Contact Me By Email


What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White

What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White

Know Anyone Who Thinks Racial Profiling Is Exaggerated? Watch This, And Tell Me When Your Jaw Drops.


This video clearly demonstrates how racist America is as a country and how far we have to go to become a country that is civilized and actually values equal justice. We must not rest until this goal is achieved. I do not want my great grandchildren to live in a country like we have today. I wish for them to live in a country where differences of race and culture are not ignored but valued as a part of what makes America great.

Wednesday, June 03, 2026

What happened when a tiny school district refused to ‘bend the knee’ to Trump and ICE | Vermont | The Guardian

What happened when a tiny school district refused to ‘bend the knee’ to Trump and ICE

"In Winooski, Vermont, where more than a third of children are English learners, a school superintendent is taking a stand to protect immigrant students

students sit in class
A reading class at Winooski high school in Winooski, Vermont, on 7 April 2026. Photograph: Oliver Parini for The Hechinger Report

On an April morning at Winooski high school, the day started with a writing prompt: Do you feel safe in school? Why or why not?

The students – whose families hail from across the globe and speak Arabic, Nepali, Spanish, Somali and more – wrote their responses before reading them aloud.

“I feel safe in school because I saw the school doors are locked every time,” one student said.

“ICE can’t come in,” said another.

The sense of security students feel in this multilingual learner class at the Vermont high school is hard-won. Since the start of the second Trump administration, the federal government has investigated schools for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts, rescinded a policy protecting students on school grounds from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests and threatened school districts with the loss of federal funding. Administration officials have also encouraged states to challenge a decades-old supreme court decision guaranteeing undocumented students’ right to public schooling.

While many districts have chosen to go quiet or self-censor, the Winooski school system and its superintendent, Wilmer Chavarria, have taken the opposite approach.

Wilmer Chavarria is the superintendent of the Winooski school district.
Wilmer Chavarria is the superintendent of the Winooski school district. Photograph: Oliver Parini/Oliver Parini for The Hechinger Report

Last year, this small district of about 800 students was the first in Vermont to pass a sanctuary policy aimed at protecting students from immigration enforcement while at school. Chavarria also refused to sign a document from the Trump administration saying it was complying with the federal ban on DEI efforts in schools.

This was despite the district being directly affected by federal policies. Last year, Chavarria, a naturalized citizen, was detained for several hours by immigration officials at the Houston airport while on his way back from visiting family in Nicaragua. Over Thanksgiving break, a second-grader was detained with his mother by federal agents. In early December, the Winooski school district was the target of racist messages and phone calls after a video of a student raising the Somali flag on a pole outside the high school went viral on social media.

While there have been no direct threats by the Trump administration to pull Winooski’s federal funding, which accounts for 6% of the district’s annual budget, Chavarria said he was preparing for the possibility.

“When somebody wants us to lose funding, we’re going to lose it anyways. The difference is, did we lose it while bending the knee, or did we lose it while standing up for our values?” Chavarria said. “Either way, the outcome will be the same.”


Nestled along the Winooski River on the outskirts of Burlington, this 1.5-sq-mile community is the most diverse district in a state that ranks among the nation’s whitest. Nearly 60% of students are people of color and more than a third are learning to speak English.

For more than three decades, the town and neighboring region have been a federal refugee resettlement community, accepting hundreds of immigrants annually who are fleeing conflict from Bhutan, Somalia, Bosnia and Syria, among other countries. Last year, the Trump administration decreased the admissions cap for refugees into the US from 125,000 in 2025 to 7,500 in 2026, the lowest level since the program’s inception. So far, about 50 refugees, all from South Africa, have relocated to Vermont this year.

Chavarria, 37, joined Winooski schools in 2023 after serving as director of equity and education support systems in another Vermont district. Born in Nicaragua, he didn’t learn English until high school, a background that resembles many of the Winooski students he serves. His actions on behalf of immigrant students have built him widespread support locally.

