executive order

NEW YORK — President Trump’s request to add a documentary proof of citizenship requirement to the federal voter registration form cannot be enforced, a federal judge ruled Friday.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington, D.C., sided with Democratic and civil rights groups that sued the Trump administration over his executive order to overhaul U.S. elections.

She ruled that the proof-of-citizenship directive is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers, dealing a blow to the administration and its allies who have argued that such a mandate is necessary to restore public confidence that only Americans are voting in U.S. elections.

“Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the States and to Congress, this Court holds that the President lacks the authority to direct such changes,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote in her opinion.

She further emphasized that on matters related to setting qualifications for voting and regulating federal election procedures “the Constitution assigns no direct role to the President in either domain.”

Kollar-Kotelly echoed comments she made when she granted a preliminary injunction over the issue.

The ruling grants the plaintiffs a partial summary judgment that prohibits the proof-of-citizenship requirement from going into effect. It says the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, which has been considering adding the requirement to the federal voter form, is permanently barred from taking action to do so.

A message seeking comment from the White House was not immediately returned.

The lawsuit brought by the DNC and various civil rights groups will continue to play out to allow the judge to consider other challenges to Trump’s order. That includes a requirement that all mailed ballots be received, rather than just postmarked, by Election Day.

Other lawsuits against Trump’s election executive order are ongoing.

In early April, 19 Democratic state attorneys general asked a separate federal court to reject Trump’s executive order. Washington and Oregon, where virtually all voting is done with mailed ballots, followed with their own lawsuit against the order.

Swenson and Riccardi write for the Associated Press.

DUBAI — President Trump has signed an executive order vowing to use all measures, including U.S. military action, to defend the energy-rich nation of Qatar — though it remains unclear just what weight the pledge will carry.

The text of the order, available Wednesday on the White House’s website but dated Monday, appears to be another measure by Trump to assure the Qataris following Israel’s surprise attack on the country targeting Hamas leaders as they weighed accepting a ceasefire with Israel over the war in the Gaza Strip.

The order cites the two countries’ “close cooperation” and “shared interest,” vowing to “guarantee the security and territorial integrity of the state of Qatar against external attack.”

“The United States shall regard any armed attack on the territory, sovereignty or critical infrastructure of the state of Qatar as a threat to the peace and security of the United States,” the order says.

“In the event of such an attack, the United States shall take all lawful and appropriate measures — including diplomatic, economic, and, if necessary, military — to defend the interests of the United States and of the state of Qatar and to restore peace and stability.”

The order apparently came during a visit to Washington on Monday by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump organized a call by Netanyahu to Qatar during the visit in which Netanyahu “expressed his deep regret” over the strike that killed six people, including a member of the Qatari security forces, the White House said.

Qatari officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Trump’s order. However, the Qatari-funded satellite news network Al Jazeera prominently reported about it Wednesday under the headline: “New Trump executive order guarantees Qatar security after Israeli attack.”

The true scope of the pledge remains in question. Typically, legally binding agreements, or treaties, need to receive the approval of the U.S. Senate. However, presidents have entered international agreements without the Senate’s approval, as President Obama did with Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.

And ultimately, any decision to take military action rests with the president. That uncertainty has clouded previous U.S. defense agreements in Trump’s second term, such as NATO’s Article 5 guarantees.

Qatar, a peninsular nation that sticks out into the Persian Gulf, became fantastically wealthy through its natural gas reserves. It has been a key U.S. military partner, allowing America’s Central Command to have its forward operating base at its vast Al Udeid Air Base. President Biden named Qatar a major non-NATO ally in 2022, in part due to its help during America’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan.

In the aftermath of the Israeli attack, Saudi Arabia entered a mutual defense agreement with Pakistan, bringing the kingdom under Islamabad’s nuclear umbrella. It’s unclear whether other Gulf Arab countries, worried about Israel as well as Iran as it faces reimposed United Nations sanctions over its nuclear program, may seek similar arrangements as well with the region’s longtime security guarantor.

“The Gulf’s centrality in the Middle East and its significance to the United States warrants specific U.S. guarantees beyond President Donald J. Trump’s assurances of nonrepetition and dinner meetings,” wrote Bader al-Saif, a history professor at Kuwait University who analyzes Gulf Arab affairs.

Gambrell writes for the Associated Press.

President Trump on Thursday signed an executive order that would allow hugely popular social video app TikTok to continue to operate in the United States.

TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, had been under pressure to divest its ownership in the app’s U.S. operations or face a nationwide ban, due to security concerns over the company’s ties to China.

Congress passed legislation calling for a TikTok ban to go into effect in January, but Trump has repeatedly signed orders that have allowed TikTok to keep operating in the country.

Under an agreement that Trump said was approved by China’s President Xi Jinping, TikTok’s U.S. operations will be operated through a joint venture run by a majority-American investor group. ByteDance and its affiliates would hold less than 20% ownership in the venture.

About 170 million Americans use TikTok, known for its viral entertaining videos.

“These safeguards would protect the American people from the misuse of their data and the influence of a foreign adversary, while also allowing the millions of American viewers, creators, and businesses that rely on the TikTok application to continue using it,” Trump stated in his executive order.

Trump, who years ago led the push to ban TikTok from the U.S., said at a press event that he feels the deal satisfies security concerns.

“The biggest reason is that it’s owned by Americans … and people that love the country and very smart Americans, so they don’t want anything like that to happen,” Trump said.

Trump said on Thursday that people involved in the deal include Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, Dell Technologies Chief Executive Michael Dell and media mogul Rupert Murdoch. Vice President JD Vance said the new entity controlling TikTok’s U.S. operations would have a value of around $14 billion.

Murdoch’s involvement would probably entail Fox Corp. investing in the deal, a source familiar with the matter who was not authorized to comment publicly told The Times. Fox Corp. owns Fox News, whose opinion hosts are vocally supportive of Trump.

The algorithms and code would be under control of the joint venture. The order requires the storage of sensitive U.S. user data to be under a U.S. cloud computing company.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News last Saturday that the app’s data and privacy in the U.S. would be led by Oracle.

Ellison is a Trump ally who is the world’s second-richest person, according to Forbes.

TikTok already works with Oracle. Since October 2022, “all new protected U.S. user data has been stored in the secure Oracle infrastructure, not on TikTok or ByteDance servers,” TikTok says on its website.

Ellison is also preparing a bid for Warner Bros. Discovery, the media company that owns HBO, TNT and CNN, after already completing a takeover of Paramount, one of Hollywood’s original studios.

“The most important thing is it does protect Americans’ data security,” Vance said at a press gathering on Thursday. “What this deal ensures is that the American entity and the American investors will actually control the algorithm. We don’t want this used as a propaganda tool by any foreign government.”

TikTok, which has a large presence in Los Angeles, did not respond to a request for comment.

Terms of the deal are still unclear. Trump discussed the TikTok deal with China’s Xi Jinping in an extended phone call last week. Chinese and U.S. officials have until Dec. 16 to finalize the details.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s administration asked the Supreme Court on Friday to let it enforce a passport policy for transgender and nonbinary people that requires male or female sex designations based on birth certificates.

The Justice Department appealed a lower-court order allowing people use the gender or “X” identification marker that lines up with their gender identity.

It’s the latest in a series of emergency appeals from the Trump administration, many of which have resulted in victories amid litigation, including on banning transgender people from the military.

The government argues it can’t be required to use sex designations it considers inaccurate on official documents. The plaintiffs, meanwhile, say the policy violates the rights of transgender and nonbinary Americans.

The State Department changed its passport rules after Trump handed down an executive order in January declaring the United States would “recognize two sexes, male and female,” based on what it called “an individual’s immutable biological classification.”

Transgender actor Hunter Schafer, for example, said in February that her new passport had been issued with a male gender marker, even though she submitted the application with the female gender marker she has used for years on her driver’s license and passport.

A judge blocked the Trump administration policy in June after a lawsuit from nonbinary and transgender people, some of whom said they were afraid to submit applications. An appeals court left the judge’s order in place.

