putting

WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled Friday that President Trump’s name was illegally added to the Kennedy Center and blocked the administration from closing the cultural and arts venue for major renovations.

U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper in Washington, D.C., ruled that the Kennedy Center board’s March 16 vote to close the facility was “ill-informed and seemingly preordained” with no regard for its legal obligations.

“The trustees might have assessed the propriety of closure in a number of prudent ways. This was not one,” he wrote.

Cooper also concluded that the board “overstepped its statutory bounds” by unilaterally adding Trump’s name to the center. Congress gave the Kennedy Center its name, and only Congress can change it, he said.

Roma Daravi, the Kennedy Center’s vice president of public relations, said Friday the institution is “confident that on appeal the court will uphold the Board’s will to recognize President Trump’s historic contributions to our nation’s cultural center.” She said the decision would be reviewed “carefully.”

“Though the reality remains — the Center requires an urgent and significant restoration – a truth that even the plaintiff acknowledges,” Daravi said. “With $257 million secured by President Trump and approved by Congress, the resources are in place and we remain committed to pursuing every lawful avenue to ensure the Trump Kennedy Center is restored as a national cultural landmark for all Americans to enjoy.”

Cooper held hearings in late April for parallel lawsuits challenging the project. One was filed by a group of cultural and historic preservation organizations. The other was brought Rep. Joyce Beatty, an Ohio Democrat who serves as an ex-officio member of the Kennedy Center’s board. He ruled in favor of Beatty’s request but rejected the other challenge.

Justice Department attorneys said renovation plans for the building are limited in scope and well within the board’s authority to make without needing outside approvals.

The plaintiffs worry the president and his board allies will flout preservation rules designed to maintain the building’s historic fabric. In earlier statements in court hearings, attorneys for Beatty and the preservation groups raised doubts about the limited scope of the project, pointing to Trump’s statements that he would “fully expose” the building’s steel skeleton. Beatty has said she was “very fearful that we’ll see what happened with the East Wing and what happened with the Rose Garden” if the center is closed and the renovations allowed unsupervised, referring to major changes the president has made at the White House.

Trump, a Republican, has taken a keen interest in the Kennedy Center’s operations since he returned to White House last year. He installed a handpicked board that named him chairman. His name was added to the facade of a building that is considered a living monument to President John F. Kennedy.

The Kennedy Center has kept up performances ahead of the closure, though at a much slower pace than in previous years. Trump attended the premiere of the musical “Chicago” in March and other shows, including “Moulin Rouge” are slated for June.

Bill Maher, the comedian who has had an up and down relationship with Trump, is expected to be awarded the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor on June 28, an event that was anticipated to be one of the final big moments at the Kennedy Center before the closure.

Cooper was nominated to the bench by Democratic President Obama.

Kunzelman and Sloan write for the Associated Press.

Reporting from Washington — California is confronting the limits of its power to save federal environmental protections as Congress and the Trump administration take aim at a landmark law the state has relied on for decades to clean the air of noxious smog.

A push by Republicans to roll back parts of the Clean Air Act would affect California more than any other state, rattling its lawmakers and regulators. And their legal authority to pick up the fight against California’s smog on their own is constrained.

The House last month passed a bill fiercely opposed by doctors and public health groups, including the American Lung Assn. and the American Academy of Pediatrics, that would delay for years new anti-pollution standards aimed at ultimately preventing 160,000 childhood asthma attacks and as many as 220 premature deaths in California each year.

The Trump administration had already tried using regulatory authority to put the standards on hold for a year, but walked back that action Wednesday after California and 14 other states filed suit against the delay.

The bill advancing in Congress would go much further, permanently upending the way restrictions are imposed on the ozone and small particulate matter that make up smog. No longer would regulators base decisions solely on scientific findings about what level of smog is safe to breathe. The potential cost to business would for the first time loom large in setting limits, and ultimately guide such things as when people with breathing problems are warned to stay indoors.

“It would be disastrous to do this,” said Jared Blumenfeld, former regional director of the federal Environmental Protection Agency for California and other Western states.

“The Clean Air Act has been one of the most successful and revered public health measures taken anywhere on the planet. Everyone from China to India to European nations came to my office and said, ‘How do we achieve these kinds of gains?’ This all originated in Los Angeles at a time the air was so bad it led to the creation of the EPA.”

