By Claudia Boyd-Barrett, KFF Health News

In July, federal immigration agents took Milagro Solis-Portillo to Glendale Memorial Hospital just outside Los Angeles after she suffered a medical emergency while being detained. They didn’t leave.

For two weeks, Immigration and Customs Enforcement contractors sat guard in the hospital lobby 24 hours a day, working in shifts to monitor her movements, her attorney Ming Tanigawa-Lau said.

ICE later transferred the Salvadoran woman to Anaheim Global Medical Center, against her doctor’s orders and without explanation, her attorney said. There, Tanigawa-Lau said, ICE agents were allowed to stay in Solis-Portillo’s hospital room round-the-clock, listening to what should have been private conversations with providers. Solis-Portillo told her attorney that agents pressured her to say she was well enough to leave the hospital, telling her she wouldn’t be able to speak to her family or her attorney until she complied.

“She described it to me as feeling like she was being tortured,” Tanigawa-Lau said.

Legal experts say ICE agents can be in public areas of a hospital, such as a lobby, and can accompany already-detained patients as they receive care, illustrating the scope of federal authority. Detained patients, however, have rights and can try to advocate for themselves or seek legal recourse.

Earlier this year, California set aside $25 million to fund legal services for immigrants, and some local jurisdictions — including Orange County, Long Beach, and San Francisco— have put money toward legal aid efforts. The California Department of Social Services lists some legal defense nonprofits that have received funds.

Sophia Genovese, a supervising attorney and clinical teaching fellow at Georgetown Law, said law enforcement officers, including federal immigration agents, can guard and even restrain a person in their custody who is receiving health care, but they must follow constitutional and health privacy laws regardless of the person’s immigration status. Under those laws, patients can ask to speak with medical providers in private and to seek and speak confidentially with legal counsel, she said.

“ICE should be stationed outside of the room or outside of earshot during any communication between the patient and their doctor or medical provider,” Genovese said, adding that the same applies to a patient’s communication with lawyers. “That’s what they’re supposed to do.”

ICE guidelines

When it comes to communication and visits, ICE’s standards state that detainees should have access to a phone and be able to receive visits from family and friends, “within security and operational constraints.” However, these guidelines are not enforceable, Genovese said.

If immigration agents arrest someone without a warrant, they must tell them why they’ve been detained and generally can’t hold them for more than 48 hours without making a custody determination. A federal judge recently granted a temporary restraining order in a case in which a man named Bayron Rovidio Marin was monitored by immigration agents in a Los Angeles hospital for 37 days without being charged and was registered under a pseudonym.

In the past, perceived violations by agents could be reported to ICE leadership at local field offices, to the agency’s headquarters, or to an oversight body, Genovese said. But earlier this year, the Department of Homeland Security cut staffing at ombudsman offices that investigate civil rights complaints, saying they “obstructed immigration enforcement by adding bureaucratic hurdles.”

The assistant secretary for public affairs at DHS, Tricia McLaughlin, said that agents arrested Marin for being in the country illegally and that he admitted his lack of legal status to ICE agents. She said agents took him to the hospital after he injured his leg while trying to evade federal officers during a raid. She said officers did not prevent him from seeing his family or from using the phone.

“All detainees have access to phones they can use to contact their families and lawyers,” she said.

McLaughlin said the temporary restraining order was issued by an “activist” judge. She did not address questions about staffing cuts at the ombudsman offices.

DHS also said Solis-Portillo was in the country illegally. The department said she had been removed from the United States twice and arrested for the crimes of false identification, theft, and burglary.

“ICE takes its commitment to promoting safe, secure, humane environments for those in our custody very seriously,” McLaughlin said. “It is a long-standing practice to provide comprehensive medical care from the moment an alien enters ICE custody. This includes access to medical appointments and 24-hour emergency care.”

Protections in California

Anaheim Global Medical Center did not respond to a request for comment. In a statement, Dignity Health, which operates Glendale Memorial Hospital, said it “cannot legally restrict law enforcement or security personnel from being present in public areas which include the hospital lobby/waiting area.”

California enacted a law in September that prohibits medical establishments from allowing federal agents without a valid search warrant or court order into private areas, including places where patients receive treatment or discuss health matters. But many of the most high-profile news reports of immigration agents at health care facilities have involved detained patients brought in for care.

Erika Frank, vice president of legal counsel for the California Hospital Association, said hospitals have always had law enforcement, including federal agents, bring in people they’ve detained who need medical attention.

Hospitals will defer to law enforcement on whether a patient needs to be monitored at all times, according to association spokesperson Jan Emerson-Shea. If law enforcement officers overhear medical information about a patient while they’re in the hospital, it doesn’t constitute a patient-privacy violation, she added.

“This is no different, legally, from a patient or visitor overhearing information about another patient in a nearby bed or emergency department bay,” Emerson-Shea said in a statement.

She didn’t address whether patients can demand privacy with providers and attorneys, and she said hospitals don’t tell family and friends about the detained patient’s location, for safety reasons.

Sandy Reding, who is president of the California Nurses Association and visited the Glendale facility when Solis-Portillo was there, said nurses and patients were frightened to see masked immigration agents in the hospital’s lobby. She said she saw them sitting behind a registration desk where they could hear people discuss private health information.

“Hospitals used to be a sanctuary place, and now they’re not,” she said. “And it seems like ICE has just been running rampant.”

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote Nov. 18 on a proposal to provide more protections for detainees at county-operated health facilities. These include limiting the ability of immigration officials to hide patients’ identities, allowing patients to consent to the release of information to family members and legal counsel, and directing staff to insist immigration agents leave the room at times to protect patient privacy. The county would also defend employees who try to uphold its policies.

Solis-Portillo’s lawyer, Tanigawa-Lau, said her client ultimately decided to self-deport to El Salvador rather than fight her case, because she felt she couldn’t get the medical care she needed in ICE custody.

“Even though Milagro’s case is really terrible, I’m glad that there’s more awareness now about this issue,” Tanigawa-Lau said.

©2025 KFF Health News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

By Jonathan Shorman, Stateline.org

A day after President Donald Trump took office, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement issued a new directive to its agents: Arrests at courthouses, restricted under the Biden administration, were again permissible.

In Connecticut, a group of observers who keep watch on ICE activity in and around Stamford Superior Court have since witnessed a series of arrests. In one high-profile case in August, federal agents pursued two men into a bathroom.

“Is it an activity you want to be interfering with, people fulfilling their duty when they’re called to court and going to court? For me, it’s insanity,” said David Michel, a Democratic former state representative in Connecticut who helps observe courthouse activity.