The Trump administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to put the order on hold while the lawsuit plays out.

“The Constitution does not prohibit the government from defining sex in terms of an individual’s biological classification,” Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer wrote.

He pointed to the high court’s recent ruling upholding a ban on transition-related health care for transgender minors. The courts conservative majority found that law doesn’t discriminate on the basis of sex, and Sauer argued that finding also supports the Trump administration’s decision to change passport rules issued in 2021.

An attorney for the plaintiffs, on the other hand, said the passport rules are discriminatory.

“This administration has taken escalating steps to limit transgender people’s health care, speech, and other rights under the Constitution, and we are committed to defending those rights,” said Jon Davidson, senior counsel for the LGBTQ & HIV Project at the American Civil Liberties Union.

Whitehurst writes for the Associated Press.

Marc Seawright took pride in his job at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, where he worked for more than eight years and most recently oversaw technology policy to support the agency’s mission of combating workplace harassment and discrimination.

But then President Trump began targeting transgender and nonbinary people within hours of returning to the White House by issuing a series of executive orders — including one declaring the existence of two unchangeable sexes. Seawright was ordered to develop technology to scrub any mention of LGBTQ+ identities from all EEOC outreach materials, which had been created to help employers understand their obligations under civil rights law.

Suddenly, his tech expertise “was being leveraged to perpetuate discrimination against people like me,” said Seawright, 41, who served as the EEOC’s director of information governance and strategy before he quit in June, citing a hostile work environment. “It became overwhelming. It felt insurmountable.”

A San Francisco-based Army veteran, Seawright is one of 10 transgender and gender nonconforming government employees across federal agencies who spoke with the Associated Press about their workplace experiences since Trump regained office, describing their fear, grief, frustration and distress working for an employer that rejects their identity — often with no clear path for recourse or support. Several requested anonymity for fear of retaliation; some, including Seawright, have filed formal discrimination complaints.

Since January, the Trump administration has reversed years of legal and policy gains for transgender Americans, including stripping government websites of “gender ideology” and reinstituting a ban on transgender service members in the military.

The White House and the EEOC declined to respond to allegations that the president’s policies created a hostile workplace for transgender federal employees. But his executive order, which defines sex as strictly male or female, states that its goal is to protect spaces designated for women and girls.

“Efforts to eradicate the biological reality of sex fundamentally attack women by depriving them of their dignity, safety, and well-being,” the order says.

Independent Women, a nonprofit that advocates for legislation defining sex as male and female, supports Trump’s executive order.

“Women’s rights can get erased if men can just self-identify to women’s spaces,” said the organization’s senior legal advisor Beth Parlato.

Brad Sears, senior scholar at UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute, which researches policy impacting LGBTQ+ people, points to “a sweeping, government-wide initiative to really erase transgender people from public life,” including adults in the workplace.

“The federal workplace is increasingly an inhospitable place for the transgender employees who remain,” Sears said.

Compared with private sector workers, transgender federal employees are especially vulnerable because many ultimately answer to the president, said Olivia Hunt, director of federal policy at Advocates for Trans Equality, which seeks legal and political rights for transgender people in the United States.

“In the absence of an ability to impose their will directly on employers throughout the country, this administration is going to use the tools that they have to attack the trans people who are in close proximity to them, and that includes federal workers,” Hunt said.

After serving as the first openly transgender soldier in the Illinois National Guard, LeAnne Withrow retired from the military due to injury, and now works in a federal civilian role helping military families access resources.

Withrow visits armories across Illinois for her job, sometimes in remote areas. But Trump’s executive order directing agencies to take “appropriate action” to ensure that intimate spaces “are designated by sex and not identity” created a major hurdle for Withrow when her supervisors informed her that she was no longer allowed to use the women’s restroom at work.

“I don’t use men’s spaces because I don’t feel comfortable doing that,” the 34-year-old said.

At locations without single-occupancy options, a simple bathroom break can mean a 45-minute round trip to a nearby gas station or McDonald’s.

Represented by the ACLU, Withrow filed a class action complaint in May challenging the Trump administration’s policy on the basis of sex discrimination.

A spokesperson for the Illinois National Guard declined to comment on the pending lawsuit but said the agency is “committed to treating all of our employees with dignity and respect.” The Department of Defense also declined to comment, citing policy, but affirmed its commitment to enforcing relevant laws and implementing the gender executive order.

For Seawright at the EEOC, he feels like his skill set was being wielded against the agency’s mission, not to support it. Following Trump’s signing of his executive order, Acting EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, a Republican, quickly began reshaping policy and, among other things, removed the agency’s “pronoun app,” which allowed employees to display their pronouns in their profiles. It was a tool that was created — then dismantled — by Seawright.

He had spent two years developing the app to support a nonbinary employee at the agency.

“For it to be just kind of yanked away summarily with none of the thoughtfulness and planning that went into implementing the tool … that became really frustrating,” Seawright said.

His mental health suffered, and he requested extended personal leave shortly after he completed the project scrubbing references to gender identity. When he returned in late February, the situation continued to deteriorate.

He hired lawyers at Katz Banks Kumin and filed a formal discrimination complaint. In June, Seawright resigned, citing “significant distress, anxiety, depression, sleeplessness, anger, and sadness” caused daily by Lucas’ “anti-transgender actions.”

Withrow, meanwhile, still works in her role while navigating similar challenges.

“I do feel as though there is at least an implied threat for trans folks in federal service,” she said. “We’ll just continue to meet the objectives and focus on the mission, and hope that that is enough proof that we belong.”

Savage writes for the Associated Press.

The mayor of Chicago struck back Saturday against what he called the “out-of-control” Trump administration’s plan to surge federal officers into the nation’s third-largest city, which could take place within days.

The Chicago Police Department will be barred from helping federal authorities with civil immigration enforcement or any related patrols, traffic stops and checkpoints during the surge, according to an executive order signed by Mayor Brandon Johnson.

Johnson directed all city departments to guard the constitutional rights of Chicago residents “amidst the possibility of imminent militarized immigration or National Guard deployment by the federal government.”

When asked during a news conference about federal agents who are presumably “taking orders,” Johnson replied: “Yeah, and I don’t take orders from the federal government.”

Johnson also blocked Chicago police from wearing face coverings to hide their identities, as most federal immigration officers have done since President Trump launched his crackdown.

The federal surge into Chicago could start as early as Friday and last about 30 days, according to two U.S. officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss plans that had not been made public.

The officials described the immigration crackdown as part of a larger effort to expand the federal law enforcement presence in major Democratic-run cities, as it did earlier this year in Los Angeles.

On Saturday, Trump commented about Chicago crime and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker on his social media site: “Six people were killed, and 24 people were shot, in Chicago last weekend, and JB Pritzker, the weak and pathetic Governor of Illinois, just said that he doesn’t need help in preventing CRIME. He is CRAZY!!! He better straighten it out, FAST, or we’re coming! MAGA. President DJT”

Unlike the recent federal takeover of policing in Washington, D.C., the Chicago operation is not expected to rely on the National Guard or military and is focused exclusively on immigration, rather than being cast as part of a broad campaign against crime, the officials said.

Chicago is home to a large immigrant population, and both the city and the state of Illinois have some of the country’s strongest rules against cooperating with federal immigration enforcement efforts. That has often put the city and state at odds with the Trump administration’s mass deportation agenda.

Johnson’s order builds on the city’s longtime stance, saying neither Chicago nor Illinois officials have sought or been consulted on the federal presence and demanding Trump stand down on those plans.

The mayor had harsh words for Trump during his news conference, accusing the president of “behaving outside the bounds of the Constitution” and seeking a federal presence in Democratic cities as retribution against his political rivals.

“He is reckless and out of control,” Johnson said. “He’s the biggest threat to our democracy that we’ve experienced in the history of our country.”

In response, the White House insisted the potential flood of federal agents was about “cracking down on crime.”

