update - Trump admin prosecution of "sandwich thrower" doesn't cut the mustard!

[mandrill]

Trump blocked by judge in harsh rebuke


A federal judge blocked efforts by President Donald Trump’s administration to lay off government workers, issuing a temporary halt to the firings just as officials moved forward with thousands of job cuts amid the ongoing U.S. government shutdown. The move came as critics accused Trump and his allies of deliberately deepening the shutdown’s fallout — maximizing pain for employees who had nothing to do with the political standoff that brought Washington to a standstill, Knewz.com can report.

The argument against the layoffs — and what the judge said


A judge said early evidence suggested the White House budget office, led by Russell Vought, had “taken advantage of the lapse in government spending and government functioning to assume that all bets are off, that the laws don’t apply to them anymore and they can impose the structures that they like.” By: Chris Kleponis – CNP / MEGA© Knewz (CA)

The American Federation of Government Employees and other federal labor unions urged Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to halt the Trump administration from issuing or enforcing new layoff notices. According to the unions, the dismissals are an abuse of power meant to punish workers and pressure Congress during the shutdown. They argued the “firings would be illegal and motivated by political retribution.”

Judge Illston — who’s served on the bench for 30 years following her 1995 appointment by President Bill Clinton — agreed to temporarily block the cuts, saying the administration had moved forward recklessly. “It’s very much ready, fire, aim on most of these programs, and it has a human cost,” she said in what’s been described as a sharp rebuke. “It’s a human cost that cannot be tolerated.” In granting the temporary restraining order, Illston said she believed the evidence would likely show the layoffs were unlawful and beyond the administration’s authority.

Claims of political retribution


President Donald Trump called the government shutdown an opportunity to shutter “Democrat programs that we want to close up or we never wanted to happen … and they’re never going to come back in many cases.” By: Francis Chung – Pool via CNP / MEGA© Knewz (CA)
More than 4,000 employees across federal agencies including Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security and Treasury received reduction-in-force (RIF) notices, with the Trump administration indicating more cuts were on the way. The unions argued the layoffs amount to political retaliation, pointing to Trump’s recent comments that he planned to fire “a lot” of people and that the dismissals “should be Democrat-oriented.”


What key Trump administration officials said about mass layoffs

Vice President J.D. Vance doubled down, telling Fox News the Trump administration plans to pursue even “deeper” government cuts. Russell Vought, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget — whom Trump himself has compared to the Grim Reaper — said the number of layoffs could reach more than 10,000. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said even though the Trump administration ordered the firings, it isn’t to blame — Democrats are. “This conversation about layoffs would not be happening right now if the Democrats did not vote to shut the government down,” Leavitt claimed.

What Democrats said about the layoffs

Senator Chris Van Hollen introduced legislation to pay all federal employees, service members and contractors “during the current Republican-led shutdown,” his office said. The bill would also prevent the Trump administration’s “attempts at mass firings while the government is shut down.” By: Aaron Schwartz – Pool via CNP / MEGA© Knewz (CA)
Democrats hit back at comments made by Trump and his staff. “When they tell you that the shutdown is making them fire these federal employees, do not believe it for a moment. That is a big lie. It is a big fat lie. It is also illegal,” said Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, which is home to more than 100,000 federal workers. Van Hollen claimed those constituents want protections when the government reopens. “What we’re hearing from federal employees is that they want to be sure that when the government reopens, they’re not again subjected to this terrorism being imposed by Russ Vought.” Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, which is also home to many government employees, said Democrats want to ensure any deal Democrats make with Republicans will make it harder to withhold funds authorized by Congress. “We’ll get the government reopened, but we’ve got to also make sure that when a deal is struck, it is kept,” Warner said.

 

[mandrill]

Newsmax analyst says Trump lying about 130M donation to troops


Newsmax legal analyst Andrew Napolitano suggested President Donald Trump was not telling the truth when he claimed that a billionaire's $130 million donation could be used to pay military troops during the government shutdown.

Speaking on Monday, Napolitano reacted to the $130 donation by Timothy Mellon, which Trump promised would "make sure that the military got paid."



"Well, look, he's obviously a very charitable person," the legal analyst said. "However, the government can't spend that money because the Constitution says no money shall be spent from the public treasury but that which has been authorized by Congress."

"And Congress, in furtherance of that constitutional language, wrote legislation, which is signed into law, which says the Defense Department can't spend money that are gifts," he continued. "So the money is probably sitting somewhere, but the government can't spend it."



"I don't know what they can do with that money," Napolitano added. "They can't spend it under this legislation."

Napolitano, however, was curious about what the government did with the donation.

"If we have a reporter with Treasury Secretary Bessent in the Far East, please ask him, where is that cash?" he remarked.

