Department

What a difference eight years makes. During President Trump’s first term, then-Sen. Marco Rubio pushed the president to expand his human rights diplomatic agenda. Rubio recognized that promoting human rights abroad is in the national interest. He urged the president to appoint an assistant secretary for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor — commonly known as DRL — after the position was left vacant for nearly two years. He co-sponsored the Women, Peace and Security Act (ensuring that the U.S. includes women in international conflict negotiations), spoke out against the torture of gay men in Chechnya and co-sponsored the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.

So it is shocking that as secretary of State, Rubio is overseeing the near-total destruction of his department’s human rights and global justice policy shops and programs. Rubio knows this decision, one catastrophe among the many State Department cuts he’s contemplating, will undermine the enforcement of legislation he previously championed. It will also imperil decades of bipartisan foreign policy and leave the world a much more dangerous and unjust place. Congress must use its authorization and appropriation powers to protect this work.

We speak from experience. We represent the Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice, an organization of former State Department senior diplomats mandated to promote human rights and criminal justice globally, and to combat human trafficking. If the proposed DRL “reorganization” proceeds, critical infrastructure and expertise, which took decades and enormous political will to build, will be lost. It would also send a chilling message to the world, and to Americans: The U.S. no longer sees the quests for equality, global justice or human rights as foreign policy imperatives, or as priorities at all.

Rubio’s plan would shutter most of the State Department’s offices devoted to human rights and lay off an estimated 80% of the DRL staff, most of whom are experts in human rights and democracy. In a recent Substack post, he claimed these civil servants had become “left-wing activists [waging] vendettas against ‘anti-woke’ leaders.” Surely he knows they have instead proved themselves committed to serve the U.S. government under whatever administration is elected.

Rubio may claim that he is not eliminating DRL, but by stripping it of all policy functions, limiting it to dispensing minimal humanitarian assistance and undermining its ability to influence policy debates, his plan will be the last nail in the coffin in which the Trump administration buries America’s human rights work.

When difficult foreign policy debates are underway at the highest levels, there will be no U.S. experts at the table who specialize in human rights issues. Yet we know it is crucial that America’s foreign policy decisions balance the often precarious tension between human rights and economic and geopolitical issues.

The destruction of DRL means many important initiatives will cease altogether. As one example, the bureau previously funded a global network of civil society organizations working to reintegrate detained children of Islamic State insurgents in Iraq. Without intervention, these children and their mothers (often victims themselves) would have been indefinitely trapped in refugee camps and left susceptible to radicalization and terrorist recruitment. This lifesaving work — which made Americans safer by disrupting the cycle of anti-American extremism — was done at minimal cost to U.S. taxpayers. Now this meticulously crafted network will probably disintegrate, empowering hostile regimes overnight and imperiling the victims of Islamic extremism.

Per the plan, the few surviving DRL offices would be rebranded along ideological lines. The Office of International Labor Affairs would become the Office of Free Markets and Fair Labor, allegedly to prioritize American workers. But a different message is clear: The State Department is eviscerating efforts to prevent human trafficking, forced labor and union-busting overseas, despite the fact that such practices only make it harder for America’s workers and manufacturers to compete in a global economy.

Trump’s foreign policy perversely twists human rights causes into their regressive opposites. For instance, Rubio plans to cancel the role of special representative for racial equity and justice created by the Biden administration — a long-overdue position given the destabilizing role of racial injustice in countries around the world (including our own). Now the department touts racist narratives about “civilizational allies” and asserts that human rights derive from “western values.”

That assertion is offensive, dangerous and wrong. For starters, the flagship human rights instrument is the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Labeling human rights “western” only encourages dictators around the world to falsely claim the efforts are a Trojan horse for American imperialism. Such framing may put a target on the backs of activists in repressive regimes where advocating for the most marginalized — LGBTQ+ people for example — can be a death sentence.

The Rubio overhaul of the State Department may not seem as alarming as the administration’s scorched-earth tactics elsewhere, such as the total elimination of the U.S. Agency for International Development. But his plan — and his weak and unsubstantiated justification for it — should raise alarms because foreign policy mirrors domestic policy and vice versa. Indeed, we fear that America’s retreat from human rights and democracy on the global stage is a preview for more repression to come here at home.

Congress will have to decide whether to approve Secretary Rubio’s dismantling of offices that fight for human rights and justice, a plan Sen. Rubio would have strenuously rejected less than a year ago. As the U.S. confronts emboldened adversaries, rising authoritarianism and increasing instability in the Middle East and elsewhere, senators and representatives would do well to remember that nations that promote and protect human rights and the rule of law are more likely to enjoy peace, prosperity and stability — conditions that used to define the U.S. to the rest of the world and that we need now more than ever.

Desirée Cormier Smith is the former State Department special representative for racial equity and justice. Kelly M. Fay Rodríguez is the former special representative for international labor affairs, and Beth Van Schaack the former ambassador for global criminal justice. The full list of founders of the Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice is available at thealliancefordiplomacyandjustice.org.

Michael Madsen, the actor who was a staple in numerous Quentin Tarantino films including “Kill Bill” and “Reservoir Dogs,” has died. He was 67

A spokesperson for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department confirmed to The Times that deputies responded to the actor’s Malibu home Thursday morning and found him unresponsive. He was pronounced dead at 8:25 a.m. The spokesperson did not reveal a cause of death, adding that foul play is not suspected and Madsen seemingly died of natural causes.

This story is developing and will be updated.

NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration from ending temporary legal status for more than 500,000 Haitians who are already in the United States.

District Court Judge Brian M. Cogan in New York ruled that moving up the expiration of the temporary protected status, or TPS, by at least five months for Haitians, some of whom have lived in the U.S. for more than a decade, is unlawful.

The Biden administration had extended Haiti’s TPS status through at least Feb. 3, 2026, due to gang violence, political unrest, a major earthquake in 2021 and several other factors, according to court documents.

But last week, the Department of Homeland Security announced it was terminating those legal protections as soon as Sept. 2, setting Haitians up for potential deportation. The department said the conditions in the country had improved and Haitians no longer met the conditions for the temporary legal protections.

The ruling comes as President Trump works to end protections and programs for immigrants as part of his mass deportations promises.

The judge’s 23-page opinion states that the Department of Homeland Security’s move to terminate the legal protections early violates the TPS statute that requires a certain amount of notice before reconsidering a designation.

“When the Government confers a benefit over a fixed period of time, a beneficiary can reasonably expect to receive that benefit at least until the end of that fixed period,” according to the ruling.

The judge also referenced the fact that the plaintiffs have started jobs, enrolled in schools and begun receiving medical treatment with the expectations that the country’s TPS designation would run through the end of the year.

Manny Pastreich, president of the Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ, which filed the lawsuit, described the ruling as an “important step” but said the fight is not over.

“We will keep fighting to make sure this decision is upheld,” Pastreich said in a statement. “We will keep fighting for the rights of our members and all immigrants against the Trump Administration – in the streets, in the workplace, and in the courts as well. And when we fight, we win.”

DHS did not immediately respond to an email from the Associated Press requesting comment. But the government had argued that TPS is a temporary program and thus “the termination of a country’s TPS designation is a possibility beneficiaries must always expect.”

Haiti’s TPS status was initially activated in 2010 after the catastrophic earthquake and has been extended multiple times, according to the lawsuit.

Gang violence has displaced 1.3 million people across Haiti as the local government and international community struggle with the spiraling crisis, according to a report from the International Organization for Migration. There has been a 24% increase in displaced people since December, with gunmen having chased 11% of Haiti’s nearly 12 million inhabitants from their home, the report said.

In May, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to strip Temporary Protected Status from 350,000 Venezuelans, potentially exposing them to deportation. The order put on hold a ruling from a federal judge in San Francisco that kept the legal protections in place.

The judge’s decision in New York also comes on the heels of the Trump administration revoking legal protections for thousands of Haitians who arrived legally in the U.S. through a humanitarian parole program.

When a top official responsible for oversight of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department announced recently that he is being forced out of his position, it brought to a fever pitch tensions that had been building for months.

On one side are watchdogs who say efforts to bring reforms and transparency to the Sheriff’s Department are being stymied. On the other are county officials who claim fresh perspectives are needed on the Civilian Oversight Commission.