Fueled by the Stamford uproar, Connecticut lawmakers last week approved restrictions on civil arrests and mask-wearing by federal law enforcement at state courthouses. And on Monday, a federal judge tossed a lawsuit brought by the U.S. Department of Justice that had sought to block similar restrictions in New York.

They are the latest examples of a growing number of Democratic states, and some judges, pushing back against ICE arrests in and around state courthouses. State lawmakers and other officials worry the raids risk keeping people from testifying in criminal trials, fighting evictions or seeking restraining orders against domestic abusers.

The courthouse arrests mark an intensifying clash between the Trump administration and Democratic states that pits federal authority against state sovereignty. Sitting at the core of the fight are questions about how much power states have to control what happens in their own courts and the physical grounds they sit on.

In Illinois, lawmakers approved a ban on civil immigration arrests at courthouses in October. In Rhode Island, lawmakers plan to again push for a ban after an earlier measure didn’t advance in March. Connecticut lawmakers were codifying limits imposed by the state Supreme Court chief justice in September. Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont is expected to sign the bill.

States that are clamping down on ICE continue to allow the agency to make criminal arrests, as opposed to noncriminal civil arrests. Many people arrested and subsequently deported are taken on noncriminal, administrative warrants. As of Sept. 21, 71.5% of ICE detainees had no criminal convictions, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a data research organization.

Some states, such as New York, already have limits on immigration enforcement in courthouses that date back to the first Trump administration, when ICE agents also engaged in courthouse arrests. New York’s Protect Our Courts Act, in place since 2020, prohibits civil arrests of people at state and local courthouses without a judicial warrant. The law also applies to people traveling to and from court, extending protections beyond courthouse grounds.

“One of the cornerstones of our democracy is open access to the courts. When that access is denied or chilled, all of us are made less safe and less free,” said Oren Sellstrom, litigation director at Lawyers for Civil Rights, a Boston-based group that works to provide legal support to immigrants, people of color and low-income individuals.

But in addition to challenging the New York law, the Justice Department is prosecuting a Wisconsin state judge, alleging she illegally helped a migrant avoid ICE agents.

“We aren’t some medieval kingdom; there are no legal sanctuaries where you can hide and avoid the consequences for breaking the law,” U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to Stateline. “Nothing in the constitution prohibits arresting a lawbreaker where you find them.”

Some Republican lawmakers oppose efforts to limit ICE arrests in and near courthouses, arguing state officials should stay out of the way of federal law enforcement. The Ohio Senate in June passed a bill that would prohibit public officials from interfering in immigration arrests or prohibiting cooperation with ICE; the move came after judges in Franklin County, which includes Columbus, imposed restrictions on civil arrests in courthouses.

“The United States is a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of law and order. To have a civilized society, laws must be respected, this includes immigration laws,” Ohio Republican state Sen. Kristina Roegner, the bill’s sponsor, said in a news release at the time.

Roegner didn’t respond to Stateline’s interview request. The legislation remains in a House committee.

Knowing where a target will be

Courthouses offer an attractive location for ICE to make immigration arrests, according to both ICE and advocates for migrants.

Court records and hearing schedules often indicate who is expected in the building on any given day. Administrative warrants don’t allow ICE to enter private homes without permission, but the same protections don’t apply in public areas, such as courthouses. And many people have a strong incentive to show up for court, knowing that warrants can potentially be issued for their arrest if they don’t.

“So in some respects, it’s easy pickings,” said Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island.

In June, ICE arrested Pablo Grave de la Cruz at Rhode Island Traffic Tribunal in Cranston. A 36-year-old Rhode Island resident, he had come from Guatemala illegally as a teenager.

“They pulled up on him like he was a murderer or a rapist,” friend Brittany Donohue told the Rhode Island Current, which chronicled de la Cruz’s case. “He was leaving traffic court.”

An immigration judge has since granted de la Cruz permission to self-deport.

McLaughlin, the Homeland Security assistant secretary, said in her statement that allowing law enforcement to make arrests “of criminal illegal aliens in courthouses is common sense” — conserving law enforcement resources because officers know where a target will be. The department said the practice is safer for officers and the community, noting that individuals have gone through courthouse security.

Still, ICE’s directive on courthouse arrests sets some limits on the agency’s activity.

Agents “should, to the extent practicable” conduct civil immigration arrests in non-public areas of the courthouse and avoid public entrances. Actions should be taken “discreetly” to minimize disruption to court proceedings, and agents should generally avoid areas wholly dedicated to non-criminal proceedings, such as family court, the directive says.

Crucially, the directive says ICE can conduct civil immigration arrests “where such action is not precluded by laws imposed by the jurisdiction.” In other words, the agency’s guidance directs agents to respect state and local bans on noncriminal arrests.

Trump administration court actions

But the Trump administration has also gone to court to try to overcome state-level restrictions.

The Justice Department sued in June over New York’s Protect Our Courts Act, arguing that it “purposefully shields dangerous aliens” from lawful detention. The department says the law violates the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause, under which federal law supersedes state law.

New York Democratic Attorney General Letitia James argued the state law doesn’t conflict with federal law and sought the lawsuit’s dismissal.

U.S. District Court Judge Mae D’Agostino, an appointee of President Barack Obama, on Monday granted James’ motion. The judge wrote that the “entire purpose” of the lawsuit was to allow the federal government to commandeer New York’s resources — such as court schedules and court security screening measures — to aid immigration enforcement, even though states cannot generally be required to help the federal government enforce federal law.

“Compelling New York to allow federal immigration authorities to reap the benefits of the work of state employees is no different than permitting the federal government to commandeer state officials directly in furtherance of federal objectives,” the judge wrote.

The Justice Department didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The department is also prosecuting Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan, who prosecutors allege helped a person living in the country illegally avoid ICE agents in April inside a Milwaukee courthouse by letting him exit a courtroom through a side door. (Agents apprehended the individual near the courthouse.) A federal grand jury indicted Dugan on a count of concealing an individual and a count of obstructing a proceeding.

In court documents, Dugan’s lawyers have called the prosecution “virtually unprecedented and entirely unconstitutional.”

Dugan has pleaded not guilty, and a trial is set for December.

Lawmakers seek ‘order’ in courthouses

Rhode Island Democratic state Sen. Meghan Kallman is championing legislation that would generally ban civil arrests at courthouses. The measure received a hearing, but a legislative committee recommended further study.

Kallman hopes the bill will go further next year. The sense of urgency has intensified, she said, and more people now understand the consequences of what is happening.

“In order to create a system of law that is functioning and that encourages trust, we have to make those [courthouse] spaces safe,” she said.

Back in Connecticut, Democratic state Rep. Steven Stafstrom said his day job as a commercial litigator brings him into courthouses across the state weekly. Based on his conversations with court staff, other lawyers and senior administration within the judicial branch, he said “there’s a genuine fear, not just for safety, but for disruptions of orderly court processes in our courthouses.”