 

[mandrill]

 

[mandrill]

 

[mandrill]

 

[mandrill]

 

[mandrill]

 

[mandrill]

 

[mandrill]

ICE makes stunning claim Congress doesn't get to oversee facilities due to shutdown


U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials now claim that the federal government shutdown means they are no longer required to allow members of Congress into their facilities for inspection, Politico reported on Monday.

Officials are providing two reasons for this, according to the report: First, ICE officials "have informed lawmakers that they simply don’t have the staff or funding to support those visits. Lawmakers have previously been legally allowed to demand them as part of their oversight duties, which includes monitoring conditions and communicating with detainees facing deportation."


The second reason, which they have made in court as Democratic lawmakers sue over access to ICE facilities, is that "there’s now no law on the books that requires the Trump administration to accommodate lawmakers’ visits. That requirement had been contained in government funding laws that expired when the shutdown began. Instead, ICE informed U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb that it is now funding its operations with appropriations made in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which does not require congressional access."

The court has yet to rule on the validity of this argument.


Department of Homeland Security assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Politico, “While the Democrats may not care about shutting down the government and making millions of public servants go without a paycheck, maybe they will get back to work now that they have lost the precious appropriations rider they rely on to try to storm ICE facilities.”

ICE visits, despite being protected by law, have been a source of great friction in Congress, with the agency often trying to skirt having to grant access to lawmakers, and the Trump administration even arresting one member who was involved in such oversight.

This comes as the shutdown has dragged on for several weeks, becoming one of the longest such standoffs in history and causing a number of collapses of services, including a worsening air traffic controller shortage.

 

[mandrill]

Trump's DOJ admits it submitted false information to court


During a federal appeals court review of its earlier decision permitting President Donald Trump's deployment of Oregon National Guard troops to Portland, the Justice Department (DOJ) admitted that it misrepresented key facts in its legal filings.

Earlier, the DOJ had told the court it was "undisputed that nearly a quarter" of Federal Protective Services (FPS) had to be diverted to Portland. Now, they say it was around 13.1 percent.

"Defendants’ declarations explain in detail why the surge of FPS personnel in response to violence and unrest is unsustainable. But defendants take with the utmost seriousness their obligation to provide the Court with accurate and up-to-date information, and we deeply regret these errors," the DOJ told the court, according to court documents released on Monday.

In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously ruled in favor of the administration, allowing the federalization of 200 Oregon National Guard members to protect federal property in Portland.

The court's majority cited claims that nearly a quarter of the FPS officers had been redeployed to Portland, suggesting a significant strain on federal resources.

However, upon further investigation when the court paused the deployment, the DOJ acknowledged that only 20 to 31 FPS officers were ever deployed to Portland at any given time, far fewer than the 115 initially claimed. The department expressed "deep regret" over the misrepresentation, labeling it a "material factual error"

This admission prompted the full Ninth Circuit to pause its earlier ruling, reinstating a lower court's temporary restraining order that blocks the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland.

The reversal has significant implications for the Trump administration's authority to deploy federal troops in Portland.

While the administration contends that the deployment is necessary to protect federal assets and personnel, critics argue that the misrepresentation undermines the legal basis for such actions. The development comes amid tensions between federal and state authorities over the use of military force in civilian settings.

 

[mandrill]

'Not what we signed up to do': National Guard officers vow to defy Trump’s orders


Even though President Donald Trump wants to deploy the National Guard to patrol the streets of Chicago, Illinois, two officers are now directly disobeying those orders.

CBS News reported Monday that Staff Sgt. Demi Palacek (who is running as a Democrat for the Illinois State Legislature) and Capt. Dylan Blaha (who is running for Congress as a Democrat) are both promising to refuse to help the Trump administration secure immigration enforcement operations in the United States' third-largest city due to a crisis of conscience.

"It's disheartening to be forced to go against your community members and your neighbors," Palacek said. "It feels illegal. This is not what we signed up to do."

Trump had previously federalized 500 National Guard troops from both the Illinois and Texas National Guard to safeguard Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents as they carried out arrests in the Windy City, and the Chicago deployment is still being litigated. However, Capt. Blaha told CBS he felt those orders were illegal and felt compelled to refuse them if they were given.

"I signed up to defend the American people and protect the Constitution," Blaha said. "When we have somebody in power who's actively dismantling our rights — free speech, due process, freedom of the press — it's really hard to be a soldier right now."

According to CBS, any member of the military who directly disobeys orders can be subjected to imprisonment, a court martial or even felony charges. The punishment will ultimately depend on who gave the order, whether the service member is under state or federal jurisdiction and the details behind their insubordination. Despite the potential consequences, Palacek told CBS she felt obligated to "definitely" refuse any order to deploy to Chicago.

"I'm not going to go against my community members, my family and my culture. I believe this is the time to be on the right side of history," she said.

"Look at 1930s, 1940s Germany," Blaha told CBS. "There is a point where if you didn't stand up to the Gestapo, are you just actively one of them now?"

