Pregnant immigrants warily eye US Supreme Court birthright citizenship caseNew Foto - Pregnant immigrants warily eye US Supreme Court birthright citizenship case

Every time Barbara, a 35-year-old asylum seeker from Cuba, goes to her prenatal appointments in Louisville, Kentucky, one topic looms largeamong the other pregnant immigrantsshe talks to there: will their babies be born U.S. citizens? Barbara, who asked to be identified by her first name only for fear of retaliation, crossed the U.S.-Mexican border with her family in 2022 and filed for asylum. A lawyer in Cuba, she said she fled political and religious persecution in her home country. She, her husband and 4-year-old daughter have pending U.S. asylum applications and lack permanent immigration status. The baby is due in July. Anexecutive orderissued by PresidentDonald Trumpin January that would limit automatic U.S.birthright citizenship- part of his wide-ranging immigration crackdown - would deny citizenship to their expected child, if it goes into effect. Three federal judges issued nationwide injunctionsblocking the policy, finding that it likely violated citizenship language in the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, in challenges brought by Democratic attorneys general from 22 states as well as various individual pregnant immigrants and advocacy groups. TheU.S. Supreme Courton Thursday is set tohear argumentsin the Trump administration's request that the justices allow broad enforcement of the directive by narrowing the scope of the injunctions. Trump signed the order on his first dayback in the White House, directing federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. That night, Barbara barely slept, she said. "Hearing that news provoked a horrible stress in me, that still follows me to this day," she said. If allowed to stand, Trump's order would deny citizenship to more than 150,000 children born annually in the United States, the state attorneys general said in February. About 3.6 million babies were born in the United States in 2024, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. At theSupreme Court, the administration has targeted only the nationwide scope of the injunctions, content to leave them in place to protect just the people who sued as well as the residents of the 22 states, assuming the justices find that these states have the required legal standing to bring their cases. That outcome would let Trump's order take effect in the 28 states that did not sue, including Kentucky, aside from any plaintiffs living in those states. And the Supreme Court could act without assessing the legality of Trump's directive. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, long has been understood to confer citizenship to almost everyone born in the United States. The Trump administration has argued that automatic birthright citizenship does not reflect the best reading of the 14th Amendment and it encourages "birth tourism" by expectant mothers traveling to the United States to give birth and secure citizenship for their children. For asylum seekers like Barbara, or those from countries with no embassies in the United States, the stakes are particularly high, advocates said. If her daughter is born with no claim to U.S. citizenship, Barbara said, she worries her child would be stateless. Seeking Cuban nationality is not an option, she said, "because we came here fleeing the regime." Karina Ambartsoumian-Clough, executive director of United Stateless, a group that advocates for stateless people, said ending birthright citizenship would create "a subset of people with no legal identity." Citizenship laws vary by country and policies often change, countries sometimes dissolve and borders move, Ambartsoumian-Clough said. Not all countries allow for citizenship to be passed on via a parent, Ambartsoumian-Clough added. The more immediate practicalities also are alarming, Ambartsoumian-Clough said. For instance, how would the birth of babies be formally registered and would they be able to access medical care and vaccinations? Barbara, who worked as a custodian at a local school until she was placed on bed rest for a high-risk pregnancy, said she will be following what happens at the Supreme Court, nervous that her baby will be "born into a limbo." She is planning to name her daughter Valery, which means brave. "This baby from the womb is being very brave, and has a future to conquer in this country even though they are already making it quite difficult," Barbara said. At her medical appointments, she said she has seen other mothers - mostly Guatemalans and Mexicans - cry while talking about the possibility of their babies not getting citizenship. Barbara said she feels her heart rate go up and her hands begin to sweat when she talks about it, something another mother told her she was experiencing as well. "When I talk to the other moms," she said, "I know I'm not the only one." Reporting by Kristina Cooke; Additional reporting by Ted Hesson, Andrew Chung and Nate Raymond; Editing by Will Dunham This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Pregnant immigrants eye US Supreme Court birthright citizenship case

Pregnant immigrants warily eye US Supreme Court birthright citizenship case

Pregnant immigrants warily eye US Supreme Court birthright citizenship case Every time Barbara, a 35-year-old asylum seeker from Cuba, goes ...
How Air Force One stacks up to the Qatari 747, Trump's coveted 'palace in the sky'New Foto - How Air Force One stacks up to the Qatari 747, Trump's coveted 'palace in the sky'