“If these Democrats focused on fixing crime in their own cities instead of doing publicity stunts to criticize the President, their communities would be much safer,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in an email Saturday.

Critics have noted that Trump, while espousing a tough-on-crime push, is the only felon ever to occupy the White House.

Beck writes for the Associated Press.

The Trump administration cannot deny funding to Los Angeles and 30 other cities and counties because of “sanctuary” policies that limit their cooperation with federal immigration agencies, a judge ruled late Friday.

The judge issued a preliminary injunction that expands restrictions the court handed down in April that blocked funding cuts to 16 cities and counties, including San Francisco and Santa Clara, after federal officials classified them as “sanctuary jurisdictions.”

U.S. District Judge William Orrick of the federal court in San Francisco ruled then that Trump’s executive order cutting funding was probably unconstitutional and violated the separation of powers doctrine.

Friday’s order added more than a dozen more jurisdictions to the preliminary injunction, including Los Angeles, Alameda County, Berkeley, Baltimore, Boston and Chicago.

Mayor Karen Bass’ office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a statement, a spokesperson for the White House said the Trump administration expected to ultimately win in its effort on appeal.

“The government — at all levels — has the duty to protect American citizens from harm,” Abigail Jackson, a spokesperson for the White House, said in a statement. “Sanctuary cities interfere with federal immigration enforcement at the expense and safety and security of American citizens. We look forward to ultimate vindication on the issue.”

The preliminary injunction is the latest chapter in an ongoing effort by the Trump administration to force “sanctuary cities” to assist and commit local resources to federal immigration enforcement efforts.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice published a list of what it determined to be sanctuary jurisdictions, or local entities that have “policies, laws, or regulations that impede enforcement of federal immigration laws.”

“Sanctuary policies impede law enforcement and put American citizens at risk by design,” Atty. Gen. Pamela Bondi said in a statement accompanying the published list.

Several cities and counties across the country have adopted sanctuary city policies, but specifics as to what extent they’re willing — or unwilling — to do for federal immigration officials have varied.

The policies typically do not impede federal officials from conducting immigration enforcement activities, but largely keep local jurisdictions from committing resources to the efforts.

The policies also don’t prevent local agencies from enforcing judicial warrants, which are signed by a judge. Cooperation on “detainers” or holds on jailed suspects issued by federal agencies, along with enforcement of civil immigration matters, is typically limited by sanctuary policies.

Federal officials in the suit have so far referred to “sanctuary” jurisdictions as local governments that don’t honor immigration detainer requests, don’t assist with administrative warrants, don’t share immigration status information, or don’t allow local police to assist in immigration enforcement operations.

Orrick noted that the executive orders threatened to withhold all federal funding if the cities and counties in question did not adhere to the Trump administration’s requests.

In the order, the judge referred to the executive order as a “coercive threat” and said it was unconstitutional.

Orrick, who sits on the bench in the Northern District of California, was appointed by former President Obama.

The Trump administration has been ratcheting up efforts to force local jurisdictions to assist in immigration enforcement. The administration has filed lawsuits against cities and counties, vastly increased street operations and immigration detentions, and deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles as it increased immigration operations.

The U.S. Department of Justice in June sued Los Angeles, and local officials, alleging its sanctuary city law is “illegal.”

The suit alleged that the city was looking to “thwart the will of the American people regarding deportations” by enacting sanctuary city policies.

WASHINGTON — A divided Supreme Court said Thursday the Trump administration may cancel hundreds of health research grants that involve diversity, equity and inclusion or gender identity.

The justices granted an emergency appeal from President Trump’s lawyers and set aside a Boston’s judge order that blocked the canceling of $783 million in research grants.

The justices split 5-4. Chief Justice John G. Roberts joined the court’s three liberals in dissent and said the district judge had not overstepped his authority.

The court’s conservative majority has repeatedly sided with the administration and against federal judges in disputes over spending and staffing at federal agencies.

In the latest case, the majority agreed that Trump and his appointees may decide on how to spend health research funds allocated by Congress.

Upon taking office in January, Trump issued an executive order “ending radical and wasteful government DEI programs and preferencing.”

A few weeks later, the acting director of the National Institutes of Health said the agency would no longer fund “low-value and off-mission research programs, including but not limited to studies based on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and gender identity.”

More than 1,700 grants were canceled.

Trump’s lawyers told the court NIH had terminated grants to study “Buddhism and HIV stigma in Thailand”; “intersectional, multilevel and multidimensional structural racism for English- and Spanish-speaking populations”; and “anti-racist healing in nature to protect telomeres of transitional age BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, and People of Color] for health equity.”

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and his counterparts from 15 Democratic-led states had sued to halt what they called an “unprecedented disruption to ongoing research.” They were joined by groups of researchers and public health advocates.

The state attorneys said their public universities were using grant money for “projects investigating heart disease, HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, alcohol and substance abuse, mental-health issues, and countless other health conditions.”

They said NIH had terminated a grant for a University of California study examining how inflammation, insulin resistance, and physical activity affect Alzheimer’s disease in Black women, a group with higher rates and a more aggressive profile of the disease.

Also terminated they said was a University of Hawaiʻi study that aimed to identify genetic and biological risk factors for colorectal cancer among Native Hawaiians, a population with increased incidence and mortality rates of that disease.

In June, the Democratic state attorneys won a ruling from U.S. District Judge William G. Young, a Reagan appointee. He said the sudden halt to research grants violated a federal procedural law because it was “arbitrary” and poorly explained.

He said Trump had required agencies “to focus on eradicating anything that it labels as Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (“DEI”), an undefined enemy.” He said he had tried and failed to get a clear definition of DEI and what it entailed.

When the 1st Circuit Court refused to lift the judge’s order, Trump’s Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer appealed to the Supreme Court in late July.

He noted the justices in April had set aside a similar decision from a Boston-based judge who blocked the new administration’s canceling of education grants.

The solicitor general argued that Trump’s order rescinded an executive order from President Biden in 2021 that mandated “an ambitious whole-of-government equity agenda” and instructed federal agencies to “allocate resources to address the historic failure to invest sufficiently, justly, and equally in underserved communities.”

He said the new administration decided these DEI-related grants “do nothing to expand our knowledge of living systems, provide low returns on investment, and ultimately do not enhance health, lengthen life, or reduce illness.”

WASHINGTON — Joining forces from three other Republican-led states, the Mississippi National Guard will deploy 200 troops to Washington as part of the Trump administration’s ongoing federal policing and immigration overhaul in the nation’s capital.

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves said in a statement Monday that he has approved the deployment of approximately 200 Mississippi National Guard Soldiers to Washington, D.C.

“Crime is out of control there, and it’s clear something must be done to combat it,” Reeves said.

Mississippi joins three other states that have pledged to deploy hundreds of National Guard members to the nation’s capital to bolster the Republican administration’s operation to overhaul policing in the Democratic-led city through a federal crackdown on crime and homelessness.

West Virginia said it was deploying 300 to 400 troops, South Carolina pledged 200 and Ohio said it will send 150 in the coming days, deployments that built on top of President Trump’s initial order that 800 National Guard troops deploy as part of the federal intervention.

Trump’s executive order that launched the federal operation declared a “crime emergency” in the District of Columbia and initiated a takeover Washington’s police department. The administration has ordered local police to cooperate with federal agents on immigration enforcement, orders that would contradict local laws prohibiting such collaboration.

“D.C. has been under siege from thugs and killers, but now, D.C. is back under Federal Control where it belongs,” Trump wrote on his social media website a day after issuing his order. “The White House is in charge. The Military and our Great Police will liberate this City, scrape away the filth, and make it safe, clean, habitable and beautiful once more!”

National Guard members in the District of Columbia have been assisting law enforcement with tasks including crowd control and patrolling landmarks such as the National Mall and Union Station. Their role has been limited thus far, and it remains unclear why additional troops would be needed.

Over the weekend in Washington, protesters pushed back on federal law enforcement and National Guard troops fanning out in the city. Scores of protesters gathered in the city’s Dupont Circle on Saturday and marched to the White House.