Click here to read CBS' full report.

 

[mandrill]

https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/27/politics/trump-asia-latin-america

Images

It doesn’t take America’s most lethal aircraft carrier, its F/A-18 jets and a flotilla of US Navy warships carrying dozens of Tomahawk missiles to blast a few speedboats out of the Caribbean.

So as the USS Gerald R. Ford steams from Europe to join an already formidable US naval and air force in the region, expectations are rising that the Trump administration may escalate what it claims is an assault on drug traffickers.

The first target of this new 21st-century gunboat diplomacy is Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, an election-denying dictator. The Ford will deliver a giant hint to Maduro to go, or for Venezuelan army officers to oust him. Or it could serve as the platform not just for attacks against alleged cartel targets but also to change the regime.


“You don’t move a battlegroup all the way from where it was to the Caribbean unless you’re planning on either to intimidate the country … or you’re going to start conducting combat operations in Venezuela,” Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

Top Trump aides have portrayed Venezuela as a major route for fentanyl and other drugs that kill Americans, even if evidence shows little drugs production in the country and far more significant transit routes elsewhere. They claim Maduro is at the head of a network of cartels. The administration has authorized the use of military force against such groups and declared gang members “unlawful combatants,” seeking to legally justify killings that that deny due process.


President Donald Trump heads to the 47th Association of Southeast Asian Nations Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on Sunday.
Hasnoor Hussain/Reuters

President Donald Trump is meanwhile considering plans to target cocaine facilities and alleged drug trafficking routes inside Venezuela, three US officials told CNN last week, but has not ruled out diplomacy. He’s also relishing a string of strikes against what officials claim are cartel boats. “We’re going to kill them, you know, they’re going to be like, dead,” the president said Thursday. He might be in Asia, but there’s a rising drumbeat of war closer to home.

Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested Sunday that land strikes in Venezuela were “a real possibility.” The South Carolina Republican told CBS’ “Face the Nation” that Trump told him Congress will be briefed on “future potential military operations against Venezuela and Colombia” when he gets home. “I think President Trump’s made a decision that Maduro, the leader of Venezuela, is an indicted drug trafficker, that it’s time for him to go,” he said.


Trump’s pressure on Venezuela is just one prong of a widening US strategy to leverage US power and Trumpian values in the Western Hemisphere and to push out China. This has seen the administration turn up the heat on leaders in Brazil, Panama and Colombia. On Sunday, Trump’s strategy scored a notable win when the party of Argentine President Javier Milei won big in midterm elections. The US president had made a $20 billion economic bailout offer contingent on voter support for Milei — a hero of his MAGA movement.

“BIG WIN in Argentina for Javier Milei, a wonderful Trump Endorsed Candidate! He’s making us all look good. Congratulations Javier!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. The president might be in Asia, but his gaze was also in Latin America.
US strikes on Venezuela would test law and evoke dark omens for regime change
Possible US strikes on land in Venezuela would raise political, legal and geopolitical questions for an administration that has still not provided proof to the public about drugs cargo on at least 10 speedboats it has crowed about obliterating: eight in the Caribbean and two in the Pacific.


► The Constitution states that Congress formally declares war, not a president. So, a unilateral decision by Trump to start a new conflict in Latin America would further erode legal checks on military action presidents have been watering down for decades, especially following the attacks on September 11, 2001. Graham insisted Trump doesn’t need sign-off from Congress. “The game has changed when it comes to narco-trafficking drug organizations. We’re going to take you out,” he said.


But the lack of a new authorization would suggest that Trump could simply just start wars anywhere he wants at any time. The GOP-led Congress would demean itself further by enabling a president to award himself the power to kill anyone on the high seas. “When you kill someone, you should know … if you’re not in a declared war, you really need to know someone’s name, at least you have to accuse them of something. You have to present evidence,” Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” this month.


Members of the Bolivarian Militia stand in formation during a military training amid rising tensions with the US in Caracas, Venezuela, on October 11.
Gaby Oraa/Reuters

Trump is already surfing close to the line. The War Powers Act, for instance, gives a president 60 days to use military force before congressional authorization is required. That period would expire in early November if backdated to the first attack on a speedboat on September 2. Any action against Venezuela on land “would have to be in response to an armed attack against the United States, would have to be necessary, would have to be proportionate, and would have to be authorized by Congress. None of those things, none of those boxes are checked off,” Ryan Goodman, a professor at the New York University School of Law, told CNN’s Erin Burnett this month.

► A new war in Venezuela would come with political implications, especially for Trump’s “America First” base, which embraced his promises of no new foreign entanglements. But Trump, armed with a Supreme Court ruling that says he’s immune from prosecution for any official acts and a Republican congressional majority that enables his undemocratic instincts, seems not to be listening.