Some Connecticut Republicans have questioned whether a law that only pertains to civil arrests would prove effective. State Rep. Craig Fishbein, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, noted during floor debate that entering the United States without permission is a criminal offense — a misdemeanor for first-time offenders and a felony for repeat offenders. Because of that, he suggested the measure wouldn’t stop many courthouse arrests.

“The advocates think they’re getting no arrests in courthouses, but they’ve been sold a bill of goods,” he said.

Stafstrom, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, said in response that he believed the legislation protects many people who are in the country illegally because that crime is often not prosecuted.

“All we’re asking is for ICE to recognize the need for order in our courthouses,” Stafstrom said.

Stateline reporter Jonathan Shorman can be reached at jshorman@stateline.org.

©2025 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

The post Working Families Party seeks to bring authenticity to the Democrats appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

The post Hamtramck mayoral election decided by 6 votes, Mahmood files recount appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

The post Sheffield team says all of city’s stakeholders are helping design new mayoral administration appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

Exiled by the elite after his conviction for sexually soliciting a teenage girl and failing to rehabilitate his image as a sexual predator, an embittered Jeffrey Epstein in 2011 believed his old friend Donald Trump had escaped scrutiny.

“I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump,” Epstein wrote to his longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell that April, noting Trump had “spent hours at my house” with Virginia Giuffre, one of the most prominent women to speak out about being abused by the financier, who died by suicide in April.

The correspondence, obtained from Epstein’s estate by the House Oversight Committee, was included among more than 20,000 documents released this week that brought the men’s relationship history into greater focus. Scores of emails in the cache chart Epstein’s obsession with Trump as he spiraled into scandal and his Palm Beach neighbor ascended to the presidency.

Epstein was at a low point when he sent the missive to Maxwell after serving jail time in Florida for soliciting a 16-year-old. Two months earlier, a Manhattan judge had rejected a bid to downgrade his sex offender status, despite the well-connected wealth manager having then-District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr., in his corner.

Giuffre had publicly spoken out about her allegations that Epstein trafficked her to powerful men for sex, sharing with the Daily Mail a now-infamous photograph of her with his friend Prince Andrew and Maxwell as apparent evidence.

Epstein’s 2011 email to Maxwell marveled that Trump, then hosting “The Apprentice” and floating a run for president had “never once been mentioned.”

“I have been thinking about that…,” Maxwell replied.

Democrats released Epstein’s 2011 message to Maxwell among a set of emails early Wednesday that appeared to suggest the president knew about the financier’s depraved lifestyle and its young victims.

Claiming that their colleagues across the aisle had engaged in a cherry-picking mission, House Republicans later published thousands of Epstein’s digital files online, revealing Giuffre’s identity in the 2011 message, which the Democrats had previously redacted. Many came to the president’s defense, arguing that it proved nothing. Giuffre, they noted, had denied that Trump had abused her or that she’d seen him abuse others in the years before her death.

The president has long denied engaging in any abuse and claimed he stopped talking to Epstein — whom he’d counted as a friend since the 1980s — in the early 2000s over a dispute related to real estate.

On Friday, following a barrage of reporting about the emails, Trump took to his social media site Truth Social to slam what he calls the “EPSTEIN HOAX.” He demanded the Justice Department investigate Epstein’s “involvement and relationship with Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, J.P. Morgan, Chase, and many other people and institutions, to determine what was going on with them, and him.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi said Jay Clayton, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, would head the probe.

Dirt on Trump

The trove of Epstein emails released this week, massive in volume and spanning 2011 to 2019, includes 1,625 references to Trump, although there is no direct communication between the two men.

Made clear throughout is that — whether or not he did — Epstein maintained he had dirt on Trump.

Messaging ahead of a presidential debate in December 2015, Epstein asked his quasi-consultant, Trump biographer Michael Wolff, with whom he spoke regularly, how Trump might best answer a potential question about their relationship.

“I think you should let him hang himself. If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency. You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win, you could save him, generating a debt,” Wolff responded.

“Of course, it is possible that, when asked, he’ll say Jeffrey is a great guy and has gotten a raw deal and is a victim of political correctness, which is to be outlawed in a Trump regime.”

Wolff suggested it could be time to pull the trigger less than two weeks before Trump won the presidency in 2016, following the release of “Filthy Rich,” a book about Epstein’s perversions.

“There’s an opportunity to come forward this week and talk about Trump in such a way that could garner you great sympathy and help finish him. Interested?” Wolff wrote on Oct. 29. It’s not clear from the release whether Epstein responded.

The batch of emails released this week, made searchable online by the Courier Newsroom, is separate from the federal government’s investigative records — the so-called “Epstein files” — whose release the House of Representatives is set to vote on next week.

The trove sheds light on Epstein’s state of mind in the years before his death, and how closely he followed the president’s whereabouts, policy moves, and his own set of scandals. In countless typo-laden emails, the Brooklyn-born financier situated himself as a POTUS expert in conversations with journalists and various confidants, spoke with members of Trump’s inner circle, and sought to shape U.S. policy.

In June 2018, he asked former Norwegian Prime Minister Thorbjørn Jagland to convey a message to Russian President Vladimir Putin about his willingness to provide insight on Trump.

His correspondence with Wolff is featured throughout the records, and Epstein also frequently spoke about Trump with former New York Times reporter Landon Thomas Jr., joking about sending him a photo of Trump with girls in bikinis in his kitchen in December 2015.

Epstein communicated regularly with the often foul-mouthed former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, whom he told Trump was “borderline insane,” the emails show.

He also chatted often with Trump adviser Steve Bannon, who in August 2018 told the financier they had to discuss “a crazed jihad against u,” and that “somebody big has u in the gunsights.”

After Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty to breaking campaign finance laws for then-President Trump in the now-notorious Stormy Daniels hush money scheme in 2018, Epstein alluded to his insider’s perspective in correspondence with Kathy Ruemmler, a former Goldman Sachs executive and Obama aide, with whom the cache shows he frequently chatted.

“You see, i know how dirty donald is,” the financier quipped. “my guess is that non-lawyers ny biz people have no idea. what it means to have your fixer flip.”

“The real villain”

That December, The Miami Herald published the most complete account yet of allegations Epstein had serially exploited vulnerable teenage girls. The piece laid out how Epstein had effectively gotten off with a slap on the wrist in his 2008 plea deal due to former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, who Trump had tapped as his Labor Secretary.

Epstein strategized with Wolff, who believed “directly debunking” the claims wasn’t the right move.

