- US intelligence contradicts Trump claims linking gang to Venezuelan government to speed deportationsWASHINGTON (AP) — A new U.S. intelligence assessment found no coordination between Tren de Aragua and the Venezuelan government, contradicting statements that Trump administration officials have made to justify their invocation of the Alien Enemies Act and deporting Venezuelan migrants, according to U.S. officials. The classified assessment from the National Intelligence Council, released this month, […]
- BALTIMORE (AP) — A federal judge on Thursday imposed new restrictions on billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, limiting its access to Social Security systems that hold personal data on millions of Americans. U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander issued a preliminary injunction in the case, which was brought by a group of labor unions […]
- PHOENIX (AP) — Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs on Thursday vowed to veto all bills not already on her desk amid a standoff with the Republican-controlled Legislature over funding for a state agency that provides services for some of Arizona’s most vulnerable residents. Hobbs is demanding that lawmakers find a bipartisan compromise that would guarantee funding […]
- Police in Idaho released body-worn and security camera recordings Thursday showing officers fatally shooting a knife-wielding, intellectually disabled teenage boy from the other side of a chain link fence, confirming that they made no effort to de-escalate the situation before opening fire. Victor Perez was autistic and nonverbal and had cerebral palsy, though there is […]
- WASHINGTON (AP) — For Democrats, the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case is about fundamental American ideals — due process, following court orders, preventing government overreach. For the Trump administration and Republicans, it’s about foreigners and gang threats and danger in American towns and cities. And that argument is precisely the one that Donald Trump wants to […]
Recent Posts
- US intelligence contradicts Trump claims linking gang to Venezuelan government to speed deportationson April 18, 2025 at 3:18 am
WASHINGTON (AP) — A new U.S. intelligence assessment found no coordination between Tren de Aragua and the Venezuelan government, contradicting statements that Trump administration officials have made to justify their invocation of the Alien Enemies Act and deporting Venezuelan migrants, according to U.S. officials. The classified assessment from the National Intelligence Council, released this month, is more comprehensive and authoritative than an earlier intelligence product released Feb. 26 and reported last month by The New York Times, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the assessment. They were not authorized to address the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. The new assessment draws input from the 18 agencies that comprise the intelligence community. It repeatedly stated that Tren de Aragua, a gang that originated in a prison in Venezuela, is not coordinated with or supported by the country’s president, Nicolás Maduro, or senior officials in the Venezuelan government. While the assessment found minimal contact between some members of the gang and low-level members of the Venezuelan government, there was a consensus that there was no coordination or directive role between gang and government. The assessment provided support and extensive sourcing for those assertions, according to the officials. Of the 18 organizations that make up the U.S. government’s intelligence community, only one — the FBI — did not agree with the findings. It is not uncommon for intelligence agencies to differ in their assessments on matters of great public interest. But the latest assessment was significant for its near unanimity. Several years ago, under former Director Christopher Wray, the FBI assessed that the COVID-19 pandemic most likely originated from a lab leak, though that was hardly the uniform consensus. The position got recent support from a CIA assessment declassified in January. The White House and the office of Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, did not respond to messages seeking comment Thursday night. The intelligence assessment’s findings come as the Supreme Court last week ruled that the Trump administration can use the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 wartime law, to deport Venezuelan migrants — but that the migrants must get court hearings before they’re taken from the United States. Tren de Aragua has been linked to a series of kidnappings, extortion and other crimes throughout the Western Hemisphere. Those activities are tied to a mass exodus of millions of Venezuelans as their country’s economy unraveled over the past decade. The Alien Enemies Act was created to give the president wide powers to imprison and deport noncitizens in time of war. Until now, it has been used just three times, most recently eight decades ago during World War II to justify the detention of Japanese-American civilians. The American Civil Liberties Union, which has filed legal challenges to the Trump administration’s use of the law, contends that Trump does not have the authority to use the Alien Enemies Act against a criminal gang rather than a recognized state. President Donald Trump invoked the act in March, declaring in a proclamation that Tren de Aragua “is closely aligned with, and indeed has infiltrated, the Maduro regime, including its military and law enforcement apparatus.” Attorney General Pam Bondi repeated that assertion Monday night in an interview on Fox News Channel. Bondi defended the invocation of the wartime law and called Tren de Aragua “a foreign arm of the Venezuelan government.” “They are organized. They have a command structure. And they have invaded our country,” she said. Last month, the Trump administration used the Alien Enemies Act to fly more than 130 men accused of being members of the gang to El Salvador, where the U.S. has paid for the men to be held in a notorious prison. The Venezuelans deported under the act received no opportunity to challenge the orders, and attorneys for many of the men have said there is no evidence they are gang members. The Trump administration has argued that the gang has become an invading force and designated it, along with seven other crime groups, as “foreign terrorist organizations.” The latest intelligence assessment was first reported Thursday by The Washington Post. ___ Associated Press writers David Klepper and Eric Tucker contributed to this report. Brought to you by www.srnnews.com