► And what would US attacks would mean for the citizens of nations involved? Many Venezuelans would love to shake off Maduro’s iron grip, which wrecked their country’s wealth. Yet military action risks civilian casualties and mistakes, and can sometimes unite civilians even around a tyrannical regime. Regime change can also go badly wrong — like in Iraq or Libya so far this century. And CIA-backed coups and wars against cartels in Latin America have a painful history.

► A new US war in the Western Hemisphere could also foster a backlash against a US government already meddling in the region’s politics. Trump seems to have his eye on Colombian President Gustavo Petro after Maduro and attempted to sway Sunday’s elections in Argentina. He’s also been pressuring Brazil.

► US-sponsored regime change would also set a brazen precedent at a time of strongmen who cultivate regional spheres of influence. This would weaken US arguments against potential Chinese expansionism, including against Taiwan, and undercut US moral authority over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Why some Americans might back a new US war
The test of any presidential action overseas is whether it promotes the well-being of Americans. Trump has made this more explicit than ever — putting national interests above alliances, international institutions and global free trade.


In the abstract, stemming the flow of drugs into the United States, including fentanyl, which kills tens thousands of Americans each year, would be a good thing. And no one would be surprised if speedboats targeted by the US were involved in low-grade smuggling. Still, most supplies of fentanyl come over land via Mexico and China, not Venezuela.

But many Americans voted for Trump because he vowed to end uncontrolled migration. Ousting Maduro could tamp down Venezuelan arrivals at the US border and encourage some of those who fled the country to return.

So, commentary that sees potential US action in the Western Hemisphere as anti-America First tells only half the story. The administration’s strategy in the region is an outgrowth of domestic immigration and crime policy, so it is more applicable to Trump’s political creed than it might seem.

Trump would surely take steps to try to prevent Venezuela turning into an Iraq-style quagmire. But his policy could be troubling nevertheless. His new threats to Latin American leaders reflect his wish to apply personal political power everywhere, often with little regard for the Constitution. His administration is also reviving historic zeal for US presidents to dominate their own backyard.


Trump admires President William McKinley, mostly for his tariff policy. But the 25th president also waged the Spanish-American War, acquiring sovereignty over Puerto Rico, as well as Guam and the Philippines. This administration also draws comparisons to President James Monroe, whose doctrine of 1823 signaled to European powers the US would not tolerate further colonization or interference in the Western Hemisphere.


A MAGA-fied Monroe Doctrine replaces European powers with China and to a lesser extent Russia. Both have long sought a diplomatic and strategic footing with nations close to the US, including Cuba. “The United States is committed to countering China’s corrupt influence in Central America,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote on X on September 4. Early this year, the top US diplomat traveled to Panama to demand steps to weaken China’s influence over the Panama Canal.


Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has long been a hawkish foe of left-wing dictators in Latin America. His advocacy is now creating a powerful front with the more domestic and migration-focused concerns of another administration heavyweight with Trump’s ear: Stephen Miller.




Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro looks on during a meeting at the National Assembly in Caracas on August 22.
Juan Barreto/AFP/Getty Images

One question that would follow a US operation against Maduro is whether any US success would lead to a wider toppling of left-leaning governments across the region in a realignment mirroring Trump’s worldview.


But if the US is trying to thwart Chinese imperialism, many observers see an attempt to impose American hegemony over Latin America instead. Trump slapped a 50% tariff on Brazil after it prosecuted his friend former President Jair Bolsonaro over a coup attempt. The administration made a hero of Salvadoran tough guy Nayib Bukele, and sent undocumented migrants to one of his brutal jails. Trump is also hostile to Petro, a former Marxist guerrilla and liberal leader in Colombia whose policies clash with the MAGA vision.



A new government in Venezuela — an oil-rich nation to which US oil firms would love to return in a big way — would fulfill multiple Trump goals.


The tightening relationship between Trump’s team and opposition leader and Maria Corina Machado suggests Washington sees her party, which polled better than Maduro in last year’s fraudulent election, according to foreign observers, as heir apparent. Machado, the new Nobel Peace Prize winner, has campaigned for democracy and freedom of expression. Her strong advocacy of Trump suggests her right-wing views would make her a kindred political spirit. “It was Maduro who declared a war on us Venezuelans after we won by the landslide in the presidential election last year,” Machado told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.” “Maduro is the one who started the war. President Trump is stopping the war.”


Still, arguments that Trump is motivated by promoting democratic freedoms in Venezuela would be a stretch because of his own attempts to destroy the verdict of US voters in the 2020 election and the legal alarms already set off by his hardline Latin America strategy.


This story and headline have been updated with new developments.

 

[mandrill]

 

[mandrill]

Lawsuit challenges the boundaries of the only GOP-held congressional district in New York City


NEW YORK (AP) — A lawsuit filed Monday seeks to redraw the boundaries of the only congressional district in New York City represented by a Republican, arguing that its current configuration unconstitutionally dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters.