“That’s going against virtue itself,” Wolff wrote. “What I’d like to do is game out everything, creating a structure for thinking this through. Definitely not a piecemeal response. Figure out where we want to be and where we can reasonably get and work backwards.”

Epstein replied, “im thinking what would trump do.”

“Claims are ludicrous and self-serving, media is working with the other side’s lawyers, this is all about Donald Trump,” Wolff responded.

“…all about Donald Trump, the real villain,” Epstein said.

Less than two months later, Epstein explicitly implicated Trump, mentioning Mar-a-Lago to Wolff in a partially redacted email on January 31, 2019, and writing, “trump said he asked me to resign, never a member ever. . of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.”

Epstein was apparently still focused on the president the following June, when an email outlining some of Trump’s potentially questionable financial dealings landed in his inbox. Epstein’s accountant Richard Kahn sent over “interesting findings” from financial disclosures, or what Kahn called “trumps 100 pages of nonsense.”

Within eight weeks, Epstein was dead. Officials said he’d killed himself in his lower Manhattan jail cell a month after his arrest on sweeping sex trafficking charges.

Maxwell, his longtime partner in crime, was indicted a year later for aiding the abuse for at least a decade in the 1990s and convicted at trial in December 2021. This summer, she was transferred to a cushy prison facility in Bryan, Texas, after meeting with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal lawyer, for a highly unusual sit-down.

Transcripts of the meeting showed that Epstein’s longtime right-hand revealed little new information but notably praised the president, whom she is reportedly now planning to ask for a pardon.

President Trump announced he’s withdrawing his support of Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, calling his former ally a “ranting lunatic” and a “disgrace to our great Republican party” for publicly blasting his handling of various issues, including the Epstein files.

In a wild post shared on his social media platform Friday night, Trump wrote that despite accomplishing what he called “record achievements for our country” and turning the U.S. into the world’s “hottest” nation, all that “Wacky Marjorie” does is “complain, complain, complain.”

He said he would endorse a challenger against Greene “if the right person runs” in next year’s midterm elections, claiming the people of her district are similarly “fed up with her and her antics.”

The political breakup appears to be the culmination of a dispute that had been simmering for at least six months, which the president suggested began when he discouraged Greene from running for Senate or governor.

She also “told many people that she is upset” that Trump doesn’t “return her phone calls anymore,” the president said.

“With 219 congressmen/women, 53 U.S. senators, 24 Cabinet members, almost 200 countries, and an otherwise normal life to lead, I can’t take a ranting lunatic’s call every day,” Trump wrote on Truth Social around 8:30 p.m. Friday.

President Trump just attacked me and lied about me. I haven’t called him at all, but I did send these text messages today. Apparently this is what sent him over the edge.

The Epstein files.

And of course he’s coming after me hard to make an example to scare all the other… pic.twitter.com/EcUzaohZZs

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (@RepMTG) November 15, 2025

Less than an hour later, the polarizing Georgia lawmaker — and former MAGA powerhouse — fired back at Trump’s claims in a lengthy post on X, sharing a screenshot of a text message she said “sent him over the edge.”

“President Trump just attacked me and lied about me. I haven’t called him at all, but I did send these text messages today,” she wrote, posting a message in which she tells the president about the importance of “releasing the Epstein files.”

Greene was one of a handful of Republicans to sign on with House Democrats to force a vote over releasing the files related to the sex trafficking investigation into the disgraced late financier.

“It’s astonishing really how hard he’s fighting to stop the Epstein files from coming out — that he actually goes to this level,” Greene continued.

Despite being a longtime and ardent supporter of the president and the MAGA agenda, Greene said she doesn’t “worship or serve Donald Trump.”

....

Early Saturday morning, Trump doubled down on his attack, slamming “Marjorie ‘Traitor’ Greene” as someone who has “betrayed the entire Republican party when she turned left.”

A few hours later, Greene suggested the exchange is making her fear for her life.

“I am now being contacted by private security firms with warnings for my safety as a hot bed of threats against me are being fueled and egged on by the most powerful man in the world,” she wrote on X. “The man I supported and helped get elected.”

“As a Republican, who overwhelmingly votes for President Trump‘s bills and agenda, his aggression against me, which also fuels the venomous nature of his radical internet trolls (many of whom are paid), this is completely shocking to everyone,” wrote Greene, who in 2019 famously stalked and confronted Parkland school shooting survivor David Hogg with claims that his gun control activism was being funded by Democrats.

“The political industrial complex and the toxic violent nature of American politics must end,” she said. “Our country is worth saving and it can only be done if we pull together and save ourselves.”

Detroit has a number of famous representatives. Representatives John Dingell, labor leader Patrick McNamara, and Congressmember John Conyers. 

Charles Diggs Jr. doesn’t often make these lists. But should he? The first Black congressmember from Michigan, he worked with Martin Luther King, Jr, helped pass the Voting Rights Act, advocated for the end of apartheid in South Africa, and changed America’s foreign policy stances toward many nations in Africa.

Why don’t more people know about him? 

It’s partly because the congressmember ended his professional career in disgrace, having to retire because of a payroll kickback scheme he orchestrated.

But what should we remember about this representative who built cross-ideological and cross-political coalitions to achieve civil rights for more people in America and around the world?

Marion Orr is a professor of political science at Brown University. He spoke with Producer Sam Corey about his new book, “House of Diggs: The Rise and Fall of America’s Most Consequential Black Congressman, Charles C. Diggs Jr.”

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, YouTube, or NPR 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: A lifetime of fighting for Detroit’s children, now carved in brick and stone

Robyn Vincent

Read More »

The Metro: Gambling in sports and Pistons icon’s legacy amid scandal

Cary Junior II

Read More »

The Metro: Detroit Narrative Agency wants Detroit’s story told the right way

Tia Graham

Read More »

The post The Metro: Why more people don’t know about Michigan’s first Black congressmember appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

The post MichMash: State House Speaker Matt Hall wants more H.E.A.T. and less ‘pork’ appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

The post Federal government is back open, but at what cost? appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

Last week, Democrats ran across the country on alleviating the issue of affordability. 

Those people spreading the message were often young, 30-somethings. 

That was true in New York City, where Zohran Mamdani became mayor-elect. And it was true in Detroit, where Mary Sheffield won as well. The voters who brought those people to victory — particularly in the New York mayoral race and the Virginia governor’s race — were young voters. 

Amanda Litman, the co-founder and president of Run For Something, recently told a reporter that of the over 200 left candidates affiliated with her organization, nearly every one who achieved victory did it by discussing affordability, particularly housing costs. 

So, how much does the issue of “affordability” translate to more liberal and more conservative places across the country? And, how much can we understand about what young people want from what we saw last week?

Litman joined The Metro to discuss.

