thursday, the Supreme Court rejected this sort of race-to-the-border logic. Now that the Supreme Court has stepped in and ordered Abrego Garcia’s return, it is up to the Trump administration to comply. But the court’s unanimous order also leaves the White House a little wiggle room. The court found that one aspect of the lower court’s directive, that the administration “effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return, was “unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority.” It directed the lower court to “clarify” that directive, “with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” At the same time, it also found that the administration “should be prepared to share what it can con­cerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps.”

If the administration, and the trial court, are looking for some guidance on what steps the government could take to “effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return, they need not look past the free-wheeling actions of the administration over the last month for some tactics for achieving that goal. The playbook from which it is drawing its current tactics is full of ways to bring Abrego Garcia home. And it won’t take much.

The U.S. government could pressure the Salvadoran government in any number of ways, like it has other nations and institutions.

The U.S. pays El Salvador to detain deported migrants like Abrego Garcia. The administration could threaten to cut those funds or suspend future transfers unless he is returned. It could increase tariffs. It could assert the power to increase tariffs on other countries that do business with El Salvador. It could cut foreign aid to the country. Indeed, the U.S. government could pressure the Salvadoran government in any number of ways, like it has other nations and institutions. If it even hinted that it might consider any of these tactics, Abrego Garcia would be on the next flight home. That it refused to even try speaks volumes.

In the long run, as at least some members of the court recognize, any judicial ruling short of ordering the Trump administration to secure the return of Abrego Garcia will simply encourage the federal government to deport individuals — noncitizens and citizens alike — and place them in the hands of a foreign power as quickly as possible, putting them out of the supposed reach of the law and the Constitution. In a statement appended to the court’s order, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson warned of this possibility: “The Government’s argument, moreover, implies that it could deport and incarcerate any person, including U. S. citizens, without legal consequence, so long as it does so before a court can intervene.”

For now, the Supreme Court did not say exactly how the Trump administration should comply with its orders, but the justices at least did what they had to do in this setting: declare these actions illegal. If the Trump administration does not move to bring Abrego Garcia home, it will only raise the stakes. The courts should not tolerate the White House’s feigned powerlessness, especially when it has tried to stretch the bounds of its own power in so many other contexts.

Ray Brescia

Ray Brescia is a professor of law at Albany Law School and author of the forthcoming book “The Private Is Political: Identity and Democracy in the Age of Surveillance Capitalism.”

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Trump administration to award a no-bid contract on vaccines and autism

Published

on

Trump administration to award a no-bid contract on vaccines and autism

NEW YORK (AP) — Federal health officials intend to award a contract to Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute to investigate whether there is a link between vaccinations and autism, according to a government procurement notice.

The Troy, New York, engineering school is getting the no-bid contract because of its “unique ability” to link data on children and mothers, according to the notice posted this week.

Officials at the Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to questions about the notice, including how much the contract is for or what exactly the researchers intend to do.

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a leading voice in the antivaccine movement before President Donald Trump selected him to oversee federal health agencies, announced in April a “massive testing and research effort” to determine the cause of autism by this month. He has repeatedly tried to link vaccines to the condition.

An RPI biotech engineering professor, Juergen Hahn, has used artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques to look for patterns in blood samples of children with autism. Hahn “is renowned for the quality and rigor of his research,” RPI officials said in a statement acknowledging the intended grant.

“If this project is awarded, he intends to publish the results of his work at the conclusion of the project,” the statement added.

The Associated Press left messages seeking comment from Hahn.

The notice raises many questions, said Alycia Halladay, who oversees research activities and grants for the Autism Science Foundation.

RPI is not known in the field as having any special access to data on this kind of question and “wouldn’t be the obvious choice,” Halladay said.

It’s also not clear how the contract fits into other autism research that the government may be planning, she said.

But perhaps the biggest question is why money is being spent on such a study at all, she added.

Scientists have ruled out a link between vaccines and autism, finding no evidence of increased rates of autism among those who are vaccinated compared with those who are not.