The case, filed by an election law firm on behalf of four voters, comes amid a national fight over congressional boundaries ahead of next year's midterm elections, which will determine control of the narrowly divided U.S. House.

President Donald Trump has pressured Republican-led states to redraw House districts to increase his party's chances of maintaining control of the House, leading to a flurry of redistricting efforts across the country. Democrats have launched their own counter measures, but those efforts have often been blunted by laws intended to prevent partisan gerrymandering.

The lawsuit in New York, if successful, could help Democrats in their quest to retake a House majority next year.

The plaintiffs allege the district, which is represented by Republican U.S. Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, is drawn without accounting for a rise in Staten Island's Black and Latino population and should be reconfigured to include parts of lower Manhattan, which leans more Democratic.

As it currently stands, the district encompasses Staten Island, a conservative enclave, along with a nearby part southern Brooklyn that shares a similar political bent. Lower Manhattan is dominated by massive apartment and office buildings and is home to the city's financial district.

In a statement, Malliotakis called the case “frivolous” and said the boundaries were “enacted into state law by the state’s independent redistricting commission, the Democrat-controlled state Legislature and Democrat governor.”

NYGOP Chair Ed Cox issued a similar statement, saying “Everyone should see this effort for what it is: a naked attempt to disenfranchise voters in NY-11 and elect a Democrat to this Congressional District contrary to the will of voters.”

The state's election board, which is named as a defendant in the case, declined to comment.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul had pledged to wade into the national redistricting battle, but has few options to substantially change the state's congressional lines ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Democrats in the state Legislature redrew the congressional map last year to give their party a modest boost in a few battleground districts, helping the party to pick up a handful of seats in the 2024 elections. Democrats currently control a majority of the state's congressional districts.

The Associated Press

 

[mandrill]

Attorney warns Trump move could tank credit for millions


An attorney specializing in consumer protection is sounding the alarm as the Trump administration prepares to enact a new policy that could tank credit ratings for millions of Americans.

A total of 15 states currently have laws that limit medical debt from impacting individuals' credit scores, laws that were enacted under the Biden administration, which in early 2025 issued a new rule that would have removed all medical debt from credit reports, eliminating an estimated $49 billion in unpaid medical bills from credit reports.

However, the Trump administration is set to issue guidance Tuesday that would roll back the Biden administration’s efforts by prohibiting states from withholding individuals’ medical debt from credit reporting, The Lever reported Monday, a move that could “harm” millions of Americans, according to Chi Chi Wu, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center.

“[The Trump administration’s new guidance is] trying to invalidate [state] protections that don’t cost anything to anyone,” Wu said, speaking with The Lever. “It’s not just taking a hands-off approach and saying, ‘we won’t protect consumers,’ it’s saying, ‘we are going to actively harm you.’”



About 100 million Americans hold around $220 billion in medical debt, and those unpaid bills impacts the credit reports of about 15 million, despite more than 90 percent of Americans having health insurance. Given the impact of having a low credit score – which can limit access to loans, housing, vehicles and employment – support has grown for eliminating medical debt from credit reports, with 90 percent of Americans supporting the idea.

The United States is unique in its citizens having billions of dollars worth of medical debt given the nation is the only major Western nation without a form of universal health care coverage. Instead, the United States’ health care system is a patchwork of private, employer-based and public programs.

The United States spends more on health care per capita than any other nation on earth, and despite ranking near the bottom in health outcomes when compared with other major Western nations; life expectancy is significantly lower than comparable nations, and other health metrics like infant and maternal mortality are also far worse.

“Whether [the federal guidance is] successful or not is going to be up to the court,” Wu said. “This is not a legally binding opinion. I would hope that courts aren’t persuaded by it.”

 

[mandrill]

'Gross federal overreach': Here’s what's inside Trump’s $1.2 billion demands of UCLA


The 27-page settlement proposal of demands sent by President Donald Trump to UCLA in exchange or $1.2 billion in funding, made public Friday, is being called a "gross federal overreach," according to a new report in Cal Matters.

The document was made public after public after the UCLA Faculty Association and the Council of University of California Faculty Associations sued the public university to disclose the information under the California Public Records Act.

The proposal outlines the administration’s vision for higher education that is free from efforts to promote diversity and transgender inclusion, according to Cal Matters.

While the university system argued that making the proposal public would cause it “irreparable harm” during ongoing negotiations with the Trump administration, it was released after a California superior court judge ordered it to do so, and the state Supreme Court rejected its appeal.

The list of demands was the result of the U.S. Department of Justice in July accusing the university of not doing enough to combat antisemitism during last year’s pro-Palestine protests, and for allegedly violating federal civil rights law.

Governor Gavin Newsom has characterized the fine as “extortion,” and UC President James Milliken said that paying the settlement would “completely devastate” the university system.

