AFP USA

US government lawyers pushed Friday for the case of a pro-Palestinian protest leader slated for deportation to be moved to a Louisiana court thought to be sympathetic to President Donald Trump’s hardline immigration crackdown.Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil — a prominent face of the protest movement that erupted in response to Israel’s war in Gaza — was arrested and taken to Louisiana earlier this month, sparking protests. Several other foreign student protesters have been similarly targeted.The government has not accused Khalil of any crime, but instead ordered his deportation and canceling his green card resident’s permit on the grounds of undermining US foreign policy.At a hearing in New Jersey, government lawyer August Flentje said that “for jurisdictional certainty, the case belongs in Louisiana.”But Khalil’s lawyer Baher Azmy accused the government of seeking to move the case to bolster its “retaliation.”The judge said he would not rule immediately on shifting the case to the Western District of Louisiana, a more conservative bench that has previously leaned towards Trump’s policies.Khalil was not present at the hearing, but his wife Noor attended with several supporters.- ‘Witch hunt’? -Khalil’s arrest has triggered outrage from Trump opponents, free speech advocates and some on the political right, who say the case will have a chilling effect on freedom of expression.Immigration officers have similarly detained and sought to deport a Tufts University student from Turkey, Rumeysa Ozturk, and Columbia student Yunseo Chung. Their deportations have been blocked for now by courts.Ozturk’s lawyer said Thursday that “we should all be horrified at the way (officers) abducted Rumeysa in broad daylight” after footage of masked, plainclothes officers surrounding the veiled student circulated online.Students at Columbia have described a culture of fear in the wake of the action against the college and its students.”Nothing can protect you,” said one student, a Hispanic-American with US citizenship who participated in last year’s protests calling for a Gaza ceasefire and for Columbia to divest from Israel.”I take precautions, I check if someone is following me. Before, I wasn’t afraid to leave my apartment door unlocked; now I lock it in case an agent comes in to check my stuff.”Nadia Urbinati, a professor of Political Theory at Columbia, told AFP that “writing papers, teaching, having new research, researchers or fellows becomes more restricted, controlled and monitored.”A foreign student, who declined to be named for fear of retaliation, said Trump had sought to “isolate” activists. “We try to laugh,” said another, but “the feeling of fear and paranoia is widespread.”Dozens protested in support of Khalil outside the New Jersey courthouse, holding Palestinian flags and banners.”We are going to fight this witch hunt,” said one protester, who did not want to be identified.As well as targeting foreign students at Columbia University, the Trump administration has sought to slash $400 million of federal funding and grants over alleged anti-Semitism on campus.Last week the Ivy League university announced a comprehensive package of measures to appease the White House, including “improvements to our disciplinary processes.” Columbia said it would require protesters to identify themselves when challenged, even if they wear masks, as many did during the height of the pro-Palestinian protests.It also announced the expansion of its security team, including the hiring of 36 officers empowered to remove or arrest those that break university rules.The Trump administration had demanded that the university deploy external oversight, but the school stopped short of that, instead vowing to engage with outside academics on the issue.Separately, a number of university professors sued the Trump administration in Massachusetts Tuesday, arguing its campaign targeting foreign academics was illegal.

Billionaire and Trump ally Elon Musk faced an immediate legal challenge Friday to his promise to give $1 million to two voters in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court race in his latest attempt to use his vast fortune to sway the results of crucial US votes.Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul wrote on Instagram that his office was “aware of the offer recently posted by Elon Musk” and said he plans to “take legal action today to seek a court order to stop this from happening.”Musk, the world’s richest person and one of President Donald Trump’s top advisors, has already spent millions trying to boost support for Republican Brad Schimel, who would tilt the swing-state’s top court to a conservative majority if elected.The Tesla and SpaceX tycoon announced on X, which he also owns, that he would “hand over checks for a million dollars” to two people who sign a petition opposing “activist judges” — a term used by Republicans for judges who rule against some of Trump’s policies.He has also offered $100 to anyone signing the petition.Serious national issues are on the docket for the Wisconsin court’s next term, including abortion access and rules for voting in the crucial 2026 midterm nationwide congressional elections. Schimel is also openly backed by Trump, who wrote on his Truth Social platform this week that the race is “really big and important.”The latest stunt was a redux of Musk’s earlier million-dollar prizes in battleground states during the presidential election.The entrepreneur has rapidly emerged as one of the most powerful people in the country, with huge government contracts for his companies and a free-ranging role in Trump’s administration to slash spending on everything from foreign policy to domestic programs.In January, Tesla — currently facing tumbling stock prices amid consumer anger at Musk — took Wisconsin to court over the state’s denial of dealer licenses for the auto company.

