By ALANNA DURKIN RICHER and ERIC TUCKER

WASHINGTON (AP) — A lawyer picked by judges to serve as the top federal prosecutor for a Virginia office that pursued cases against foes of President Donald Trump was swiftly fired Friday by the Justice Department in the latest clash over the appointments of powerful U.S. attorneys.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the firing of James Hundley on social media shortly after he was unanimously chosen by judges to replace former Trump lawyer Lindsey Halligan as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. While the law says that the district court may choose U.S. attorneys when an initial appointment expires, the Trump administration has insisted that the power lies only in the hands of the executive branch.

“EDVA judges do not pick our US Attorney. POTUS does. James Hundley, you’re fired!” Blanche said in a post on X.

Hundley, who has handled criminal and civil cases for more than 30 years, didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment Friday evening.

The firing of Hundley is the latest reflection of tumult in one of the Justice Department’s most elite prosecution offices, which since September has been mired in upheaval following the resignation of a veteran prosecutor amid Trump administration pressure to prosecute two of the president’s biggest political foes, former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

That prosecutor, Erik Siebert, was effectively forced out and swiftly replaced by Halligan, a White House aide who secured indictments against Comey and James but was later deemed by a judge to have been unlawfully appointed. The cases were dismissed, but the Justice Department has appealed that decision.

Halligan resigned from the position last month after judges in the district signaled continued skepticism over the legitimacy of her appointment.

U.S. attorneys, the top federal prosecutors in regional Justice Department offices around the country, typically require Senate confirmation but the law does permit attorneys general to make temporary appointments for limited time periods. In several instances, though, the Justice Department has attempted to leave its temporary appointees in place in ways that have invited court challenges and drawn resistance from judges who have found the appointments unlawful.

Last week, a lawyer appointed by judges to be the U.S. attorney for northern New York was fired by the Justice Department after spending less than a day in the job. Judges in the district appointed Kinsella after declining to keep the Trump administration’s pick, John Sarcone, in place after his 120-day term elapsed.

By MARK SHERMAN

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s vision of the Supreme Court, in which his three appointees are personally loyal to him, collided with the court’s view of itself Friday when six justices voted to strike down Trump’s signature economic policy — global tariffs imposed under an emergency powers law.

The outcome led Trump to launch an unusually stark personal attack on the justices, with special rancor reserved for the two Trump appointees who defied him.

The case represented a challenge of Trump’s many untested, yet forcefully stated imperatives on everything from trade to immigration policy and the court’s ability to maintain its independence and, at times, act as a check on presidential authority.

“The Supreme Court’s ruling on tariffs is deeply disappointing and I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed, for not having the courage to do what’s right for the country,” Trump said in the White House briefing room several hours after the court issued its decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts.

Trump said he expected as much from the three Democratic appointees on the court. “But you can’t knock their loyalty,” he said. “It’s one thing you can do with some of our people.”

Asked specifically about Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, who were part of the majority, Trump said, “I think it’s an embarrassment to their families, if you want to know the truth, the two of them.”

Vice President JD Vance, whose wife, Usha, spent a year as a law clerk to Roberts, echoed the president’s criticism, though he didn’t make it personal. “This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple,” Vance wrote on X.

Legal opposition to the tariffs crossed political lines, with a key challenge coming from the libertarian-leaning Liberty Justice Center and support from pro-business groups like the Chamber of Commerce.

Trump has had a checkered history with the court dating back to the start of his first White House term in 2017, though he won his biggest court battle in 2024, a presidential immunity ruling that prevented him from being prosecuted over efforts to undo his 2020 election loss.

In the first year of his second term, he won repeated emergency appeals that allowed him to implement major aspects of his immigration crackdown and other key parts of his agenda.

Presidential criticism of Supreme Court decisions has its own long history. President Thomas Jefferson was critical of the court’s landmark Marbury v. Madison case, which established the concept of judicial review of congressional and executive action. President Franklin Roosevelt, frustrated about decisions he thought blunted parts of the New Deal, talked about older justices as infirm and sought to expand the court, a failed effort.

In 2010, President Barack Obama used his State of the Union speech, with several members of the court in attendance, to take aim at the court’s just-announced Citizens United decision that helped open the floodgates to independent spending in federal elections. Justice Samuel Alito, who hasn’t attended the annual address since, mouthed the words “not true” in response from his seat.

Trump, though, crossed a line in the way he assailed the justices who voted against him, Ed Whelan, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a former law clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia, wrote in an email.

“It’s entirely fine for a president to criticize a Supreme Court ruling that goes against him. But it’s demagogic for President Trump to contend that the justices who voted against him did so because of lack of courage,” Whelan wrote.

Some presidents also have criticized justices they appointed for decisions they’ve made.

Following the seminal Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower told friends that appointing Chief Justice Earl Warren had been his biggest mistake, according to biographer Stephen E. Ambrose.