WASHINGTON ―President Donald Trumpsays Air Force Oneisn't up to snuff. When he lands and looks over at the planes of the leaders of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates sitting on the tarmac, he says his presidential ride doesn't compare. "This is like a totally different plane," Trump told Fox News commentator Sean Hannity this week aboard Air Force One duringhis trip to the Middle East. "It's much smaller. It's less impressive." Yet as Trumpplans to accept Boeing 747-8, oftendubbed a "palace in the sky,"from Qatar's royal family ‒ a $400 million foreign gift that would be the largest ever to a U.S. president ‒ the exterior differences might not jump off the page for the casual flyer. Plane negotiations:Trump in talks to accept luxury jet from Qatar's royal family The Qatari plane stretches 18 feet 4 incheslonger than Air Force One, can carry more weight and fly slightly faster and farther. It's also 22 years newer than Air Force One, built in 1990. Both planes hold about the same number of passengers and have the same height. But the Qatari plane separates itself most visibly with its lavish inside amenities ‒ creamy white and tan leather furnishings, rugs and artwork designed by the famed French interior design firm Cabinet Alberto Pinto,according to Bloomberg. Trump has portrayed the jet as an aging relic and the Qatari plane as a badly needed upgrade. "We're the United States of America," Trump said. "I believe that we should have the most impressive plane." But if converted to Air Force One, the Qatari plane's inside would have to be entirely stripped, scrubbed for surveillance technology for security reasons and effectively rebuilt, Republicans lawmakers on committees that oversee the nation's armed services and intelligence agenciestold the Wall Street Journal. Trump has complained that Boeing has been too slow to complete a new Air Force One after his first administration in 2018 awarded the company a $3.9 billion contract to build two new Air Force One jets.CNN reportedthe new planes could be delivered by 2027 ‒ two years earlier than the most recently predicted date and before Trump's second term ends. (The Air Force operates a second Air Force One jet, also a Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, deployed in 1991.) More:Fighter jets, chandeliers, a Cybertruck: See the pomp of Trump's Middle East visit Trump's idea is for the Qatari plane to serve as the temporary Air Force One until Boeing finishes building the new versions. The plane would then go to his future presidential library. Democrats and other critics of the move argue accepting the plane could violate the Constitution's Emoluments Clause, which bars any U.S. official from accepting "any present" of "any kind whatsoever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state." The White House has countered that the plane is agift to the U.S. Air Force, not Trump personally. The White House has not released information about the Qatari plane that Trump covets. Butthe news publication Semafor trackedthe tail number of the plane when it was parked at Palm Beach International Airport in South Florida this summer. The number matches a Boeing serial number of a plane detailed in a 16-page "aircraft specification summary" by the Swiss firm AMAC Aerospace It's unclear whether the Qatari plane hasundertaken accommodationssince the summary was posted in 2023. Here is a comparisons of the Qatari plane versus Air Force One based on publicly available information: Air Force One is a Boeing 747-200B, which has increased fuel capacity and more powerful engines than the standard 747-200. Boeing first started serving the model in 1972. Air Force One has upgrades from a standard 747-200B that include special electronic and communications equipment, a self-contained baggage loader, front and aft air-stairs and the capability for in-flight refueling. The Qatari plane is a Boeing 747-8, a widebody aircraft with lengthened fuselage and redesigned wings,according to Boeing. The model went onto the market in 2011. The current Air Force One plane was completed in 1990 and has served six presidents: George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Trump, both in his first and second non-consecutive terms. The Qatari royal family purchased the Boeing 747-B in 2012, the same year it was built. The plane's interior was refurbished and itbegan service in 2015. In addition to being longer and a bit taller, the 747-B owned by Qatar also has a wider wing span: 224 feet, 5 inches, compared to Air Force One's 195, 8 inches. The Qatari 747-8 can also fly farther without refueling. Air Force One can fly about 7,751 miles without needing to refuel. That's equivalent to aflight west from Washington D.C. to Tokyo. The 747-B has a maximum take-off weight of 987,000 pounds, compared to 833,000 pounds for Air Force One. More:'This is what they call perfecto': Gulf monarchies bring A-game to Trump charm offensive Air Force One has about 4,000 square feet of interior floor space,according to information from Boeingand the U.S. Force. That includes an executive suite with quarters for both the president and first lady (equipped with a dressing room, lavatory and shower), a conference and dining room, an office area for senior staff members, an area that can convert into a medical facility, as well as sitting areas for the presidential staff and Secret Service, Air Force crews and traveling members of the press. Air Force One also contains two galleys that can provide 100 meals at one sitting, advanced multi-frequency radios for air-to-air, ground and satellite communications and state-of-the-art navigation, electronic and communications equipment. The plane has six passenger lavatories. The interior of the Qatari plane has a more modern design with chic cream white couches, seats and rugs, photos of the plane show. Artwork from the late American sculptor Alexander Calder is featured throughout,according to Bloomberg, along with custom-made Tai Ping rugs, sycamore and wacapou wood fixtures. The layout includes a master bedroom, guest bedroom, a private hallway for the executive residence, an upper deck lounge area with a long leather sofa facing a large flat screen television, additional loung areas with oversized leather seats, a private office and several galleries. Amenities include electric window shades, water systems that allow hot and cold water for each sink and shower, a digital entertainment and game system, along with sophisticated sound, television and broadband internet systems. The plane has nine lavatories for passengers in addition to one lavatory in the bedroom suite and another in the guest bedroom. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Air Force One vs the Qatari 747: How they compare