So far, Brown University, Dartmouth College, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), University of Arizona, University of Pennsylvania, University of Southern California (USC) and University of Virginia (UVA) have rejected Trump's compact due to concerns over academic freedom and institutional independence.

"In issuing the demands, the Trump administration initially withheld more than $500 million in research grants to UCLA. But its leverage remains unclear now after a federal judge ordered the administration to restore nearly all those grants in August and September," Cal Matters reports.

Among Trump's demands of UCLA:

Hire a senior administrator to review UCLA’s policies related to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, and eliminate “identity-based preferences” in faculty hiring and scholarship programs.Prohibit the use of “personal statements, diversity narratives, or any applicant reference to racial identity as a means to introduce or justify discrimination” in its admissions process. (A 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling already prohibits race-based admissions, though students are free to submit essays that detail how race affected their lives.)Prohibit the UCLA School of Medicine and its affiliated hospitals from performing gender affirming surgeries or hormone therapy for patients under 18.Issue a public statement saying that it will comply with Trump’s executive order that recognizes male and female as the only two sexes.Ban female transgender student athletes from participating in women’s sports.Establish a process so that “foreign students likely to engage in anti-Western, anti-American, or antisemitic disruptions or harassment” are not admitted to UCLA. (That seems to be at odds with the letter’s goal of protecting UCLA “faculty and students from retaliation for expressing minority opinions or engaging in free expression.”)Develop training materials to “socialize international students to the norms of a campus dedicated to free inquiry and open debate.”

Cal Matters notes that some of these, including the elimination of diversity statements in faculty hiring and banning overnight demonstrations, are already UC policy.In regards to the Trump administration's use of "antisemitism" as an impetus for these demands, over 600 Jewish students, faculty and alumni publicly opposed the settlement in an open letter published in August titled, "Jews in defense of UC."The UCLA Faculty Association agrees.“It is not just today’s students and workers who will be harmed by this gross federal overreach — but generations of Californians," said association president Anna Markowitz.

 

[mandrill]

ICE chiefs ousted amid war between Trump enforcers Homan and Noem

 

[mandrill]

Trump ally leading 'purge' of ICE agents as White House demands 'high-visibility' arrests


Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem's controversial chief adviser Corey Lewandowski is reportedly leading a "purge" on rival Immigration and Customs Enforcement leaders as the Trump administration demands more arrests and citing "lagging removal numbers."

For the first time ever, Border Patrol officials will step into ICE positions, moving to a more aggressive approach and removing five ICE field leaders from offices in Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Diego and Philadelphia, The Daily Beast reports.


Fox News reports that "tense" and "combative" infighting between ICE and Border Patrol has pitted the two groups against each other. Lewandowski, President Donald Trump's former campaign manager and Noem's rumored extramarital affair partner, has apparently compiled a list of at least a dozen field officers to be replaced by Border Patrol.

Noem, Lewandowski and Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino reportedly "want high-visibility sweeps to increase daily counts as they try to hit a ‘3,000-a-day’ deportations benchmark set by Donald Trump’s influential deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller."



Lewandowski is considered a DHS special government employee. He travels with Noem and works as her "gatekeeper," influencing strategy and personnel.

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, referred to the unprecedented moment in a post on X late Monday:

"HUGE moment. ICE leadership is being purged tonight. The old guard, which prioritized targeted enforcement operations aimed at people with criminal records, is being replaced with Border Patrol and Greg Bovino's 'Midway Blitz' style.

Think things are bad now? It'll get worse."

 

[mandrill]

US citizen, 67, ‘has ribs broken’ by Border Patrol agents after being dragged out of car while driving home into street they’d blocked off



Shocking video shows a chaotic scene on a quiet Chicago street as Border Patrol agents in tactical gear drag a 67-year-old man from his car while children in Halloween costumes look on in horror.

According to his running club, the man, who is a U.S. citizen, was returning from a team run when agents pulled him out of his vehicle, tackled him to the ground and kneeled on top of him, allegedly breaking six ribs and causing internal bleeding.

The incident unfolded Saturday in the city’s Old Irving Park neighborhood, where residents say the agents disrupted a children’s Halloween parade amid an immigration enforcement operation.

In a statement shared on Instagram, the Chicago-based DWRunning club identified the victim as one of their athletes, although it did not name him.

“One of our athletes was on his way home from a team long run yesterday and as he turned onto his block, found that Border Control had the road blocked,” the club wrote.

“The agents threatened to break his window if he didn’t move his car. Before he could act, they pulled him out of his car, knelt on his back, and subdued him, though he never resisted. They broke six of his ribs and caused internal bleeding.”

The club condemned the incident, saying: “This really is happening in our country with frightening frequency. It’s terrifying and it has to stop. We must keep sharing these stories, calling out these injustices and standing up for those who can’t stand up for themselves.”

