|
|
|
Under threat from Trump, Columbia University agrees to policy changes
Legal Business |
2025/03/21 19:38
|
Under threat from the Trump administration, Columbia University agreed to implement a host of policy changes Friday, including overhauling its rules for protests and conducting an immediate review of its Middle Eastern studies department.
The changes, detailed in a letter sent by the university’s interim president, Katrina Armstrong, came one week after the Trump administration ordered the Ivy League school to enact those and other reforms or lose all federal funding, an ultimatum widely criticized in academia as an attack on academic freedom.
In her letter, Armstrong said the university would immediately appoint a senior vice provost to conduct a thorough review of the portfolio of its regional studies programs, “starting immediately with the Middle East.”
Columbia will also revamp its long-standing disciplinary process and bar protests inside academic buildings. Students will not be permitted to wear face masks on campus “for the purposes of concealing one’s identity.” An exception would be made for people wearing them for health reasons.
In an effort to expand “intellectual diversity” within the university, Columbia will also appoint new faculty members to its Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies department. It will also adopt a new definition of antisemitism and expand programming in its Tel Aviv Center, a research hub based in Israel.
The policy changes were largely in line with demands made on the university by the Trump administration, which pulled $400 million in research grants and other federal funding, and had threatened to cut more, over the university’s handling of protests against Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.
The White House has labeled the protests antisemitic, a label rejected by those who participated in the student-led demonstrations.
A message seeking comment was left with a spokesperson for the Education Department. As a “precondition” for restoring funding, federal officials demanded that the university to place its Middle Eastern, South Asian and African Studies Department under “academic receivership for a minimum of five years.”
They also told the university to ban masks on campus, adopt a new definition of antisemitism, abolish its current process for disciplining students and deliver a plan to ”reform undergraduate admissions, international recruiting, and graduate admissions practices.”
Historians had described the order as an unprecedented intrusion on university rights long treated by the Supreme Court as an extension of the First Amendment.
On Friday, freedom of speech advocates immediately decried Columbia’s decision to acquiesce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Military veterans are becoming the face of Trump’s government cuts
Legal Business |
2025/03/17 19:39
|
As congressional lawmakers scramble to respond to President Donald Trump’s slashing of the federal government, one group is already taking a front and center role: military veterans.
From layoffs at the Department of Veterans Affairs to a Pentagon purge of archives that documented diversity in the military, veterans have been acutely affected by Trump’s actions. And with the Republican president determined to continue slashing the federal government, the burden will only grow on veterans, who make up roughly 30% of the federal workforce and often tap government benefits they earned with their military service.
“At a moment of crisis for all of our veterans, the VA’s system of health care and benefits has been disastrously and disgracefully put on the chopping block by the Trump administration,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, the top Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, at a news conference last week.
Most veterans voted for Trump last year — nearly 6 in 10, according to AP Votecast, a nationwide survey of more than 120,000 voters. Yet congressional Republicans are standing in support of Trump’s goals even as they encounter fierce pushback in their home districts. At a series of town halls this week, veterans angrily confronted Republican members as they defended the cuts made under Trump adviser Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency.
“Do your job!” Jay Carey, a military veteran, yelled at Republican Rep. Chuck Edwards at a town hall in North Carolina.
“I’m a retired military officer,” an attendee at another forum in Wyoming told Republican Rep. Harriet Hageman before questioning whether DOGE had actually discovered any “fraud.”
Although Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson advised his members to skip the town halls and claimed that they were being filled with paid protesters, some Republicans were still holding them and trying to respond to the criticism.
“It looks radical, but it’s not. I call it stewardship, in my opinion,” Republican Rep. Gus Bilirakis of Florida said on a tele-town hall. “I think they’re doing right by the American taxpayer. And I support that principle of DOGE.”
Still, some Republicans have expressed unease with the seemingly indiscriminate firings of veterans, especially when they have not been looped in on the administration’s plans. At a town hall on Friday, Texas Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw told the audience, “We’re learning about this stuff at the speed of light, the way you are. I think there’s been some babies thrown out with the bath water here, but we’re still gathering information on it.”
Crenshaw, a former Navy SEAL, added, “If you’re doing a job that we need you to do, you’re doing it well, yeah, we’ve got to fight for you.”