“Wilmer has been a brave voice in a time in our country where that’s being punished,” said Robin Merritt, a parent of three children in the district.

The sanctuary schools policy is a key reason. The guidance formally outlined in Winooski’s policy reaffirms that staff will not share student data with immigration officials. It also restricts agents’ access to campus without a signed judicial warrant, among other steps. In May, after advocacy from Chavarria and others, the Vermont legislature passed a law modeled after Winooski’s policy, requiring all schools in the state to have immigration enforcement protocols.

Ignacia Rodriguez Kmec, policy counsel at the nonprofit National Immigration Law Center, said clear policies like this one not only protect students, but also staff, who may not know what immigration agents are allowed to do on school grounds.

“You want to be able to show that you support all families, including immigrant families, that they ideally should participate and not be afraid of coming to school,” she said.

A 2022 study found that children from families with mixed citizenship status were more likely to earn As and less likely to report problems with their teachers and peers if they attended a school that had a “safe zone” policy restricting immigration enforcement on campus.

“I really see the impact in the classroom,” said Caitlin MacLeod-Bluver, who teaches English and history at Winooski high and was Vermont’s teacher of the year in 2025. “When kids feel seen and heard and valued in our district and community, it shows up in the work they’re doing.”

 a teacher sits at a desk
Caitlin Macleod Bluver teaches at Winooski high school. Photograph: Oliver Parini/Oliver Parini for The Hechinger Report

A desire to reassure immigrant families was the reason Chavarria decided to raise the Somali flag on school grounds on 5 December, three days after Donald Trump referred to Somalis as “garbage” in a cabinet meeting. When a video of the flag went viral on rightwing social media, staff had to temporarily take down the district’s website and social media accounts and unplug school phones because of death threats.

Despite the onslaught, the staff kept the Somali flag up, beside the US and Vermont flags, through the following week to show support for Somali students, who make up about 9% of the school system’s student population.

Chavarria – who, with his husband, stayed at a hotel for a few days following the episode after receiving death threats – said he believed if more school leaders publicly and vocally pushed back on Trump administration policies, Winooski wouldn’t be as big a target for hate.

“It does feel like we are alone in an ocean,” he said.


Inside the Winooski school building this spring, there were visible traces of the challenges of the past year. Since the deluge of death threats in December, doors separating hallways are locked, requiring a staff member to let students through sections of the building throughout the day.

A table with “Know your rights” and “Conoce tus derechos” emblazoned across a banner sits off to the side, with documents translated into more than half a dozen languages telling families how to organize their documents and talk to children about ICE.

Still, outside of school walls, the district has not been able to keep all students safe. In the weeks following the second-grader’s detention in November, teachers wrote letters of support appealing to immigration officials and organized a fundraiser for emergency resources and legal fees. Erin Hurley, a multilingual teacher who taught the boy, said detention center officials denied her request to send his schoolwork to him.

letters on a wall
Letters of support hang on the walls of the Winooski school district. Photograph: Oliver Parini for The Hechinger Report

During phone calls, the mother told Winooski staff that her son wasn’t doing well at the detention center in Dilley, Texas. After seven weeks, and despite having a lawyer fighting for their release, the family decided to self-deport.

In the last year, Hurley and other staff members at the school district have volunteered to be temporary guardians for several students whose parents worry about being detained.

“I feel so disgusted that our country has come to this. These families make our community so much brighter. They contribute to Vermont so much,” Hurley said.


Back in Winooski high school’s multilingual learners class, their teacher turned to a new topic: astronauts onboard Artemis II had just released photos from the moon, the farthest any human has ever traveled from Earth. She pulled the images up on a screen for the class to see.

They had a million questions. Is that photo artificial intelligence? How do the astronauts have access to the internet? Why didn’t they land on the moon?

For a few minutes, their thoughts were 250,000 miles away. Then, it was time to practice reading and writing in English again.