Objecting to a dissenting vote in an antitrust case, President Theodore Roosevelt once allegedly said of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, wounded in action during the Civil War, that he ”could carve out of a banana a judge with more backbone.”

But these remarks were conveyed in private, not at a livestreamed presidential appearance in the White House briefing room.

On a personal level, Trump has had a sometimes tense relationship with Roberts, who has twice issued public rebukes of the president over attacks on federal judges.

Trump didn’t mention Roberts by name on Friday, but he seemed to be assailing the chief justice when he said he lost the case because the justices “want to be politically correct,” “catering to a group of people in D.C.”

Trump used similar language when he criticized Roberts’ vote in 2012 that upheld Obamacare.

Similar to the timing following the Citizens United ruling, the president and some members of the court, dressed in their black robes, are likely to be in the same room Tuesday when Trump delivers his State of the Union address.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg once nodded off during a presidential speech in the House of Representatives, attributing her drowsiness to some fine California wine. No justice is likely to be napping Tuesday night.

By MICHAEL PHILLIS

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration said Friday it backs a 10-year deadline for most cities and towns to replace their harmful lead pipes, giving notice that it will support a tough rule approved under the Biden administration to reduce lead in drinking water.

The Environmental Protection Agency told a federal appeals court in Washington that it would defend the strongest overhaul of lead-in-water standards in three decades against a court challenge by a utility industry association.

The Trump administration has typically favored rapid deregulation, including reducing or killing rules on air and water pollution. On Friday, for example, it repealed tight limits on mercury and other toxic emissions from coal plants. But the agency has taken a different approach to drinking water.

“After intensive stakeholder involvement, EPA concluded that the only way to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act’s mandate to prevent anticipated adverse health effects ‘to the extent feasible’ is to require replacement of lead service lines,” the agency’s court filing said.

Doing so by a 10-year deadline is feasible, the agency added, supporting a rule that was based in part of the finding that old rules that relied on chemical treatment and monitoring to reduce lead “failed to prevent system-wide lead contamination and widespread adverse health effects.”

The EPA said in August it planned to defend the Biden administration’s aggressive rule, but added that it would also “develop new tools and information to support practical implementation flexibilities and regulatory clarity.” Some environmental activists worried that that meant the EPA was looking to create loopholes.

Lead, a heavy metal once common in products like pipes and paints, is a neurotoxin that can stunt children’s development, lower IQ scores and increase blood pressure in adults. Lead pipes can corrode and contaminate drinking water. The previous Trump administration’s rule had looser standards and did not mandate the replacement of all pipes.

Standards aimed at protecting kids

The Biden administration finalized its lead-in-water overhaul in 2024. It mandated that utilities act to combat lead in water at lower concentrations, with just 10 parts per billion as a trigger, down from 15. If higher levels were found, water systems had to inform their consumers, take immediate action to reduce lead and work to replace lead pipes that are commonly the main source of lead in drinking water.

The Biden administration at the time estimated the stricter standards would protect up to 900,000 infants from having low birth weight and avoid up to 1,500 premature deaths a year from heart disease.

“People power and years of lead-contaminated communities fighting to clean up tap water have made it a third rail to oppose rules to protect our health from the scourge of toxic lead. Maybe only a hidebound water utility trade group is willing to attack this basic public health measure,” said Erik Olson, senior director at the Natural Resource Defense Council, an environmental nonprofit.

The American Water Works Association, a utility industry association, had challenged the rule in court, arguing the EPA lacks authority to regulate the portion of the pipe that’s on private property and therefore cannot require water systems to replace them.

The agency countered on Friday that utilities can be required to replace the entire lead pipe because they have sufficient control over them.

The AWWA also said the 10-year deadline wasn’t feasible, noting it’s hard to find enough labor to do the work and water utilities face other significant infrastructure challenges simultaneously. Water utilities were given three years to prepare before the 10-year timeframe starts and some cities with a lot of lead were given longer.

The agency said they looked closely at data from dozens of water utilities and concluded that the vast majority could replace their lead pipes in 10 years or less.

Replacing decades-old standards

The original lead and copper rule for drinking water was enacted by the EPA more than 30 years ago. The rules have significantly reduced lead in water but have been criticized for letting cities move too slowly when levels rose too high.

Lead pipes are most commonly found in older, industrial parts of the country, including major cities such as Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit and Milwaukee. The rule also revises the way lead amounts are measured, which could significantly expand the number of communities found violating the rules.

The EPA under President Donald Trump has celebrated deregulation. Officials have sought to slash climate change programs and promote fossil fuel development. On drinking water issues, however, their initial actions have been more nuanced.

In March, for example, the EPA announced plans to partially roll back rules to reduce so-called “forever chemicals” in drinking water — the other major Biden-era tap water protection. That change sought to keep tough limits for some common PFAS, but also proposed scrapping and reconsidering standards for other types and extending deadlines.