How Air Force One stacks up to the Qatari 747, Trump's coveted 'palace in the sky'

How Air Force One stacks up to the Qatari 747, Trump's coveted 'palace in the sky' WASHINGTON ―President Donald Trumpsays Air Fo...
Jeanine Pirro sworn in as DC's top federal prosecutorNew Foto - Jeanine Pirro sworn in as DC's top federal prosecutor

The US attorney's office in Washington, DC, is hoping for a new era of relative calm as the top federal prosecutor in the nation's capital switches from one outspoken, controversial ally of the president to another. Former Fox News host andnewly tapped interim US Attorney Jeanine Pirrotook her oath of office on Wednesday and now leads one of the most powerful federal prosecution offices in the country. Pirro takes on a position that is under the microscope of Democrats, Republicans, and the Trump administration after Ed Martin, her predecessor, had his nomination withdrawn as it faltered on Capitol Hill over hispraise of an alleged Nazi sympathizer, hisrefusal to saythere was violence at the US Capitol riot and his comments denigrating police officers who defended the building that day. Employees at the US attorney's office are hoping that, despite her public persona as a bellicose cable news host, Pirro will bring a more stable leadership presence to the position responsible for running federal criminal investigations in DC. Some DC prosecutors told CNN that under Martin, managing the public comments by the interim US attorney with continuing their work without interruption felt impossible. Some joked that they hope Pirro will focus on TV appearances to allow prosecutors to litigate cases without distractions. "Hopefully Thursday will be better than the past four months," one official inside the office quipped of Pirro's first full day in the job. But it's not yet clear how Pirro, a former judge and district attorney for Westchester County in New York, will handle the new role. She has not held a position in the justice system since 2005, when she left the district attorney's office and began her career on television, and, as a longtime friend and staunch supporter of Trump, some prosecutors fear that she will continue in Martin's footsteps. "We're swapping a man for a woman, nothing more," one person said. "The rest is the same." While Republican opposition to his nomination may have doomed his prospects of running the DC US attorney's office, Martin is staying in a leadership role at DOJ and his attention-grabbing approach to justice will stay in the limelight. Martin, whose highly public and abrasive strategy drew national criticisms but endeared the president to him, plans to continue his path of aggressively exacting revenge on behalf of the Trump administration in his new role at the DOJ atop theWeaponization Working Group. In a news conference marking his final appearance at the US attorney's office on Tuesday, Martin said that the group, which was established on Bondi's first day to review law enforcement actions enacted under the Biden administration for any examples of "politicized justice," would be taking a more public-facing approach. Martin said that the "starting point" for their work would include probes into the work of special counsel Jack Smith and New York Attorney General Letitia James, how the sweeping January 6-related prosecutions unfolded, and whether the Biden administration was "targeting Catholics." And even if he can't find legal backing to bring charges, Martin said, he hopes to publicly call them out. "There are some really bad actors, some people that did some really bad things to the American people, and if they can be charged, we'll charge them," Martin said. But if they can't be charged, "we will name them… there should be people that are shamed. And that's a fact, that's the way things work," Martin continued, suggesting that is how he sees his role leading the weaponization group. Martin's comments have caught the attention of lawyers representing former special counsel prosecutor Jay Bratt and helped underscore why he opted to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights when answering questions from the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday. CNN's Paula Reid contributed to this report. For more CNN news and newsletters create an account atCNN.com