This story was produced by the Hechinger Report, a non-profit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter."

Blanche Says Justice Dept. Won’t Proceed With Trump’s $1.8 Billion Fund

 

Blanche Says Justice Dept. Won’t Proceed With Trump’s $1.8 Billion Fund

“Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the withdrawal of a $1.8 billion fund proposal to compensate individuals claiming unfair prosecution. The fund, initially linked to a settlement involving former President Trump, faced backlash from Republicans and was deemed a potential political liability. While the fund proposal is scrapped, Blanche will maintain an order blocking IRS investigations into Trump and his associates for existing tax violations.

The acting attorney general told lawmakers that he would leave in place an order forcing the I.R.S. to drop investigations into President Trump, his family and his businesses.

Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, made clear to a House committee on Tuesday that the fund proposal would be permanently withdrawn.Demetrius Freeman for The New York Times

Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, said on Tuesday he was withdrawing a proposal to create a $1.8 billion fund to compensate people claiming to be victims of unfair prosecution, amid a revolt among Republicans who saw it as an ethical and political disaster.

“We’re not moving forward with the fund, period,” Mr. Blanche told members of a House Appropriations subcommittee. He repeated himself to make clear that he meant the fund proposal would be permanently withdrawn.

His statement could break an impasse with Senate Republicans, who had demanded the fund be scrapped as a precondition for passing a major immigration enforcement bill. Opponents had described the proposal as a slush fund for allies of President Trump.

But Mr. Blanche said he would leave in place an order he signed last month that would, in effect, block the I.R.S. from investigating Mr. Trump, his family and his businesses for existing tax violations.

“Nothing has changed with that,” said Mr. Blanche, who added that the tax order would not shield Mr. Trump and his associates from future investigations.

Outraged Democrats accused Mr. Blanche, the president’s former defense lawyer, of cutting a sweetheart deal that would let the president and his family avoid a potential $100 million penalty.

“So the blanket immunity is, is not something that you’re going to move back on?” asked Representative Rosa DeLauro, Democrat of Connecticut who accused Mr. Blanche of prioritizing the president’s financial interests over the public good.

“You do not belong in this job,” she added.

While Mr. Blanche has now taken the fund off the table, much political damage has already been done. In addition, the unusually favorable tax deal provides Democrats with a potentially potent line of attack in the midterm elections — that Republicans support shielding a billionaire president from tax penalties at a time when many Americans are struggling financially.

Democrats repeatedly requested that Mr. Blanche commit to rescind, in writing, his order creating the payout fund.

“You started it, you established it in writing, so it just makes sense to rescind it in writing,” said Representative Grace Meng, Democrat of New York.

“I’m not committing to put anything in writing,” he said, adding that he would abide by his word and would take the request under advisement.

The testimony came a day after the department committed to abiding by a federal judge’s order pausing the fund’s implementation until at least June 12, a decision some administration officials privately said could provide an off-ramp to unwind the plan.

Mr. Blanche, appearing last month before the Senate Appropriations Committee, had offered few details about how it would be implemented, and declined to guarantee that the money would not be doled out to those who ransacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Mr. Trump had discussed backing off the plan to establish the fund, bankrolled by taxpayers, which was announced last month immediately after he agreed to settle a $10 billion lawsuit he had filed against the I.R.S. over the leak of his tax returns.

Mr. Blanche has said he did not directly participate in the secretive negotiations that led to the settlement.

He had privately expressed concerns about a deal. But he determined that the plan, created by a subordinate and moved forward by Mr. Trump’s private lawyers, including Boris Epshteyn, passed legal muster and assented, according to officials briefed on the talks.

Critics have accused the acting attorney general, Mr. Trump’s former lead defense lawyer, of sacrificing his department’s independence to serve a president he still views as a client.

In a wide-ranging podcast interview with the Fox News host Sean Hannity released on Tuesday, a relaxed Mr. Blanche systematically attacked all the prosecutors who had overseen cases against the president, offering an unapologetic defense of his pursuit of Mr. Trump’s campaign of retribution.

Mr. Blanche, ditching his standard suit for a polo shirt, assailed the former special counsels Robert S. Mueller III and Jack Smith, who had handled federal investigations into Mr. Trump. Mr. Blanche also attacked state and local prosecutors, including Alvin L. Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, and Letitia James, the New York attorney general, who had pursued cases against Mr. Trump.

Mr. Blanche openly talked about the so-called grand conspiracy investigation that seeks to tie many of those inquiries together in a single purported plot to deprive Mr. Trump of his rights, breaking sharply with a Justice Department policy that bars the public discussion of ongoing inquiries, particularly those involving grand juries.

“There is a grand conspiracy investigation, correct?” Mr. Hannity asked, in an interview recorded over the Memorial Day weekend.

“Yes, absolutely,” Mr. Blanche responded. “One hundred percent.”

Mr. Blanche then revealed information about two grand juries, which typically sit in secret, hearing evidence in the case. He agreed with Mr. Hannity that one had been empaneled in Florida and the second in another state.

Mr. Blanche even disclosed some targets of the grand conspiracy case by name: James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director; John O. Brennan, the former C.I.A. director; and James R. Clapper Jr., the former director of national intelligence.

“Let’s talk about individuals,” Mr. Hannity said. “Comey? Brennan? Clapper?”

“Yeah,” Mr. Blanche said.

Nonetheless, Mr. Blanche and other senior officials have tried to blunt Mr. Trump’s attempt to monetize his grievances by obtaining government compensation for the leak of his tax returns.

The fund proposal allowed the president to drop his suit while creating a mechanism to provide payments to supporters who claimed they were also targeted unfairly.

“What we did was entirely legal and appropriate,” Mr. Blanche told Mr. Hannity. “And again, the Trump family gets nothing.”

But that proposal prompted a revolt among Senate Republicans, some of whom berated Mr. Blanche during a contentious meeting at the Capitol last month.

On Monday, the department had signaled that it was re-evaluating the situation, but stopped short of pulling the plug, saying in a statement that it would abide by the ruling in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia temporarily suspending payouts.

But that initially did little to ease the concerns of Republican senators, who reacted with revulsion to a plan they viewed as an ethical minefield and a potential political liability in midterm elections already made treacherous by Mr. Trump’s declining popularity.

Democrats pledged to attach amendments to legislation that would defund the effort, adding to demands by Republicans for the Trump administration to kill the plan outright.

Annie Karni contributed reporting.

A correction was made on 

June 2, 2026

An earlier version of this article misidentified the panel that Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, appeared before on Tuesday. It was a House Appropriations subcommittee, not the House Appropriations Committee.

Glenn Thrush covers the Department of Justice for The Times and has also written about gun violence, civil rights and conditions in the country’s jails and prisons.

Alan Feuer covers extremism and political violence for The Times, focusing on the criminal cases involving the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and against former President Donald J. Trump.” 

Tuesday, June 02, 2026

What DNA Revealed About Frederick Douglass Real Ancestry Shocked Everyone

 

White Men Didn’t Win When Affirmative Action Died

 

Why the Phone Hangs Up 3 Seconds After You Say Hello

 

Justice Roberts RUNS SCARED from the MONSTER he CREATED

 

Hegseth Strikes Female and Black Navy Officers From Promotion List

 

Hegseth Strikes Female and Black Navy Officers From Promotion List

“Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth removed nine Navy officers from the promotion list for one-star admiral, disproportionately targeting women and minority officers. This move, which appears to violate Pentagon rules, raises concerns about Hegseth’s anti-diversity stance and its impact on the military’s top ranks. Critics argue that Hegseth’s actions undermine the merit-based promotion system and create an atmosphere of anxiety among senior military officers.

The defense secretary’s decision to block the officers’ promotions appears driven by his anti-diversity stance rather than based on merit.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, wearing a dark suit, motions with his right hand.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s removal of at least seven officers from the list appears to violate rules governing the promotion system, according to current and former defense officials.Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times

In a move that disproportionately targets women and minority officers, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently blocked the promotions of nine Navy officers who had been selected by a board of senior Navy admirals.

The net result of Mr. Hegseth’s intervention is a slate of 22 nominees to be one-star admirals that bears little resemblance to the broader force these officers will help lead.

Three of the officers removed by Mr. Hegseth from the promotion list are women and two are Black men. An additional four are white men.

Mr. Hegseth’s actions, which appear to violate the rules governing a promotion system that is supposed to be apolitical and merit-based, were described by five current and former defense officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive personnel matters.

No female officers were included on the new one-star list, which was released publicly in late May, despite the fact that women make up about 21 percent of the active-duty Navy. The list appears to include only two nonwhite officers, even though sailors who identify as racial minorities make up about 38 percentof the active-duty Navy.

Mr. Hegseth’s removal of the officers from the one-star list is highly unusual, said the current and former defense officials. According to Pentagon rules, the defense secretary is supposed to pull officers from the list only for moral, mental, physical or professional failings that raise questions about the officers’ fitness to lead.

Mr. Hegseth’s actions are the latest in a series of firings and personnel interventions that appear to be driven by his anti-diversity politics rather than the officers’ performance. Taken together, they could reshape the military’s top ranks for years to come.

Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, declined to say why Mr. Hegseth pulled the officers off the Navy one-star list. “Military promotions are given to those who have earned them,” Mr. Parnell said. “The department will never consider the color of a service member’s skin or their gender as a factor in promotions.” The Navy declined to comment.

Since taking office, Mr. Hegseth has fired or sidelined nearly three dozen senior military officers as part of a broader campaign designed to purge the Pentagon of leaders he has disparaged as “foolish,” “reckless” and “woke.” He has consistently refused to explain why he has chosen to fire officers or pull them from promotion lists.

His scrutiny has fallen heavily on female and minority officers, who have borne the brunt of the dismissals. Nearly 60 percent of the senior officers Mr. Hegseth has fired are female or Black, Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said in recent Senate testimony. Women and minorities currently account for fewer than 20 percent of all generals and admirals.

“You are hollowing out the military’s bench of experience and highest-performing senior officers, while making young officers wonder if they should continue to serve,” Mr. Reed told Mr. Hegseth at another recent hearing.

Among those dismissed were Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., the second African American to serve as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the first woman to lead the Navy.

Navy Adm. Lisa Franchetti speaks during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on her nomination for reappointment to the grade of admiral and to be Chief of Naval Operations in 2023.Jacquelyn Martin/Associated Press

Earlier this year, Mr. Hegseth also removed four colonels — two Black men and two women — from the Army’s list of nominees for one-star general over the objections of Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll. Mr. Driscoll insisted that the officers had a long history of exemplary service and had done nothing wrong.

Officers selected for one-star rank are chosen by a board of admirals or generals who review hundreds of personnel files over the course of meetings that can span two weeks. Only about 5 percent of those eligible for promotion to one-star are chosen, making it the most competitive board in the U.S. military.

The lists are then reviewed by the service secretaries and the defense secretary, who under Pentagon rules may strike names in limited circumstances, like the emergence of new information that raises questions about the officers’ qualifications for service.

The unpredictability of Mr. Hegseth’s interventions has created an atmosphere of anxiety and mistrust among the military’s top ranks, military officials said.

The lack of information has exasperated Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike. In April, Representative Austin Scott, Republican of Georgia, pressed Gen. Christopher C. LaNeve, the acting Army chief of staff, on whether Mr. Hegseth had pulled the names of officers from that service’s one-star list as first reported in The New York Times.

“I’m less worried about the race and the gender than if he did or he didn’t do it,” Mr. Scott said. “Did he pull four names from the list, as has been reported?”

General LaNeve, who had taken over after Mr. Hegseth fired his predecessor, Gen. Randy George, said that the congressman would have to ask Mr. Hegseth.

“Well, if I could get anybody over there to respond, I would,” Mr. Scott replied.

Two weeks later, when Mr. Hegseth appeared before the House Armed Services Committee, he acknowledged that he had pulled names from the Army one-star list, but declined to explain the specific grounds for their removal.

“We don’t talk about that out of respect for those officers,” he said. Instead, he spoke broadly of the need to correct for years of “gender and demographic engineering” that he asserted had blunted the effectiveness of U.S. troops on the battlefield.

In a break with protocol, Mr. Hegseth also urged senior Navy officials to include Capt. William Francis Jr., a Navy SEAL who serves as Mr. Hegseth’s special assistant, on the one-star list, current and former Navy officials said. Captain Francis’ lack of command experience made him ineligible for promotion under the board’s rules and he was not selected, officials said.

At a recent House Armed Services Committee hearing, Representative Chrissy Houlahan, Democrat of Pennsylvania and an Air Force veteran, asked Mr. Hegseth whether he had ordered the Navy to add a special operations officer who lacked the necessary command time to the Navy’s promotion list for admiral.

“I’m not aware of what you’re referring to,” Mr. Hegseth replied. His response was, at best, misleading.

The officers struck from the Navy one-star list seem to have been targeted because they took part in some diversity-related event years or even decades earlier, current and former Navy officials said.

One highly respected officer whose promotion was pulled had served as a surface warfare officer, completed the Navy’s advanced nuclear power school and was selected to be a top aide to a four-star admiral in the Pentagon.

She was singled out by Mr. Hegseth shortly after her name appeared on a website that said it was working to purge “woke” military officers. The site noted that the officer had worked as a “diversity liaison officer” two decades ago, responsible for helping the Navy recruit and retain women and minorities.

Another female officer targeted by Mr. Hegseth served as a Navy pilot and foreign area officer, interacting with militaries around the world. The third female officer is a physician who leads a major Navy medical command.

Before he was selected by President Trump to serve in the Pentagon, Mr. Hegseth had opposed the inclusion of women in combat jobs. Since then he has moderated his position, saying that women should be able to serve in combat roles, as they have since 2013, if they can meet the same physical standards as men.

Still, his actions have raised questions about whether he believes that female officers are fit to serve at the most senior levels of the U.S. military, his critics said.

In late May, Jessica Ruttenber, who retired as a lieutenant colonel and flew Air Force refueling tankers in Iraq and Afghanistan, noticed the striking absence of any women on the Navy’s one-star list.

She did not know that Mr. Hegseth had pulled female officers off the list.

“The military I left in 2021 feels very different from the one we are watching today,” she wrote in an online essay. “In some ways, it feels like we are watching hard-won progress move backward in real time. That is the part I cannot shake. Because if I am honest, I now find myself wondering: Would I want my own children to enter a system like this?”

Greg Jaffe covers the Pentagon and the U.S. military for The Times.

Kate Kelly is an investigative reporter covering government accountability for The Times.“

Monday, June 01, 2026

Trump Administration Live Updates: President Said to Be Backing Off Plans for $1.8 Billion Fund After Backlash

 

Trump Administration Live Updates: President Said to Be Backing Off Plans for $1.8 Billion Fund After Backlash

“President Trump is reportedly backing off his plan for a $1.8 billion fund to compensate individuals claiming unfair prosecution by the government. The plan faced backlash from both Democrats and Republicans, with concerns it would reward Trump’s political allies. The Justice Department stated it would abide by a court order halting the fund’s disbursement, which some senators interpreted as a clear acknowledgment of the fund’s unworkability.

President Trump wearing a blue suit, white shirt and red tie. He is sitting at a table.
President Trump at the White House last week.Doug Mills/The New York Times

What We’re Covering Today

  • Payout Fund: President Trump is backing off his plan for a $1.8 billion fund to pay people he says have been victimized by the federal government, according to two people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Mr. Trump has not abandoned his immunity from audits, which also emerged as part of a deal with the I.R.S. to drop his lawsuit against the agency. It was not clear whether word that he planned to drop the plan would satisfy skeptical lawmakers, including many Republicans, who had revolted over the fund, imperiling the passage of a bill to fund the president’s immigration crackdown. Read more ›

    U.S. Military: Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, recently blocked the promotions of at least seven Navy officers who had been selected by a board of senior admirals to rise to one-star admiral rank. His actions appeared to violate promotion system rules and disproportionally affected women and minority officers. Read more ›

Beyond the legal challenges, President Trump has also faced increasing pressure from both parties on Capitol Hill to torpedo the fund.Allison Robbert for The New York Times

President Trump is backing off his plan to establish a $1.8 billion fund to compensate people who claimed they were victims of unfair prosecution by the government, two people familiar with the matter said on Monday.

The people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the president’s thinking, said he had been leaning for days toward scrapping the fund, which critics have characterized as a scheme to reward Mr. Trump’s political allies with public benefits.

Robert Jimison
June 1, 2026, 6:22 p.m. ET1 hour ago

Senator John Curtis, Republican of Utah, said that “it is not enough for me to have the courts pushback” on the weaponization fund and echoed what many of his colleagues have said, that the statement from the Department of Justice did not satisfy all of his concerns. “I have a lot of unanswered questions,” he said adding that he would support “pretty robust” guardrails on any future effort to move ahead with the fund. 

Minho Kim
June 1, 2026, 6:04 p.m. ET1 hour ago

Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, told reporters on Monday that the Trump administration should clearly state that it is giving up on the $1.8 billion fund that stands to benefit President Trump’s allies if it had changed its position. Earlier today, the Justice Department said in a statement that it was abiding by the court order stopping disbursement of funds for now, but said it disagreed with the court’s decision. “I appreciate them saying that, but they don’t have a choice,” Kennedy told reporters. “They have to abide by “the federal district court order.”

Annie Karni
June 1, 2026, 5:19 p.m. ET2 hours ago

On Capitol Hill, a Republican leadership aide said Republican senators interpreted the Justice Department’s statement, which said that it would abide by a federal judge’s temporary order not to proceed with any steps to activate the fund until at least June 12, as a clear walk back and a clear acknowledgement that the fund was unworkable. The aide said that this move was what members have been asking for, although it was not clear whether the statement alone would unlock the votes needed to move ahead with a narrow reconciliation bill.

Annie Karni
June 1, 2026, 5:12 p.m. ET2 hours ago

Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas who just lost his primary to a Trump-backed candidate last week, said that he was satisfied with the Justice Department statement on the fund, which threatened to hold up passage of a reconciliation bill. “It makes it moot,” he said. “Hopefully we’ll get the reconciliation bill done. They said they’ll accept the ruling of the judge, that makes it moot.”

Maggie Haberman
June 1, 2026, 4:40 p.m. ET3 hours ago

Trump is backing off of his plan to establish a $1.8 billion fund to compensate people who claimed they were victims of government “weaponization” by Democrats, according to two people familiar with the matter who were granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. 

His move, which he not commented on publicly, came as the fund drew widespread backlash from Democrats and Republican senators.

The Trump administration is dismantling a $368 million deep-ocean observation system that was put in place a decade ago to monitor coastal environments, marine ecosystems and powerful currents that affect the global climate.

The National Science Foundation said it would send ships in June to begin removing more than 900 deep-sea instruments anchored off Oregon, Washington State, Alaska, North Carolina, and an area between Greenland and Iceland known as the Irminger Sea.