“The question has been studied for 20 years, multiple times by researchers around the world using millions of people, and there has never been a credible association found between vaccines and autism,” Halladay said.

Those who have spent decades researching autism have found no single cause. Genetics play a role, and other factors include the age of a child’s father, the mother’s weight, and whether she had diabetes or was exposed to certain chemicals.

Whatever amount is being spent on the project could instead be going to “other important research questions,” including studies of genetics and environmental factors, Halladay said.

“I think that’s the most frustrating part,” she said.

For months, HHS officials have been trying to use vaccine safety data compiled by the CDC to look for harms that might be tied to shots. Kennedy has accused CDC leaders of stonewalling those efforts, but the actual obstacle has been something else, said one former federal health official familiar with the situation, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation.

About a dozen medical research organizations collect the vaccine safety data and report it to the CDC. Contracts that stretch back nearly two decades give those entities — not the CDC — control over the data, and HHS has not yet been able to get it, the official said.

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Charlie Kirk’s death leaves lawmakers on edge across party lines

Published

on

Charlie Kirk’s death leaves lawmakers on edge across party lines

Lawmakers are on high alert after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirkvoicing concerns about their safety and making calls for increased protection as the political atmosphere in the U.S. grows more tense.

Fears have been aired on both sides of the aisle. Democrats and Republicans, many of whom maintained a close relationship with Kirk, say they’re worried about their own security and that of their families, staffers and colleagues.

Some members of Congress are taking immediate action.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is postponing two upcoming events in North Carolina, according to her office. Democratic Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., canceled events this weekend, though he asked his staff that a church service remain on the schedule. And Reps. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., and Nancy Mace, R-S.C., told BLN they are pausing public events in the near term.

Moskowitz — who was targeted last year by an armed man who has been sentenced to 25 years in federal prison for illegal firearms offenses — said he is concerned about the safety of the entire House of Representatives.

‘We all go to things like that. We all speak at colleges, we all go to public events, we all do parades. That could’ve been anybody.’

“I’m worried about everybody in that chamber, including myself,” Moskowitz said. “I’m worried about my Republican colleagues that are vocal on TV and social media; I’m worried about my Democratic colleagues who are vocal on TV and social media.”

He called the shooting death of Kirk, video footage of which quickly went viral, “shocking and terrifying and dehumanizing” and said it hits close to home for politicians who routinely make public appearances. “We all go to things like that. We all speak at colleges, we all go to public events, we all do parades. That could’ve been anybody,” he said.

Mace said she has requested police officers be stationed outside her offices, is doubling her security team and now plans to carry a firearm. She said she planned to go to a gun range this weekend.

“I never thought we would get to this place, but here we are. I think an invisible line was crossed,” she said. “I don’t even feel safe walking outside, I don’t feel safe being in my own vehicle, and I certainly don’t feel safe going anywhere without someone with a gun on my side or carrying myself.”

The fears and emotions among members were still raw two days after Kirk, the 31-year-old darling of the right, was fatally shot during an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday, sending shockwaves and sparking fury through conservative circles, Washington and the entire country. Authorities announced Friday morning that Tyler Robinson, 22, had been apprehended in connection with the killing.

The newfound concern comes as threats against lawmakers have already been spiking. The U.S. Capitol Police told BLN on Friday that the agency is “on track to work through roughly 14,000 Threat Assessment Cases by the end of 2025,” a nearly 50% percent increase from the prior year.

Capitol Police investigated 9,474 “concerning statements and direct threats” against members of Congress and their families and staff in 2024, compared to 8,008 incidents in 2023.

The stunning increase in threats against lawmakers is playing out against a heightened political environment nationwide, with attacks against politicians and activists on the rise. President Donald Trump has faced two assassination attempts, including the campaign rally incident in Butler, Pennsylvania, when a bullet grazed his ear.

And in June, Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman, a Democrat, and her husband, Mark, were fatally shot at their homes. Another Democrat in the state Senate, John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette, were critically injured after both were shot at their house the same night.

In the wake of Kirk’s assassination, members of Congress in both parties are demanding increased security.