 

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, YouTube, or NPR 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: Detroit Narrative Agency wants Detroit’s story told the right way

Tia Graham

Read More »

The Metro: The case for a Detroit land conservancy

Sam Corey

Read More »

The Metro: Covenant House Michigan brings awareness to youth homelessness with Sleep Out Detroit

Tia Graham

Read More »

The post The Metro: Why tackling affordability issues was the winning message for candidates across the country appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

By ROB GILLIES and MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press

NIAGARA-ON-THE-LAKE, Ontario (AP) — Top diplomats from the Group of Seven industrialized democracies are meeting Ukraine’s foreign minister on Wednesday as Ukraine tries to fend off relentless Russian aerial attacks that have brought rolling blackouts across the country ahead of winter.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will participate in a G7 session on Ukraine and defense cooperation.

Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand is hosting the meeting in southern Ontario as tensions rise between the U.S. and traditional allies like Canada over defense spending, trade and uncertainty over President Donald Trump’s ceasefire plan in Gaza and efforts to end the Russia-Ukraine war.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he wants to order 25 Patriot air defense systems from the United States. Combined missile and drone strikes on the power grid have coincided with Ukraine’s frantic efforts to hold back a Russian battlefield push aimed at capturing the eastern stronghold of Pokrovsk.

Canada announced additional sanctions on 13 people and 11 entities, including several involved in the development and deployment of Russia’s drone program.

Britain says it will send $17 million to help patch up Ukraine’s energy infrastructure as winter approaches and Russian attacks intensify. The money will go toward repairs to power, heating and water supplies and humanitarian support for Ukrainians.

U.K. Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, who made the announcement before the meeting, said Russian President Vladimir Putin “is trying to plunge Ukraine into darkness and the cold as winter approaches” but the British support will help keep the lights and heating on.

Canada recently made a similar announcement.

The two-day meeting in Niagara-on-the-Lake, near the U.S. border, comes after Trump ended trade talks with Canada because the Ontario provincial government ran an anti-tariff advertisement in the U.S. that upset him. That followed a spring of acrimony, since abated, over the Republican president’s insistence that Canada should become the 51st U.S. state.

Anand will have a meeting with Rubio, but she noted that a different minister leads the U.S. trade file. The U.S. president has placed greater priority on addressing his grievances with other nations’ trade policies than on collaboration with G7 allies.

The G7 comprises Canada, the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Japan. Anand also invited the foreign ministers of Australia, Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, South Korea, South Africa and Ukraine to the meeting, which began Tuesday.

Putin has tried to justify Russia’s attack on Ukraine by saying it was needed to protect civilians in eastern Ukraine — a false claim the U.S. had predicted he would make as a pretext for his invasion.

By SAFIYAH RIDDLE, Associated Press/Report for America

A federal appeals court will hear arguments Wednesday about whether a spending law passed in July that ended Medicaid reimbursements for Planned Parenthood can remain in effect while legal challenges continue.

President Donald Trump’s tax and spending cut bill targets organizations that both provide abortions and receive more than $800,000 a year in Medicaid reimbursements. Planned Parenthood has argued the law violates the Constitution, while anti-abortion activists applauded the legislation.

The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled that the law could go into effect in September while a lower court considered Planned Parenthood’s claims. A three-judge panel of the appeals court was scheduled to preside over the hearing Wednesday.

In a report released ahead of the hearing, Planned Parenthood said the legislation cost $45 million in September alone as clinics across the country paid for treatment for Medicaid patients out of pocket — a rate that the organization says is unsustainable.

Nearly half of Planned Parenthood’s patients rely on Medicaid for health care aside from abortions, which was already not covered by the federal insurance program that serves millions of low-income and disabled Americans.

Legal fight

Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its member organizations in Massachusetts and Utah, as well as a major medical provider in Maine, filed lawsuits against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in July. The Maine provider has been forced to stop it’s primary care services while its lawsuit works its way through the courts.

In the meantime, seven states — California, Colorado, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and Washington — have directed state funds to compensate for lost federal Medicaid reimbursements.

That has covered roughly $200 million of the $700 million that the organization spends annually on Medicaid patients, according to Planned Parenthood.

In light of the shortfall, some clinics will force Medicaid patients to pay out of pocket while others will close altogether, adding to the 20 Planned Parenthood affiliated clinics that have closed since July and the 50 total that have closed since the start of Trump’s second term.

“The consequence is for patients who are going to be forced to make impossible choices between essential services,” Planned Parenthood President and CEO Alexis McGill Johnson said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Abortion at the heart of the debate

Carol Tobias, president of the National Right to Life Committee, said Trump’s legislation is a step in the right direction. Even though federal tax dollars aren’t used for abortions directly, she said taxpayers are contributing to abortion services even if they are morally or religiously opposed since Medicaid reimbursements help organizations that provide them stay afloat.

“To be forced to pay for that is just very objectionable,” Tobias said.

She suggested Planned Parenthood could stop offering abortions if it wanted to keep providing medical care to vulnerable populations.

Planned Parenthood’s president has doubled down on the organization’s commitment to providing abortions.

“The government should not play a role in determining any pregnancy outcomes,” Johnson said.

A range of services hit

Planned Parenthood is the country’s largest abortion provider, but abortions only constituted 4% of all medical services in 2024, according to the organization’s annual report. Testing for sexually transmitted infections and contraception services make up about 80%. The remaining 15% of services are cancer screenings, primary care services and behavioral health services.

Jenna Tosh, CEO of Planned Parenthood California Central Coast, said in an interview that the Medicaid cuts threaten abortion and non-abortion medical care in equal measure. Roughly 70% of patients who use Planned Parenthood California Central Coast rely on Medicaid, she said.

“Many of our patients, we are their primary provider of health care,” Tosh said. “You really start pulling at the thread of the entire health care safety net for the most vulnerable people.”

The story has been corrected to show that the hearing Wednesday is before a judicial panel of the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, not before a federal judge.

By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The longest government shutdown in history could conclude as soon as Wednesday, Day 43, with almost no one happy with the final result.

Democrats didn’t get the heath insurance provisions they demanded added to the spending deal. And Republicans, who control the levers of power in Washington, didn’t escape blame, according to polls and some state and local elections that went poorly for them.

The fallout of the shutdown landed on millions of Americans, including federal workers who went without paychecks and airline passengers who had their trips delayed or canceled. An interruption in nutrition assistance programs contributed to long lines at food banks and added emotional distress going into the holiday season.

The agreement includes bipartisan bills worked out by the Senate Appropriations Committee to fund parts of government — food aid, veterans programs and the legislative branch, among other things. All other funding would be extended until the end of January, giving lawmakers more than two months to finish additional spending bills.