Since the incident, the group said it had seen an outpouring of support.

“The outpouring of messages and support the past 24 hours has been overwhelming and heartwarming. It’s given us some hope that light can shine through the dark,” the post said. “For those concerned about our athlete, thank you. He is doing as well as can be expected.”

DWRunning’s co-owner and head coach, Dan Walters, told The Independent he could not currently comment further for legal reasons.



The incident unfolded Saturday in the city’s Old Irving Park neighborhood, where residents say the agents disrupted a children’s Halloween parade amid an immigration enforcement operation (DWRunning Racing Team)
The violent clash, captured on multiple cellphones, has reignited outrage over the tactics of federal immigration agents operating in residential areas to enact Donald Trump’s stated policy of rounding up and deporting illegal immigrants.

It came during a broader immigration raid in Old Irving Park, where residents say federal agents deployed tear gas without warning as families gathered for the neighborhood’s Halloween parade.

According to ABC News, more video clips showed agents tackling and arresting several people, including U.S. citizens, outside homes decorated for Halloween. In one clip, a man identified as Carlos Rodriguez can be heard yelling, “You’re scaring our children to death.”

“Unbelievable. Never thought this would happen in my neighborhood – scaring our children to death, thinking this is a cool thing to do,” Rodriguez said in the video, ABC News reported.



Video clips showed agents tackling and arresting several people, including U.S. citizens, outside homes decorated for Halloween (DWRunning team via Instagram)


An agent pushes back at the crowds amid a raid in an Irving Park neighborhood (DWRunning team via Instagram)


Agents unleashed tear gas as they left the area (DWRunning team via Instagram)
Asked to comment on the incident, Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, released a statement to The Independent, addressing the operation but not the specific treatment of the 67-year-old man.

“On October 25, 2025, Border Patrol conducted an operation that resulted in the arrest of, a criminal illegal alien from Mexico, who has previously been arrested for assault.



The man had just returned from a running event, his club said (DWRunning)
“During the operations Border Patrol agents were surrounded and boxed in by a group of agitators. Federal law enforcement issued multiple lawful commands and verbal warnings, all of which were ignored. During the operation, two U.S. citizens were arrested for assaulting and impeding a federal officer. To safely clear the area after multiple warnings and the crowd continuing to advance on them, Border Patrol had to deploy crowd control measures.


“Our officers are facing a 1000% increase in assaults against them as they put their lives on the line to arrest murderers, rapists, abusers, and gang members. Secretary Noem’s message to the rioters is clear: you will not stop us or slow us down. ICE and our federal law enforcement partners will continue to enforce the law. And if you lay a hand on a law enforcement officer, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Court filings in a case brought by the Chicago Headline Club, a chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists, and reviewed by The Independent, paint a different picture. Attorneys allege that on October 25, “masked CBP agents entered the 3700 block of Kildare in Old Irving Park and ruined what should have been an ordinary Saturday morning.”



Crowds gathered around the man as he was pushed to the ground by agents (DWRunning team via Instagram)
Children were preparing for a parade, neighbors were still in pajamas, with one woman outside with her hair wrapped in a towel, when agents began tackling residents, including one man “approximately 70 years old.”

Witnesses said agents acted aggressively toward neighbors who appeared nonviolent. Agents allegedly deployed tear gas as they left the scene, “without any audible warning,” and wore no identification numbers.


The filing says: “According to Brian Kolp, an attorney who ‘supports law enforcement and represents them,’ residents were not doing anything threatening or violent (neighbors were not touching agents or threatening them). While leaving the scene after making their arrests, and without any audible warning, agents deployed tear gas. One of the canisters caught on fire.



Greg Bovino, center, has been ordered to appear in court every day this week amid accusations his officers have been deploying tear gas against members of the public ‘without justification’ (AP)
“The federal agents were masked and did not have any identification numbers. This experience was terrifying for residents.”

Attorneys for the plaintiffs say the agents violated a temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis, which limits the use of aggressive tactics and requires body cameras during federal operations in Chicago.


Ellis has ordered Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino, who oversees “Operation Midway Blitz,” to appear before her every day this week following allegations that he personally deployed tear gas “without justification” last week and that his officers violently detained protesters and indiscriminately fired tear gas into neighborhoods.

Bovino told ABC News that “there are no sanctuaries in Chicago or anywhere else in the United States,” and defended the use of tear gas as “riot control measures” after agents were allegedly attacked by “rioters.”

The Independent has always had a global perspective. Built on a firm foundation of superb internation

 

[mandrill]

Judge rips Border Patrol chief for tear gassing kids in Chicago as agents come under fire for Trump’s mass deportation operation


The border patrol chief commanding dozens of federal agents in Chicago has been ordered to appear in court every day after he and his officers faced a wave of allegations that they violently detained protesters and indiscriminately fired tear gas into neighborhoods.