The Republican chair of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, Rep. Mike Bost, assured listeners on a tele-town hall last week that he and Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins are talking regularly. As the VA implements plans to cut roughly 80,000 jobs, Bost has said he is watching the process closely, but he has expressed support and echoed Collins’ assurances that veterans’ health care and benefits won’t be slashed.
“They’ve cut a lot, but understand this: Essential jobs are not being cut,” Bost said, but then added that his office was helping alert the VA when people with essential jobs had in fact been terminated.
Two federal judges this month ordered the Trump administration to rehire the probationary employees who were let go in the mass firings. At the VA, some of those employees have now been put on administrative leave, but a sense of dread and confusion is still hanging over much of the federal workforce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Austria’s new government is stopping family reunions immediately for migrants
Attorney News |
2025/03/13 10:41
|
The new Austrian government said Wednesday that family reunion procedures for migrants will be immediately halted because the country is no longer able to absorb newcomers adequately.
The measure is temporary and intended to ensure that those migrants who are already in the country can be better integrated, Chancellor Christian Stocker from the conservative Austrian People’s Party said.
“Austria’s capacities are limited, and that is why we have decided to prevent further overloading,” Stocker said.
The new measure means that migrants with so-called protected status — meaning they cannot be deported — are no longer allowed to bring family members still living in their home countries to Austria.
The new three-party coalition made up of the People’s Party, the center-left Social Democrats and the liberal Neos, has said that curbing migration is one of its top issues and vowed to implement strict new asylum rules.
Official figures show that 7,762 people arrived in Austria last year as part of family reunion procedures for migrants. In 2023 the figure was 9,254. Most new arrivals were minors.
Migrants who are still in the asylum process or have received a deportation order are not allowed in the first place to bring family members from their countries of origin.
Most recent asylum seekers came from Syria and Afghanistan, the Austrian chancellery said in a statement. The European Union country has 9 million inhabitants.
Stocker said the measure was necessary because “the quality of the school system, integration and ultimately the security of our entire systems need to be protected — so that we do not impair their ability to function.”
The government said it had already informed the EU of its new measures. It denied to say for how long it would put family reunions on hold.
“Since last summer, we have succeeded in significantly reducing family reunification,” Interior Minister Gerhard Karner said. “Now we are creating the legal basis to ensure this stop is sustainable.”
All over the continent, governments have been trying to cut the number of migrants. The clamp-down on migrants is a harsh turnaround from ten years ago, when countries like Germany and Sweden openly welcomed more than 1 million migrants from war-torn countries such as Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Many communities and towns in other countries, such as Germany, also say they no longer have capacities to find shelter or homes for migrants.
The EU is trying to keep more migrants from entering its 27-country bloc and move faster to deport those whose asylum procedures are rejected.
On Tuesday, the EU unveiled a new migration proposal that envisions the opening of so-called “return hubs” to be set up in third countries to speed up the deportation for rejected asylum-seekers.
So far, only 20% of people with a deportation order are effectively removed from EU territory, according to the European Commission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Japan’s trade minister fails to win US assurances on tariff exemptions
Legal Business |
2025/03/10 10:41
|
Japan’s trade minister said this week that he has failed to win assurances from U.S. officials that the key U.S. ally will be exempt from tariffs, some of which take effect on Wednesday.
Yoji Muto was in Washington for last ditch negotiations over the tariffs on a range of Japanese exports including cars, steel and aluminum.
Muto said Monday in Washington that Japan, which contributes to the U.S. economy by heavily investing and creating jobs in the United States, “should not be subject to” 25% tariffs on steel, aluminum and auto exports to America.
His meetings with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett came just two days before the steel and aluminum tariffs are due to take effect. President Donald Trump has also said a possible 25% tariff on imported foreign autos could take effect in early April.
Muto said the U.S. officials acknowledged Japanese contributions and agreed to continue talks, but did not approve his request for Japan’s exemption from the steep import duties.
“We did not receive a response that Japan will be exempt,” Muto told reporters. “We must continue to assert our position.”
As Trump’s tariff threats have triggered tensions and vows of retaliation from Canada, Mexico and China, Japan has been working to firm up ties with other countries.
Last week, the foreign and trade ministers from Japan and Britain gathered in Tokyo for their first “two-plus-two” economic dialogue. They agreed to stand up for “fair, rules-based international trade,” though nobody directly mentioned Trump.