- Federal judge in Baltimore temporarily limits DOGE access to Social Security dataon April 18, 2025 at 3:18 am
BALTIMORE (AP) — A federal judge on Thursday imposed new restrictions on billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, limiting its access to Social Security systems that hold personal data on millions of Americans. U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander issued a preliminary injunction in the case, which was brought by a group of labor unions and retirees who allege DOGE’s recent actions violate privacy laws and present massive information security risks. Hollander had previously issued a temporary restraining order. The injunction does allow DOGE staffers to access data that’s been redacted or stripped of anything personally identifiable, if they undergo training and background checks. Hollander said DOGE and any DOGE-affiliated staffers must purge any of the non-anonymized Social Security data that they have received since Jan. 20. They are also barred from making any changes to the computer code or software used by the Social Security Administration, must remove any software or code they might have already installed, and are forbidden from disclosing any of that code to others. “The objective to address fraud, waste, mismanagement, and bloat is laudable, and one that the American public presumably applauds and supports,” Hollander wrote in the ruling issued late Thursday night. “Indeed, the taxpayers have every right to expect their government to make sure that their hard earned money is not squandered.” But that’s not the issue, Hollander said — the issue is with how DOGE wants to do the work. “For some 90 years, SSA has been guided by the foundational principle of an expectation of privacy with respect to its records. This case exposes a wide fissure in the foundation,” the judge wrote. During a federal court hearing Tuesday in Baltimore, Hollander repeatedly asked the government’s attorneys why DOGE needs “seemingly unfettered access” to the agency’s troves of sensitive personal information to uncover Social Security fraud. Union members and retirees gathered outside the courthouse to protest DOGE’s actions, which they consider a threat to the future of Social Security benefits. “What is it we’re doing that needs all of that information?” Hollander said, questioning whether most of the data could be anonymized, at least in the early stages of analysis. Attorneys for the Trump administration said changing the process would slow down their efforts. “While anonymization is possible, it is extremely burdensome,” Justice Department attorney Bradley Humphreys told the court. He argued the DOGE access doesn’t deviate significantly from normal practices inside the agency, where employees and auditors are routinely allowed to search its databases. But attorneys for the plaintiffs called it unprecedented and “a sea change” in terms of how the agency handles sensitive information, including medical and mental health records and other data pertaining to children and people with disabilities — “issues that are not only sensitive but might carry a stigma.” The access alone is a privacy violation that causes harm to Social Security recipients, said Alethea Anne Swift, an attorney with the legal services group Democracy Forward, which is behind the lawsuit. “That intrusion causes an objectively reasonable unease,” she said. The Social Security Administration has experienced turmoil since President Donald Trump began his second term. In February, the agency’s acting commissioner Michelle King stepped down from her role after refusing to provide DOGE staffers with the access they wanted. The White House replaced her with Leland Dudek — who failed to appear at Tuesday’s hearing after Hollander requested his presence to testify about recent efforts involving DOGE. The judge issued a letter last month rebuking Dudek’s threats that he might have to shut down agency operations or suspend payments because of Hollander’s temporary restraining order. Hollander made clear that her order didn’t apply to SSA workers who aren’t affiliated with or providing information to DOGE, so they can still access any data they use in the course of ordinary work. But DOGE staffers who want access to the anonymized data must first undergo the typical training and background checks required of other Social Security Administration staffers, she said. In recent weeks, Dudek has faced calls to resign after he issued an order that would have required Maine parents to register their newborns for Social Security numbers at a federal office rather than the hospital. The order was quickly rescinded. But emails showed it was political payback to Maine Gov. Janet Mills, a Democrat who has defied the Trump administration’s push to deny federal funding to the state over transgender athletes. Despite the fraught political context surrounding the DOGE access case, Hollander admonished Humphreys when he suggested during Tuesday’s hearing that her questioning was starting to “feel like a policy disagreement.” “I do take offense at your comment because I’m just trying to understand the system,” the judge said during Tuesday’s hearing. Hollander, 75, who was nominated to the federal bench by President Barack Obama, is the latest judge to consider a DOGE-related case. Many of her inquiries Tuesday focused on whether the Social Security case differs significantly from another Maryland case challenging DOGE’s access to data at three other agencies: the Education Department, the Treasury Department and the Office of Personnel Management. In that case, an appeals court recently blocked a preliminary injunction and cleared the way for DOGE to once again access people’s private data. Hollander’s injunction could also be appealed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the Trump administration in other cases, including allowing DOGE access to the U.S. Agency for International Development and letting executive orders against diversity, equity and inclusion move forward. Brought to you by www.srnnews.com