Brown and Pesoli write for the Associated Press.

President Trump said Monday he would renew his assault on mail-in voting after Russia’s autocratic leader, Vladimir Putin, told him to do so at their meeting in Alaska last week.

The president provided few details, but wrote on social media that he would “lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, and also, while we’re at it, Highly ‘Inaccurate,’ Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES.”

Already in March, Trump had issued an executive order directing the Justice Department to “take all necessary action” to prevent mail-in ballots received after election day from being counted. The order also attempted to impose a proof of citizenship requirement for voter registration.

Those portions of the executive action has been enjoined by courts over constitutional concerns. But another provision, directing the independent U.S. Election Assistance Commission to shift its guidance on voting machines banning the use of certain bar codes and quick-response codes, has been allowed to proceed.

The U.S. Constitution states that the timing, place and manner of elections “shall be prescribed in each state” by local legislatures, and that Congress has the ability to pass laws altering state election regulations. The president is given no authority to prescribe or govern election procedures.

Trump’s action comes on the heels of his meeting with Putin in Anchorage, where the Russian leader told him that mail-in ballots led to his electoral defeat in 2020, according to the president.

The U.S. intelligence community has assessed that Putin attempted to influence the last three U.S. presidential elections in Trump’s favor.

“Vladimir Putin said something — one of the most interesting things. He said, ‘Your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting,’” Trump told Fox News in an interview.

Trump has criticized mail-in voting since entering politics in 2015. But his presidential campaign embraced the practice leading up to the 2024 election, encouraging his supporters — especially those affected by Hurricane Helene in North Carolina — to take advantage of mail-in voting opportunities.

“Absentee voting, early voting and election day voting are all good options,” Trump said at the time. “Republicans must make a plan, register and vote!”

WASHINGTON — Hundreds of West Virginia National Guard members will deploy across the nation’s capital as part of the Trump administration’s assumption of control over policing in the District of Columbia in what it says is part of a nationwide crackdown on crime on homelessness.

The move comes as federal agents and National Guard troops have begun to appear across the heavily Democratic city after Trump’s executive order on Monday federalizing local police forces and activating about 800 D.C. National Guard troops.

By adding outside troops to join the existing National Guard deployment and federal law enforcement officers temporarily assigned to Washington, President Trump is exercising even tighter control over the city. It’s a power play that the president has justified as an emergency response to crime and homelessness, even though district officials have noted that violent crime is lower than it was during Trump’s first term in office.

A protest against Trump’s intervention drew scores to Washington’s Dupont Circle on Saturday afternoon before a march to the White House, about a mile and a half away. Demonstrators assembled behind a banner that said, “No fascist takeover of D.C.,” and some in the crowd held signs that said, “No military occupation.” Trump was at his Virginia golf club after Friday’s summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska.

Gov. Patrick Morrisey, a Republican, announced Saturday that he was sending a contingent of 300 to 400 National Guard members.

“West Virginia is proud to stand with President Trump in his effort to restore pride and beauty to our nation’s capital,” Morrisey said.

Morgan Taylor, one of the organizers of Saturday’s protest, said demonstrators who turned out on a hot summer day were hoping to spark enough backlash to Trump’s actions that the administration would be forced to pull back.

“It’s hot, but I’m glad to be here. It’s good to see all these people out here,” she said. “I can’t believe that this is happening in this country at this time.”

Protesters said they are concerned about what they view as Trump’s overreach, arguing that he had used crime as a pretext to impose his will on Washington.

John Finnigan, 55, was taking an afternoon bike ride when he ran into the protest in downtown Washington. A real estate construction manager who has lived in the capital for 27 years, he said that Trump’s moves were “ridiculous” because “crime is at a 30-year low here.”

“Hopefully some of the mayors and some of the residents will get out in front of it and try and make it harder for it to happen in other cities,” Finnigan said.

Jamie Dickstein, a 24-year-old teacher, said she was “very uncomfortable and worried” for the safety of her students given the “unmarked officers of all types” now roaming Washington and detaining people.

Dickstein said she turned out to protest with friends and relatives to “prevent a continuous domino effect going forward with other cities.”

The West Virginia National Guard activation suggests the administration sees the need for additional manpower, after Trump played down the need for Washington to hire more police officers.

Maj. Gen. James Seward, West Virginia’s adjutant general — a chief aide to the governor and commanding general of the National Guard — said in a statement that members of the Guard “stand ready to support our partners in the National Capital Region” and that the Guard’s “unique capabilities and preparedness make it an invaluable partner in this important undertaking.”

Federal agents have appeared in some of the city’s most highly trafficked neighborhoods, garnering a mix of praise, resistance and alarm from local residents and leaders across the country.

City leaders, who are obligated to cooperate with the president’s order under the federal laws that direct the district’s local governance, have sought to work with the administration, though they have bristled at the scope of the president’s takeover.

On Friday, the administration reversed course on an order that aimed to place the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration as an “emergency police commissioner” after the district’s top lawyer sued to contest. After a court hearing, Trump’s attorney general, Pam Bondi, issued a memo that directed D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law.

District officials say they are evaluating how to best comply.

In his order Monday, Trump declared an emergency, citing the “city government’s failure to maintain public order.” He said that impeded the “federal government’s ability to operate efficiently to address the nation’s broader interests without fear of our workers being subjected to rampant violence.”

In a letter to city residents, Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, wrote that “our limited self-government has never faced the type of test we are facing right now.”

She added that if Washingtonians stick together, “we will show the entire nation what it looks like to fight for American democracy — even when we don’t have full access to it.”

Brown and Pesoli write for the Associated Press. AP writer Josh Boak contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — A divided panel of appeals court judges ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration can suspend or terminate billions of dollars of congressionally appropriated funding for foreign aid.

Two of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that grant recipients challenging the freeze did not meet the requirements for a preliminary injunction restoring the flow of money.

In January, on the first day of his second term in the White House, Republican President Trump issued an executive order directing the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to freeze spending on foreign aid.

After groups of grant recipients sued to challenge that order, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ordered the administration to release the full amount of foreign assistance that Congress had appropriated for the 2024 budget year.

The appeal court’s majority partially vacated Ali’s order.

Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson and Gregory Katsas concluded that the plaintiffs did not have a valid legal basis for the court to hear their claims. The ruling was not on the merits of whether the government unconstitutionally infringed on Congress’ spending powers.

“The parties also dispute the scope of the district court’s remedy but we need not resolve it … because the grantees have failed to satisfy the requirements for a preliminary injunction in any event,” Henderson wrote.

Judge Florence Pan, who dissented, said the Supreme Court has held “in no uncertain terms” that the president does not have the authority to disobey laws for policy reasons.

“Yet that is what the majority enables today,” Pan wrote. “The majority opinion thus misconstrues the separation-of-powers claim brought by the grantees, misapplies precedent, and allows Executive Branch officials to evade judicial review of constitutionally impermissible actions.”

The money at issue includes nearly $4 billion for USAID to spend on global health programs and more than $6 billion for HIV and AIDS programs. Trump has portrayed the foreign aid as wasteful spending that does not align with his foreign policy goals.

Henderson was nominated to the court by Republican President George H.W. Bush. Katsas was nominated by Trump. Pan was nominated by Democratic President Joe Biden.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — In past Olympic Games held on American soil, sitting presidents have served in passive, ceremonial roles. President Trump may have other plans.

An executive order signed by Trump on Tuesday names him chair of a White House task force on the 2028 Games in Los Angeles, viewed by the president as “a premier opportunity to showcase American exceptionalism,” according to a White House statement. Trump, the administration said, “is taking every opportunity to showcase American greatness on the world stage.”

At the White House, speaking in front of banners adding the presidential seal to the logo for LA28, Trump said he would send the military back to Los Angeles if he so chose in order to protect the Games. In June, Trump sent the National Guard and U.S. Marines to the city amid widespread immigration enforcement actions, despite widespread condemnation from Mayor Karen Bass and other local officials.