Many state lawmakers agree, and they are vowing to keep California in compliance with the Clean Air Act as it exists now — regardless of what happens in Washington. But that turns out to be a promise not easily kept.

“This is not an easy switch whereby Congress gets rid of the standard, and California just puts it back in place,” Blumenfeld said.

Some of the most damaging pollution released inside California’s borders can only be controlled by federal regulators. Among California’s biggest concerns is what is spewed from the exhaust pipes of trucks traveling through the state that are not subject to its strict emissions rules. Such fumes account for 60% of such heavy truck pollution.

The EPA has been under pressure to toughen federal rules for trucks to enable California to meet its obligations under the act. The state and EPA have also been working on research into new technologies to clean truck emissions.

Even if the industry-friendly Trump administration slows down those efforts, the act empowers states and activists to impose pressure on the EPA in court.

But that would change under the measure passed by the House, HR 806, which would weaken the air quality standards now motivating federal action.

“We need EPA to continue to move ahead aggressively,” said Kurt Karperos, deputy executive officer at the California Air Resources Board. “It has a responsibility under the Clean Air Act to take action.… We are concerned this would be used as a justification to slow down.”

The pushback against the Clean Air Act in Congress is rooted in complaints, often driven by industry, that the EPA under the Obama administration set standards for air quality that are impossible to reach without harming economies in places that are already struggling, like California’s Central Valley, home to some of the worst air in the nation.

Among the most effective allies for Republicans pushing to weaken standards is the head of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, which regulates 25,000 square miles. It is home to 4 million Californians, who struggle with smoggy air and soaring asthma rates.

Seyed Sadredin, the district’s executive director, said there is only so much his agency is empowered to do, and now it faces severe federal sanctions for emissions from cars and trucks it has no authority to regulate.

Sadredin recently told Congress that local businesses will soon be prevented from expanding and big highway projects forfeited under Clean Air Act sanctions the valley faces — even after the region has done everything in its power to control pollution with some of the toughest restrictions in the nation.

“It all sounds nice and noble when you look down to the valley from the outside,” he said of the tough federal standards. “If you are with the elite crowd, you might say, ‘Let’s punish the valley for something they have no control over.’ We are talking real-life impact in a place suffering from double-digit unemployment, poverty, malnutrition. This has a real impact on our people. It is not just an academic argument.”

The San Joaquin board limited its support of the House measure to the part that would exempt air districts from sanctions in certain circumstances. A public outcry moved it to back away from its push to force the EPA to consider economic impacts in determining what air is safe to breathe.

But the economic impact language is still part of the House bill that the San Joaquin board helped get passed, creating no small measure of tension between Sadredin and other air quality experts who say his dire warnings served to benefit agriculture and drilling interests averse to stricter rules.

The valley is not going to lose big highway projects and businesses if it can’t control truck and car pollution it has no authority to regulate, according to state air regulators. But it will be pushed in the areas where it does have control, they say, including cutting pollution from oil and gas wells, and residential and agricultural burning.

“It is absolutely not in the cards,” Karperos said of the punishment Sadredin warns will befall the valley in coming years under current clean air rules. A good faith plan by the valley to further reduce emissions in the places it can would protect it from such sanctions, he said. But that plan will require more action by a region resistant to it.

“There are feasible strategies,” Karperos said. “The threat of sanctions is a red herring.”

Times staff writer Tony Barboza contributed to this report.

evan.halper@latimes.com

Follow me: @evanhalper

ALSO

High-speed rail backers lose another round in court

Oil companies outspent environmentalists during California’s climate change negotiations

Trump’s Cabinet seeks spiritual guidance from minister with a dim view of female politicians

JERSEY Shore star Snooki has confessed that she’s putting off life-saving surgery because she’s scared.

At the start of the year, Nicole ‘Snooki’ Polizzi revealed her stage 1 cervical cancer diagnosis to the world.

The MTV reality star, 38, believes she could have avoided the diagnosis had she gone to her recommended follow up visits to the doctor.

But despite saying she had regrets over “just keep putting it off” about her prior appointments, she is now putting off life-saving surgery.

Her doctor recommends that Nicole should undergo a hysterectomy to avoid the possibility of the cancer’s return.

“No, we’re not putting off any more appointments,” Nicole said.

SCARY NEWS

Jersey Shore’s Snooki reveals cervical cancer diagnosis and issues plea to fans

But she later added: “They’re already yelling at me to schedule the hysterectomy, which I didn’t. I’m traveling.”