Jeanine Pirro sworn in as DC’s top federal prosecutor

Jeanine Pirro sworn in as DC's top federal prosecutor The US attorney's office in Washington, DC, is hoping for a new era of relativ...
Trump's 'weaponization' chief accuses D.C. disciplinary counsel investigating him of weaponizationNew Foto - Trump's 'weaponization' chief accuses D.C. disciplinary counsel investigating him of weaponization

WASHINGTON — The incoming director of the Justice Department's "Weaponization Working Group" revealed Wednesday he was under investigation by D.C.'s Office of Disciplinary Counsel, accusing the official in charge of investigating bar complaints of "weaponizing" his role, according to an letter viewed by NBC News. Outgoing Interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ed Martin, in a going-away email to his staff, complained about the actions of Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton P. "Phil" Fox III, who serves as chief prosecutor for disciplinary matters for attorneys who are members of the D.C. Bar. "Please know that I will continue to fight against the systemic abuse of our prosecutors by [Public Defender Service], the Judges, and especially the DC Disciplinary Counsel," Martin wrote in the email to staff. "It is an outrage how they treat us and I will continue the fight against the weaponization of our law licenses against us. Please see the attached — I am taking on Mr. Fox head on. His conduct is personally insulting and professionally unacceptable." Several outside organizations and members of Congress have sought investigations into Martin over his actions while he was U.S. attorney, and Fox had previously declined to take further steps on at least one of the requests. Most requests sent to Fox's office are turned away, but Martin's letter indicted that at least one probe was moving forward, which has been given a disciplinary docket number: 2025-D047. The investigation is in a non-public stage, and will only become a matter of public record if the office makes a decision to move forward with a disciplinary case against Martin. Fox declined to comment. News of the investigation wasfirst reported by Reuters. Martin's goodbye email was accompanied by a copy of a letter to Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, in which he complains that Fox sent "signature required paid postage" to his home and office which "prompted questions from my family and work colleagues who had to sign." Martin called it an "annoyance" and saying it "pushed the envelope of confidentiality." He also writes that Fox sent the letter to the intake email box for the U.S Attorney's Office's Civil Division. "To be clear, Mr. Fox is weaponizing his role, responsibilities, and his office against me and this office. He is using a recent bar complaint as his weapon," Martin wrote in the letter. "I ask that you not only suspend Mr. Fox immediately to investigate his conduct, but also to dismiss this case against me because of his prejudicial conduct." The Justice Department's Weaponization Working Group, of which Martin is taking charge,was formedby Attorney General Pam Bondi in response to an executive order from President Donald Trump and is charged with looking into several issues, including the work of former Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Justice Department's handling of the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Martin's letter came the same day that former Fox News host Jeanine Pirro took over the role of interim U.S. attorney, after the Senate didn't move forward with confirming Martin to serve on a permanent basis. In a press conference on Tuesday, Martin said that he planned to"shame" individuals he said "did some really bad things to the American people"even if the Justice Department did not pursue criminal charges. In an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson that posted on Wednesday, Martin said that he doesn't think that prosecuting individuals for criminal wrongdoing is enough, continuing to suggest that he'll use the bully pulpit of the Justice Department to communicate information about uncharged parties. "One of the reasons I say information is so key, you can't, we can't win the Article III battle fast enough," Martin said, referring to courts. "You can't win it fast enough to get the progress we need." "So you're in the courts fighting to get the truth out, fighting to make these things, prosecutions and all, but they take a longer time than just getting the word out, right, getting the information out," Martin said. "I feel like it's a different moment in history."