“We’ll do anything necessary to keep the Olympics safe, including using our National Guard or military, OK?” he said. “I will use the National Guard or the military. This is going to be so safe. If we have to.”

Trump’s executive order establishes a task force led by him and Vice President JD Vance to steer federal coordination for the Games. The task force will work with federal, state and local partners on security and transportation, according to the White House.

Those roles have been fairly standard for the federal government in past U.S.-hosted Olympic Games. But Trump’s news conference could present questions about whether a president with a penchant for showmanship might assume an unusually active role in planning the Olympics, set to take place in the twilight of his final term.

There is ample precedent for military and National Guard forces providing security support during U.S.-hosted Olympic Games. But coming on the heels of the recent military deployment to Los Angeles, Trump’s comments may prove contentious.

French president Emmanuel Macron was a key figure in preparations for last year’s Paris Games, including expressing his vocal support for the ambitious Olympic opening ceremony plan to parade athletes down the Seine River on boats. Many officials were concerned about potential threats along the 3.7-mile stretch, but authorities responded by increasing security measures that included up to 45,000 police officers and 10,000 soldiers.

The task force, to be housed within the Department of Homeland Security, will “assist in the planning and implementation of visa processing and credentialing programs for foreign athletes, coaches, officials, and media personnel,” the executive order said. City officials have expressed concern that the president’s border policies could deter international visitors and complicate visa processing for Olympic teams.

Tensions with L.A.

More concentrated involvement from Trump could spell further strain with Los Angeles city officials, who sought to make nice in the wake of devastating January fires, but have fiercely bucked Trump’s recent immigration offensive. Trump swiped at Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass during his remarks on Tuesday, calling her “not very competent” and criticizing the pace of city permitting for fire rebuilding. (Bass did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

Known for her coalition-building skills, Bass is not, by nature, a public brawler. In the aftermath of the Palisades fire, she appeared determined to preserve her fragile relationship with the president — and the billions of dollars of federal aid her city was depending on — responding diplomatically even as he publicly attacked her.

But that determined cordiality crumbled when masked immigration agents and military personnel descended on the city. With troops stationed in the city and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal authorities arresting undocumented immigrants at courthouses, car washes and Home Depot parking lots, Bass took on Trump forcefully.

At news conferences and in interviews, she accused the president of waging “an all-out assault on Los Angeles, inciting chaos and fear and using the city as “a test case for an extremist agenda.”

Casey Wasserman, chairman of LA28, attended the White House event, thanking Trump for “leaning in” to planning for an Olympics that was awarded to Los Angeles during his first term.

“You’ve been supportive and helpful every step of the way,” Wasserman said, noting that the Games would amount to hosting seven Super Bowls a day for 30 days. “With the creation of this task force, we’ve unlocked the opportunity to level up our planning and deliver the largest, and yes, greatest Games for our nation, ever.”

Wasserman will also have a delicate political balancing act, managing a Games in a deep-blue city with a famously mercurial Republican president in office.

President Trump holds a full set of medals from the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles during Tuesday’s event at which he announced an executive order regarding federal involvement in the 2028 Los Angeles Games.

(Julia Demaree Nikhinson / Associated Press)

A Hollywood scion and sports and entertainment mogul, Wasserman has long been a prominent Democratic donor known for his close relationship with the Clintons.

But in recent months he has diversified his giving, with hefty donations to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and House Speaker Mike Johnson’s leadership fund. Wasserman has publicly praised Trump’s commitment to the Games and traveled to Mar-a-Lago in January to meet with the incoming president.

Presidents have long played a role in the Games. In 1984, Ronald Reagan formally opened the Summer Olympics in Los Angeles, becoming the first American president to do so. Reagan attended several Olympic events, but repeatedly emphasized the federal government’s role was focused on security, according to the White House Historical Assn.

The Olympic Charter requires the host country’s head of state to officially open the Games, but before Reagan, the duty had been fulfilled by local political leaders or vice presidents representing the president.

Ever-tightening security

The federal government has historically provided significant funding when the Games are hosted on U.S. soil, with financial support going toward both security and infrastructure.

Leading up to the 1996 Games in Atlanta, the federal government spent $227 million on security and transportation, playing “very much a junior partner” to the Olympic Committee, then-Vice President Al Gore said at the time. Still, a bombing at the Centennial Olympic Park during the games that summer shook the security establishment.

The 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City were the first Games to be classified as a “National Special Security Event,” the government’s highest security rating for any event that designates the U.S. Secret Service as the lead agency for implementing security. That standard has remained in place for U.S.-held Olympic Games ever since. The Secret Service will also lead security coordination for the 2028 Games.

The federal government was particularly involved in the Salt Lake City games, which were held just months after the 9/11 attacks.

Los Angeles leaders are actively involved in the security planning, and are currently in negotiations with LA28 for the use of the city’s police, traffic officers, and other employees during the Olympics and Paralympics.

Security, trash removal, traffic control, paramedics and more will be needed during the 17-day Olympics and the two-week Paralympics the following month.

Under the 2021 Games agreement between LA28 and the city, LA28 must reimburse Los Angeles for any services that go beyond what the city would provide on a normal day. The two parties must agree by Oct. 1, 2025, on “enhanced services” — additional city services needed for the Games, beyond that normal level — and determine rates, repayment timelines, audit rights and other processes.

Overtime for Los Angeles police officers, and any other major expenses, would be acutely felt by a city government that recently closed a nearly $1-billion budget deficit, in part by slowing police hiring.

Wilner reported from Washington, Wick and Nguyen from Los Angeles. Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Seven months into President Trump’s second term, California has filed 37 lawsuits against his administration and spent about $5 million doing it.

Before you go off on a government-spending rant, let me drop this figure on you: For each dollar the state has spent in litigation with Trump, it has recouped $33,600 in funds that the federal government has tried to take away from the Golden State, according to Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta.

That, as he put it during a Monday news conference, is “bringing the receipts.”

These aren’t dollars Californians were wishing for or begging for from the federal government — these are funds that have already been legally allotted to the state but which the Trump administration is attempting to stop for reasons petty, ideological or both. They pay for teacher training, immunizations, tracking infectious diseases, keeping roads safe, disaster recovery and on and on. And they are predominantly your tax dollars, being withheld from your state.

“What we’re demanding is that we get the funding that’s already been legally approved and appropriated,” Bonta said.

But as much as it’s about paying for the basics that keep California going, it’s also about protecting an inclusive and equitable way of living that defines the ethos of our state. Don’t tread on us! Californians get to spend our money how we see fit.

“When you add it all up, you see the totality of what’s at stake: the California dream,” Bonta said. “The idea that every Californian, no matter how they look, where they live or how much money they have, can send their kid to school, go to the doctor when they’re sick and put food on the table and a roof over their heads.”

Or as Gov. Gavin Newsom put it, it’s litigation not for the sake of suing, but to “defend, to stand tall, to hold the line in terms of our values, the things we hold dear.”

It’s serious times, folks. Trump has made it clear that he doesn’t stand for LGBTQ+ rights, for immigrants’ rights, for women’s rights, for due process or even public schools. But so far, the courts have held, for the most part, to their responsibility to be a check on this unbalanced administration.

Of course, lawyers win cases, sometimes regardless of facts. I want to give a shout out to our state Department of Justice. Bonta may be the state’s top lawyer, but there is a whole army of legal folks behind these lawsuits.

The $5 million spent so far has been entirely in-house, Bonta said. This cash isn’t going to expensive outside counsel, but, as my colleague Kevin Rector points out, money that is funding the smart, talented attorneys and staff who work for taxpayers.

More than a few of them were around during Trump’s first term, when the state was involved in more than 120 lawsuits against his administration. Many of those suits were about process — the haphazard, rules-be-damned way Trump seeks to implement his policies.