Japan depends heavily on exports and the auto tariffs would hurt, because vehicles are its biggest export and the United States is their top destination.
“Clearly companies in Japan are very concerned,” said Rintaro Nishimura, political analyst and associate at Japan Practice of The Asia Group. “Obviously the auto is the crown jewel for Japan, especially in the context of these tariffs.” He says they are concerned also because the Trump administration is carrying it out in just two months after taking office.
Trump also has criticized Japan’s contributions to the two countries’ mutual defense arrangements, adding to tensions with Tokyo.
Muto said the two sides agreed to keep discussing to find ways to establish a “win-win” relationship that would serve national interests of both countries.
The two sides also discussed energy cooperation, including joint development of liquefied natural gas reserves in Alaska, which Trump and Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba agreed on during Ishiba’s visit to the White House in February. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court makes it harder for EPA to police sewage discharges
Headline Legal News |
2025/03/07 15:20
|
A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday made it harder for environmental regulators to limit water pollution, ruling for San Francisco in a case about the discharge of raw sewage that sometimes occurs during heavy rains.
By a 5-4 vote, the court’s conservative majority ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency overstepped its authority under the Clean Water Act with water pollution permits that contain vague requirements for maintaining water quality.
The decision is the latest in which conservative justices have reined in pollution control efforts.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the court that EPA can set specific limits that tell cities and counties what can be discharged. But the agency lacks the authority “to include ‘end-result’ provisions,” Alito wrote, that make cities and counties responsible for maintaining the quality of the water, the Pacific Ocean in this case, into which wastewater is discharged.
“When a permit contains such requirements, a permittee that punctiliously follows every specific requirement in its permit may nevertheless face crushing penalties if the quality of the water in its receiving waters falls below the applicable standards,” he wrote.
One conservative justice, Amy Coney Barrett, joined the court’s three liberals in dissent. Limits on discharges sometimes still don’t insure water quality standards are met, Barrett wrote.
“The concern that the technology-based effluent limitations may fall short is on display in this case,” Barrett wrote, adding that “discharges from components of San Francisco’s sewer system have allegedly led to serious breaches of the water quality standards, such as ‘discoloration, scum, and floating material, including toilet paper, in Mission Creek.’”
The case produced an unusual alliance of the liberal northern California city, energy companies and business groups.
The EPA has issued thousands of the permits, known as narrative permits, over several decades, former acting general counsel Kevin Minoli said.
The narrative permits have operated almost as a backstop in case permits that quantify what can be discharged still result in unacceptable water quality, Minoli said.
With the new restrictions imposed by the court, “the question is what comes in place of those limits,” Minoli said.
Alito downplayed the impact of the decision, writing that the agency has “the tools needed” to insure water quality standards are met. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
180 fired CDC employees received emails asking them to come back to work
Legal Business |
2025/03/02 23:19
|
The nation’s top public health agency says about 180 employees who were laid off two weeks ago can come back to work.
Emails went out Tuesday to some Centers for Disease Control and Prevention probationary employees who got termination notices last month, according to current and former CDC employees.
A message seen by the AP was sent with the subject line, “Read this e-mail immediately.” It said that “after further review and consideration,” a Feb. 15 termination notice has been rescinded and the employee was cleared to return to work on Wednesday. “You should return to duty under your previous work schedule,” it said. “We apologize for any disruption that this may have caused.”
About 180 people received reinstatement emails, according to two federal health officials who were briefed on the tally but were not authorized to discuss it and spoke on condition of anonymity.
It’s not clear how many of the reinstated employees returned to work Wednesday. And it’s also unclear whether the employees would be spared from widespread job cuts that are expected soon across government agencies.
The CDC is the latest federal agency trying to coax back workers soon after they were dismissed as part of President Donald Trump’s and billionaire Elon Musk’s cost-cutting purge. Similar reversals have been made among employees responsible for medical device oversight, food safety, bird flu response, nuclear weapons and national parks.
The Atlanta-based CDC is charged with protecting Americans from outbreaks and other public health threats. Before the job cuts, the agency had about 13,000 employees.
Last month, Trump administration officials told the CDC that nearly 1,300 of the agency’s probationary employees would be let go. That tally quickly changed, as the number who actually got termination notices turned out to be 700 to 750.