Trump's 'weaponization' chief accuses D.C. disciplinary counsel investigating him of weaponization

Trump's 'weaponization' chief accuses D.C. disciplinary counsel investigating him of weaponization WASHINGTON — The incoming dir...
Gabbard fires intel officials who oversaw memo contradicting White House claims on Venezuelan gangNew Foto - Gabbard fires intel officials who oversaw memo contradicting White House claims on Venezuelan gang

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has fired two top intelligence officials who oversaw a recent intelligence assessment which contradicted President Donald Trump's assertions that the gang Tren de Aragua is operating under the direction of the Venezuelan regime, two officials said Wednesday. The assessment undermined the rationale for Trump invoking a rarely used 1798 law, the Alien Enemies Act, to allow suspected Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang members in the U.S. to be summarily deported without standard due process. Gabbard dismissed Michael Collins, the acting chair of the National Intelligence Council, and council vice chair Maria Langan-Riekhof, both career officials with decades of experience in intelligence analysis, two officials said. "She dismissed these individuals because they were unable to provide unbiased intelligence," one of the officials said, without elaborating. Gabbard's deputy chief of staff, Alexa Henning,said in a social media postthat they were dismissed "because they politicized intelligence." A spokesperson for Gabbard, Olivia Coleman, said in an email: "The Director is working alongside President Trump to end the weaponization and politicization of the Intelligence Community." Last month, the National Intelligence Council, which oversees analyses based on information from the country's intelligence agencies, produced a memo on the relationship between TdA and the regime of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Citing a consensus from all other intelligence agencies except the FBI, it concluded that the gang does not take orders from or operate in close coordination with the Maduro government. Trump and other administration officials have asserted that the regime directs TdAand cited that as a basis for invoking the Alien Enemies Act, declaring the gang an invading force. The law previouslyhad only been used in wartime. The assessment's conclusionfirst became public in a Washington Post report. It's not known if Collins and Langan-Riekhof personally worked on the assessment, but the leaders of the council usually sign off on significant analyses, a former intelligence official said. Laura Loomer, a far-right activist who has lobbied Trump to fire some top national security officials, singled out Collins and the National Intelligence Council in asocial media postlast month. "Why would leakers in the NIC try to undermine President Trump's efforts to deport Tren De Aragua gang members? . . . The NIC senior officials should be fired." Loomer took credit for the recent dismissal of the four-star general overseeing the National Security Agency, Gen. Timothy Haugh. Democratic lawmakers condemned the firings, as did former senior intelligence officials, one of whom accused Gabbard of punishing seasoned analysts for providing an assessment that did not back up the president's agenda. John Brennan, former director of the CIA, said the dismissals are "going to have real reverberations" for employees in the intelligence community. "It's clearly a signal to tell analysts throughout the intelligence community: 'you tell the truth, you provide objective analysis, as you're supposed to be doing, you are running the risk of getting fired,'" Brennan told MSNBC's Nicole Wallace. He added that Collins and Langan-Riekhof "are two of the most experienced, accomplished, and talented analysts in the entire U.S. intelligence community" who have worked for successive presidents from both parties since the 1990s. The episode suggests that intelligence professionals "have to get in line, that there's a sense that there needs to be fealty to Donald Trump," he said. Jonathan Panikoff, who worked as an analyst at the National Intelligence Council,said in a social media postthat the organization "is the heartbeat of apolitical US all-source analysis," drawing on the best intelligence analysts. Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in an email that Gabbard "is purging intelligence officials over a report that the Trump administration finds politically inconvenient." Warner added: "Whatever the administration is trying to protect, it's not our national security." Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, has written aletterto Gabbard demanding she provide information to Congress within a week explaining the firing of the two senior officials. Citing media reports that the officials were sacked due to purported political bias, Himes wrote that it was "an exceptionally serious allegation to make against career intelligence officers" that should be supported by evidence. "I ask that you provide such evidence to the Committee no later than May 21," he wrote. Himes added that the decision to dismiss the officials from such an important body in the intelligence community should have been communicated to congressional intelligence committees in accordance with statutory requirements.

Gabbard fires intel officials who oversaw memo contradicting White House claims on Venezuelan gang

Gabbard fires intel officials who oversaw memo contradicting White House claims on Venezuelan gang Director of National Intelligence Tulsi G...

 

TEC POLITICS © 2015 | Distributed By My Blogger Themes | Designed By Templateism.com