Our California lawyers learned then that courts do in fact uphold law, and simply pointing out that rules have to be followed was often enough to stop Trump. While we now have a seasoned legal team that understands the weaknesses in what Trump is doing, the sort-of-funny part is that he’s still doing it. Few lessons learned, which is good for California.

So far, these lawsuits by California have ensured that about $168 billion that Trump would have cut off instead continued to flow to California. Bonta said that in the 19 cases that have made it in front of a judge so far, he’s succeeded in 17, including winning 13 court orders directly blocking Trump’s “illegal actions.”

He’s also secured wins outside of court, including when the U.S. Department of Education recently backed down after freezing school funding weeks before school is set to start. That funding, under threat of a lawsuit, has been restored.

Bonta said that while the state is fighting every lawsuit with rigor, two are personal to him and “remain sort of the most important in terms of what they represent.”

They happen to be the first two suits the state filed, shortly after Trump took office. The first was about birthright citizenship, and Trump’s bid to end it. It’s a case Bonta says is “very meaningful” to him.

Bonta was born in the Philippines and immigrated to the United States when he was 2 months old, living in a trailer in the Central Valley town of La Paz, the home of the United Farm Workers. His parents left their country to avoid martial law as the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos gained power, and worked with civil rights leaders including Cesar Chavez once they settled here.

So it makes sense that an executive order that would leave about 24,500 babies born each year in California without U.S. citizenship hits hard with Bonta.

Bonta, along with attorneys general of several other states, filed that lawsuit the day after Trump took office, in response to an executive order he signed on Inauguration Day. So far, multiple courts have expressed deep skepticism of that order, and the idea that the Constitution and prior Supreme Court rulings should be ignored in favor of Trump’s position.

The second case that Bonta takes personally is a multistate pushback on Trump’s sweeping halt of federal funding. That case put at risk about $3 trillion nationwide, including that $168 billion in California, about a third of the state budget.

Coming up next is a challenge to the deployment of Marines and National Guard troops in Los Angeles. The Trump administration has been quietly removing those soldiers in recent days, perhaps in preparation for asking the court to drop that case, which seems like a loser for them. No troops, no case. We’ll see how it goes in a few days.

“The Marines and the National Guardspeople arrived to quiet streets in L.A.,” Bonta said. “The president has been incredibly, in my view, disrespectful to these patriots. He’s treated them as political pawns.”

The $5 million the state has spent so far on legal fights with Trump is part of $25 million the Legislature set aside earlier this year during a special session. Bonta said that even that will likely not be enough to keep the challenges flowing for the next three and a half years.

Newsom, for his part, is all in and promised that Bonta “will not be in need of resources to do his job.” (And yes, I know it raises his profile for a 2028 presidential run.)

As much as it seems ridiculous that we are setting aside this huge chunk of change for legal fees at a moment when we are facing a budget crisis, the cost of letting Trump run roughshod over our state is much higher. This is money well spent.

Because it’s not just our federal funding at stake, it’s the California dream.

WASHINGTON — President Trump will order the establishment of a White House task force on Tuesday focused on security for the Olympics Games in Los Angeles in 2028.

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said the president plans on creating the task force by executive order on Tuesday, telling The Times that Trump “considers it a great honor to oversee this global sporting spectacle.”

“During his first term, President Trump was instrumental in securing America’s bid to host the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles,” Leavitt said. “Sports is one of President Trump’s greatest passions, and his athletic expertise, combined with his unmatched hospitality experience will make these Olympic events the most exciting and memorable in history.”

It is unclear whether the executive order will provide relief as city leaders and the Los Angeles Organizing Committee for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the privately funded nonprofit organization known as LA28 that is planning the Games, negotiate key issues including security costs.

The executive order follows on Trump’s signature legislation, referred to by the president as the “Big Beautiful Bill,” securing $1 billion for security, planning and other costs for the L.A. Games.

Casey Wasserman, chairperson and president of LA28, thanked the Trump administration in a statement “for their leadership and unwavering support as we prepare to deliver the largest and most ambitious Olympic and Paralympic Games ever hosted in the United States.”

“Since we secured this historic opportunity in 2017, President Trump has consistently recognized the magnitude of our responsibility in welcoming the world to Los Angeles,” Wasserman said. “The creation of this task force marks an important step forward in our planning efforts and reflects our shared commitment to delivering not just the biggest, but the greatest Games the world has ever seen in the summer of 2028.”

Los Angeles leaders are in negotiations with LA28 for the use of the city’s police, traffic officers and other employees during the Olympics and Paralympics.

Security, trash removal, traffic control, paramedics and more will be needed during the 17-day Olympics and the two-week Paralympics the following month.

Under the 2021 Games agreement between LA28 and the city, LA28 must reimburse the city for any services that go beyond what the city would provide on a normal day. The two parties must agree by Oct. 1, 2025, on “enhanced services” — additional city services needed for the Games, beyond that normal level — and determine rates, repayment timelines, audit rights and other processes.

Overtime for Los Angeles police officers, and any other major expenses, would be acutely felt by a city government that recently closed a nearly $1-billion budget deficit, in part by slowing police hiring.

Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — The Smithsonian Institution has removed from an exhibit a reference to President Trump’s two impeachments, a decision that comes as the White House exerts pressure to offer a more positive — and selective — view of American history. A spokesperson said the exhibit eventually “will include all impeachments.”

A label referring to impeachment had been added in 2021 to the National Museum for American History’s exhibit on the American presidency, in a section called “Limits of Presidential Power.” Smithsonian spokesperson Phillip Zimmerman said Friday that the section, which includes materials on the impeachment of President Clinton and the Watergate scandal that helped lead to President Nixon’s resignation, needed to be overhauled. He said the decision came after the museum was “reviewing our legacy content recently.”

“Because the other topics in this section had not been updated since 2008, the decision was made to restore the Impeachment case back to its 2008 appearance,” Zimmerman said in an email.

He said that in September 2021, the museum installed a temporary label on content concerning Trump’s impeachments. “It was intended to be a short-term measure to address current events at the time,” he said. But the label remained in place.

“A large permanent gallery like the American Presidency that opened in 2000 requires a significant amount of time and funding to update and renew,” he said. “A future and updated exhibit will include all impeachments.”

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said the Smithsonian has “highlighted divisive DEI exhibits which are out of touch with mainstream America” for too long.

“We are fully supportive of updating displays to highlight American greatness,” he said in a statement that did not address the missing reference to Trump’s impeachments.

Trump’s impeachments were more recent

Trump is the only president to have been impeached twice — in 2019, for pushing Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, who would defeat Trump in the 2020 election; and in 2021 for “incitement of insurrection,” a reference to the Jan. 6, 2021, siege of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters attempting to halt congressional certification of Biden’s victory.

The Democratic majority in the House voted each time for impeachment. The Republican-led Senate each time acquitted Trump. Soon after Trump’s first impeachment, the history museum issued a statement saying that curators “will determine which objects best represent these historic events for inclusion in the national collection.”

Since returning to office in January, Trump has cut funding, forced out officials and otherwise demanded changes across a range of Washington cultural institutions, including the Smithsonian, the Library of Congress, the Kennedy Center and the National Endowment for the Humanities.

The current administration has targeted interpretations of history

In March, Trump issued an executive order titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” in which he alleged that the Smithsonian was beholden to “a divisive, race-centered ideology.” He has placed Vice President JD Vance in charge of an effort to ensure no funding goes to “exhibits or programs that degrade shared American values, divide Americans based on race, or promote programs or ideologies inconsistent with Federal law and policy.”

Congressional Democrats issued a statement in April calling Trump’s order a “flagrant attempt to erase Black history.”

Last week, artist Amy Sherald canceled a planned exhibit at the National Portrait Gallery after officials raised concerns over her painting “Trans Forming Liberty, 2024,” in which she depicts a nonbinary transgender person posing as the Statue of Liberty. Sherald is best known for her painting of then-First Lady Michelle Obama, which was commissioned by the Portrait Gallery.