A federal judge in Washington ruled on Monday that protesters criticizing President Trump near the Capitol could not be forced to take down a flag reading “8647,” finding no indication that the message could be taken as a true threat against the president’s life.

Judge Randolph D. Moss wrote that despite efforts by police to compel the group, an advocacy organization called Accountability Now USA, to remove the flag and other signage over the course of several months, he concluded it was clear that the flag and its message were protected speech. The dispute in some ways mirrored the criminal case against James Comey, the former F.B.I. director, who was indicted on a charge of making a threat against the president over a photograph posted to Instagram that depicted seashells on a beach arranged into the same numbers.

The Defense Department has designated its press office as a classified space, off limits to journalists, further restricting interactions between its public-facing representatives and the reporters assigned to cover the military.

The move, confirmed by the department’s acting press secretary, follows a change in policy from earlier this year that required journalists to have an official escort at all times when visiting the Pentagon.

A divided federal appeals court on Monday blocked the Trump administration from removing more than two dozen transgender service members from the military while a lawsuit fighting their dismissal is decided.

The 2-to-1 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is the latest legal salvo over a divisive policy that has forced out thousands of troops and left thousands of others in limbo for more than a year.

Scott Dance
June 1, 2026, 4:56 p.m. ET2 hours ago

A federal judge on Monday blocked Trump administration efforts to strip the the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a Colorado-based climate research laboratory, of its oversight of a key computing center in Wyoming. The administration’s plan to transfer stewardship of the facility, announced in February, has already caused a “flood of resignations” by scientists and threatens the future of the lab, wrote R. Brooke Jackson, a senior U.S. district judge in Colorado, in a preliminary injunction against the National Science Foundation.

There is evidence the decision may have been driven by political retribution against Colorado leaders, and it may have violated federal law on administrative procedures, Judge Jackson said. N.S.F. officials declined to comment.

The center, known as NCAR, has managed the supercomputing center — used by more than 4,000 climate and weather scientists to model atmospheric conditions and study air pollution, wildfires, hurricanes and solar storms — since the facility opened in 2012. The Trump administration said it was transferring oversight of the facility to an unspecified third party.

The Energy Department has issued new guidance that could prevent people from receiving rebates for replacing gas appliances with electric ones.

The guidance, which took effect on Friday, would prevent states from offering rebates to people who buy an electric stove to replace a gas range. It would also end rebates for similar swaps of ovens, dryers, heat pumps and water heaters.

In a move that disproportionately targets women and minority officers, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently blocked the promotions of nine Navy officers who had been selected by a board of senior Navy admirals.

The net result of Mr. Hegseth’s intervention is a slate of 22 nominees to be one-star admirals that bears little resemblance to the broader force these officers will help lead.

In late April, a lawyer for the Justice Department told a federal judge that her colleagues had been in the midst of negotiations with a Rhode Island hospital about turning over gender-transition treatment health records, only for the hospital’s lawyers to stop responding.

But Judge Mary S. McElroy of Federal District Court in Rhode Island concluded that was not true. While the government claimed it had not heard from the hospital since February, emails showed the hospital’s lawyers had stayed in close touch.

Former F.B.I. officials are starting a group to help embattled bureau employees grapple with the Trump administration’s rapid efforts to reshape its agency, saying that the work force is under incredible strain under its director, Kash Patel.

The group, called the F.B.I. Support Network, is an offshoot of the Justice Connection organization, made up of former Justice Department employees who offer legal, mental health or job search services to current agency employees.

More than 200 people have now been killed in a bombing campaign by the U.S. military against people it has accused of smuggling drugs in the waters off South America, after a string of deadly attacks over the last week.

The military said on Saturday that three men had been killed in the eastern Pacific during a strike ordered by Gen. Francis L. Donovan, the head of the Southern Command, against a boat that was “engaged in narco-trafficking operations.” Their deaths bring the total killed to at least 202, in more than 60 strikes“