Movie stars including Joaquin Phoenix, Penelope Cruz and Richard Gere have blasted the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for failing to defend an Oscar-winning Palestinian filmmaker who said he was attacked by Israeli settlers.Hamdan Ballal co-directed “No Other Land,” which won best documentary at this year’s Academy Awards. This week, he said he had been assaulted by settlers and detained at gunpoint by soldiers in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.Unlike multiple other prominent filmmaker groups, the US-based Academy initially did not issue a statement. On Wednesday, it sent a letter to members that condemned “harming or suppressing artists for their work or their viewpoints,” without naming Ballal.By Friday morning, more than 600 Academy members had signed their own statement in response. “It is indefensible for an organization to recognize a film with an award in the first week of March, and then fail to defend its filmmakers just a few weeks later,” the members said.”We stand in condemnation of the brutal assault and unlawful detention of Oscar-winning Palestinian filmmaker Hamdan Ballal by settlers and Israeli forces in the West Bank,” they wrote.The Academy leadership’s response “fell far short of the sentiments this moment calls for,” said the members.The Los Angeles-based group’s board convened an extraordinary meeting Friday to confront the deepening crisis, according to trade outlet Deadline.The Academy did not immediately respond to an AFP request for comment. “No Other Land” chronicles the forced displacement of Palestinians by Israeli troops and settlers in Masafer Yatta — an area Israel declared a restricted military zone in the 1980s.Despite winning the coveted Oscar, the film has struggled to find a major US distributor.Following Monday’s incident, Ballal told AFP the “brutality” of the attack “made me feel it was because I won the Oscar.”During his detention at an Israeli military center, Ballal said he noticed soldiers mentioning his name alongside the word “Oscar” during shift changes.He was released Tuesday, after being detained the previous day for allegedly “hurling rocks.” Yuval Abraham, who also co-directed and appears in the documentary, has criticized the Academy — both for its initial silence, and then for its subsequent statement.”After our criticism, the academy’s leaders sent out this email to members explaining their silence on Hamdan’s assault: they need to respect ‘unique viewpoints’,” he wrote on X, sharing a screenshot of the Academy’s letter.

US President Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court on Friday to overturn a lower court ban on his use of an obscure wartime law to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members without due process.The emergency appeal sets up a showdown over one of the most glaring examples of Trump’s unprecedented attempts to increase presidential power since returning to the White House in January.Trump invoked the little-known 1798 Alien Enemies Act to justify rounding up alleged Venezuelan gang members, some of whom were sent to a notorious maximum security prison set up by the right-wing government in El Salvador.The Trump administration has used images of the alleged Tren de Aragua gang members being shackled and having their heads shaved in the Central American prison as proof that it is serious about cracking down on illegal immigration.Rights advocates say some of the deportees had nothing to do with gangs and that even potential criminals are required to be given court hearings before expulsion, in line with the US Constitution.District Judge James Boasberg issued an injunction barring further flights of deportees under the Alien Enemies Act after two planeloads of Venezuelan migrants were sent to El Salvador on March 15.Boasberg said migrants subject to potential deportation should be “entitled to individualized hearings to determine whether the Act applies to them at all.”On Friday, the judge extended until April 12 his temporary restraining order barring any further deportations under the Alien Enemies Act.An initial appeal by the Trump administration was turned down Wednesday with one appeals court judge saying that even “Nazis got better treatment” from the United States during World War II.In its appeal to the Supreme Court, which is dominated by conservative justices, acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris said the case is a key test of presidential authority over the courts.”This case presents fundamental questions about who decides how to conduct sensitive national-security-related operations in this country” — the president or judges, Harris said.”The Constitution supplies a clear answer: the President,” she said. “The republic cannot afford a different choice.”- ‘Summary removal’ -Harris said the Alien Enemies Act, which has only been used previously during the War of 1812, World War I and World War II, authorizes “summary removal of enemy aliens engaged in ‘invasions or predatory incursions’ of US territory.””The district court’s orders have rebuffed the President’s judgments as to how to protect the Nation against foreign terrorist organizations and risk debilitating effects for delicate foreign negotiations,” she said.The acting solicitor general asked the Supreme Court to immediately stay the district court’s order while it considers the case.Lee Gelernt, a lawyer with the ACLU, urged the court to preserve the status quo “so that more individuals are not sent off to a notorious foreign prison without any process, based on an unprecedented and unlawful use of a wartime authority.””The president is not king,” added Skye Perryman of Democracy Forward. “He cannot deport people without due process, and he cannot invoke wartime powers — used only three times in history — during peacetime without accountability.”Trump has campaigned relentlessly on social media against Boasberg, even calling for him to be impeached by Congress, a remark that drew a rare public rebuke of the president from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.Attorneys for several of the deported Venezuelans have said that their clients were not members of Tren de Aragua, had committed no crimes and were targeted largely on the basis of their tattoos.