Here’s a look at how the shutdown started and is likely to end:

What led to the shutdown

Democrats made several demands to win their support for a short-term funding bill, but the central one was an extension of an enhanced tax credit that lowers the cost of health coverage obtained through Affordable Care Act marketplaces.

The tax credit was boosted during the COVID-19 pandemic response, again through President Joe Biden’s big energy and health care bill, and it’s set to expire at the end of December. Without it, premiums on average will more than double for millions of Americans. More than 2 million people would lose health insurance coverage altogether next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected.

“Never have American families faced a situation where their health care costs are set to double — double in the blink of an eye,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

While Democrats called for negotiations on the matter, Republicans said a funding bill would need to be passed first.

“Republicans are ready to sit down with Democrats just as soon as they stop holding the government hostage to their partisan demands,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said.

Thune eventually promised Democrats a December vote on the tax credit extension to help resolve the standoff, but many Democrats demanded a guaranteed fix, not just a vote that is likely to fail.

Thune’s position was much the same as the one Schumer took back in October 2013, when Republicans unsuccessfully sought to roll back parts of the Affordable Care Act in exchange for funding the government. “Open up all of the government, and then we can have a fruitful discussion,” Schumer said then.

Democratic leaders under pressure

The first year of President Donald Trump’s second term has seen more than 200,000 federal workers leave their job through firings, forced relocations or the Republican administration’s deferred resignation program, according to the Partnership for Public Service. Whole agencies that don’t align with the administration’s priorities have been dismantled. And billions of dollars previously approved by Congress have been frozen or canceled.

Democrats have had to rely on the courts to block some of Trump’s efforts, but they have been unable to do it through legislation. They were also powerless to stop Trump’s big tax cut and immigration crackdown bill that Republicans helped pay for by cutting future spending on safety net programs such as Medicaid and SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.

The Democrats’ struggles to blunt the Trump administration’s priorities has prompted calls for the party’s congressional leadership to take a more forceful response.

Schumer experienced that firsthand after announcing in March that he would support moving ahead with a funding bill for the 2025 budget year. There was a protest at his office, calls from progressives that he be primaried in 2028 and suggestions that the Democratic Party would soon be looking for new leaders.

This time around, Schumer demanded that Republicans negotiate with Democrats to get their votes on a spending bill. The Senate rules, he noted, requires bipartisan support to meet the 60-vote threshold necessary to advance a spending bill.

But those negotiations did not occur, at least not with Schumer. Republicans instead worked with a small group of eight Democrats to tee up a short-term bill to fund the government generally at current levels and accused Schumer of catering to the party’s left flank when he refused to go along.

“The Senate Democrats are afraid that the radicals in their party will say that they caved,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said at one of his many daily press conferences.

The blame game

The political stakes in the shutdown are huge, which is why leaders in both parties have held nearly daily press briefings to shape public opinion.

Roughly 6 in 10 Americans say Trump and Republicans in Congress have “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of responsibility for the shutdown, while 54% say the same about Democrats in Congress, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

At least three-quarters of Americans believe each deserves at least a “moderate” share of blame, underscoring that no one was successfully evading responsibility.

Both parties looked to the Nov. 4 elections in Virginia, New Jersey and elsewhere for signs of how the shutdown was influencing public opinion. Democrats took comfort in their overwhelming successes. Trump called it a “big factor, negative” for Republicans. But it did not change the GOP’s stance on negotiating. Instead, Trump ramped up calls for Republicans to end the filibuster in the Senate, which would pretty much eliminate the need for the majority party to ever negotiate with the minority.

Damage of the shutdown

The Congressional Budget Office says that the negative impact on the economy will be mostly recovered once the shutdown ends, but not entirely. It estimated the permanent economic loss at about $11 billion for a six-week shutdown.

Beyond the numbers, though, the shutdown created a cascade of troubles for many Americans. Federal workers missed paychecks, causing financial and emotional stress. Travelers had their flights delayed and at times canceled. People who rely on safety net programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program saw their benefits stopped, and Americans throughout the country lined up for meals at food banks.

“This dysfunction is damaging enough to our constituents and economy here at home, but it also sends a dangerous message to the watching world,” said Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan. “It demonstrates to our allies that we are an unreliable partner, and it signals to our adversaries that we can’t work together to meet even the most fundamental responsibilities of Congress.”

By LISA MASCARO, AP Congressional Correspondent

WASHINGTON (AP) — After refusing to convene the U.S. House during the government shutdown, Speaker Mike Johnson is recalling lawmakers back into session — and facing an avalanche of pent-up legislative demands from those who have largely been sidelined from governing.

Hundreds of representatives are preparing to return Wednesday to Washington after a nearly eight-week absence, carrying a torrent of ideas, proposals and frustrations over work that has stalled when the Republican speaker shuttered the House doors nearly two months ago.

First will be a vote to reopen the government. But that’s just the start. With efforts to release the Jeffrey Epstein files and the swearing in of Arizona’s Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva, the unfinished business will pose a fresh test to Johnson’s grip on power and put a renewed focus on his leadership.

“It’s extraordinary,” said Matthew Green, a professor at the politics department at The Catholic University of America.

“What Speaker Johnson and Republicans are doing, you have to go back decades to find an example where the House — either chamber — decided not to meet.”

Gaveling in after two months gone

When the House gavels back into session, it will close this remarkable chapter of Johnson’s tenure when he showed himself to be a leader who is quietly, but brazenly, willing to upend institutional norms in pursuit of his broader strategy, even at the risk of diminishing the House itself.

Rather than use the immense powers of the speaker’s office to forcefully steer the debate in Congress, as a coequal branch of the government on par with the executive and the courts, Johnson simply closed up shop — allowing the House to become unusually deferential, particularly to President Donald Trump.

Over these past weeks, the chamber has sidestepped its basic responsibilities, from passing routine legislation to conducting oversight. The silencing of the speaker’s gavel has been both unusual and surprising in a system of government where the founders envisioned the branches would vigorously protect their institutional prerogatives.

“You can see it is pretty empty around here,” Johnson, R-La., said on day three of the shutdown, tour groups no longer crowding the halls.

“When Congress decides to turn off the lights, it shifts the authority to the executive branch. That is how it works,” he said, blaming Democrats, with their fight over health care funds, for the closures.

An empty House as a political strategy

The speaker has defended his decision to shutter the House during what’s now the longest government shutdown in U.S. history. He argued that the chamber, under the GOP majority, had already done its job passing a stopgap funding bill in September. It would be up to the Senate to act, he said.

When the Senate failed over and over to advance the House bill, more than a dozen times, he refused to enter talks with the other leaders on a compromise. Johnson also encouraged Trump to cancel an initial sit-down with the Democratic leaders Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries to avoid a broader negotiation while the government was still closed.