With 180 more people now being told they can return, the actual number of CDC employees terminated so far would seem to stand somewhere around 550. But federal health officials haven’t confirmed any specifics.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. last month pledged “ radical transparency ” at the department, but HHS officials have not provided detail about CDC staff changes and did not respond to emailed requests on Tuesday and Wednesday. An agency spokesman, Andrew Nixon, previously told the AP only that CDC had more full-time employees after the job cuts than it did before the COVID-19 pandemic.
Those who received reinstatement emails included outbreak responders in two fellowship programs — a two-year training that prepares recent graduates to enter the public health workforce through field experience and a laboratory program that brings in doctorate-holding professionals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawsuit against abortion accommodations in the workplace can proceed
Legal Topics |
2025/02/27 21:53
|
A lawsuit filed by 17 states challenging federal rules entitling workers to time off and other accommodations for abortions may proceed, a federal appeals court ruled.
The Eighth Circuit Court’s decision on Thursday reverses Eastern District of Arkansas U.S. District Judge D.P. Marshall, Jr.'s dismissal of the case in June after he found that the states lacked standing to sue. Eighth Circuit Chief Judge Steven M. Colloton, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush in 2003, wrote in Thursday’s opinion that the states do have standing since they are subject to the federal rules.
Led by Republican state attorneys general in Tennessee and Arkansas, the 17 states sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in April challenging its rules on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a 2022 bipartisan law requiring employers to make “reasonable accommodations” for pregnant or postpartum employees.
In addition to more routine pregnancy workplace accommodations like time off for prenatal appointments, more bathroom breaks, or permission to carry snacks, the rules say that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure.
“The Biden-era EEOC’s attempt to turn a good law into an ideological weapon to force broad elective abortion accommodations is illegal,” Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in an emailed statement. “The EEOC’s unlawful regulations undermine the constitutional authority of the people’s elected representatives and we are vindicated by the Court’s decision to let our suit proceed.”
The lawsuit — joined by state attorneys in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and West Virginia — is one of several legal challenges to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act rules. One case in Texas seeks to overturn the law in its entirety.
The Eighth Circuit Court’s decision to revive the case comes after a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling opened the door to state abortion bans, and as bills to track and charge women who get abortions with murder have gotten attention in Missouri, North Dakota and Oklahoma state legislatures this month.
The EEOC, which enforces U.S. anti-discrimination laws, during former President Joe Biden’s administration published regulations that provide guidance for employers and workers on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. In them, the agency said that workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure, along with pregnancy-related medical conditions like miscarriage, stillbirth and lactation. Citing numerous court rulings, the EEOC in its regulations said it was conforming to decades of legal precedent establishing that pregnancy-related discrimination laws include abortion.
But many Republican lawmakers, including Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who co-sponsored the bill, were furious when the EEOC stated that the law covered abortions. Both Republican EEOC commissioners voted against the rules at the time. A spokesperson for the EEOC said the agency will “refrain from discussing litigation” but referred The Associated Press to Acting Chair Andrea Lucas’ position on the Commission’s PWFA regulations, which she voted against.
“I support elements of the final rule. However, I am unable to approve it because it purports to broaden the scope of the statute in ways that, in my view, cannot reasonably be reconciled with the text,” she wrote in a statement at the time explaining her decision to vote against the rules.
The EEOC has undergone significant change since President Donald Trump took office last month. After naming Lucas, a Republican, as acting chair, Trump fired two Democratic commissioners of the five-member bipartisan EEOC before their terms expired in an unprecedented move. Had the commissioners been allowed to carry out their terms, the EEOC would have had a Democratic majority well into Trump’s term. The administration also dismissed Karla Gilbride as the EEOC’s general counsel, replacing her with Andrew Rogers as acting counsel.
Without a quorum, the EEOC cannot rescind its own rules, although Lucas in the statement said she intends for the EEOC to reconsider portions of the rules she believes are unsupported by law once a quorum is re-established.
The Department of Justice represents the EEOC in court, and under Trump, it remains to be seen whether it will continue to fight the states’ lawsuit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Headline Legal News for You to Reach America's Best Legal Professionals. The latest legal news and information - Law Firm, Lawyer and Legal Professional news in the Media. |
|
|