PFAS and lead pipes are both costly threats to safe water. There are some federal funds to help communities.

The Biden administration estimated about 9 million lead pipes provide water to homes and businesses in the United States. The Trump administration updated the analysis and now projects there are roughly 4 million lead pipes. Changes in methodology, including assuming that communities that did not submit data did not have lead pipes, resulted in the significant shift. The new estimate does correct odd results from some states — activists said that the agency’s initial assumptions for Florida, for example, seemed far too high.

The EPA did not immediately return a request for comment. The AWWA pointed to their previous court filing when asked for comment.

The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment.

By MICHAEL BIESECKER and JESSE BEDAYN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Newly released records show a U.S. citizen was shot and killed in Texas by a federal immigration agent last year during a late-night traffic encounter that was not publicly disclosed by the Department of Homeland Security.

The death of Ruben Ray Martinez, 23, would mark the earliest of at least six deadly shootings by federal officers since the start of a nationwide immigration crackdown in President Donald Trump’s second term. On Friday, DHS said the shooting on South Padre Island last March occurred after the driver intentionally struck an agent.

The shooting involved a Homeland Security Investigations team that was conducting an immigration enforcement operation in conjunction with local police, according to documents obtained by American Oversight, a nonprofit watchdog group based in Washington.

The records are part of a tranche of heavily redacted internal documents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement that the nonprofit obtained as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

Though Martinez’s death on March 15, 2025, was reported by local media outlets at the time, federal and state authorities did not disclose that the shooting involved the team from HSI. In a statement Friday, DHS said the driver who was killed “intentionally ran over a Homeland Security Investigation special agent,” resulting in another agent firing “defensive shots to protect himself, his fellow agents, and the general public.”

The department did not respond to questions about why it had made no media release or other public notification of the officer-involved shooting over the last 11 months.

Martinez’s mother, Rachel Reyes, said her son was just days past his 23rd birthday when he and his best friend drove from San Antonio down to the beach for the weekend to celebrate. South Padre Island, located on the Gulf Coast just north of the U.S.-Mexico border, is a renowned spring break destination that attracts tens of thousands of college-aged partiers each March.

Martinez worked at an Amazon warehouse, liked to play video games and hang out with friends. His mother said he had never had any prior run-ins with law enforcement.

“He was a typical young guy,” Reyes told The Associated Press. “He never really got a chance to go out and experience things. It was his first time getting to go out of town. He was a nice guy, humble guy. And he wasn’t a violent person at all.”

Records show federal agents were assisting police

According to an internal two-page ICE incident report included in the newly disclosed documents, shortly after midnight, HSI officers were assisting South Padre Island police by redirecting traffic through a busy intersection after a vehicle accident with several injuries.

A blue, four-door Ford with a driver and passenger approached the officers, who ordered the driver to stop. The report does not say why. Initially, the driver didn’t respond to commands but did eventually come to a stop, according to the report.

Agents then surrounded the vehicle, telling those inside to get out, but the driver “accelerated forward” and struck an HSI special agent “who wound up on the hood of the vehicle,” the report said. An HSI supervisory special agent standing by the side of the car then fired his weapon multiple times through the open driver’s side window, and the vehicle stopped.

Paramedics already on the scene of the accident quickly provided medical aid and the driver was taken by ambulance to a regional hospital in Brownsville, where he was pronounced dead, according to the report. The passenger, also a U.S. citizen, was taken into custody.

The HSI officer who the report says was struck by the vehicle was treated for an unspecified knee injury at a nearby hospital and released.

The names of the two HSI agents involved in the shooting and the names of the two men in the car were all redacted from the ICE report, but Reyes confirmed the dead driver was her son. She said he was shot three times.

State investigation into shooting is still ‘active’

The report says the Texas Rangers responded to the shooting scene and took the lead as the primary agency investigating the shooting.

Reyes said she first learned her son had been shot by a federal agent, rather than a local police officer, about a week after he was killed. She was contacted by an investigator from the Rangers who she said told her there were videos of the shooting that contradicted the account provided by federal agents. DHS did not immediately respond to an email Friday about the claim that there is video showing a different account.

She said she was told by the investigator that the state report into the shooting was completed in October and that the case would be presented to a grand jury for potential criminal charges.

The Texas Department of Public Safety, which includes the Rangers, said in a statement Friday that the investigation into the shooting is still “active” and declined to offer more information.

Messages left with the office of Cameron County District Attorney Luis V. Saenz, an elected Democrat whose jurisdiction includes South Padre Island, received no response Friday. South Padre Island Police Chief Claudine O’Carroll also did not respond to requests for comment.

Attorneys for the family said Friday they have spent the past year pursuing accountability and transparency.