Instead, the speaker, whose job is outlined in the Constitution, second in line of succession to the presidency, held held almost daily press conferences on his side of the Capitol, a weekly conference call with GOP lawmakers, and private talks with Trump. He joined the president for Sunday’s NFL Washington Commanders game as the Senate was slogging through a weekend session.

“People say, why aren’t you negotiating with Schumer and Jeffries? I quite literally have nothing to negotiate,” Johnson said at one point.

“As I’ve said time and time again, I don’t have anything to negotiate with,” he said on day 13 of the shutdown. “We did our job. We had that vote.”

And besides he said of the GOP lawmakers, “They are doing some of their best work in the district, helping their constituents navigate this crisis.”

Accidental speaker delivers for Trump

In many ways, Johnson has become a surprisingly effective leader, an accidental speaker who was elected to the job by his colleagues after all others failed to win it. He has now lasted more than two years, longer than many once envisioned.

This year, with Trump’s return to the White House, the speaker has commandeered his slim GOP majority and passed legislation including the president’s so-called “one big beautiful bill” of tax breaks and spending reductions that became law this summer.

Johnson’s shutdown strategy also largely achieved his goal, forcing Senate Democrats to break ranks and approve the funds to reopen government without the extension of health care subsidies they were demanding to help ease the sticker shock of rising insurance premium costs with the Affordable Care Act.

Johnson’s approach is seen as one that manages up — he stays close to Trump and says they speak often — and also hammers down, imposing a rigid control over the day-to-day schedule of the House, and its lawmakers.

Amassing quiet power

Under a House rules change this year, Johnson was able to keep the chamber shuttered indefinitely on his own, without the usual required vote. This year his leadership team has allowed fewer opportunities for amendments on legislation, according to a recent tally. Other changes have curtailed the House’s ability to provide a robust check on the executive branch over Trump’s tariffs and use of war powers.

Johnson’s refusal to swear-in Grijalva is a remarkable flex of the speaker’s power, leading to comparisons with Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell’s decision not to consider President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, said David Rapallo, an associate professor and director of the Federal Legislation Clinic at Georgetown University Law Center. Arizona has sued to seat her.

Marc Short, who headed up the White House’s legislative affairs office during the first Trump administration, said of Johnson, “It’s impressive how he’s held the conference together.”

But said Short, “The legislative branch has abdicated a lot of responsibility to the executive under his watch.”

Tough decisions ahead for the Speaker

As lawmakers make their way back to Washington, the speaker’s power will be tested again as they consider the package to reopen government.

Republicans are certain to have complaints about the bill, which funds much of the federal government through Jan. 30 and keeps certain programs including agriculture, military construction and veterans affairs running through September.

But with House Democratic leaders rejecting the package for having failed to address the health care subsidies, it will be up to Johnson to muscle it through with mostly GOP lawmakers — with hardly any room for defections in the chamber that’s narrowly split.

Jeffries, who has criticized House Republicans for what he called an extended vacation, said, “They’re not going to be able to hide this week when they return.”

By Melissa Nann Burke, MediaNews Group

Michigan is resuming the process of getting full monthly benefits to residents who receive federal assistance to pay for food, state officials said Monday.

The announcement from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services came after a federal appeals court on Monday declined to block the decision of a lower court judge who had ordered the Trump administration to finance benefits in full this month for those eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps.

The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services said it directed its EBT vendor to “once again” begin issuing full SNAP benefits to Michigan’s 1.4 million participants. Taxpayer-funded food aid in Michigan is distributed to recipients through electronic debit cards known as Bridge Cards.

The agency said SNAP recipients who normally receive their benefits on the ninth of the month should receive their full SNAP allotment within 48 hours, and all other SNAP recipients should receive full benefit payments on their normally scheduled date.

“We are glad to be able to provide assistance to Michigan families to help them put food on the table,” said Elizabeth Hertel, MDHHS director, in a statement.

“The uncertainty, confusion, and frustration caused by the USDA’s request to block SNAP payments for the more than one million Michigan residents who rely on food assistance has been unfair, and in Michigan, we will continue to do everything we can to help those affected.”

However, the U.S. Department of Justice on Monday indicated it would appeal to the Supreme Court to try to avoid paying out full benefits, seeking a stay of the order by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

In a filing with the Supreme Court, Solicitor General D. John Sauer noted in part that the U.S. Senate appeared on track to passing legislation to end the record-setting 41-day government shutdown.

The legislation under consideration includes full-year funding for SNAP, and if that’s adopted and signed into law, the application to the Supreme Court wouldn’t be needed. If it doesn’t pass, the government “still intends to pursue a stay” to stop the order requiring full SNAP payments.

Trump’s administration at first said SNAP benefits would not be issued in November due of the shutdown. But a couple dozen states and nonprofit groups sued, prompting judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island to rule that the administration could not entirely skip November’s benefits for SNAP participants.

The administration said it would tap a contingency fund to provide 65% of the maximum monthly allotments, but U.S. District Judge John McConnell last week said that wasn’t sufficient and ordered full funding for SNAP benefits.

Michigan moved quickly and directed their EBT vendor to disburse full benefits to SNAP recipients on Thursday, so those who receive monthly benefits on the third, fifth and seventh days of the month already received their benefits last week, according to MDHHS.

The state halted benefits payments over the weekend after Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson put McConnell’s order on hold Friday night, pending further consideration by an appeals court.

Last week, local food pantries in Michigan were tracking a 30% to 50% increase in the number of individuals seeking aid, according to the Food Bank Council of Michigan. Families can find local food pantries as needed by calling 2-1-1.

SNAP serves about 1 in 8 Americans, including about 1.4 million Michiganians. In the state, the average household assisted by the program receives about $335 in benefits a month, or about $5.68 per person a day. SNAP benefits support more than 492,000 Michigan children.

Across nearly every part of Michigan, households with children were far more likely to receive SNAP benefits than households overall, based on Census data. In almost every county, at least a quarter of households with children participated in SNAP, including more than half of those households in counties like Ottawa, Clinton and Gratiot.

About 78% of SNAP households in Michigan are working households, half of households have someone with a disability and 36% of households have seniors, according to state data.

Staff Writer Ben Warren contributed to this report.

Mayor-elect Mary Sheffield ran on several promises: creating job opportunities for young people, improving schools, and investing in neighborhoods. 

It’s no question that her platform was appealing, as the candidate won 77% of the vote. Detroit has a lot of poverty, a significant amount of crime, and many residents are in need of better job opportunities. 

How are residents reacting to Sheffield’s victory? What do they hope she accomplishes? And, what kinds of organizing and coalition building will the new mayor have to do to live up to her promises?