- Arizona governor halts bill signing over funding disputeon April 18, 2025 at 2:18 am
PHOENIX (AP) — Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs on Thursday vowed to veto all bills not already on her desk amid a standoff with the Republican-controlled Legislature over funding for a state agency that provides services for some of Arizona’s most vulnerable residents. Hobbs is demanding that lawmakers find a bipartisan compromise that would guarantee funding through the end of the fiscal year for the state’s Division of Developmental Disabilities, which supports close to 60,000 people with autism, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, Down syndrome and other cognitive and intellectual disabilities. Before signing off on a funding package, Republicans want to establish guardrails for the program, such as reducing the number of paid hours that parents who care for their children with disabilities can receive per week. Democrats want to approve funding first and discuss reforms later. The strategy of holding back on signing bills isn’t new. Hobbs’ Republican predecessors also withheld their signatures over budget disputes. Republicans became frustrated after learning that Hobbs was requesting about $13 million more in supplemental funding for the Division of Developmental Disabilities, despite having already released her executive budget proposal. Republicans contend that Hobbs has mismanaged the funds — going so far as to convene an ad hoc committee earlier this month to discuss “executive budget mismanagement.” Rep. David Livingston, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, said during a hearing earlier this week that it was unacceptable for programs within the division to be shut down in early May because of a lack of funding. House Speaker Steve Montenegro in a statement called the governor’s veto threat “political blackmail.” Hobbs, who is up for reelection in 2026, claims that Republicans are leveraging the crisis for “political warfare.” The governor is willing to even veto legislation she supports so long as a bipartisan compromise is not reached, said her spokesperson Christian Slater. “We have been waiting for far too long,” Slater said in an interview. “Families are at the brink.” ——- Govindarao covers Arizona government and politics for The Associated Press, with a focus on women in state government. She is based in Phoenix. Brought to you by www.srnnews.com
- Idaho police release body camera video of nonverbal and autistic teen’s fatal shootingon April 18, 2025 at 2:18 am
Police in Idaho released body-worn and security camera recordings Thursday showing officers fatally shooting a knife-wielding, intellectually disabled teenage boy from the other side of a chain link fence, confirming that they made no effort to de-escalate the situation before opening fire. Victor Perez was autistic and nonverbal and had cerebral palsy, though there is no indication the responding officers were aware of that. The 17-year old was removed from life support and died in a hospital a week after the shooting, and a law firm said Wednesday it intends to file a federal wrongful death suit against the city of Pocatello on behalf of his family. Perez was in a confrontation in his fenced yard with family members who tried to get the blade away from him on April 5 when a neighbor called 911, reporting that an apparently intoxicated man armed with a knife — Perez, who walked with a staggered gait due to his disabilities — was chasing people in the yard. Perez had fallen over and was on the ground when officers arrived. Guns drawn, they repeatedly yelled, “Drop the knife!” but he instead stood up and began to step toward them. Three officers opened fire with their handguns, while a fourth fired a bean-bag shotgun, officials said Thursday. The shots came just seconds after the officers got out of their vehicles. The city’s release of the videos included text slides that stressed that Perez was approaching the officers, who were on the other side of a chain link fence from him, while holding the knife, and that he was close to two family members who were behind him. “Whether or not Perez had a medical condition or was experiencing a mental health crisis was not provided to dispatch or known to officers,” one slide read. The shooting has outraged community members who questioned why the officers fired without trying to learn more about the situation, use de-escalation techniques or use less-lethal force. About 200 people attended a vigil Saturday morning outside the Pocatello hospital where Perez died, and another crowd of protesters gathered that afternoon outside Pocatello City Hall, which also houses the police department. Police Chief Roger Schei and Mayor Brian Blad have declined to answer questions about the shooting, citing an investigation being conducted by the East Idaho Critical Incident Task Force. The officers’ names have not been released. Law enforcement officials say it is not always appropriate for police to use de-escalation techniques, especially when there is danger to the officers or the public or if a subject is not complying with orders. But policing experts who have reviewed cellphone video of Perez’s shooting note that there was a fence between the officers and the teen, that they used lethal force instead of Tasers and that they failed to use the basic tactic of backing up to create space between them and Perez. Brad Andres, who recorded video of the shooting on his phone after his son called 911, said the police “appeared to be like a death squad or a firing squad.” “They never once asked, ‘What is the situation, how can we help?’” he said. “They ran up with their guns drawn, they triggered a mentally disabled person to react and when he reacted … they shot him.” Brought to you by www.srnnews.com
- The Abrego Garcia case pulls Democrats into the immigration debate Trump wants to haveon April 18, 2025 at 2:18 am
WASHINGTON (AP) — For Democrats, the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case is about fundamental American ideals — due process, following court orders, preventing government overreach. For the Trump administration and Republicans, it’s about foreigners and gang threats and danger in American towns and cities. And that argument is precisely the one that Donald Trump wants to have. This dichotomy is playing out as Democrats double down on their defense of Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man mistakenly deported and imprisoned without communication. They’re framing his case as a threat to individual rights to challenge President Trump’s immigration policies. The effort comes as the Trump administration pushes back harder, turning this deportation into a test case for his crusade against illegal immigration despite a Supreme Court order saying Abrego Garcia must be returned to the United States. In trying to shape public discourse against Democrats, White House officials are accusing them of defending a foreigner who they’ve claimed is a gang member based on testimony of an informant — and whose wife admitted she once filed a protective order against him despite now advocating for his return. “Due process and separation of powers are matters of principle,” Democratic Rep. Adriano Espaillat, the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said Thursday. “Without due process for all, we are all in danger.” The opposition started the year splintered on its immigration strategy, especially after an election season where Trump led Republicans to victories by harping on illegal border crossings and vowing to conduct mass deportations. But now many Democrats are latching onto the Abrego Garcia case, with a senator trekking down to El Salvador and a number of House representatives working to organize official visits to the Salvadoran prison. On Thursday evening, Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen posted photos of himself meeting in El Salvador with Abrego Garcia. The lawmaker did not provide an update on the status of Abrego Garcia, whose attorneys are fighting to force the Trump administration to facilitate his return to the U.S. Other high-profile Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders are making a public appeal by painting the case as an example of government overreach. But even Newsom, who has presidential aspirations, recognized Trump’s ability to curry favor with the public. “These are not normal times, so we have to call it out with clarity and conviction,” Newsom said in an interview with YouTube commentator Brian Tyler Cohen. “But we’ve got to stay focused on it so the American people can stay focused on it. Because his success is his ability to win every damn news cycle and get us distracted and moving in 25 different directions.” Immigration was a relative strength for Trump in a March AP-NORC poll, which found that about half of U.S. adults approved of his approach to immigration. And he came into office with strong support for one component of his immigration agenda — deporting people with certain kinds of criminal histories. The vast majority of U.S. adults favored deporting immigrants convicted of violent crimes, according to a January AP-NORC poll. There was far less consensus about how to handle deportations more broadly, though. The January poll found that removing immigrants who are in the country illegally and have not committed a violent crime was divisive, with only about 4 in 10 U.S. adults in support and slightly more than 4 in 10 opposed. Along those lines, a Pew Research Center poll from late February found that while about half of Americans said at least “some” immigrants living in the country illegally should be deported, very few people in that group supported deporting immigrants who have a job or are married to a U.S. citizen. The Trump administration has acknowledged Abrego Garcia’s deportation was a result of “an administrative error,” saying immigration officials were aware of his protection from deportation. But Trump officials have described Abrego Garcia, who was living in Maryland, as a “terrorist” and claimed he is a member of the MS-13 gang, even though he was never criminally charged in the U.S. with gang involvement. “He is not coming back to our country,” Attorney General Pam Bondi has said. In defending his administration’s position, Trump says he is doing what he was elected to do and justifying the need to deport millions, saying a “big percentage” of migrants who arrived during the Biden administration are criminals — an assertion for which there is no evidence. Studies show immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans. And while it is not clear when Abrego Garcia arrived in the U.S., he began fighting against deportation proceedings in 2019 — before Democratic President Joe Biden took office. “I was elected to get rid of those criminals — get them out of our country or to put them away, but to get them out of our country. And I don’t see how judges can take that authority away from the president,” Trump, a Republican, said Thursday. A three-judge panel from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Trump’s government is “asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order.” While immigration is a relative strength, defiance of court rulings could put his administration in a trickier situation. A Washington Post/Ipsos poll conducted in February found that about 8 in 10 Americans think the Trump administration should follow a federal court’s ruling if it determines that the administration has done something illegal. Rep. Glenn Ivey, a Democrat who represents the Maryland district where Abrego Garcia lived, told The Associated Press that no allegations brought up by Trump officials would change how he approaches the case. Ivey, who is more aligned with the party’s moderates, described the issue as about more than just immigration. “On the one hand, it’s an immigration issue. On the other hand, it’s also a constitutional issue,” he said. “Yes, there’s an immigration component, but it’s rapidly growing into a separation of powers conflict that could actually end up taking on historic proportions.” ___ Gomez Licon reported from Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Associated Press writers Seung Min Kim in Washington and Jonathan J. Cooper in Phoenix contributed to this report. Brought to you by www.srnnews.com
Recent Comments