Billionaire and Trump ally Elon Musk promised Friday to give $1 million to two voters in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court race, his latest foray into using his vast fortune to sway the results of crucial US votes.Musk, the world’s richest person and one of President Donald Trump’s top advisors, has already spent millions trying to boost support for  Republican Brad Schimel, who would tilt the swing-state’s top court to a conservative majority if elected.The Tesla and SpaceX tycoon announced on X, which he also owns, that he would “hand over checks for a million dollars” to two people who sign a petition opposing “activist judges” — a term used by Republicans for judges who rule against some of Trump’s policies.He has also offered $100 to anyone signing the petition.Serious national issues are on the docket for the Wisconsin court’s next term, including abortion access and rules for voting in the crucial 2026 midterm nationwide congressional elections. Schimel is also openly backed by Trump, who wrote on his Truth Social platform this week that the race is “really big and important.”The latest stunt was a redux of Musk’s earlier million-dollar prizes in battleground states during the presidential election.The entrepreneur has rapidly emerged as one of the most powerful people in the country, with huge government contracts for his companies and a free-ranging role in Trump’s administration to slash spending on everything from foreign policy to domestic programs.In January, Tesla — currently facing tumbling stock prices amid consumer anger at Musk — took Wisconsin to court over the state’s denial of dealer licenses for the auto company.

The western US state of Utah has become the first to prohibit fluoridation of its public drinking water, part of a growing movement reexamining the decades-old public health practice.New US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has long been a vocal critic of fluoridated water, which currently reaches an estimated 200 million Americans — about two-thirds of the population.Utah’s ban, signed into law by Governor Spencer Cox on Thursday, is set to take effect on May 7. Legislatures in other Republican-led states including North Dakota, Tennessee, and Montana, are considering similar measures.Opposition is not limited to red states. Liberal-leaning cities such as Portland, Oregon, and the City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii, have also banned fluoridation.Fluoride was first introduced to US water systems in 1945, dramatically reducing childhood cavities and adult tooth loss. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention hails it as one of the top public health achievements of the 20th century.But controversy has grown around its potential neurotoxic effects. Last year, the Department of Health and Human Services under former president Joe Biden concluded with “moderate confidence” that higher levels of fluoride are linked to lower IQ scores.This January, a paper in the prestigious journal JAMA Pediatrics, authored by the same government scientists, found a “statistically significant association” between fluoride exposure and reduced IQ. However, it left open key questions about what dosage levels may be harmful.The World Health Organization’s safety threshold stands at 1.5 milligrams per liter — about double the US guideline of 0.7 mg/L — and the study said there was insufficient data to determine whether that limit should be revised.Ending fluoridation is generally opposed by the dental and public health communities. Critics of the recent study argue it failed to adequately control for confounding variables and environmental factors.Fluoride occurs naturally in varying concentrations and strengthens teeth in several ways: by restoring minerals lost to acid, reducing acid production by cavity-causing bacteria, and making it harder for those bacteria to adhere to enamel.Proponents argue fluoridation reduces socioeconomic disparities in dental care.But with fluoride toothpastes widely available since the 1960s, some research suggests diminishing returns. A recent Canadian study found that ending fluoridation increased dental caries, while an Irish study reported a decline in severe caries in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas.Fluoridation policies also vary widely by country, with many, including Germany and France eschewing the practice altogether.

US President Donald Trump said he had an “extremely productive” first call Friday with Canada’s new Prime Minister Mark Carney, after soaring tensions over tariffs and Trump’s repeated calls to annex his northern neighbor.Trump added that the two had agreed to meet soon after Canada’s April 28 general election in which Carney — who took office two weeks ago — has made standing up to the US president the focus of his campaign.”I just finished speaking with Prime Minister Mark Carney, of Canada. It was an extremely productive call, we agree on many things,” Trump said on his Truth Social network.Trump said they would be “meeting immediately after Canada’s upcoming Election to work on elements of Politics, Business, and all other factors, that will end up being great for both the United States of America and Canada.”Typically, a new Canadian leader makes a phone call with the US president an immediate priority but this was Trump and Carney’s first contact since the Canadian was sworn in on March 14.Carney’s office said the pair had a “very constructive conversation” and agreed to begin “comprehensive negotiations about a new economic and security relationship immediately following the election.”It added, however, that Carney told Trump his government will impose retaliatory tariffs on American goods from April 2, when sweeping US levies are set to come into place.Trump’s glowing post was still a dramatic change in tone from recent rhetoric between Washington and Ottawa, who are NATO allies and long-standing economic partners.The US president has sparked fury in Canada by repeatedly insisting that it should become the 51st US state and by slapping or threatening tariffs on the country.His post on Friday was notable for its diplomacy, as Trump gave Carney his official title of prime minister and made no reference to his annexation drive.In contrast, Trump would often belittle Carney’s predecessor Justin Trudeau, with whom he had a long-standing rivalry, as “governor” in a reference to his calls for Canada to join the United States.Canada’s new prime minister — who is in a tight election race to stay in the job — has meanwhile stepped up his rhetoric.The former central banker was chosen by Canada’s centrist Liberal Party to replace Trudeau but has never faced the country’s electorate.- ‘Old relationship’ -Just a day before the call, Carney upped the ante by declaring that decades of close cooperation with the United States were now at an end because of Trump.”The old relationship we had with the United States based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military cooperation is over,” Carney said.Carney added that he would not participate in substantive trade negotiations with Washington until the president shows Canada “respect,” particularly by ending his repeated annexation threats.While the call may have eased tensions for now, the tariffs issue in particular has not gone away.Trump’s planned 25 percent levy on vehicle imports to the United States is to come into force next week and could be devastating for a Canadian auto industry that supports an estimated 500,000 jobs. The 78-year-old Republican is also set to impose reciprocal tariffs on all countries that put levies on US exports, and Canada is to be in the firing line for those too.Trump has warned Canada against working with the European Union to counter upcoming reciprocal tariffs on all imports that he is expected to announce next week.If they did so, they would face “large scale tariffs, far larger than currently planned,” Trump has said. The US president’s statement that he and Carney would meet immediately after Canada’s elections apparently ignored the fact that the race is too close to call.Trudeau was deeply unpopular when he announced he was stepping down, with Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives seen as election favorites just weeks ago.Since Trump’s threats, the polls have spectacularly narrowed in favor of Carney’s Liberals, who hold a minority in parliament.

US government lawyers pushed Friday for the case of a pro-Palestinian protest leader slated for deportation to be moved to a Louisiana court thought to be sympathetic to President Donald Trump’s hardline immigration crackdown.Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil — a prominent face of the protest movement that erupted in response to Israel’s war in Gaza — was arrested and taken to Louisiana earlier this month, sparking protests. Several other foreign student protesters have been similarly targeted.The government has not accused Khalil of any crime but instead ordered his deportation and cancellation of his green card resident’s permit on the grounds of undermining US foreign policy.At a hearing in New Jersey, government lawyer August Flentje said that “for jurisdictional certainty, the case belongs in Louisiana.”But  Khalil’s lawyer Baher Azmy accused the government of seeking to move the case to bolster its “retaliation.”The judge said he would not rule immediately on shifting the case to the Western District of Louisiana, a more conservative bench that has previously been sympathetic to Trump’s policies.Khalil was not present but his wife Noor attended with several supporters.His arrest has triggered outrage from Trump opponents, free speech advocates and some on the political right, who say the case will have a chilling effect on freedom of expression.Immigration officers have similarly detained and sought to deport a Tufts University student from Turkey, Rumeysa Ozturk, and Columbia student Yunseo Chung. Their deportations have been blocked for now by courts.Ozturk’s lawyer said Thursday that “we should all be horrified at the way (officers) abducted Rumeysa in broad daylight” after footage of masked, plainclothes officers surrounding the veiled student circulated online.Dozens protested in support of Khalil outside the New Jersey courthouse, holding Palestinian flags and banners.”We are going to fight this witch hunt,” said one protester, who did not want to be identified.As well as targeting foreign students at Columbia University, the Trump administration has sought to slash $400 million of federal funding and grants over alleged anti-Semitism on campus.- Academics sue government -Last week the Ivy League university announced a comprehensive package of measures to appease the White House, including “improvements to our disciplinary processes.” It said it would require protesters to identify themselves when challenged, even if they wear masks, as many did during the height of the pro-Palestinian protests.It also announced the expansion of its security team, including the hiring of 36 officers empowered to remove or arrest those that break university rules.The Trump administration had demanded that the university deploy external oversight, but the school stopped short of that, instead vowing to engage with outside academics on the issue.Separately, a number of university professors sued the Trump administration in Massachusetts Tuesday, arguing its campaign targeting foreign academics was illegal.

The US Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation measure was largely unchanged last month, according to government data published Friday, but a widely scrutinized gauge of underlying price pressures rose.The personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index rose 2.5 percent in the 12 months to February, the Commerce Department said in a statement, unchanged from a month earlier. Inflation rose 0.3 percent on a monthly basis.Both measures were in line with the median forecasts from economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.But of greater concern to Fed officials, an inflation measure stripping out volatile food and energy costs rose more than expected, by 0.4 percent month-on-month, and by 2.8 percent from a year ago.The Fed is attempting to return inflation to its long-term target of two percent. Friday’s data suggests policymakers still have some way to go as they also grapple with the effects of trade policy uncertainty.”They’re kind of in wait-and-see mode for awhile,” Wolfe Research chief economist Stephanie Roth told AFP. “Our call is that they’re going to cut rates because growth is weakening, but they actually need to see a rising unemployment rate first.”So today probably doesn’t really change the narrative that much for them,” she added. – Stop-start tariff rollout -US President Donald Trump has embarked on a stop-start rollout of country- and sector-specific tariffs, drawing condemnation from allies and warnings from Fed officials that the measures will likely push up prices. “It looks inevitable that tariffs are going to increase inflation in the near term,” Boston Fed President Susan Collins — who has a vote on the US central bank’s rate-setting committee this year — said Thursday.Earlier this month, the Fed voted to extend a pause in rate cuts, holding its key lending rate at between 4.25 and 4.50 percent.Financial markets see a roughly 90 percent chance that the Fed will vote to continue that pause at its next rate meeting in May, according to CME Group.”The data support our view that downside risks to the economy are emerging, but with inflation heating up, the Fed for now will maintain its wait-and-see approach,” Nationwide chief economist Kathy Bostjancic wrote in a note to clients. Personal income increased by 0.8 percent last month, according to the Commerce Department data published Friday.And personal saving as a percentage of disposable personal income — a measure of how much consumers are saving — jumped to 4.6 percent last month, up from a revised 4.3 percent a month earlier.The jump in the personal savings rate since the start of the year may be related to consumer confidence, which has deteriorated sharply in recent months, with consumers more likely to save money if they are concerned about where the economy is headed.Americans are now feeling less optimistic about the US economy, and more concerned about rising inflation, according to fresh data on consumer sentiment published Friday by the University of Michigan.  “UMich isn’t the greatest measure, but I think directionally, it tells you something important,” said Roth from Wolfe Research. “And I think it’s telling you that consumers are starting to become concerned about the inflation backdrop, and this is the thing that differentiates whether the Fed is able to look through this tariff or not.”

A woman sentenced to life in prison for murdering a Mexican-American pop star in a Texas motel was denied parole on Thursday, almost three decades after the killing.Yolanda Saldivar was president of Selena’s fan club and had claimed she accidentally shot the singer on March 31, 1995 at a motel room in Corpus Christi, Texas.The 23-year-old star, whose full name was Selena Quintanilla Perez, was wildly popular in the Mexican-American community of Tejano music — an upbeat mingle of Texan and Mexican sounds — and on the verge of breaking through to a larger mainstream audience when she was killed.”After a thorough consideration of all available information, which included any confidential interviews conducted, it was the parole panel’s determination to deny parole to Yolanda Saldivar and set her next parole review for March 2030,” the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole said in a statement.According to the board, the decision was based on the “brutality, violence, assaultive behavior or conscious selection of the victim’s vulnerability” of the murder, which indicated Saldivar “poses a continuing threat to public safety.”The singer’s family welcomed the decision.”While nothing can bring Selena back, this decision reaffirms that justice continues to stand for the beautiful life that was taken from us,” her family and widower Chris Perez said in a joint statement.Saldivar, now 64, was a personal assistant to Selena and an employee at her boutique when she fatally shot the star in the back after meeting her at a motel.The singer had reportedly confronted Saldivar about more than 30,000 dollars missing from her fan club and two of her boutiques.Witnesses told police that Selena identified Saldivar as her killer before she collapsed and died.Listed by Billboard magazine as one of the greatest Latin artists of all time, Selena won a Grammy in 1993 and received a posthumous award in 2021.In 2017, she was honoured with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.