Greg Bovino, the top Customs and Border Protection official for Donald Trump’s mass deportation operation in Illinois, was ordered to testify in federal court Tuesday after protesters suing the administration accused Bovino and agents of repeatedly gassing residents in violation of a judge’s restraining order.

In court filings, protesters accused agents of shooting chemical agents at close range and pointing a gun at one demonstrator while saying “bang, bang” and “you’re dead, liberal.”

Protesters also allege masked agents tossed tear gas canisters while hanging out the window from the passenger seat of an unmarked SUV and “unleashed violence” the morning before a Halloween parade in a Chicago suburb, where agents allegedly tackled three people, including a 67-year-old U.S. citizen, before filling the streets with tear gas.

“That was the instance, as well, where children were present and they were dressed up in their Halloween costumes,” Illinois District Judge Sara Ellis said Tuesday.

“Those kids were tear gassed on their way to celebrate Halloween in their local school parking lot,” she said. “These kids, you can imagine, their sense of safety was shattered ... and it’s gonna take a long time for that to come back, if ever.”

Bovino, the face of Trump’s boots-on-the-ground anti-immigration agenda, has been ordered to appear in Ellis’s courtroom every day for the next week until November 5, when she is scheduled to hold a hearing on a preliminary injunction that could block further use of riot weapons in Chicago.

“Almost every day” since Ellis issued a restraining order earlier this month, federal agents “have violated it by using tear gas against civilians in residential neighborhoods of Chicago without any lawful basis for doing so,” plaintiffs wrote in court filings.

The plaintiffs — which include a group of protesters, faith leaders and journalists who cover demonstrations — argue that federal agents under Bovino’s command “went on a tour of Chicago neighborhoods, gassing residents in different neighborhoods each day” within the last week.

“Plainly, Defendants are not merely enforcing immigration law. Immigration enforcement does not typically require the daily use of tear gas on civilians in residential areas,” she wrote.

“Instead, the government is regularly inflicting harm on civilians who are simply protesting or observing Defendants’ violent and unprecedented paramilitary enforcement efforts in one of the country’s largest municipalities,” plaintiffs argued.

They argue that officers are “inciting violence in peaceful residential neighborhoods to transform Chicago into the very ‘war zone’ that [administration officials] use to justify the deployment of more federal force.”

“Defendants are engineering their own pretext for their presence and behavior in Chicago,” they wrote.



Border Patrol officers are accused of firing tear gas into crowds of demonstrators in defiance of a restraining order that blocks chemical agents and other riot weapons without warning (AP)


Federal agents are accused of stirring up unrest in several Chicago suburbs during Trump’s mass deportation sweeps, what plaintiffs in a lawsuit claim is ‘engineering their own pretext for their presence and behavior in Chicago’ (REUTERS)
Over the last week, volatile scenes emerged from protests against immigration raids in Chicago’s Little Village, Lakeview and Old Irving Park neighborhoods, where masked and heavily armed and armored border patrol agents filled streets with tear gas and arrested several demonstrators.


In protests in Little Village October 23, “Bovino was apparently the first federal agent to throw a tear gas canister into the crowd,” according to plaintiffs. Bovino “did not give any audible warnings before doing so and the crowd was not being violent or committing any crimes at the time he threw the tear gas canisters,” they argued.

Images in court filings appear to show Bovino standing with agents as he lobs tear gas cans towards demonstrators.



Before-and-after images submitted by plaintiffs in a lawsuit against federal agents' use of force at protests in Illinois appears to show officers firing chemical agents steps away from a demonstrator’s face October 23 (US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois)


An image in court filings appears to show Border Patrol chief Gregory Bovino lobbing a tear gas canister at protesters in Chicago October 23 (US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois)
A Homeland Security spokesperson told The Independent that Bovino was struck in the head by an object thrown by a “rioter.”

“Did Judge Ellis get hit in the head by a rock like I did this morning?” Bovino told a reporter at the scene. “Maybe she needs to see what that’s like before she gives an order like that.”


During the same interview, Bovino said “I take my orders from the executive branch.”

The border patrol chief’s statement “suggests disdain for this Court’s authority to enjoin his unlawful conduct,” according to plaintiffs.

Homeland Security officials have argued that “rioters” and “agitators” had “surrounded” and “attacked” agents at demonstrations in Chicago’s suburbs. Officers legally deployed riot weapons after the crowd “ignored” multiple warnings to leave the areas, a spokesperson told The Independent in response to questions about use-of-force measures at several demonstrations.

Secretary Kristi Noem’s “message to the rioters is clear: you will not stop us or slow us down,” assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement Tuesday.

“ICE and our federal law enforcement partners will continue to enforce the law,” she added. “And if you lay a hand on a law enforcement officer, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”