“It is critical that there is a full and fair investigation into why HSI was present at the scene of a traffic collision and why a federal officer shot and killed a U.S. citizen as he was trying to comply with instructions from the local law enforcement officers directing traffic,” attorneys Charles M. Stam and Alex Stamm said in a statement.

Agents involved were part of a border task force

According to the ICE report, the HSI agents involved in the shooting were part of a maritime border enforcement security task force typically focused on combating transnational criminal organizations at seaports. Over the last year, however, officers from across multiple federal agencies have been reassigned to prioritize immigration enforcement.

In January, Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother in Minneapolis, was killed in the driver’s seat of her SUV by ICE officer Jonathan Ross. Trump administration officials initially attempted to paint Good as a “domestic terrorist” who tried to ram officers with her vehicle before multiple videos emerged of the incident that cast doubt on the government’s narrative.

As in the Good case, experts in police training and tactics questioned why a federal officer apparently positioned himself in front of Martinez’s vehicle.

“You don’t stand in front of the car, you don’t put yourself in harm’s way,” said Geoffrey Alpert, a police use-of-force expert at the University of South Carolina. He added that there’s never a scenario where it’s justified, “because you don’t know whether this person is going to flee, and if he flees, you could be dead.”

Alpert said investigators will likely review any available body camera video or other footage to examine how swiftly Martinez moved the car forward, if he merely took his foot off the break or pressed down hard on the accelerator.

Martinez’s mother said she didn’t believe he would ever intentionally assault a law enforcement officer.

“They didn’t give him a chance,” Reyes said. “It’s so excessive. They could have done anything else besides that. It’s like they shoot first and ask questions later.”

Bedayn reported from Denver.

By RIO YAMAT

The ability of federal safety regulators to oversee airplane maintenance at United Airlines has been hindered by inadequate staffing, high employee turnover and the improper use of virtual inspections instead of on-site reviews in some cases, according to a government watchdog audit released Friday.

The U.S. Transportation Department’s inspector general said the Federal Aviation Administration lacks sufficient staffing and workforce planning to effectively monitor United’s large fleet. Past audits by the government watchdog also highlighted FAA challenges overseeing other airline maintenance programs, including at American Airlines, Southwest Airlines and Allegiant Air.

The FAA declined to comment on the findings but referred The Associated Press to a letter it sent the inspector general’s office that was included in the audit report. In it, the FAA said it agreed with most of the recommendations and was taking steps to address them by the end of the year.

“FAA will implement a more systemic approach to strengthen inspector capacity and will take other measures to ensure that staffing levels remain sufficient to meet surveillance requirements,” the letter said.

The recommendations included a reevaluation of staffing rules, an independent workplace survey of inspector workloads and office culture, and improved training on accessing and using United’s safety data — a current gap that the report said currently keeps inspectors from fully evaluating maintenance issues and safety risk trends.

In a statement to AP, United said it works closely with the FAA on a daily basis in addition to employing its own internal safety management system.

“United has long advocated in favor of providing the FAA with the resources it needs for its important work,” the carrier said.

The inspector general’s office said the audit was conducted between May 2024 and December 2025, amid a series of maintenance-linked incidents at United.

It found that the FAA sometimes had its personnel conduct inspections “virtually” when it lacked staffing or funding for travel even though agency policy requires postponing reviews that can’t be done on site. Doing the work remotely can create safety risks because inspectors may miss or misidentify maintenance problems, the reported stated.

“Inspectors we spoke with stated that their front-line managers instructed them to perform inspections virtually rather than postponing inspections,” the report said.

The audit also found that ongoing staffing shortages at the FAA inspection offices tasked with United’s oversight have resulted in fewer inspections being conducted, limited surveillance of the carrier’s maintenance operations and an “overall loss of institutional knowledge.”

In March 2024, passengers had to be evacuated from a United plane that rolled off a runway after landing in Houston. The next day, a United jetliner bound for Japan lost a tire while taking off from San Francisco but later landed safely in Los Angeles.

In December 2025, a United flight experienced an engine failure during takeoff from Dulles International Airport before safely returning to the airport.

Associated Press writer Josh Funk contributed.

By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — The federal government is asking a court to “run roughshod” over the First Amendment after seizing electronic devices from a Washington Post reporter’s Virginia home last month, an attorney for the newspaper argued Friday.

U.S. Magistrate Judge William Porter didn’t rule from the bench on the newspaper’s request for an order requiring authorities to return the devices taken from the Virginia home of Post reporter Hannah Natanson. Porter had authorized the search by FBI agents investigating allegations that a Pentagon contractor illegally leaked classified information to Natanson.

Porter said he intends to issue a decision before a follow-up hearing scheduled for March 4.

“I have a pretty good sense of what I’m going to do here,” the magistrate said without elaborating.

Pentagon contractor Aurelio Luis Perez-Lugones was arrested on Jan. 8 and charged with unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents. Perez-Lugones is accused of taking home printouts of classified documents from his workplace and later passing them to Natanson.

Federal agents seized a phone, two laptops, a recorder, a portable hard drive and a Garmin smart watch when they searched Natanson’s home in Alexandria, Virginia, on Jan. 14. Last month, Porter agreed to temporarily bar the government from reviewing any material from Natanson’s devices.

Post attorney Simon Latcovich said the information contained on Natanson’s devices could expose hundreds of confidential sources who routinely provided her with dozens, if not hundreds, of tips every day.

“Since the seizure, those sources have dried up,” he said.

If Porter intends to privately review the material contained on Natanson’s devices before deciding what can be shown to the government, Latcovich asked him to allow attorneys for the Post and the reporter to see it first so they can argue for keeping at least some of it under wraps.

Justice Department attorney Christian Dibblee said the government recognizes that Porter didn’t authorize a “fishing expedition.”

“The government does take that seriously,” he said.

The newspaper’s attorneys accused authorities of violating legal safeguards for journalists and trampling on Natanson’s First Amendment free speech rights.

Justice Department attorneys argued that the government is entitled to keep the seized material because it contains evidence in an ongoing investigation with national security implications.

The case has drawn national attention and scrutiny from press freedom advocates who say it reflects a more aggressive posture by the Justice Department toward leak investigations involving journalists.

“There is a pattern here, your honor, that this is a part of,” Latcovich said.

The post ICE detains a father outside of Detroit mosque, family concerned about accommodations during Ramadan appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

The post MichMash: What is a ConCon and will it happen in Michigan? appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

Communities across Michigan are asking how, exactly, local law enforcement is working with federal immigration agents as the Trump administration steps up aggressive enforcement, including the killing of two Americans in Minneapolis. In Detroit, that question is playing out on the pages of two police personnel files. 

Detroit Police Chief Todd Bettison vowed to fire two officers who broke department rules by calling U.S. Border Patrol during traffic stops, handing people over to federal immigration agents. Then he dropped the terminations.

In one stop, an officer called Border Patrol, believing the person was undocumented. In the other, a sergeant called for help communicating with a driver who didn’t speak English, though the department runs a 24-hour translation hotline.

DPD policy — stemming from a 2007 anti-profiling ordinance and a 2020 internal directive — bars officers from contacting Border Patrol, ICE, or any federal agency for translation or immigration enforcement. 

Outlier Media’s public records requests turned up at least two more incidents the chief did not disclose.

Ahead of the Board of Police Commissioners’ vote on the suspensions, The Metro’s Robyn Vincent spoke with Noah Kincade, who runs the Documenters program at Outlier Media. 

The Detroit Documenters helped surface these cases at police commission meetings. 

ICE and CBP did not respond to WDET’s requests for comment about this story.

Hear the full conversation using the media player above.

Editor’s Note: After this interview aired, the Board of Police Commissioners voted 10–0 to suspend both officers without pay for 30 days. Bettison, who said he would terminate them, backed off the next morning. His reversal comes after one officer sued in federal court, claiming her lieutenant ordered the call, and Michigan Republican House Speaker Matt Hall threatened to review Detroit’s state funding in response to the case.

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on demand.

Subscribe to The Metro on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, NPR.org or wherever you get your podcasts.

Support the podcasts you love.

One-of-a-kind podcasts from WDET bring you engaging conversations, news you need to know and stories you love to hear. Keep the conversations coming. Please make a gift today.

Give now »

More stories from The Metro

The Metro: Millions of Iranians want the regime gone. They don’t agree on what’s next

Robyn Vincent

Read More »

The Metro: A positive perspective on Michigan’s economy

Sam Corey

Read More »

The Metro: Paczki Day highlights Polish culture and history

Cary Junior II

Read More »

The post The Metro: Detroit police chief said the line was clear. His officers crossed it anyway appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

Across metro Detroit, some leaders’ stances against ICE have gotten firmer. 

The Detroit police chief is not allowing his officers to work with ICE. Last week, Sterling Heights Mayor Michael Taylor spoke with The Metro about his criticisms of the institution.

Now, in Southfield, federal and state lawmakers are trying to stop ICE from opening an administrative office. 

Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald, who is running to be Michigan’s Attorney General, has expressed concerns about ICE enforcement, and the presence of ICE agents in her jurisdiction. She spoke with The Metro‘s Robyn Vincent about that and more.

The Metro contacted US Immigration and Customs Enforcement prior to this conversation. They did not respond with a comment by the time this aired.

 

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on demand.

Subscribe to The Metro on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, NPR.org or wherever you get your podcasts.

Trusted, accurate, up-to-date.

WDET strives to make our journalism accessible to everyone. As a public media institution, we maintain our journalistic integrity through independent support from readers like you. If you value WDET as your source of news, music and conversation, please make a gift today.

Donate today »

More stories from The Metro

The Metro: Oakland County’s top legal official says ICE agents are not above the law

Sam Corey

Read More »

The Metro: Millions of Iranians want the regime gone. They don’t agree on what’s next

Robyn Vincent

Read More »

The Metro: Fear is the new recession. How immigration enforcement is affecting small businesses

Robyn Vincent

Read More »

The post The Metro: Oakland County’s top legal official says ICE agents are not above the law appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

A new statewide poll shows Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson opening up a narrow lead in Michigan’s 2026 governor’s race, while independent candidate Mike Duggan is losing ground, even after allies and pro-Trumpers poured seven figures into boosting his campaign.

The post New poll shows Benson pulling ahead as Duggan slips despite big spending appeared first on Detroit Metro Times.

The post Haley Stevens runs for Michigan’s open US Senate seat appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

There’s a lot of fear and uncertainty in Iran right now. 

Protestors have faced a violent reaction from Iran’s political leaders, resulting in the death of thousands of Iranians. But the demonstrations, nonetheless, have continued — and not just in Iran. 

This past weekend, the Iranian diaspora and others — amounting to hundreds of thousands of people around the world — protested the Iranian government. 

The demonstrations occurred in Germany and Los Angeles and Toronto and across the river, in Windsor.

One of the people participating the ongoing protests is Mahshid Soleimani. She’s a PhD student at the University of Windsor and a leader of an Iranian student group on campus. She spoke about her perspective, as part of the Iranian diaspora, with The Metro‘s Robyn Vincent.

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on demand.

Subscribe to The Metro on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, NPR.org or wherever you get your podcasts.

Support the podcasts you love.

One-of-a-kind podcasts from WDET bring you engaging conversations, news you need to know and stories you love to hear. Keep the conversations coming. Please make a gift today.

Give now »

More stories from The Metro

The Metro: Oakland County’s top legal official says ICE agents are not above the law

Sam Corey

Read More »

The Metro: A positive perspective on Michigan’s economy

Sam Corey

Read More »

The Metro: Sacred Spaces highlights Black art galleries and institutions during Black History Month

Tia Graham

Read More »

The post The Metro: The view of Iran from Windsor appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

In 2023, Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed one of the most aggressive clean energy laws in the country — requiring Michigan utilities to hit 50% renewable energy by 2030 and 100% clean electricity by 2040. That plan assumed federal policy would be moving in the same direction. Things like federal tax credits, Environmental Protection Agency regulations, and infrastructure money for electric vehicles were anticipated to follow.

But that’s not what’s happening now. Last week, the Trump administration revoked the EPA’s ability to regulate pollution.

What does that decision mean for Michigan? What does it mean for DTE and Consumers Energy, which are both tasked with transitioning to clean energy sources instead of relying on things like natural gas?

Liesl Clark is the director of climate action engagement for the University of Michigan’s School for Environment and Sustainability. She also used to run the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy. 

The Metro‘s Sam Corey spoke with the director about the president’s actions and what she would recommend the state do now.

 

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on demand.

Subscribe to The Metro on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, NPR.org or wherever you get your podcasts.

Trusted, accurate, up-to-date.

WDET strives to make our journalism accessible to everyone. As a public media institution, we maintain our journalistic integrity through independent support from readers like you. If you value WDET as your source of news, music and conversation, please make a gift today.

Donate today »

More stories from The Metro

The Metro: Millions of Iranians want the regime gone. They don’t agree on what’s next

Robyn Vincent

Read More »

The Metro: Oakland County’s top legal official says ICE agents are not above the law

Sam Corey

Read More »

The Metro: Detroit police chief said the line was clear. His officers crossed it anyway

Robyn Vincent

Read More »

The post The Metro: President Trump won’t regulate pollution. Can Michigan do that on its own? appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

By HANNAH SCHOENBAUM

An exhibit about nine people enslaved by George Washington must be restored at his former home in Philadelphia after President Donald Trump’s administration took it down last month, a federal judge ruled on Presidents Day, the federal holiday honoring Washington’s legacy.

The city of Philadelphia sued in January after the National Park Service removed the explanatory panels from Independence National Historical Park, the site where George and Martha Washington lived with nine of their slaves in the 1790s, when Philadelphia was briefly the nation’s capital.

The removal came in response to a Trump executive order “restoring truth and sanity to American history” at the nation’s museums, parks and landmarks. It directed the Interior Department to ensure those sites do not display elements that “inappropriately disparage Americans past or living.”

U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe ruled Monday that all materials must be restored in their original condition while a lawsuit challenging the removal’s legality plays out. She prohibited Trump officials from installing replacements that explain the history differently.

Rufe, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush, began her written order with a quote from George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984” and compared the Trump administration to the book’s totalitarian regime called the Ministry of Truth, which revised historical records to align with its own narrative.

“As if the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s 1984 now existed, with its motto ‘Ignorance is Strength,’ this Court is now asked to determine whether the federal government has the power it claims — to dissemble and disassemble historical truths when it has some domain over historical facts,” Rufe wrote. “It does not.”

She had warned Justice Department lawyers during a January hearing that they were making “dangerous” and “horrifying” statements when they said Trump officials can choose which parts of U.S. history to display at National Park Service sites.

The Interior Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling, which came while government offices were closed for the federal holiday.

The judge did not provide a timeline for when the exhibit must be restored. Federal officials can appeal the ruling.

The historical site is among several where the administration has quietly removed content about the history of enslaved people, LGBTQ+ people and Native Americans.

Signage that has disappeared from Grand Canyon National Park said settlers pushed Native American tribes “off their land” for the park to be established and “exploited” the landscape for mining and grazing.

Last week, a rainbow flag was taken down at the Stonewall National Monument, where bar patrons rebelled against a police raid and catalyzed the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement. The administration has also removed references to transgender people from its webpage about the monument, despite several trans women of color being key figures in the uprising.

The Philadelphia exhibit, created two decades ago in a partnership between the city and federal officials, included biographical details about each of the nine people enslaved by the Washingtons at the home, including two who escaped.

Among them was Oney Judge, who was born into slavery at the family’s plantation in Mount Vernon, Virginia, and later escaped from their Philadelphia house in 1796. Judge fled north to New Hampshire, a free state, while Washington had her declared a fugitive and published advertisements seeking her return.

Because Judge had escaped from the Philadelphia house, the park service in 2022 supported the site’s inclusion in a national network of Underground Railroad sites where they would teach about abolitionists and escaped slaves. Rufe noted that materials about Judge were among those removed, which she said “conceals crucial information linking the site to the Network to Freedom.”

Only the names of Judge and the other eight enslaved people — Austin, Paris, Hercules, Richmond, Giles, Moll and Joe, who each had a single name, and Christopher Sheels — remained engraved in a cement wall after park service employees took a crowbar to the plaques on Jan. 22.

Hercules also escaped in 1797 after he was brought to Mount Vernon, where the Washingtons had many other slaves. He reached New York City despite being declared a fugitive slave and lived under the name Hercules Posey.

Several local politicians and Black community leaders celebrated the ruling, which came while many were out rallying at the site for its restoration.

State Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, a Philadelphia Democrat, said the community prevailed against an attempt by the Trump administration to “whitewash our history.”

“Philadelphians fought back, and I could not be more proud of how we stood together,” he said.

The post Windsor mayor surprised by Trump bridge threat, points finger at Morouns appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

The three Democrats vying for Michigan’s open U.S. Senate seat agree that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has grown increasingly brutal under President Donald Trump, but they are sharply divided over whether the agency can be fixed at all.

The post El-Sayed stands alone in Michigan’s Senate race by calling to abolish ICE appeared first on Detroit Metro Times.

By STEPHEN GROVES and MATT BROWN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Dozens of U.S. lawmakers were trying to make their way this weekend to the Munich Security Conference to assure allies of America’s reliability, but burdened with political crises at home, their entrance to the annual gathering of international leaders was more of a limp than a stride.

Some didn’t make the trip at all. House Speaker Mike Johnson canceled an official delegation of roughly two dozen House members who had planned to attend the event, leaving those lawmakers either to find their own way to Germany or send their regrets.

While two bipartisan delegations from the Senate still made the trip, they departed amid bitter fights over how U.S. immigration agents are carrying out President Donald Trump’s sweeping crackdowns on illegal immigration, which have included fatal shootings of two people protesting the raids, as well as the Trump administration’s recent failed effort to indict six Democratic lawmakers who produced a video urging U.S. military members not to obey “illegal orders.”

“It is a little bit, you know, depressing to be here with what we have to deal with at home,” Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, who was among those investigated by the Department of Justice, said in a live interview with Politico in Munich.

For over six decades, the annual conference has gathered world leaders in pursuit of cooperation for shared security, with the United State often playing a leading role. But Trump has upended his nation’s posture toward the rest of the world, especially Europe. And while many lawmakers who attended tried to assure European counterparts that the U.S. still wants a seat at the table, it was clear they were still grappling with the rapidly changing political environment at home.

“I expect to have a number of challenging conversations with friends and allies about their concern and alarm about what they’ve seen federal law enforcement under this administration do in Minneapolis and the attempt to indict six of my colleagues and other steps that frankly have more of the hallmarks of authoritarian societies than democracies,” said Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware.

Senate’s bipartisan traditions are slipping

The security forum in recent years has been a reinforcing event for the coalition of nations backing Ukraine in its defense against Russia’s invasion — a cause that once enjoyed strong support from Republicans. But several GOP senators who have participated in years past and hold spots on committees overseeing the U.S. military and foreign affairs decided this year to stay home. The delegations that did attend included significantly more Democrats.

As lawmakers exited Washington on Thursday, Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri ripped Democrats for heading to Munich while the Department of Homeland Security faced a shutdown during an impasse in Congress over funding the agency that oversees immigration enforcement.

“How do you justify getting on a plane and going to Europe when you’re shutting down DHS?” Schmitt told reporters. “They’re making a decision that their travel to Munich to cozy up with the Euros is way more important than funding DHS.”

Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz responded on social media, noting that he and Schmitt had both gone to Munich the year prior and that it “continues to be an important bipartisan trip.”

Still, Schatz also said this year is different in light of the Department of Justice attempting to indict two senators.

“Spare me the high-minded panel discussions and bilats and press availabilities about the United States as the indispensable nation, when we are dispensing with our most sacred constitutional obligations,” he said in a floor speech this week.

Republicans articulate Trump policy

Some Republicans who attended the Munich gathering came not to offer reassurances, but to herald the changing world under under Trump. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby were among the top Trump administration officials participating.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is close to Trump, led one of the delegations of senators. He presented a bullish argument that European security is better off with Trump’s willingness to break up the traditional roles of Western allies. He argued the U.S. needs to keep up pressure on Iran with the goal of toppling the regime, as well as build pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin to reach a peace deal.

“We’re here at a crucial moment, folks. If we don’t follow through with what we promised the people of Iran, it will destroy America’s credibility for years to come, it will make this world less safe,” he said.

A new voice from the US

Graham has been a mainstay at Munich and other like conferences for years, yet there was also a new voice from the American side.

Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the progressive from New York, made her first trip to the conference to discuss the rise of populism and the shifting role of American power in the world. Her attendance at the conference, she said, was meant to show support for international liberal values.

“We are ready for the next chapter, not to have the world turned to isolation, but to deepen our partnership on greater and increased commitment to integrity to our values,” she said at a roundtable.

Ocasio-Cortez said she identified with voters who had defected from traditional left-of-center parties in Europe and the United States for populist hard-right parties. She said her frustrations with a Democratic Party “that championed special interests, the elite” is what had pushed her to run for office.

“Domestically and globally, there have been many leaders who’ve said ‘We will go back’. And I think we have to recognize that we are in a new day and in a time,” she said, adding “That does not mean that the majority of Americans are ready to walk away from a rules-based order and that we’re ready to walk away from our commitment to democracy.”

Joey Cappelletti in Washington contributed to this story.

By DAVID A. LIEB

Virginia voters will get to cast ballots on a congressional redistricting plan benefiting Democrats while a court battle plays out over the legality of the effort.

The Virginia Supreme Court said Friday that a statewide referendum can be held April 21 on whether to authorize mid-decade redistricting, and the court will decide sometime later whether the plan is legal.

Democrats celebrated the green light for the election. But the court’s schedule raises the possibility that it could all be for naught, if the Supreme Court ultimately upholds a lower court ruling that the mid-decade redistricting amendment is invalid.

Virginia Democrats hold six of the state’s 11 U.S. House seats, but they are backing a revised map that could help them win up to 10 seats in this year’s midterm elections. The new districts are a key part of Democrats’ national strategy to try to offset potential Republican gains in several other states that redrew their districts last year at the urging of President Donald Trump.

The Republican president is trying to preserve a narrow GOP majority in the House against political headwinds that typically blow against the party in power in midterm elections.

Before Virginia Democrats can implement new congressional districts, they need voter approval to temporarily set aside a constitutional provision that places redistricting authority with a bipartisan commission and instead grant that power to the General Assembly. Lawmakers endorsed a constitutional amendment allowing their mid-decade redistricting last fall, then passed it again in January as part of a two-step process that requires an intervening election in order for an amendment to be placed on the ballot.

But Tazewell Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley Jr. last month struck down the General Assembly’s actions on three grounds. The judge ruled that lawmakers failed to follow their own rules for adding the redistricting amendment to a special session.

Hurley also ruled that the General Assembly’s initial vote for the amendment failed to occur before the public began casting ballots in last year’s general election and thus didn’t count toward the two-step process. And he ruled that the state failed to publish the amendment three months before the election, as required by law. As a result of those issues, he said, the amendment was invalid and void.

Democrats appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court, which agreed on Friday to consider the case while stating that a narrowly tailored injunction by the lower court doesn’t prevent the April referendum. The court directed initial briefs to be filed by March 23, with the last round of court filings due April 23. Any oral arguments would be scheduled for later, the court said.

Nationwide, the redistricting battle has resulted so far in nine more seats that Republicans believe they can win in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio, and six that Democrats think they can win in California and Utah. Democrats have hoped to make up that three-seat margin in Virginia, though the lower court ruling raised a hurdle to their plans. It’s unclear whether the redistricting efforts in various states ultimately will make any difference in determining control of Congress in the November election.