Lara then pressed: “I know but this is your life,” adding how she is a mom to three beautiful kids.

“Well, I’m not going to lie, I’m scared,” the reality star added.

“I know, and I understand that. But you know what’s going to be more scary? If you don’t do it,” Lara urged.

“If you get this hysterectomy, do the doctors feel like you will be way ahead of the curve?” Lara asked.

Snooki replied: “Yes.”

Nicole recently underwent a PET scan where the results thankfully showed the cancer has not spread, though the surgery is highly encouraged to ensure the cancer does not return.

Elsewhere in the interview, Snooki opened up about the moment she found out about her devastating diagnosis.

“I was terrified. I was terribly crying in my car. Like, what am I going to do?” she recalled.

“I have three kids. I got to do my will. I haven’t done my will yet.”

Snooki first told fans about her health scare in an emotional video posted online in January.

At the time, she urged her followers to take their gynecological health seriously, and get all the necessary appointments done.

She noted that she was trying to get caught up on all hers, adding that several recent pap smears came back irregular in recent years.

Nicole said this raised concern with her doctors, who urged her to undergo a colposcopy to retrieve samples from her cervix for biopsy.

“That hurt. It wasn’t a great experience,” she said.

She then shared that the results of the colposcopy were “not great,” adding that her doctor “found cancerous cells on the top of my cervix.”

He urged her to get a biopsy to see if the cancerous cells spread, telling her the results of that would determine the next steps.

Nicole admitted at the time that she had avoided visiting the doctor because she did not want to deal with “pain” or “stress” caused by different procedures.

She admitted, however, that doctors visits are necessary, and encouraged her followers to take it seriously.

Snooki got emotional in the clip as the reality hit her.

“Obviously, I’m done having kids,” Nicole said through tears.

“But like as a woman, the thought of getting a hysterectomy is just sad, and it’s scary…the thought of getting the hysterectomy and then not being able to have kids, I think that’s what’s killing me,” she confessed.

JODIE Marsh has been charged with assault after allegedly confronting her neighbour in a row over her animals.

The ex-glamour model, 47, said she “lost it” and “put her hands on his neck” after he carried out what she called a “campaign of harassment”.

Marsh claims the neighbour filmed her animals and doctored clips to make them look “skeletal” after trespassing on her land.

Describing the clash, she said: “I put my hand on his neck because I leaned in to whisper to him.

“I can’t even remember what I said because I was so upset. It lasted around 30 seconds.

“I’m scared to sleep in my own house. I’m scared to go out.”

STAR’S TRAUMA

Celeb presenter reveals he was sexually assaulted 12 years ago by two men

STAR ARRESTED

Hunger Games actor arrested after ‘trying to shoot three men dead in car’

The former lads’ mag star turned her back on fame to run Fripps Farm rescue centre in Lindsell, Essex.

Marsh is due to appear at Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court tomorrow.

She is charged with common assault, specifically the use of “threatening / abusive / insulting words / behaviour with intent to cause fear or provoke unlawful violence”.

Common assault carries a maximum sentence of six months in prison.

But speaking to The Sun, Jodie insisted she did not hurt her neighbour, adding: “I didn’t actually injure him in any way.”

An Essex Police spokesman said: “At around 12.40pm on Friday 16 January officers were called to an address in Lindsell to reports of a woman behaving aggressively towards a man and assaulting him.

“It was further reported that verbal threats were made.

“As a result of further enquiries, charges of common assault and using threatening / abusive / insulting words or behaviour have since been authorised against Jodie Marsh, 47, of Lindsell.

“She is due to appear at Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court on Friday 17 April.”

Fripps Farm is currently home to over 250 animals including alpacas, emus and reptiles, many of which have been saved from slaughter.

The reality star’s website reads: “Jodie gives a loving home to animals that are either unwanted or in danger of being put to sleep or slaughtered.”

It comes after a fire on her farm killed two of her beloved marmosets.

Fripps Farm hasn’t been without its controversies amid neighbour rows and court battles.

Marsh was left in tears of joy after winning a court battle to keep lemurs at the sanctuary.

She had appealed against a council’s decision to refuse her application for a wild animal licence.

Concerns had been raised about her taking a meerkat to the pub.

She said trolls were behind much of the criticism.

At a previous hearing, clips of screeching zoo lemurs were played to Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court.

But Judge Christopher Williams dismissed the council’s argument about the animals’ noise.