The showdown is playing out as the commission continues fighting the county for access to internal sheriff’s department records on deputy misconduct, including investigations into gang-like cliques said to rule over certain stations and promote a culture of violence.

Robert Bonner, the oversight commission chair, wrote in a letter last month that he was “involuntarily leaving” the body he has been a member of since its founding in 2016. Bonner, 83, said in an interview that he was chairing the commission’s May meeting at the L.A. County Hall of Records when he unexpectedly received a letter from County Supervisor Kathryn Barger stating that she would be appointing someone to replace him.

On Thursday, Bonner gave his first address to the commission since revealing his time as chair will end this month.

Bonner said he was “still surprised” that he had been “dismissed without so much as a phone call from Supervisor Barger.”

And he had choice words for other county operators that he described as thorns in the commission’s side.

“It can be treacherous. The county bureaucrats — and this includes, by the way, the county counsel’s office — they guard their turf and see an independent commission as a threat to that turf,” Bonner said.

“There are forces within the county,” he added later, “that do not want to see real, effective and meaningful oversight over the sheriff’s department.”

Helen Chavez, a spokesperson for Barger, said in an email that Bonner’s claims that the supervisor summarily dismissed him were made “for dramatic effect” and “are not only inaccurate but also mischaracterize the circumstances of his departure” from the commission.

“His assertion that his presence alone was essential to achieving reforms is both self-serving and dismissive of the dedicated Commissioners and staff who are collectively advancing the Civilian Oversight Commission’s mission,” the statement said. “These reforms are bigger than any one individual, and they will continue without interruption.”

Barger, who chairs the county‘s Board of Supervisors, told The Times in a statement last month that she is “committed to broadening the diversity of voices and expertise represented on the Commission.”

Fifth District Supervisor Kathryn Barger attends a Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors meeting in 2023.

(Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times)

She said her decision to replace Bonner “reflects my desire to continue cultivating public trust in the oversight process by introducing new perspectives that support the Commission’s vital work.”

On Thursday, Patti Giggans, an ally of Bonner’s on the commission, stood up for the departing chairman during what he said would likely be the last of the body’s monthly meetings he’d attend as a commissioner.

“I have a feeling all of us here, all the commissioners, appreciate your leadership, your tenacity, your brilliance and courage to go up against forces that are not necessarily yet in agreement with what effective oversight means,” she said.

The County Counsel’s office said in an email that it “has fully supported the COC, as an advisory body to the Board, in its efforts to seek the information it needs to play a powerful oversight role on behalf of LA County citizens.”

But some observers note that the county counsel is in an awkward position, since the office represents multiple parties involved. That includes the Civilian Oversight Commission, which has been trying to enforce subpoenas, as well as Barger’s office and the sheriff’s department.

Peter Eliasberg, chief counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, said it seems to him that nearly every time such a dispute comes up, the county’s lawyers side with the sheriff’s department.

“It’s either intentional or it’s incredibly short-sighted for Commissioner Bonner to be pushed out at this point, at a time when he’s been spearheading incredibly important reforms,” Eliasberg said. “It feels to me like this is an effort once again to hamstring this commission.”

Bonner, who previously served as a federal judge and was head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, isn’t the only commissioner to acrimoniously leave the oversight body this year.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Robert Luna, right, talks with former oversight official Sean Kennedy during the annual Baker to Vegas law enforcement relay on April 5 in Baker, Calif.

(William Liang / For The Times)

In February, Loyola Law School professor Sean Kennedy resigned after county lawyers sought to stop him from filing a brief in court in support of Diana Teran, an advisor to former L.A. County Dist. Atty. George Gascón who faced felony charges from the state. Teran was accused of improperly accessing records about sheriff’s deputies, but a state appellate court recently moved to dismiss the case.

Kennedy said in February that he quit because he believed it was “not appropriate for the County Counsel to control the COC’s independent oversight decisions.”

Last month, Kennedy received notification that a law firm had “been engaged by the Office of the County Counsel” to investigate him for allegedly retaliating against a sergeant in the sheriff’s department who had faced oversight scrutiny. Kennedy has denied any wrongdoing, claiming the probe against him is politically motivated.

In an email this week, Kennedy described Bonner’s removal as “the death-knell for meaningful civilian oversight of the LASD.” He claimed that the Board of Supervisors “supports the sheriff in preventing the commissioners from accessing confidential documents to do their job.”

Barger’s office pushed back against the criticism, pointing to correspondence from Bonner earlier this year that the supervisor’s office said suggested he was willing to step down.

In an April 18 email to Barger, Bonner wrote that “if you decide not to reappoint me, please be assured that I am fine with that.”

Chavez, Barger’s spokesperson, questioned the “stark contrast” between “his posture and tone” then compared with Bonner’s recent public remarks.

Bonner told The Times he followed up his April 18 email to express that he “wanted to be extended” to achieve his goals as chair.

“I never wanted to her to think I lusted for the job,” Bonner said in a text message.

The abrupt departures of Bonner and Kennedy have raised concerns about who will fill the void they leave behind.

The Civilian Oversight Commission voted on Thursday for the body’s co-vice chair, Hans Johnson, to fill Bonner’s shoes when his time in the role concludes on July 17.

“The loss of Rob and Sean, who were deeply committed to getting to the bottom of problems in the sheriff’s department, is a blow to the county,” said Bert Deixler, former special counsel to the oversight commission. “These were two special guys who knew what they were talking about. Long, long history.”

Deixler attributed the turmoil to “political machinations” within the county and decried the move to replace Bonner.

“I just can’t understand it,” he said. “There couldn’t be a merits-based reason for making that decision.”

At the commission’s meeting Thursday, Bonner listed several goals he had hoped to accomplish before his time as chair ends. His priorities included bolstering the board’s ability to conduct effective oversight and compelling a commitment by Sheriff Robert Luna to enact a ban on deputy gangs and cliques.

It’s not yet clear how Bonner’s dismissal will affect those plans.

“I’m leaving,” he said. “You guys have got to pick up the ball here after July 17.”

July 1 (UPI) — U.S. State Department representatives met with nuclear forensic scientists from around the world Tuesday at this year’s annual Nuclear Forensics International Technical Working Group meeting in Italy.

The meeting, taking place in Bologna during record heat throughout much of Europe, comes nine days after the United States launched B-2 bomber airstrikes on three nuclear enrichment sites in Iran.

While President Donald Trump said the airstrikes “obliterated” the facilities, the U.N. nuclear watchdog chief said the damage only set back Iran’s nuclear program by a few months.

The State Department released a statement Tuesday, outlining the meeting with no specifics or reference to last month’s strikes.

“Nuclear forensics, the scientific analysis of nuclear materials, deters nuclear terrorism and ensures public safety by identifying the origin and history of nuclear materials,” the statement read.

The State Department’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation was involved in planning this week’s meeting after having co-chaired the full-working group and all five ITWG task groups.

The ITWG has met for nearly 30 years “to make the world safer through the advancement of nuclear forensics best practices.”

This year’s meeting involves more than 80 experts from 30 countries discussing new developments, in an effort to grow international cooperation “in nuclear forensics exercise and capability development.”

While U.S. airstrikes weakened Iran’s nuclear program, Iran is not the only country targeted for denuclearization. Last week, the State Department said it was committed to the “complete denuclearization” of North Korea.

“President Trump, in his first term, made significant outreach to North Korea,” said State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce.

“They’ve got their own nuclear program in North Korea and we remain committed to the complete denuclearization of North Korea,” she said. “That remains a commitment.”

Warner Music Group will lay off an unspecified number of employees as part of a months-long restructuring plan to cut costs, Chief Executive Robert Kyncl said in a memo to staff Tuesday.

Kyncl said in the memo that the plan to “future-proof” the company includes reducing annual costs by roughly $300 million, with $170 million of that coming from “headcount rightsizing for agility and impact.” The additional $130 million in costs will come from administrative and real estate expenses, he said.

The cuts are the “remaining steps” of a period of significant change at the company, Kyncl said, with previous rounds of layoffs and leadership switch-ups happening in the last two years as he worked to “transform” the company.

“I know that this news is tough and unsettling, and you will have many questions. The Executive Leadership Team has spent a lot of time thinking about our future state and how to put us on the best path forward,” Kyncl said in the internal memo that was reviewed by The Times. “These decisions are not being made lightly, it will be difficult to say goodbye to talented people, and we’re committed to acting with empathy and integrity.”

It’s unclear how many employees will be laid off or what departments will see cuts, but Kyncl emphasized the company will be focused on increasing investments in its artists and repertoire department and mergers and acquisitions.

Hours before the news of layoffs, the company announced a $1.2-billion joint venture with Bain Capital to invest in music catalogs. The collaboration will add to the company’s catalog-purchasing power across both recorded music and music publishing, Kyncl said.

“In an ever-changing industry, we must continue to supercharge our capabilities in long-term artist, songwriter, and catalog development,” he wrote. “That’s why this company was created in the first place, it’s what we’ve always been best at, and it’s how we’ll differentiate ourselves in the future.”

In 2024, Warner Music laid off 600 employees, or approximately 10% of its workforce, and in 2023, 270 jobs were cut.

Warner Music Group shares closed at $27.83, up 2.17%, on Tuesday.

WASHINGTON — Court records show that the Trump administration has agreed to spare from deportation a key witness in the federal prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia in exchange for his cooperation in the case.

Jose Ramon Hernandez Reyes, 38, has been convicted of smuggling migrants and illegally reentering the United States after having been deported. He also pleaded guilty to “deadly conduct” in connection with a separate incident in which he drunkenly fired a gun in a Texas community.

Records reviewed by the Washington Post show that Hernandez Reyes has been released early from federal prison to a halfway house and has been given permission to stay in the U.S. for at least a year.

Prosecutors have identified Hernandez Reyes as the “first cooperator” in the case against Abrego Garcia, according to court filings. The Department of Homeland Security maintains that Hernandez Reyes owned a sport utility vehicle that Abrego Garcia was allegedly using to smuggle migrants when the Tennessee Highway Patrol stopped him in 2022. That traffic stop is at the center of the criminal investigation against Abrego Garcia.

Hernandez Reyes is among several cooperating witnesses who could help the administration deport Abrego Garcia.

Abrego Garcia, a construction worker who had been living in Maryland, became a prime focus in Trump’s immigration crackdown when he was mistakenly deported to his native El Salvador in March. Facing mounting pressure and a Supreme Court order, the administration returned him this month to face the smuggling charges, which his attorneys have called “preposterous.”

On Friday, attorneys for Abrego Garcia asked a federal judge in Tennessee to delay his release from jail because of “contradictory statements” by the administration over whether he’ll be deported upon release.

A federal judge in Nashville has been preparing to release Abrego Garcia to await trial on human smuggling charges. But she’s been holding off over concerns that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement would swiftly detain him and try to deport him again.

Abrego Garcia’s attorneys are now asking the judge to continue to detain him after statements by administration officials “because we cannot put any faith in any representation made on this issue by” the Justice Department.

Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty.

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department on Friday fired at least three prosecutors involved in U.S. Capitol riot criminal cases, the latest moves by the Trump administration targeting attorneys connected to the massive prosecution of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Those dismissed include two attorneys who worked as supervisors overseeing the Jan. 6 prosecutions in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington as well as a line attorney who prosecuted cases stemming from the Capitol riot and insurrection, the people said. They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss personnel matters.

A letter received by one of the prosecutors was signed by Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi. The letter did not provide a reason for their removal, effective immediately, citing only “Article II of the United States Constitution and the laws of the United States,” according to a copy seen by the Associated Press.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment Friday evening.

The terminations marked yet another escalation of the moves that have raised alarm over the Trump administration’s disregard for civil service protections for career lawyers and the erosion of the Justice Department’s independence from the White House. Top leaders at the Justice Department have also fired employees who worked on the prosecutions of President Trump and demoted a slew of career supervisors in what has been seen as an effort to purge the agency of lawyers seen as insufficiently loyal.

Trump’s sweeping pardons of the Jan. 6 rioters have led to worries about actions being taken against attorneys involved in the massive prosecution of the more than 1,500 Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol as lawmakers met to certify Joe Biden’s election victory. Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of all of them on his first day back in the White House, releasing from prison people convicted of seditious conspiracy and violent assaults on police.

During his time as interim U.S. attorney in Washington, Ed Martin in February demoted several prosecutors involved in the Jan. 6 cases, including the attorney who served as chief of the Capitol Siege Section. Others demoted include two lawyers who helped secure seditious conspiracy convictions against Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes and former Proud Boys national chairman Enrique Tarrio.

In January, then-acting Deputy Atty. Gen. Emil Bove ordered the firings of about two dozen prosecutors who had been hired for temporary assignments to support the Jan. 6 cases but were moved into permanent roles after Trump’s 2024 presidential win. Bove said he would not “tolerate subversive personnel actions by the previous administration.”

Trump, the only felon to ever occupy the White House, was impeached on a charge of inciting insurrection in the attack on the Capitol. He was also indicted on felony charges related to Jan. 6, but that case was dropped after Trump was elected in November.

Richer writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Americans’ per capita income–after adjustment for inflation–declined in 1991, the first drop in nine years, the Commerce Department reported Wednesday.

The fall in real personal income was even greater in California, reflecting the impact of the recession in the state.

Nationwide, personal income averaged $19,082 last year, a scant 2.1% improvement over the prior year. That compares to a 4.1% rise in consumer prices, meaning real per capita income fell last year.

In California, personal income averaged $20,952 in 1991, a 1.3% increase over 1990. Nevada lagged even more with personal income of $19,175, only 0.7% higher than the prior year.

It was the first time since 1982 that growth in per capita income failed to keep pace with inflation, and it was the slowest growth since per capita incomes rose just 1% in 1958, a recession year.

The Commerce Department calculates personal income using wages and salaries, rents, dividends and government payments such as Social Security. This total measure of income–$4.81 trillion nationally in 1991–divided by a population of 252.2 million yields the per capita income for America.

California last year was among a group of 14 slow-growing states, according to the Commerce Department. This represents a major change from the 1980s, when these states were enjoying rapid growth, significantly above the national expansion of per capita incomes. They led the boom, with the central part of the nation lagging behind.

Now the situation is reversed, with the Midwest enjoying growth while both coasts suffer from sluggish economic performance.

The eastern states, notably New England and New York, suffered “declines in earnings in construction, durables, manufacturing and retail trade,” the Commerce Department said. Incomes grew in the West, but population and inflation grew even faster.

The fast-growing states, in which per capita income outstripped the national average, had strong gains in construction, manufacturing and service industries, the Commerce Department said. This group included Texas, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Hawaii and Utah.

Nationally, the growth rate in per capita income has been slowing since the end of the Reagan Administration. The increase in 1988 was 7.1%, and then slipped to 6.9% in 1989, and 5.4% in 1990 before reaching 1.3% last year.

The Commerce Department indicated that the recession, now in its second year, has had widespread and pervasive impact throughout the country. The growth of income slowed in all 50 states compared to the previous year’s performance.

“The defense cutbacks are having a big impact,” said Rudolph E. DePass, a Commerce Department analyst. “The high-income states (in the 1980s) . . . were generally all pretty heavily involved in the defense industry.”

Only seven states enjoyed per capita incomes in 1991 matching or exceeding the national inflation rate. They were: Wyoming, 5.1%; Montana, 4.8%; North Dakota, 4.8%; Hawaii, 4.6%; Louisiana, 4.2%; New Mexico, 4.1%, and Arkansas, 4.1%. Mississippi at 4% virtually matched the national average.

Economists predicted that income growth would improve modestly this year as the economy recovers.

“1992 will be slightly better. You could see a 3% to 4% increase,” said economist Lawrence Chimerine of DRI-McGraw Hill, a Lexington, Mass., forecasting firm. “But we still will be lucky to match or exceed inflation, and we won’t make up for the weakness of the last several years.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — A federal judge on Wednesday granted a preliminary injunction to stop the U.S. Department of Labor from shutting down Job Corps, a residential program for low-income youths, until a lawsuit against the move is resolved.

The injunction bolsters a temporary restraining order U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter issued this month when he directed the Labor Department to cease removing Job Corps students from housing, terminating jobs or otherwise suspending the nationwide program without congressional approval.

Founded in 1964, Job Corps aims to help teenagers and young adults who struggled to finish traditional high school and find jobs. The program provides tuition-free housing at residential centers, training, meals and healthcare.

“Once Congress has passed legislation stating that a program like the Job Corps must exist, and set aside funding for that program, the DOL is not free to do as it pleases; it is required to enforce the law as intended by Congress,” Carter wrote in the ruling.

Labor Department spokesperson Aaron Britt said the department was working closely with the Department of Justice to evaluate the injunction.

“We remain confident that our actions are consistent with the law,” Britt wrote in an email.

The Labor Department, led by Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, said in late May that it would pause operations at all contractor-operated Job Corps centers by the end of June. It said the publicly funded program yielded poor results for its participants at a high cost to taxpayers, citing low student graduation rates and growing budget deficits.

“Secretary DeRemer rightfully paused funding to reassess underperforming programs, operating in a $140 million deficit, with massive safety concerns at Job Corps centers,” Taylor Rogers, a White House spokesperson, said in an email. “The district court lacked jurisdiction to enter its order, and the Trump Administration looks forward to ultimate victory on the issue.”

The judge rejected the department’s claims that it did not need to follow a congressionally mandated protocol for closing down Job Corps centers because it wasn’t closing the centers, only pausing their activities.

“The way that the DOL is shuttering operations and the context in which the shuttering is taking place make it clear that the DOL is actually attempting to close the centers,” Carter wrote.

The harm faced by some of the students served by the privately run Job Corps centers is compelling, the judge said. Carter noted that one of the students named as a plaintiff in the lawsuit lives at a center in New York.

If the Job Corps program is eliminated, she would lose all the progress she’s made toward earning a culinary arts certificate and “will immediately be plunged into homelessness,” the judge wrote. That’s far from the “minor upheaval” described by government lawyers, he said.

The AFL-CIO’s Transportation Trades Department said the decision prevents any Job Corps center closures, job terminations or student removals, pending legislative action. “The law is clear: a federal agency cannot unilaterally dismantle a congressionally-mandated program like Job Corps,” the group said in a statement. “The students who enter the Job Corps program are the embodiment of the American dream: that if you work hard, no matter your beginnings, you can achieve success. We are proud of these students and of the Job Corps program.”

As the centers prepared to close, many students were left floundering. Some moved out of the centers and into shelters for homeless people.

“Many of these young people live in uncertainty, so it takes time to get housing and restore a lot of those supports you need when you’ve been away from your community for so long,” said Edward DeJesus, chief executive of Social Capital Builders, a Maryland-based educational consulting firm that provides training on relationship building at several Job Corps sites. “So the abrupt closure of these sites is really harmful for the welfare of young adults who are trying to make a change in their lives.”

The National Job Corps Assn., a nonprofit trade organization made up of business, labor, volunteer and academic organizations, sued to block the suspension of services, alleging it would displace tens of thousands of vulnerable young people and force mass layoffs.

The attorneys general of 20 states filed an amicus brief supporting the group’s motion for a preliminary injunction in the case.

Monet Campbell learned about the Job Corps’ center in New Haven, Conn., while living in a homeless shelter a year ago. The 21-year-old has since earned her certified nursing assistant license and phlebotomy and electrocardiogram certifications through Job Corps, and works at a nursing home.

“I always got told all my life, ‘I can’t do this, I can’t do that.’ But Job Corps really opened my eyes to, ‘I can do this,’” said Campbell, who plans to start studying nursing at Central Connecticut State University in August.

The program has been life-changing in other ways, she said. Along with shelter and job training, Campbell received food, mental health counseling, medical treatment and clothing to wear to job interviews.

“I hadn’t been to the doctor’s in a while,” she said. “I was able to do that, going to checkups for my teeth, dental, all that. So they really just helped me with that.”

Campbell said she and other Job Corps participants in New Haven feel like they’re in limbo, given the program’s possible closure. They recently had to move out for a week when the federal cuts were initially imposed, and Campbell stayed with a friend.

There are 123 Job Corps centers in the U.S., the majority of them operated by private organizations under agreements with the Department of Labor. The private centers serve more than 20,000 students across the U.S., according to the lawsuit.

Bussewitz writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Susan Haigh in Hartford and Rebecca Boone in Boise, Idaho, contributed to this report.

The hit series has a new streaming home

Disney+ has added the ‘best limited series ever’ that features one of the stars from Department Q.

Originally airing on BBC back in 2018, The Cry has a new streaming home on the platform that is also home to Marvel and The Simpsons. The series is based on the novel of the same name, written by Helen Fitzgerald.

According to the synopsis, the four-part drama follows young parents Joanna and Alistair who travel from Scotland to a town in Australia to visit family and fight for custody of Alistair’s daughter, Chloe, against his Australian ex-wife, Alexandra.

READ MORE: Disney+ drops to £1.99 in rare deal Netflix and Amazon can’t beat

READ MORE: Disney+ announces summer schedule with new series from £1.99

However, on the drive from Melbourne to the coastal town of Wilde Bay, their baby son Noah goes missing. In the aftermath of this tragedy, under public scrutiny, their relationship collapses and her psychological state disintegrates.

Jenna Coleman leads the series as Joanna. Coleman is known for her roles in Doctor Who, period drama Victoria and The Sandman. Also starring are Nine Perfect Strangers star Asher Keddie along with Kate Dickie who recently appeared in Netflix series Department Q.

Get Disney+ for £1.99 for four months

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£4.99

£1.99

Disney+

Get Disney+ here

Disney+ has brought back its popular deal that lets new and returning customers join its Standard with Ads plan for £1.99 per month for four months.

This means members can stream hit shows like Andor, The Bear and Alien: Earth, plus countless titles from Star Wars and Marvel, for a fraction of the usual price.

Many fans have praised the series online ever since its initial debut. One person advised other Disney Plus subscribers: “The Cry is in a class of its own. The acting is sublime. Set aside a day and binge-watch it.”

Another claimed: “One of the best TV dramas I’ve ever seen! Totally hooks you in and you never know what’s gonna happen next! Jenna Coleman is incredible!”

Someone else commented: “Honestly one of the best limited series I have seen in a long time. I binge watched it in one hit which at four episodes long is not hard to do!”

They continued: “Sure, it isn’t perfect, but who cares when the acting is this good, and the story so gripping, intriguing and surprising from the beginning right until the very end.

“It’s truly every parent’s worst nightmare losing a child, but how this situation plays out is so different to other stories like this that I have seen.”

One viewer shared: “I can’t stop thinking about this series and I want to watch it all over again. Jenna Coleman, brilliant and so believable; and Ewen Leslie is so convincingly unlikable and silently frightening.

“I love the way time is shifted and your brain is forced to work a little harder. Continuity rules are broken, as are comfort levels.”

The Cry is streaming on Disney+.

Citing successes other police departments across the country have seen using drones, the Los Angeles Police Commission said it would allow the LAPD to deploy unmanned aircraft on routine emergency calls.

The civilian oversight body approved an updated policy Tuesday allowing drones to be used in more situations, including “calls for service.” The new guidelines listed other scenarios for future drone use — “high-risk incident, investigative purpose, large-scale event, natural disaster” — and transferred their command from the Air Support Division to the Office of Special Operations.

Previously, the department’s nine drones were restricted to a narrow set of dangerous situations, most involving barricaded suspects or explosives.

LAPD Cmdr. Bryan Lium told commissioners the technology offers responding officers and their supervisors crucial, real-time information about what type of threats they might encounter while responding to an emergency.

Officials said there is strong community support for the expanding use of drones to combat crime — and offered reassurances that the new policy will not be used unconstitutionally.

Tuesday’s vote clears the way for a pilot program set to launch next month at four police divisions — Topanga, West L.A., Harbor and Central — spread across the department’s four geographical bureaus. The Commission asked the department to report back within six months on the program’s progress.

Commissioner Rasha Gerges Shields said the old policy was understandably “very restrictive” as the department was testing out what was then an unproven technology. But that left the LAPD “behind the times” as other agencies embraced she said.

The commissioner pointed to the city of Beverly Hills, where police have been quick to adapt cutting-edge surveillance technology. Sending out a drone ahead of officers could help prevent dangerous standoffs, informing responding officers whether a suspect is armed or not, according to Gerges Shields, who served on an internal work group that crafted the new policy.

Commissioner Teresa Sanchez Gordon turned a more skeptical eye to the issue, saying the new policy needed to protect the public. She asked whether there were clear guidelines for how and when the devices are deployed during mass demonstrations, such as the ones that have roiled Los Angeles in recent weeks.

“I guess I just want to make sure that the recording of these activities will not be used against individuals who are lawfully exercising their rights,” she said.

The updated drone policy allows for the monitoring of mass protests for safety reasons, but department officials stressed that it will not be used to track or monitor demonstrators who aren’t engaged in criminal activities.

Equipping the drones with weapons or pairing them with facial recognition software is still off-limits, officials said.

The footage captured by the drones will be also subject to periodic audits. The department said it plans to develop a web portal where members of the public will be able to track a drone’s flight path, as well as the date, time and location of its deployment — but won’t be able to watch the videos it records.

Critics remain skeptical about the promises of transparency, pointing to the department’s track record with surveillance technology while saying they fear police will deploy drones disproportionately against communities of color. Several opponents of the program spoke out at Tuesday’s meeting.

The devices vary in size (2.5-5 lbs) and can cover a distance of two miles in roughly two minutes, officials said.

Expanding the role of drones has been under consideration for years, but a public outcry over a series of high-profile burglaries on the city’s West Side sparked an increased push inside the department.

The drone expansion comes amid a broader debate over the effectiveness of the department’s helicopter program, which has been criticized for being too costly.

In adopting the new guidelines, the department is following in the lead of smaller neighboring agencies. In addition to Beverly Hills, Culver City and Chula Vista that have been using drones on patrol for years and have more permissive regulations.

LAPD Cmdr. Shannon Paulson said that new policy will give the department greater flexibility in deploying drones. For instance, she said, under the old policy, a drone could normally only be dispatched to a bomb threat by a deputy chief or above who was at the scene, which led to delays.

The Trump administration must turn over a cache of documents, photos, internal reports and other evidence detailing the activities of the military in Southern California, a federal judge ruled Tuesday, handing a procedural victory to the state in its fight to rein in thousands of troops under the president’s command.

Ordering “expedited, limited discovery,” Senior District Judge Charles R. Breyer of the federal court in San Francisco also authorized California lawyers to depose key administration officials, and signaled he might review questions about how long troops remain under federal control.

The Department of Justice opposed the move, saying it had “no opportunity to respond.”

The ruling follows a stinging loss for the state in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last Thursday, when an appellate panel struck down Breyer’s temporary restraining order that would have returned control of the troops to California leaders.

Writing for the court, Judge Mark R. Bennett of Honolulu said the judiciary must broadly defer to the president to decide whether a “rebellion” was underway and if civilians protesting immigration agents had sufficiently hampered deportations to warrant an assist from the National Guard or the Marines.

Bennett wrote that the president has authority to take action under a statute that “authorizes federalization of the National Guard when ‘the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.’”

But neither court has yet opined on California’s other major claim: that by aiding immigration raids, troops under Trump’s command violated the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which forbids soldiers from enforcing civilian laws.

Shilpi Agarwal, legal director of the ACLU of Northern California, argued the White House is abusing the post-Civil War law — known in legal jargon as the PCA — by having soldiers support Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations.

“There isn’t a dispute that what the National Guard is doing right now is prohibited by the PCA — legally it absolutely has to be,” said Agarwal. “Going out with ICE officers into the community and playing a role in individual ICE raids really feels like what the Posse Comitatus Act was designed to prohibit.”

In his June 12 order, Breyer wrote that charge was “premature,” saying that there was not yet sufficient evidence to weigh whether that law had been broken.

The 9th Circuit agreed.

“Although we hold that the President likely has authority to federalize the National Guard, nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage,” Bennett wrote. “Before the district court, Plaintiffs argued that certain uses of the National Guard would violate the Posse Comitatus Act … We express no opinion on it.

Now, California has permission to compel that evidence from the government, as well as to depose figures including Ernesto Santacruz, Jr., the director of the ICE field office in L.A., and Maj. Gen. Niave F. Knell, who heads operations for the Army department in charge of “homeland defense.”

With few exceptions, such evidence would immediately become public, another win for Californians, Agarwal said.

“As the facts are further developed in this case, i think it will be come more abundantly clear to everyone how little this invocation of the National Guard was based on,” she said.

In its Monday briefing, the Trump administration argued that troops were “merely performing a protective function” not enforcing the law.

“Nothing in the preliminary injunction record plausibly supports a claim that the Guard and Marines are engaged in execution of federal laws rather than efforts to protect the personnel and property used in the execution of federal laws,” the Justice Department’s motion said.

The federal government also claimed even if troops were enforcing the law, that would not violate the Posse Comitatus Act — and if it did, the Northern District of California would have only limited authority to rule on it.

“Given the Ninth Circuit’s finding, it would be illogical to hold that, although the President can call up the National Guard when he is unable ‘with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States,’ the Guard, once federalized, is forbidden from ‘execut[ing] the laws,’” the motion said.

For Agarwal and other civil liberties experts, the next few weeks will be crucial.

“There’s this atmospheric Rubicon we have crossed when we say based on vandalism and people throwing things at cars, that can be justification for military roaming our streets,” the lawyer said. “There was more unrest when the Lakers won the Championship.”

President Trump and his administration have tried several tactics to block Harvard University’s enrollment of international students, part of the White House’s effort to secure policy changes at the private Ivy League college.

Targeting foreign students has become the administration’s cornerstone effort to crack down on the nation’s oldest and wealthiest college. The block on international enrollment, which accounts for a quarter of Harvard’s students and much of its global allure, strikes at the core of Harvard’s identity. Courts have stopped some of the government’s actions, at least for now — but not all.

In the latest court order, a federal judge Friday put one of those efforts on hold until a lawsuit is resolved. But the fate of Harvard’s international students — and its broader standoff with the Trump administration — remains in limbo.

Here are the ways the Trump administration has moved to block Harvard’s foreign enrollment — and where each effort stands.

Harvard’s certification to host foreign students

In May, the Trump administration tried to ban foreign students at Harvard, citing the Department of Homeland Security’s authority to oversee which colleges are part of the Student Exchange and Visitor Program. The program allows colleges to issue documents that foreign students need to study in the United States.

Harvard filed a lawsuit, arguing the administration violated the government’s own regulations for withdrawing a school’s certification.

Within hours, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston put the administration’s ban on hold temporarily — an order that had an expiration date. On Friday, she issued a preliminary injunction, blocking Homeland Security’s move until the case is decided. That could take months or longer.

The government can and does remove colleges from the Student Exchange and Visitor Program, making them ineligible to host foreign students on their campuses. However, it’s usually for administrative reasons outlined in law, such as failing to maintain accreditation, lacking proper facilities for classes, failing to employ qualified professional personnel — even failing to “operate as a bona fide institution of learning.” Other colleges are removed when they close.

Notably, Burroughs’ order Friday said the federal government still has authority to review Harvard’s ability to host international students through normal processes outlined in law. After Burroughs’ emergency block in May, DHS issued a more typical “Notice of Intent to Withdraw” Harvard’s participation in the international student visa program.

“Today’s order does not affect the DHS’s ongoing administrative review,” Harvard said Friday in a message to its international students. “Harvard is fully committed to compliance with the applicable F-1 (student visa) regulations and strongly opposes any effort to withdraw the University’s certification.”

U.S. entry for incoming Harvard students

Earlier this month, Trump moved to block entry to the United States for incoming Harvard students, issuing a proclamation that invoked a different legal authority.

Harvard filed a court challenge attacking Trump’s legal justification for the action — a federal law allowing the president to block a “class of aliens” deemed detrimental to the nation’s interests. Targeting only those who are coming to the U.S. to study at Harvard doesn’t qualify as a “class of aliens,” Harvard said in its filing.

Harvard’s lawyers asked the court to block the action. Burroughs agreed to pause the entry ban temporarily, without giving an expiration date. She has not yet ruled on Harvard’s request for another preliminary injunction, which would pause the ban until the court case is decided. “We expect the judge to issue a more enduring decision in the coming days,” Harvard told international students Friday.

At the center of Trump’s pressure campaign against Harvard are his assertions that the school has tolerated anti-Jewish harassment, especially during pro-Palestinian protests. In seeking to keep Harvard students from coming to the U.S., he said Harvard is not a suitable destination. Harvard President Alan Garber has said the university has made changes to combat antisemitism and will not submit to the administration’s demands for further changes.

Scrutiny of visas

In late May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directed U.S. embassies and consulates to start reviewing social media accounts of visa applicants who plan to attend, work at or visit Harvard University for any signs of antisemitism.

On Wednesday, the State Department said it was launching new vetting of social media accounts for foreigners applying for student visas, and not just those seeking to attend Harvard. Consular officers will be on the lookout for posts and messages that could be deemed hostile to the United States, its government, culture, institutions or founding principles, the department said, telling visa applicants to set their social media accounts to “public.”

In reopening the visa process, the State Department also told consulates to prioritize students hoping to enroll at colleges where foreigners make up less than 15% of the student body, a U.S. official familiar with the matter said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to detail information that has not been made public.

Foreign students make up more than 15% of the total student body at almost 200 U.S. universities — including Harvard and the other Ivy League schools, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal education data from 2023. Most are private universities, including all eight Ivy League schools.

Some Harvard students are also caught up in the government’s recent ban against travel to the U.S. by citizens of 12 nations, mostly in Africa and the Middle East. The Trump administration last weekend called for 36 additional countries to commit to improving vetting of travelers or face a ban on their citizens visiting the United States.

F-1 and J-1 visas

Harvard sponsors more than 7,000 people on a combination of F-1 and J-1 visas, which are issued to students and to foreigners visiting the U.S. on exchange programs such as fellowships. Across all the schools that make up the university, about 26% of the student body is from outside the United States.

But some schools and programs, by nature of their subject matter, have significantly more international students. At the Harvard Kennedy School, which covers public policy and public administration, 49% of students are on F-1 visas. In the business school, one-third of students come from abroad. And within the law school, 94% of the students in the master’s program in comparative law are international students.

The administration has imposed a range of sanctions on Harvard since it rejected the government’s demands for policy reforms related to campus protests, admissions, hiring and more. Conservatives say the demands are merited, decrying Harvard as a hotbed of liberalism and antisemitism. Harvard says the administration is illegally retaliating against the university.

California Democrats are denouncing the Trump administration’s decision to terminate $3.7 billion in funding for two dozen clean energy projects, including three in the Golden State.

The 24 awards recently canceled by the U.S. Department of Energy were issued by the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations under the Biden administration and primarily focused on carbon capture and sequestration and decarbonization initiatives. Trump officials said the projects do not “advance the energy needs of the American people” and would not generate a positive return on investment for taxpayers.

“While the previous administration failed to conduct a thorough financial review before signing away billions of taxpayer dollars, the Trump administration is doing our due diligence to ensure we are utilizing taxpayer dollars to strengthen our national security, bolster affordable, reliable energy sources and advance projects that generate the highest possible return on investment,” DOE Secretary Chris Wright wrote in his announcement about the terminations.

One of the largest cuts was a $500-million award for the National Cement Company of California, whose first-of-its-kind Net-Zero Project in Lebec was geared toward developing carbon-neutral cement. Cement production is notoriously emission-intensive, accounting for as much as 8% of planet-warming greenhouse gases due to both the high heat needed in the process and its byproducts.

National Cement Company officials said the project would capture up to 1 million tons of CO2 per year — effectively the entire emissions profile of its cement plant near the border of Los Angeles and Kern counties — but also would act as a roadmap for the cement industry as a whole.

“As we understand the new priorities of the U.S. Department of Energy, we want to emphasize that this project will expand domestic manufacturing capacity for a critical industrial sector, while also integrating new technologies to keep American cement competitive,” the company said in an email. It is now exploring options to keep the project alive.

The funding cuts arrive amid sweeping changes driven by Trump’s orders to rein in federal spending and “unleash American energy.” The president has removed barriers for fossil fuel companies, such as regulations that limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, and called for increased oil and gas drilling and natural resources mining.

California, meanwhile, has set some of the nation’s most ambitious decarbonization goals, including its aim to reach carbon neutrality by 2045. Environmental experts, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, say capturing and storing carbon will be essential for slowing global warming, in addition to efforts to reduce overall carbon emissions.

In a letter to Wright dated Tuesday, California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla said the terminations “run counter to our shared interest in boosting energy production, innovation, and economic vitality.” They urged Wright to reinstate the projects.

“The United States cannot afford to halt our progress and hinder American companies’ efforts to move beyond outdated technologies if we hope to remain competitive and truly energy dominant around the globe,” the senators wrote. “These irrational cancellations will increase energy prices, hamper innovation, and set us backwards as we strive toward a clean energy future.”

The cement project wasn’t the only one canceled in California. The DOE also terminated a $270-million award for an air-cooled carbon capture and sequestration facility at the Sutter Energy Center, a natural gas power plant in Yuba City. Carbon sequestration is the process of capturing CO2 and preventing it from entering the atmosphere by storing it underground, in aquifers or other geologic formations.

The Sutter project was projected to reduce emissions from the plant by up to 95% and capture and store up to 1.75 million metric tons of CO2 each year, according to its federal project page.

The federal government also canceled $75 million for a project at the Gallo Glass Company in Modesto, which would have demonstrated the viability of replacing gas-powered furnaces with a hybrid electric melter, reducing natural gas use by as much as 70%, the federal database shows.

Schiff and Padilla said all of the awards were provided through legally binding contract agreements between the recipients and the federal government, and so cannot be canceled “on a political whim.”

For its part, the DOE said it arrived at its decisions following a thorough and individualized financial review of each project, which found that they “did not meet the economic, national security or energy security standards necessary to sustain DOE’s investment.”

However, the terminations also appear to run counter to the administration’s own public commitments. The White House on Earth Day said Trump seeks to promote energy innovation “by supporting cutting-edge technologies like carbon capture and storage, nuclear energy, and next-generation geothermal.”

The DOE eliminated funding for projects across the country, including in Texas, Mississippi, Kentucky, Wyoming, Louisiana, Texas, Alabama, Ohio, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, Texas, Washington, Arizona and Nevada.

But the cancellations in California mark yet another affront to the climate conscious state, which has in recent weeks also seen the Trump administration overturn its ability to set strict tailpipe emission standards and eventually ban the sale of new gas-powered gars. The state is suing the administration over that decision.

June 17 (UPI) — New York state education officials might face a U.S. Justice Department investigation into potential Title VI of the Civil Rights Act violations related to a public school’s chosen mascot.

The U.S. Department of Education on Tuesday announced it has asked the DOJ to investigate the New York State Department of Education and Board of Regents for banning Massapequa, N.Y., High School’s mascot, which is the “Chiefs.”

The mascot refers to the Massapequa Tribe that formerly occupied New York’s Long Island.

“Both the New York [State] Department of Education and the Board of Regents violated federal anti-discrimination law and disrespected the people of Massapequa by implementing an absurd policy: prohibiting the use of Native American mascots while allowing mascots derived from European national origin,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said.

“Both of these entities continue to disrespect the people of Massapequa by refusing to come into compliance with the Office for Civil Rights’ proposed agreement to rectify their violations,” McMahon added.

Officials with the state’s Education Department and Board of Regents have banned schools from using mascots and logos that refer to and depict aboriginal tribes.

The U.S. DOE’s Office of Civil Rights had proposed a resolution to the matter by requiring the state to rescind its ban on aboriginal tribal mascots and logos, but the state rejected it.

The DOE has opened a Title VI investigation into the matter to determine whether or not the state’s ban amounts to discrimination based on race and national origin.

A New York Education Department spokesperson called the matter a “farce” in an emailed statement to UPI.

“The referral of this matter to the Department of Justice shows that USDOE’s investigation was a farce from the outset,” NYDE spokesman JP O’Hare said.

“To the extent that any investigation took place, it represents a blatant attempt to do a political favor for the Massapequa Board of Education.”

He called the use of aboriginal tribal mascots “indolent symbolism masquerading as tradition” and said nearly all state school districts are complying with the state’s regulations.

“To date, with the exception of four school districts that have contacted us to request an extension, every school district in New York, 727 of them, has engaged in the community-driven process to rebrand their team names, mascots and logos,” O’Hare said.

“Rather than wrestling over mascots, maybe we could all focus on what’s paramount, ensuring our schools are inclusive and respectful for every student,” he added.

State education department officials have threatened to withhold state funding from the Massapequa school district if it does not change its mascot to one that conforms with New York regulations.

Those regulations don’t ban the use of mascots and logos that reference other racial or ethnic groups, such as the “Fighting Irish,” “Huguenots” and the “Dutchmen,” which the DOE says violates the Civil Rights Act.

“The U.S. Department of Education will not stand by as the state of New York attempts to rewrite history and deny the town of Massapequa the right to celebrate its heritage in its schools,” McMahon said on April 25.

She visited the school district on May 30 after the DOE investigated the matter and determined the state violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Native American Guardians Association agrees with McMahon and the DOE.

“The [NAGA] stands firm in asserting that the preservation of Native themes and imagery in New York schools is not only a matter of cultural dignity but a fundamental civil right for all students,” NAGA Vice President Frank Blackcloud said.

“We call on federal and state leaders to help us defend these dwindling expressions of our presence and contributions,” Blackcloud added.

Massapequa Board of Education President Kerry Watcher thanked NAGA, the DOE and the Trump administration for their support.

“Attempts to erase Native American imagery do not advance learning,” Watcher said.

“They distract from our core mission of providing a high-quality education grounded in respect, history and community values.”

Elijah Allman, son of pop icon Cher and songwriter Gregg Allman, landed in the hospital this weekend after law enforcement responded to a report of a man “acting erratically” in a home in the Mojave Desert.

Deputies with the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department on Saturday responded to the residence in the unincorporated community of Landers where Allman, 48, “was being evaluated by emergency medical personnel,” officials said in a statement shared with People. Deputies also “located drugs inside the home” and the musicians’ son was transported to a hospital.

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, which did not immediately respond on Monday to The Times’ request for comment and additional information, said it is investigating the incident. The statement did not reveal whether drug use led to Allman’s hospitalization but TMZ, which broke the news, reported he overdosed earlier Saturday morning. A source told the outlet Allman is “receiving the best care possible” and “lucky to have survived.”

A representative for Cher did not comment to The Times on Monday.

Marieangela King, Allman’s estranged wife, expressed support for her husband and spoke about his “unwavering commitment to sobriety and his loyalty to those he loves” in a statement to People. She acknowledged that her spouse has “faced personal challenges in the past.”

“Like many, he continues to confront his inner struggles — but it is important to recognize that he does so from a place of strength, not defeat,” she added. “Despite the assumptions that often color how his journey is portrayed, the reality is that Elijah remains grounded, focused and deeply committed to living with integrity and purpose.”

Allman has been open about his struggles with sobriety in the past, telling Entertainment Tonight in a 2014 interview that his drug addiction began before he was even a teenager. “I mean it’s just what you did, it’s just what everyone did,” he told Rob Marciano at the time.

“I [was] just looking to escape all the things in my past and that’s when you turn to those kind of drugs, you know heroin and opiates,” he said in 2014. He also recalled “some close calls and some moments of really feeling at the edge of mortality.”

Details of his alleged drug use also surfaced in December 2023 when his mother filed her bid for conservatorship to take over his finances. The Grammy-winning “Believe” singer alleged at the time that her son was “substantially unable to manage his own financial resources due to severe mental health and substance abuse issues.” Cher ended her conservatorship bid less than a year later, dismissing her petition in September 2024.

King filed a petition to divorce Allman in Los Angeles in April, citing “irreconcilable differences.” The couple, who married in December 2013, was previously headed for divorce when Allman filed a petition in 2021. In January 2024, he filed to dismiss that case without prejudice. Amid their ongoing relationship tensions, King underscored in her weekend statement, “I will always root for him.

“My support is steadfast and comes from a place of deep respect for the person he is and the resilience he continues to show,” King said.

A coalition of press rights organizations is seeking a court order to stop the “continuing abuse” of journalists by the Los Angeles Police Department during protests over President Trump’s immigration crackdown.

The federal lawsuit, filed Monday by the Los Angeles Press Club and investigative reporting network Status Coup, seeks to “force the LAPD to respect the constitutional and statutory rights of journalists engaged in reporting on these protests and inevitable protests to come.”

The suit cites multiple instances of officers firing foam projectiles at members of the media and otherwise flouting state laws that restrict the use of so-called less-lethal weapons in crowd control situations and protect journalists covering the unrest. Those measures were passed in the wake of the 2020 protests over the killing of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis when journalists were detained and injured by the LAPD while covering the unrest.

The recent suit filed in the Central District of California describes journalists being shot with less-lethal police rounds, tear-gassed and detained without cause.

Carol Sobel, a longtime civil rights attorney who represents the plaintiffs, said LAPD officers have also been blocking journalists from areas where they had a right to be, in violation of the department’s own rules and Senate Bill 98, a state law that prohibits law enforcement from interfering with or obstructing journalists from covering such events.

“You have people holding up their press credentials saying, ‘I’m press,’ and they still got shot,” she said. “The Legislature spent all this time limiting how use of force can occur in a crowd control situation, and they just all ignored it.

Apart from journalists, scores of protesters allege LAPD projectiles left them with severe bruises, lacerations and serious injuries.

The Police Department said Monday that it doesn’t comment on pending litigation. A message for the Los Angeles city attorney’s office, which represents the LAPD in most civil suits, went unreturned.

Sobel filed a similar action in the wake of the LAPD’s response to the 2020 protests on behalf of Black Lives Matter-L.A. and others who contended that LAPD caused scores of injuries by firing hard-foam projectiles. A federal judge later issued an injunction restricting the department’s use of 40-millimeter and 37-millimeter hard-foam projectile launchers to officers who are properly trained to use them.

Under the restrictions, which remain in place with the court case pending, police can target individuals with 40-millimeter rounds “only when the officer reasonably believes that a suspect is violently resisting arrest or poses an immediate threat of violence or physical harm.” Officers are also barred from targeting people in the head, torso and groin areas.

The city has paid out millions of dollars in settlements and jury awards related to lawsuits brought by reporters and demonstrators in 2020 who were injured.

On Monday, the LAPD announced an internal review of a June 10 incident in which a 30-year-old man suffered a broken finger during a confrontation with officers of the vaunted Metropolitan Division.

According to the department’s account, the Metro officers had been deployed to contend with an “unruly” crowd on Alameda Street and Temple Street and said that Daniel Robert Bill and several other demonstrators refused to leave the area and instead challenged officers. During a confrontation, several officers swung their batons and fired less-lethal munitions at Bill “to no effect” and then “used a team takedown” before arresting him.

After his arrest, Bill was taken to an area hospital, where he underwent surgery to repair a broken finger on his left hand.

The department’s Force Investigation Division will review the case, as it does all incidents in which someone is seriously injured or killed while in policy custody.

Department leaders have in the past argued that officers need less-lethal weapons to restore order, particularly when faced with large crowds with individuals throwing bottles and rocks.

The department’s handling of the recent protests is expected to be addressed at Tuesday’s meeting of the LAPD Police Commission, the department’s civilian policy-making body. The body reviewed complaints of excessive force against the department stemming from the 2020 protests but has not staked a public position about the continued use of the 40-millimeter projectiles and other crowd control measures.

WASHINGTON — Former U.S. Rep. Billy Long of Missouri was confirmed on Thursday to lead the Internal Revenue Service, giving the beleaguered agency he once sought to abolish a permanent commissioner after months of acting leaders and massive staffing cuts that have threatened to derail next year’s tax filing season.

The Senate confirmed Long on a 53-44 vote despite Democrats’ concerns about the Republican’s past work for a firm that pitched a fraud-ridden coronavirus pandemic-era tax break and about campaign contributions he received after President Trump nominated him to serve as IRS commissioner.

While in Congress, where he served from 2011 to 2023, Long sponsored legislation to get rid of the IRS, the agency he is now tasked with leading. A former auctioneer, Long has no background in tax administration.

Long will take over an IRS undergoing massive change, including layoffs and voluntary retirements of tens of thousands of workers and accusations that then-Trump advisor Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency mishandled sensitive taxpayer data. Unions and advocacy organizations have sued to block DOGE’s access to the information.

The IRS was one of the highest-profile agencies still without a Senate-confirmed leader. Before Long’s confirmation, the IRS shuffled through four acting leaders, including one who resigned over a deal between the IRS and the Department of Homeland Security to share immigrants’ tax data with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and another whose appointment led to a fight between Musk and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

After leaving Congress to mount an unsuccessful bid for the U.S. Senate, Long worked with a firm that distributed the pandemic-era employee retention tax credit. That tax credit program was eventually shut down after then-IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel determined that it was fraudulent.

Democrats called for a criminal investigation into Long’s connections to other alleged tax credit loopholes. The lawmakers allege that firms connected to Long duped investors into spending millions of dollars to purchase fake tax credits.

Long appeared before the Senate Finance Committee last month and denied any wrongdoing related to his involvement in the tax credit scheme.

Ahead of the confirmation vote, Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, sent a letter to White House chief of staff Susie Wiles blasting the requisite FBI background check conducted on Long as a political appointee as inadequate.

“These issues were not adequately investigated,” Wyden wrote. “In fact, the FBI’s investigation, a process dictated by the White House, seemed designed to avoid substantively addressing any of these concerning public reports. It’s almost as if the FBI is unable to read the newspaper.”

Democratic lawmakers have also written to Long and his associated firms detailing concerns with what they call unusually timed contributions made to Long’s defunct 2022 Senate campaign committee shortly after Trump nominated him.

The IRS faces an uncertain future under Long. Tax experts have voiced concerns that the 2026 filing season could be hampered by the departure of so many tax collection workers. In April, the Associated Press reported that the IRS planned to cut as many as 20,000 staffers — up to 25% of the workforce. An IRS representative on Thursday confirmed the IRS had shed about that many workers but said the cuts amounted to approximately the same number of IRS jobs added under the Biden administration.

The fate of the Direct File program, the free electronic tax return filing system developed during President Biden’s Democratic administration, is also unclear. Republican lawmakers and commercial tax preparation companies had complained it was a waste of taxpayer money because free filing programs already exist, although they are hard to use. Long said during his confirmation hearing that it would be one of the first programs that come up for discussion if he were confirmed.

Long is not the only Trump appointee to support dismantling an agency he was assigned to manage.

Linda McMahon, the current education secretary, has repeatedly said she is trying to put herself out of a job by closing the federal department and transferring its work to the states. Rick Perry, Trump’s energy secretary during his first term, called for abolishing the Energy Department during his bid for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination.

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

While publicly chastising groups protesting immigration raids, Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell has offered support to officers in his Latino-majority department who may have mixed feelings about the Trump administration‘s crackdown.

In a department-wide missive sent out earlier this week as protests ramped up, McDonnell acknowledged some officers were “facing criticism from the community or wrestling with the personal impact,” of recent events and needed support.

“When federal immigration enforcement actions take place in communities that may reflect your own heritage, neighborhoods, or even your family’s story, it can create a deep and painful conflict,” he wrote. “You may be wearing the uniform and fulfilling your duty, but inside, you’re asked to hold a complex mix of emotions.”

It was an unusual display of solidarity for a chief who has rarely waded into the contentious immigration debate. McDonnell has bristled over criticism about his relationship with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement while serving as Los Angeles County Sheriff during Trump’s first term.

In interviews and public comments since becoming chief McDonnell has sought to distance himself from a policy as sheriff that allowed federal immigration authorities to operate freely, targeting people for deportation in the nation’s largest jail system.

Both McDonnell and current L.A. County Sheriff Robert Luna have stressed that their departments do not cooperate with federal authorities solely for immigration purposes — polices adopted long ago to help build trust within the city’s diverse communities.

In his own message to his department this week, Luna thanked deputies for their “professionalism, resolve, and unwavering dedication” — but only briefly alluded to the immigration debate.

“Despite the complexity of this situation — made even more challenging by the heightened political environment — I trust and fully expect that you will continue to demonstrate the same level of excellence, thoughtfulness, and integrity that have brought us this far,” Luna said.

Critics of local law enforcement actions in recent days note that racial bias also remains a contentious issue, with LAPD officers pulling over and shooting Latino Angelenos at a higher rate than their share of the overall population.

Jim McDonnell was introduced by Mayor Karen Bass to serve as the new Chief LAPD during a press conference at City Hall on Oct. 4, 2024.

(Ringo Chiu/For The Times)

When asked about how he is working to keep the city’s immigrant population safe, McDonnell often cites Special Order 40, the landmark policy adopted in 1979 that forbids LAPD officers from stopping people to inquire about their citizenship status.

But Trump’s actions have put the chief and other local leaders in the awkward position of having to defend federal officers and property — while also trying to communicate that they are not on the side of immigration agents.

In his recent message to department employees, McDonnell said he recognized they “may feel loyalty, frustration, fear, or sometimes even shame as the community mistakenly views you as part of something that you are not.” The public may not “see the nuance,” of the LAPD’s postion, he said, because “simply being present can make it seem like you support an action you may not agree with, or that you’re complicit in pain affecting your own community.”

Publicly, though, the chief has struck a different, sometimes defensive tone, often focusing his remarks on destruction caused by some protesters.

At a City Council hearing Tuesday, he sparred with city leaders who challenged the department’s relationship with federal authorities.

In one exchange, City Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said he disagreed with the chief on referring to agencies such as ICE as “law enforcement partners.”

“I don’t care what badge they have on or whose orders they’re under. They’re not our partners,” Harris-Dawson said.

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez, who sits on the Council’s public safety committee and represents an Echo Park-to-Hollywood district, said in a statement to The Times that he wasn’t surprised that Latino police officers may be feeling conflicted.

“Families are being ripped apart, and I’d bet nearly every one of them has a parent or relative who’s undocumented, or were even undocumented themselves at some point,” said Soto-Martinez.

Art Placencia, a retired LAPD detective, recalled being a young cop on the job in the years when cops would arrest Latinos simply because they believed that they might be in the country illegally and deliver them into federal custody.

The LAPD of today is vastly different than when he was on the job, he said. Prodded by lawsuits and consent decrees, the once-mostly white department has grown to become more than half Latino, which more or less mirrors the city’s demographics. And while Latino officials are under-represented in the LAPD’s upper echelons, they wield more political clout than ever, Placencia said.

Placencia, the former president of an prominent association for Latino officers that once sued the LAPD for discrimination in promotion decisions, said McDonnell is caught in a bind of having to navigate the city’s left-leaning politics while also backing up his rank-and-file officers on the front lines against hostile crowds.

“He’s gotta show that he’s concerned about the officers and their feelings,” said Placencia. “They’re the ones that are out there, they’re the ones that are getting rocks thrown at them.”

In past interviews, McDonnell has spoken proudly about his immigrant upbringing — both of his parents moved to Boston from Ireland a year before he was born — saying that he understands the struggle of trying to make a better life in America. But as sheriff he also came under fire by breaking ranks with many other area politicians by opposing a “sanctuary state” bill that sought to prevent federal immigration agents from taking custody of people being released from California jails.

The selection of McDonnell last November came as a disappointment among some within the department, who had hoped Bass would pick Robert Arcos, a third-generation Mexican American, who had the backing of some powerful Latino civic leaders and would have been the first Latino chief of a city that is more than 50% Latino.

Ruben Lopez, a retired LAPD SWAT lieutenant, said he appreciated that McDonnell decided to address the internal moral dilemma that some officers face.

Lopez remembers wrestling with similar feelings when, as a young cop, he was on the front lines of a massive protest over Proposition 187, a controversial law — later struck down by a federal court — that barred undocumented immigrants from receiving public school educations and a range of other state- and county-funded benefits.

“I remember some of the command staff wanted to be more aggressive, and I felt these were just families and kids wanting to exercise their right to protest,” he said. “Because if we don’t have that trust in the community, including immigrant communities then we’re not going to get that collaborative approach to police a city of this size.”

Times staff writer Connor Sheets contributed reporting.