The House Administration Committee in August temporarily increased members’ monthly security allotment from $150 to $5,000 a month to allow them to hire personal protection through the end of the fiscal year, which closes on Sept. 30. The action also gave lawmakers an extra $10,000 to pay for residential security systems.

“I hope the speaker extends that and makes it more permanent, and I think that’s necessary, but I also don’t think that’s sufficient,” Moskowitz said, predicting that every member will soon need one staff member dedicated solely to security.

Mace, a vocal Trump ally, agreed the temporary funding increase is “not nearly enough, particularly for the higher profile members who are outspoken.”

Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Thursday “there’s been a lot of discussion” about how to address security for members of Congress following Kirk’s death, and how to pay for it.

“We’re under a very thorough review of the existing options and how we might need to enhance that to ensure member security and safety,” he said. “It’s a big concern of all of them and their spouses back home and their families and, and everything. So there’s a cost associated with that. I mean, a financial cost that is significant.”

The question of increasing funding for members’ security could come to a head in the coming weeks, as Congress stares down a Sept. 30 deadline to fund the government or risk a shutdown. Several sources said additional funding for protection could be dealt with during the government funding process.

“We’ve gotta protect people who run for public office or no one will,” Johnson said.

Mychael Schnell

Mychael Schnell is a congressional reporter at BLN, where she covers all happenings on Capitol Hill involving both Democrats and Republicans. She previously covered Congress at Blue Light News.

Mychael graduated from The George Washington University’s School of Media and Public Affairs with a bachelor’s degree in Journalism & Mass Communication and Political Science. She’s a native New Yorker, Billy Joel’s #1fan and a Rubik’s Cube aficionado.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Erika Kirk remembers her husband Charlie Kirk in first public address since his killing

Published

on

Erika Kirk remembers her husband Charlie Kirk in first public address since his killing
  • Psaki: National crises of political violence call for unifying leadership

    08:18

  • Erika Kirk delivers first public address since her husband Charlie Kirk’s assassination

    02:37

  • Now Playing

  • UP NEXT

    Ali Vitali explains the shortfalls of Senate Republicans’ nuclear option

    08:20

  • Memphis Mayor pressed on what the Guard would do in his city

    06:27

  • Michael: ‘Brazil’s Supreme Court upholds the rule of law – in America, it doesn’t matter’

    05:10

  • New emails reveal Maxwell ‘was not telling Todd Blanche the complete truth’: Lisa Rubin

    07:44

  • Talarico: ‘Political violence has no place in America’

    09:01

  • John Bolton search warrant affidavit released

    02:07

  • Lawmakers feeling ‘vulnerable’ and concerned about security: Ex-U.S. Capitol Police Chief

    06:13

  • Lawmakers scale back public events after Kirk killing

    06:20

  • ‘This is our moment’: Utah Gov. calls for ‘off ramp’ to political violence

    14:47

  • Trump admin to claim link between Covid shots and child deaths

    05:40

  • Utah Gov.: ‘Hey fascist! Catch!’ written on bullet casing

    09:21

  • ‘We got him’: Utah Gov. on Charlie Kirk shooting suspect

    14:11

  • ‘Somber and harrowing’: The Weeknight marks the 24th anniversary of 9/11

    04:14

  • Congress inches closer to Epstein files

    07:22

  • Rev. Al Sharpton: ‘Political violence has to stop’

    08:10

  • ‘Our country is in a really dark place’: Political violence on the rise in recent years

    11:19

  • Bridging divide amid rising political violence

    06:24

BLN

  • Psaki: National crises of political violence call for unifying leadership

    08:18

  • Erika Kirk delivers first public address since her husband Charlie Kirk’s assassination

    02:37

  • Now Playing

    Erika Kirk remembers her husband Charlie Kirk in first public address since his killing

    04:09

  • UP NEXT

    Ali Vitali explains the shortfalls of Senate Republicans’ nuclear option

    08:20

  • Memphis Mayor pressed on what the Guard would do in his city

    06:27

  • Michael: ‘Brazil’s Supreme Court upholds the rule of law – in America, it doesn’t matter’

    05:10

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending