California spearheads new ‘resistance’ to Trump’s plans of mass deportation, environmental protection rollback

California spearheads new ‘resistance’ to Trump’s plans of mass deportation, environmental protection rollback
In this file photo, migrants wait to be processed after crossing into the United States near the end of a border wall near Yuma, Arizona. US president-elect Donald Trump has promised mass deportations of illegal immigrants once he sets foot at the White House. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 09 November 2024
Follow

California spearheads new ‘resistance’ to Trump’s plans of mass deportation, environmental protection rollback

California spearheads new ‘resistance’ to Trump’s plans of mass deportation, environmental protection rollback
  • Trump’s sweeping election victory this week came off the back of promises to swiftly expel millions of illegal immigrants and roll back nationwide environmental protections
  • But under the US constitution, states wield significant power and any such moves will certainly be met with lawsuits

LOS ANGELES: California is spearheading a new resistance to the incoming Donald Trump administration that will test the power of Democratic states to battle mass deportation, defend reproductive rights and combat climate change.
Trump’s sweeping election victory this week came off the back of promises to swiftly expel millions of illegal immigrants and roll back nationwide environmental protections. Critics fear his allies could move to restrict access to abortion medication.
But under the US constitution, states wield significant power and any such moves will certainly be met with lawsuits.
California’s top prosecutor stood in front of San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge this week and vowed to “take on the challenges of a second Trump Administration — together.”
“We lived through Trump 1.0. We know what he’s capable of,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta.
“We’ll continue to be a check on overreach and push back on abuse of power,” he promised.
Governors and attorneys general of other liberal states including New York, Illinois, Oregon and Washington have made similar proclamations.
“If you try to harm New Yorkers or roll back their rights, I will fight you every step of the way,” Governor Kathy Hochul vowed.
“You come for my people, you come through me,” Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker said, as Democratic prosecutors across the nation coordinate their strategies.
The pre-emptive maneuvers have swiftly drawn the ire of Trump, who singled out California Governor Gavin Newsom in an angry social media riposte Friday.
“He is using the term ‘Trump-Proof’ as a way of stopping all of the GREAT things that can be done to ‘Make California Great Again,’ but I just overwhelmingly won the Election,” complained Trump.

Hindrance by litigation
State plans to disrupt his agenda will bring an unwelcome sense of deja vu for Trump, whose efforts to rescind Barack Obama’s immigration and health care policies during his first term were repeatedly stymied in court.
During the last Trump administration, California alone sued over 100 times in a variety of areas, slowing down or restricting its policies. Republican states echoed that strategy under Joe Biden’s administration.
“It was as successful as you can get,” said Julian Zelezer, professor of political history at Princeton University.
“States, especially a state as large as California, do have the power to resist some of the changes that will come from the administration, to uphold emissions regulations and other laws, including on reproductive rights.”
A benefit of litigation is that “cases move about as fast as snails,” said Kevin Johnson, a law professor at University of California, Davis.
“Some cases go around the lower courts, and by the time they hit the Supreme Court, there’s a new president,” he told AFP.

“Sanctuary states”
Immigration is expected to be a flashpoint in the looming battle.
Republican states may cooperate with the Trump administration in identifying and detaining undocumented people. But Democratic states are likely to refuse.
During Trump’s previous term California was the first to declare itself a “sanctuary state,” prohibiting local law enforcement from working with federal agents to arrest illegal immigrants.
Trump could withhold federal funding to certain states as a means of exerting pressure.
He has also floated more radical measures, including massively expanding a process called “expedited removal” to evict undocumented people without court hearings, or even using the military to arrest suspected illegal immigrants.
But “there would almost immediately be a request for a preliminary injunction,” predicted Johnson.
“If you send the military on the border” to detain or deport immigrants, “it is unprecedented in all kinds of ways, and it raises all kinds of issues.”

“As California goes, so goes the nation”
One downside for states is the enormous financial cost of countless legal battles.
“State budgets are tight, and so that money has to come from somewhere else,” said Zelezer.
With Trump having won the popular vote and increased his vote share even in most liberal states, “politically, it might be a little harder as they try to move forward with doing this again,” he said.
Still, California’s leaders’ zeal in opposing Trump appeared undaunted.
“As is so often said, as California goes, so goes the nation,” said Bonta.
“In the days and months and years to come, all eyes will look west.”


Trump says Microsoft is in talks to acquire TikTok

Trump says Microsoft is in talks to acquire TikTok
Updated 36 sec ago
Follow

Trump says Microsoft is in talks to acquire TikTok

Trump says Microsoft is in talks to acquire TikTok
US President Donald Trump told reporters on Monday that Microsoft is in talks to acquire TikTok and that he would like to see a bidding war over the app.
Microsoft and TikTok did not immediately respond to Reuters’ requests for a comment outside regular business hours.
Trump has previously said that he was in discussions with several parties about purchasing TikTok and expects to make a decision on the app’s future within the next 30 days.
The app, which has about 170 million American users, was briefly taken offline just before a law requiring ByteDance to either sell it on national security grounds or face a ban took effect on Jan. 19.
Trump, after taking office on Jan. 20, signed an executive order seeking to delay by 75 days the enforcement of the law that was put in place after US officials warned that there was a risk of Americans’ data being misused under ByteDance.

EU, Britain to face off in post-Brexit fishing battle case

EU, Britain to face off in post-Brexit fishing battle case
Updated 28 January 2025
Follow

EU, Britain to face off in post-Brexit fishing battle case

EU, Britain to face off in post-Brexit fishing battle case
THE HAGUE: A tiny silver fish which is an important food source in the North Sea will take center stage Tuesday as the European Union and Britain square off over post-Brexit fishing rights.
The bitter arbitration case over sandeels is seen as a bellwether for other potential litigation between London and Brussels in a perennial hot-bed industry, experts said.
Tuesday’s clash at the Hague-based Permanent Court for Arbitration also marks the first courtroom trade battle between the 27-member trading bloc and Britain since it left the EU in 2020.
Brussels has dragged London before the PCA following a decision last year to ban all commercial fishing of sandeels in British waters because of environmental concerns.
London in March ordered all fishing to stop, saying in court documents that “sandeels are integral to the marine ecosystem of the North Sea.”
Because of climate change and commercial fishing, the tiny fish “risked further decline... as well as species that are dependent on sandeels for food including fish, marine mammals, and seabirds.”
This included vulnerable species like the Atlantic puffin, seals, porpoises and other fish like cod and haddock, Britain’s lawyers said.
But Brussels is accusing London of failing to keep to commitments made under the landmark Trade and Cooperation Agreement, which gave the EU access to British waters for several years during a transition period after London’s exit.
Under the deal, the EU’s fishing fleet retained access to British waters for a five-and-half-year transition period, ending mid-2026. After that, access to respective waters will be decided in annual negotiations.
“The EU does not call into question the right of the UK to adopt fisheries management measures in pursuit of legitimate conservation objectives,” Brussels’ lawyers said in court papers.
“Rather, this dispute is about the UK’s failure to abide by its commitments under the agreement.”
London failed to apply “evidence-based, proportionate and non-discriminatory measures when restricting the right to EU vessels to full access to UK waters to fish sandeel,” the EU lawyers said.
Brussels is backing Denmark in the dispute, whose vessels take some 96 percent of the EU’s quota for the species, with sandeel catches averaging some £41.2 million (49 million euros) annually.
“The loss of access to fisheries in English waters could affect relations with the EU, including Denmark, as they are likely to lead to employment losses and business losses overseas,” the EU’s lawyers warned.


The case will now be fought out over three days at the PCA’s stately headquarters at the Peace Palace in The Hague, which also houses the International Court of Justice.
Set up in 1899, the PCA is the world’s oldest arbitral tribunal and resolves disputes between countries and private parties through referring to contracts, special agreements and various treaties, such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
The EU’s decision to open a case before the PCA “will not have been taken lightly and reflected the political importance it places on fishing rights,” writes Joel Reland, a senior researcher at UK in a Changing Europe, a London-based think tank.
In a number of “influential member states — including France, the Netherlands and Denmark — fishing rights are an important issue, with many communities relying on access to British waters for their livelihoods.”
“This dispute is an early warning that the renegotiation of access rights, before the TCA fisheries chapter expires in June 2026, will be critical for the EU,” said Reland.
A ruling in the case is expected by the end of March.

Trump says will build ‘Iron Dome’ missile shield

Trump says will build ‘Iron Dome’ missile shield
Updated 28 January 2025
Follow

Trump says will build ‘Iron Dome’ missile shield

Trump says will build ‘Iron Dome’ missile shield
  • The system “will be made right here in the USA,” the president said

MIAMI: President Donald Trump said Monday he would sign an executive order to start building an “Iron Dome” air defense system for the United States, like the one that Israel has used to intercept thousands of rockets.
“We need to immediately begin the construction of a state-of-the-art Iron Dome missile defense shield, which will be able to protect Americans,” Trump told a Republican congressional retreat in Miami.
Trump said the system “will be made right here in the USA.”
Speaking on the day new Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth took office, Trump said it was one of four orders he would sign, along with one that would “get transgender ideology the hell out of our military.”
During the 2024 election campaign Trump repeatedly promised to build a version of Israel’s Iron Dome system for the United States
But he ignored the fact that the system is designed for short-range threats, making it ill-suited to defending against intercontinental missiles that are the main danger to the United States.
Trump however again sung the praises of the Israeli system, which Israel has used to shoot down rockets fired by its regional foes Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon during the war sparked by the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel.
“They knock down just about every one of them,” Trump said. “So I think the United States is entitled to that.”


Ukraine’s Zelensky says war means mobilization rules cannot be changed

Ukraine’s Zelensky says war means mobilization rules cannot be changed
Updated 28 January 2025
Follow

Ukraine’s Zelensky says war means mobilization rules cannot be changed

Ukraine’s Zelensky says war means mobilization rules cannot be changed
  • Members of some units in areas deemed critical to ensuring Ukraine’s defensive lines have not enjoyed any leave since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of the country in February 2022

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said on Monday that the rigours of nearly three years of war did not allow for changes in mobilization rules because if soldiers left for home en masse, Russian President Vladimir Putin “will kill us all.”
Zelensky told Italian journalist Cecilia Sala, who was released this month after being detained for 21 days in Iran, that the toll of war on Ukrainians and their families underscored the need to bring the conflict rapidly to an end.
Parliament approved new mobilization rules last year to boost numbers of those at the front, but Ukraine’s fighting forces are still badly outnumbered by their Russian adversaries.
“The wartime situation calls for mobilization of people and all the resources we have in the country. Absolutely all of them,” Zelensky said in the interview, excerpts of which were posted on the president’s Telegram channel.
“And, unfortunately, that is the challenge of this war and that is why we have to speed things up to the maximum to end it, to oblige Russia to end this war,” Zelensky said.
“Today, we are defending ourselves. If tomorrow, for instance, half the army heads home, we really should have surrendered on the very first day. That is how it is. If half the army goes home, Putin will kill us all.”
The legislation approved last year, lowered the age of mobilization for Ukrainian men from 27 to 25 years, narrowed exemptions and imposed penalties on evaders.
Zelensky and others have rejected suggestions by politicians in the United States, Ukraine’s biggest Western backer, that the draft age be lowered further on grounds that Ukrainian forces at the front are not sufficiently well armed.
Members of some units in areas deemed critical to ensuring Ukraine’s defensive lines have not enjoyed any leave since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of the country in February 2022.
Russian forces failed in their initial advance on the capital Kyiv, but have since focused their efforts on securing all of Donbas, made up of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, in Ukraine’s east.
Russian forces occupy about 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory and have been recording their fastest gains since the invasion in their advance in the east, while holding part of four Ukrainian regions.Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky


US Justice Dept officials involved in Trump prosecutions fired

US Justice Dept officials involved in Trump prosecutions fired
Updated 28 January 2025
Follow

US Justice Dept officials involved in Trump prosecutions fired

US Justice Dept officials involved in Trump prosecutions fired

WASHINGTON: The US Justice Department fired a number of officials on Monday who were involved in the criminal prosecutions of President Donald Trump.
“Acting attorney general James McHenry made this decision because he did not believe these officials could be trusted to faithfully implement the president’s agenda because of their significant role in prosecuting the president,” a Justice Department official said.
The official did not specify now many people had their employment terminated, but US media outlets said it was more than a dozen and several were career prosecutors with the Justice Department.
Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought two federal cases against Trump, resigned earlier this month.
Smith charged Trump with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election and mishandling classified documents after leaving the White House.
Neither case came to trial and Smith — in line with a long-standing Justice Department policy of not prosecuting a sitting president — dropped them both after the Republican won November’s presidential election.
The firing of the Justice Department officials involved in prosecuting Trump was not unexpected.
Trump had vowed before the election to fire Smith “on day one” and accused the Justice Department under Democratic president Joe Biden of conducting a “political witchhunt” against him.
In his inauguration speech, Trump said he would end the “vicious, violent, and unfair weaponization of the Justice Department and our government.”
In his final report, Smith said Trump would have been convicted for his “criminal efforts” to retain power after the 2020 election if the case had not been dropped.
Trump was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding — the session of Congress held to certify Biden’s win that was violently attacked on January 6, 2021 by a mob of Trump supporters.
Smith also prepared a report into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents but it is being withheld because charges are pending against two of his former co-defendants.
Trump faces separate racketeering charges in Georgia over his efforts to subvert the election results in the southern state, but the case will likely be frozen while he is in office.
Trump was convicted in New York in May of falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments to a porn star. The judge who presided over the case gave him an “unconditional discharge” which carries no jail time, fine or probation.