Founded in the 19th century, the Smithsonian oversees a network of cultural centers that includes the portrait gallery, the history museum, the National Zoo and the Smithsonian Gardens. News of the Trump impeachment label being removed was first reported by the Washington Post.

Italie writes for the Associated Press.

A senior State Department official who was fired as a speechwriter during President Trump’s first term and has a history of racially charged, incendiary statements has been appointed to lead the embattled U.S. Institute of Peace.

The move to install Darren Beattie as the institute’s new acting president is seen as the latest step in the administration’s efforts to dismantle the organization, which was founded as an independent, nonprofit think tank. It is funded by Congress to promote peace and prevent and end conflicts across the globe. The battle is currently being played out in court.

Beattie, who currently serves as the undersecretary for public diplomacy at the State Department and will continue in that role, was fired during Trump’s first term after CNN reported that he had spoken at a 2016 conference attended by white nationalists. He defended the speech he delivered as containing nothing objectionable.

A former academic who taught at Duke University, Beattie also founded a right-wing website that shared conspiracy theories about the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, and he has a long history of posting inflammatory statements on social media.

“Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work,” he wrote in October 2024. “Unfortunately, our entire national ideology is predicated on coddling the feelings of women and minorities, and demoralizing competent white men.”

A State Department official confirmed Beattie’s appointment by the Institute of Peace board of directors, which includes Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. “We look forward to seeing him advance President Trump’s America First agenda in this new role,” they said in a statement.

The institute has been embroiled in turmoil since Trump moved to dismantle it shortly after taking office as part of his broader effort to shrink the size of the federal government and eliminate independent agencies.

Trump issued an executive order in February that targeted the organization and three other agencies for closure. The first attempt by the White House team known as the Department of Government Efficiency, formerly under the command of tech billionaire Elon Musk, to take over its headquarters led to a dramatic standoff.

Members of Musk’s group returned days later with the FBI and Washington Metropolitan Police to help them gain entry.

The administration fired most of the institute’s board, followed by the mass firing of nearly all of its 300 employees, in what they called “the Friday night massacre.”

The institute and many of its board members sued the Trump administration in March, seeking to prevent their removal and to prevent DOGE from taking over the institute’s operations. DOGE transferred administrative oversight of the organization’s headquarters and assets to the General Services Administration that weekend.

District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell overturned those actions in May, concluding that Trump was outside his authority in firing the board and its acting president and that, therefore, all subsequent actions were also moot.

Her ruling allowed the institute to regain control of its headquarters in a rare victory for the agencies and organizations that have been caught up in the Trump administration’s downsizing. The employees were rehired, although many did not return to work because of the complexity of restarting operations.

They received termination orders — for the second time — after an appeals court stayed Howell’s order.

Most recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied the U.S. Institute of Peace’s request for a hearing of the full court to lift the stay of a three-judge panel in June. That stay led to the organization turning its headquarters back over to the Trump administration.

In a statement, George Foote, former counsel for the institute, said Beattie’s appointment “flies in the face of the values at the core of USIP’s work and America’s commitment to working respectfully with international partners.” He also called it “illegal under Judge Howell’s May 19 decision.”

“We are committed to defending that decision against the government’s appeal. We are confident that we will succeed on the merits of our case, and we look forward to USIP resuming its essential work in Washington, D.C., and in conflict zones around the world,” he said.

Fields and Colvin write for the Associated Press.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration left many local officials in the dark about the immigration detention center that rose from an isolated airstrip in the Everglades, emails obtained by the Associated Press show, while relying on an executive order to seize the land, hire contractors and bypass laws and regulations.

The emails show that local officials in southwest Florida were still trying to chase down a “rumor” about the sprawling “Alligator Alcatraz” facility planned for their county while state officials were already on the ground and sending vendors through the gates to coordinate construction of the detention center, which was designed to house thousands of migrants and went up in a matter of days.

“Not cool!” one local official told the state agency director spearheading the construction.

The 100-plus emails dated June 21 to July 1, obtained through a public records request, underscore the breakneck speed at which the the governor’s team built the facility and the extent to which local officials were blindsided by the plans for the compound of makeshift tents and trailers in Collier County, a wealthy, majority-Republican corner of the state that’s home to white-sand beaches and the western stretch of the Everglades.

The executive order, originally signed by the Republican governor in 2023 and extended since then, accelerated the project, allowing the state to seize county-owned land and evade rules in what critics have called an abuse of power. The order granted the state sweeping authority to suspend “any statute, rule or order” seen as slowing the response to the immigration “emergency.”

A representative for DeSantis did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Known as the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport, the airstrip is about 45 miles (72 kilometers) west of downtown Miami. It is located within Collier County but is owned and managed by neighboring Miami-Dade County. The AP asked for similar records from Miami-Dade County, which is still processing the request.

To DeSantis and other state officials, building the facility in the remote Everglades and naming it after a notorious federal prison were meant as deterrents. It’s another sign of how President Donald Trump’s administration and his allies are relying on scare tactics to pressure people who are in the country illegally to leave.

Detention center in the Everglades? ‘Never heard of that’

Collier County Commissioner Rick LoCastro apparently first heard about the proposal after a concerned resident in another county sent him an email on June 21.

“A citizen is asking about a proposed ‘detention center’ in the Everglades?” LoCastro wrote to County Manager Amy Patterson and other staff. “Never heard of that … Am I missing something?”

“I am unaware of any land use petitions that are proposing a detention center in the Everglades. I’ll check with my intake team, but I don’t believe any such proposal has been received by Zoning,” replied the county’s planning and zoning director, Michael Bosi.

Environmental groups have since filed a federal lawsuit, arguing that the state illegally bypassed federal and state laws in building the facility.

In fact, LoCastro was included on a June 21 email from state officials announcing their intention to buy the airfield. LoCastro sits on the county’s governing board but does not lead it, and his district does not include the airstrip. He forwarded the message to the county attorney, saying, “Not sure why they would send this to me?”

In the email, Kevin Guthrie, the head of the Florida Division of Emergency Management, which built the detention center, said the state intended to “work collaboratively” with the counties. The message referenced the executive order on illegal immigration, but it did not specify how the state wanted to use the site, other than for “future emergency response, aviation logistics, and staging operations.”

The next day, Collier County’s emergency management director, Dan Summers, wrote up a briefing for the county manager and other local officials, including some notes about the “rumor” he had heard about plans for an immigration detention facility at the airfield.

Summers knew the place well, he said, after doing a detailed site survey a few years ago.

“The infrastructure is — well, nothing much but a few equipment barns and a mobile home office … (wet and mosquito-infested),” Summers wrote.

FDEM told Summers that while the agency had surveyed the airstrip, “NO mobilization or action plans are being executed at this time” and all activity was “investigatory,” Summers wrote.

Emergency director said lack of information was ‘not cool’

By June 23, Summers was racing to prepare a presentation for a meeting of the board of county commissioners the next day. He shot off an email to FDEM Director Kevin Guthrie seeking confirmation of basic facts about the airfield and the plans for the detention facility, which Summers understood to be “conceptual” and in “discussion or investigatory stages only.”

“Is it in the plans or is there an actual operation set to open?” Summers asked. “Rumor is operational today… ???”

In fact, the agency was already “on site with our vendors,” coordinating construction of the site, FDEM bureau chief Ian Guidicelli responded.

“Not cool! That’s not what was relayed to me last week or over the weekend,” Summers responded, adding that he would have “egg on my face” with the Collier County Sheriff’s Office and Board of County Commissioners. “It’s a Collier County site. I am on your team, how about the courtesy of some coordination?”

On the evening of June 23, FDEM officially notified Miami-Dade County it was seizing the county-owned land to build the detention center, under emergency powers granted by the executive order.

Plans for the facility sparked concerns among first responders in Collier County, who questioned which agency would be responsible if an emergency should strike the site.

Discussions on the issue grew tense at times. Local Fire Chief Chris Wolfe wrote to the county’s chief of emergency medical services and other officials on June 25: “I am not attempting to argue with you, more simply seeking how we are going to prepare for this that is clearly within the jurisdiction of Collier County.”

‘Not our circus, not our monkeys’

Summers, the emergency management director, repeatedly reached out to FDEM for guidance, trying to “eliminate some of the confusion” around the site.

As he and other county officials waited for details from Tallahassee, they turned to local news outlets for information, sharing links to stories among themselves.

“Keep them coming,” Summers wrote to county Communications Director John Mullins in response to one news article, “since [it’s] crickets from Tally at this point.”

Hoping to manage any blowback to the county’s tourism industry, local officials kept close tabs on media coverage of the facility, watching as the news spread rapidly from local newspapers in southwest Florida to national outlets such as the Washington Post and the New York Times and international news sites as far away as the U.K., Germany and Switzerland.

As questions from reporters and complaints from concerned residents streamed in, local officials lined up legal documentation to show the airfield was not their responsibility.

In an email chain labeled, “Not our circus, not our monkeys…,” County Attorney Jeffrey Klatzkow wrote to the county manager, “My view is we have no interest in this airport parcel, which was acquired by eminent domain by Dade County in 1968.”

Meanwhile, construction at the site plowed ahead, with trucks arriving around the clock carrying portable toilets, asphalt and construction materials. Among the companies that snagged multimillion-dollar contracts for the work were those whose owners donated generously to DeSantis and other Republicans.

On July 1, just 10 days after Collier County first got wind of the plans, the state officially opened the facility, welcoming DeSantis, Trump, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and other state and national officials for a tour.

A county emergency management staffer fired off an email to Summers, asking to be included on any site visit to the facility.

“Absolutely,” Summers replied. “After the President’s visit and some of the chaos on-site settles-in, we will get you all down there…”

Payne writes for the Associated Press.

Few initiatives of the Trump administration more seriously undermine our understanding of the nation’s past than Executive Order 14023 from March 27, which promises “to restore Federal sites dedicated to history, including parks and museums, to solemn and uplifting public monuments.”

The order directs the Interior secretary to cleanse all National Park Service sites of any signage that “inappropriately disparages Americans past or living” and instead “emphasize the beauty, grandeur, and abundance of landscapes and other natural features.” The Park Service staff was also instructed to purge gift shops of books that could be construed as critical of any American. In a similar vein, the Smithsonian Institution was ordered to remove “improper ideology” from its properties to assure they reflected “American greatness.”

Unwilling to depend on park personnel to enforce the patriotism mandate, the Trump administration is enlisting park visitors to report potentially offending displays and ranger talks that present an insufficiently sanitized account of American history. On June 9, acting National Park Service director Jessica Bowron instructed regional directors to “post signage that will encourage public feedback via QR code and other methods that are viable” concerning anything they encounter at a park site that they believe denigrates the nation’s history. (It is worth noting that when queried about the QR code directive, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum claimed to know nothing of the mandate, although he signed it on May 20.) How will the Trump administration respond if a visitor uses one of the mandatory QR codes to file a complaint?

And that is just the beginning. The Trump administration has also made clear it would like to eliminate entire sites that are not “National Parks, in the traditionally understood sense.” That means targeting those features that lack the grandeur of Yosemite and the Grand Tetons: smaller parks, sites and memorials, many of which honor women and minorities. Generally lacking soaring redwoods or massive gorges, these sites — many in urban areas where President Trump’s revisionist history has not caught on — would seem to describe places in California such as César Chavez National Monument outside Bakersfield, Manzanar National Historic Site and Rosie the Riveter WWII Home Front National Historical Park in Richmond.

Trump and his ahistorical myrmidons — he just mused that the Civil War ended in 1869 — regularly display an abysmal ignorance of basic American history. In their view, such federal (and presumably state) sites should present only a simplistic view of our complex 249-year history, one that virtually ignores the contributions and struggles of hundreds of millions of Americans.

Even before we see how many “tips” the Park Service’s invitation elicits from visitors eager to rat on rangers, the wording of the executive order itself is chilling. Any signage or lecture that “inappropriately disparages Americans past or living” — and who is to say what constitutes disparagement? — must be replaced with rhetoric that emphasizes “the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people.” Needless to say, the many sites that tell the stories of civil rights and anti-slavery struggles, the Civil War, the role of immigrants, the battles for labor rights and the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people are going to have a challenging time ensuring they in no way offend those willing to acknowledge only uninterrupted “greatness” of the American story. Sometimes our greatness has been manifested by our progress toward a more perfect union — and that story cannot be told without mentioning imperfections.

One need not have a PhD in history to appreciate the dire threat presented by these efforts to replace historical scholarship with uncritical flag-waving. Historians have an obligation to challenge myth, to uncover obscured stories, to give voice to those who were unable to fully participate in earlier eras of the American story because of their race, ethnicity, gender or viewpoints. That is why our government has protected sites including Ellis Island (which President Lyndon B. Johnson added to Statue of Liberty National Monument), Birmingham Civil Rights National Monument and Stonewall National Monument (both recognized by President Obama). Trump’s Orwellian orders seek to undo a half-century of scholarship that revealed a far more complex and nuanced history than the simplified versions taught to generations of schoolchildren.

Fortunately, professional historians have not been cowed like many university leaders, law firms and others who have shamefully capitulated to Trump’s assault on free speech and intellectual integrity. A March statement from more than 40 historical societies condemned recent efforts to “purge words, phrases, and content that some officials deem suspect on ideological grounds [and] to distort, manipulate, and erase significant parts of the historical record.”

The national parks consistently rate as one of the most popular features of American government. Neither their rangers nor their exhibits should be intimidated into parroting a sanitized and distorted version of the nation’s past. As the historians declared, “We can neither deny what happened nor invent things that did not happen.” Americans should use those QR codes to send a clear message rejecting efforts to manipulate our history to suit an extremist ideological and political agenda.

John Lawrence is a visiting professor at the University of California’s Washington Center and a former staff director of the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Mayor Karen Bass announced a plan Friday to provide direct cash assistance to people who have been affected by the Trump administration’s sweeping immigration raids.

The aid will be distributed using cash cards with a “couple hundred” dollars on them, which should be available in about a week, Bass said at a news conference.

“You have people who don’t want to leave their homes, who are not going to work, and they are in need of cash,” she said.

Bass spoke about a family she met who needed two incomes to afford their rent. After one of the breadwinners was detained in an immigration raid, she said, the family is concerned they may face eviction.

It was not immediately clear what the qualifications will be needed to receive the cards.

The mayor emphasized that the money will not come from city coffers but from philanthropic partners. The cards will be distributed by immigrants rights groups such as the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.

The city will coordinate between philanthropists and organizations distributing the cards, according to the mayor’s office.

The mayor compared the program to “Angeleno Cards,” created by Mayor Eric Garcetti in 2020 to give financial assistance to people struggling during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The announcement came during a Bass news conference about an executive order she signed Friday directing all city departments to “bolster protocols” and training on how to comply with the city’s sanctuary policy, which states that city employees and city property may not be used to “investigate, cite, arrest, hold, transfer or detain any person” for the purpose of immigration enforcement, except for serious crimes. Departments will have to come up with their plans within two weeks.

The Trump administration sued the city over the sanctuary policy last month, arguing that it discriminates against organizations like ICE.

The executive order also creates a working group that will examine — and possibly update — the LAPD’s policy on responding to immigration enforcement. Since 1979, the LAPD has taken a strong stance against enforcing federal immigration law, prohibiting its officers from initiating contact with anyone for the sole purpose of learning their immigration status.

The executive order also includes a directive to file Freedom of Information Act requests for Immigration and Customs Enforcement to turn over records with the dates and locations of every raid in the city since June 6, as well as the identities of the people detained and the reason for their detention.

The cash cards are one of a slew of announcements — including the executive order — this week by the mayor in response to the federal immigration crackdown in Los Angeles that has entered its second month.

Earlier this week, Bass and the city attorney announced the city’s intention to join a lawsuit calling for an end to the Trump administration’s “unlawful” raids in the city.