Donna Givens Davidson, the president of the Eastside Community Network and a co-host of the Authentically Detroit podcast, joined Robyn Vincent to discuss.

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, YouTube, or NPR or wherever you get your podcasts.

Support local journalism.

WDET strives to cover what’s happening in your community. As a public media institution, we maintain our ability to explore the music and culture of our region through independent support from readers like you. If you value WDET as your source of news, music and conversation, please make a gift today.

Give now »

More stories from The Metro

The Metro: Why more people don’t know about Michigan’s first Black congressmember

Sam Corey

Read More »

The Metro: Why tackling affordability issues was the winning message for candidates across the country

Sam Corey

Read More »

The Metro: Why Detroit residents are happy with Sheffield’s victory

Sam Corey

Read More »

The post The Metro: Why Detroit residents are happy with Sheffield’s victory appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

By NICHOLAS RICCARDI and ALANNA DURKIN RICHER, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The pardons of dozens of Republicans accused of participating in efforts to overturn the 2020 election are a continuation of President Donald Trump’s attempts to rewrite the history about his election loss.

They come months after Trump’s sweeping grant of clemency to all 1,500-plus people charged in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, which was the culmination of the campaign to reverse Trump’s loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

Unlike the Jan. 6 pardons, the newer ones will have little legal effect. None of the people on the new pardon list had faced federal prosecution for their actions in 2020. The presidential pardon has no impact on state or civil cases.

But they send a signal to those thinking of denying future elections in Trump’s favor.

Here’s a look at some of the more prominent names who were pardoned:

Rudy Giuliani

The former New York City mayor, who was celebrated as “America’s mayor” after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, played a pivotal role in pushing Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud as the Republican’s personal lawyer in 2020. He has faced a slew of legal woes and financial setbacks for his advocacy of Trump’s false claims, including losing his law license in Washington and New York. He was criminally charged in cases brought by state prosecutors in Georgia and Arizona and pleaded not guilty. Those cases have hit roadblocks but remain unresolved and are not impacted by Trump’s pardon. Giuliani was ordered in 2023 to pay $148 million to two Georgia election workers who sued him over lies he spread about them and a reached a deal in January to resolve the debt and retain some of his property. The amount the women were set to receive was not disclosed. Giuliani has denied wrongdoing and said he was right to challenge an election he believed was tainted by fraud.

Mark Meadows

Trump’s chief of staff during the 2020 election and its aftermath, Meadows was charged in Arizona and Georgia cases and pleaded not guilty in both states. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected his effort to move his case in Georgia to federal court, where a pardon would nullify his jeopardy. Meadows has contended his post-election actions were taken in his official capacity as White House chief of staff, though prosecutors and judges have disagreed. Meadows was on the phone when Trump asked Georgia’s secretary of state, Republican Brad Raffensperger, to “find” him enough votes to be declared the winner of the state.

Kenneth Chesebro

Prosecutors in Fulton County, Georgia, alleged that Chesebro, an attorney, worked with Georgia Republicans at the direction of Trump’s campaign to organize 16 people to sign a certificate falsely claiming that Trump won the state and that they were his “duly elected and qualified” electors. Chesebro pleaded guilty to a conspiracy count in the state case but unsuccessfully tried to withdraw his plea as the massive case against him and 17 others, including Trump, collapsed due to legal issues. Chesebro’s law license in New York state was suspended after his plea.

Jenna Ellis

A prominent conservative media figure and an attorney, Ellis also pleaded guilty to one count of aiding and abetting false statements and writings in the Georgia case. She apologized in court for advising the Trump campaign on how to overturn its loss and was censured and barred from practicing law for three years in her native Colorado for her conduct in 2020.

John Eastman

A prominent conservative law professor, Eastman wrote a key memo outlining the Trump strategy of trying to reverse the president’s election loss by presenting a slate of alternate electors to Congress. Eastman faces charges in a state case filed by Arizona’s Democratic attorney general over that scheme. He was also charged in Fulton County, and the disciplinary board of the California State Bar has recommended he lose his California law license. Eastman has pleaded not guilty in the criminal cases and appealed his license suspension to California’s Supreme Court. He argues he is being punished for simply giving legal advice.

Jeffrey Clark

Clark, as a Justice Department official in the first Trump administration, drafted a letter that said the department was investigating “various irregularities” and had identified “significant concerns” that may have impacted the election in Georgia and other states. Clark wanted the letter sent to Georgia lawmakers, but Justice Department superiors refused. A Washington attorney disciplinary panel in July recommended that he be stripped of his law license, finding he made “intentionally false statements” when he continued to push for the Justice Department to issue the letter after being told by superiors that it contained falsehoods. Clark, who is now overseeing a federal regulatory office in the second Trump administration, said in a post on X on Monday: “I did nothing wrong when I questioned the 2020 election in Georgia.”

Sidney Powell

A lawyer and staunch Trump ally, Powell filed in battleground states a series of lawsuits that were rejected by courts and played a pivotal role in pushing unsubstantiated claims of fraud. Emails and documents obtained through subpoenas in one lawsuit showed Powell was involved in arranging for a computer forensics team to travel to rural Coffee County, about 200 miles (320 kilometers) southeast of Atlanta, to copy data and software from elections equipment there in January 2021. She pleaded guilty in 2023 to reduced charges in the Georgia case, becoming the second defendant to reach a deal with prosecutors. She was initially charged with racketeering and six other counts but ultimately received probation after pleading guilty to six misdemeanors accusing her of conspiring to intentionally interfere with the performance of election duties.

By GERALD IMRAY, Associated Press

CAPE TOWN, South Africa (AP) — U.S. President Donald Trump says that his government will boycott the Group of 20 summit this month in South Africa over his claims that a white minority group there is being violently persecuted. Those claims have been widely rejected.

Trump announced Friday on social media that no U.S. government official will attend the Nov. 22-23 summit in Johannesburg “as long as these Human Rights abuses continue.” South Africa’s Black-led government has been a regular target for Trump since he returned to office.

In February, Trump issued an executive order stopping U.S. financial assistance to South Africa, citing its treatment of the Afrikaner white minority. His administration has also prioritized Afrikaners for refugee status in the U.S. and says they will be given most of the 7,500 places available this fiscal year.

The South African government — and some Afrikaners themselves — say Trump’s claims of persecution are baseless.

Descendants of European settlers

Afrikaners are South Africans who are descended mainly from Dutch but also French and German colonial settlers who first came to the country in the 17th century.

Afrikaners were at the heart of the apartheid system of white minority rule from 1948-1994, leading to decades of hostility between them and South Africa’s Black majority. But Afrikaners are not a homogenous group, and some fought against apartheid. There are an estimated 2.7 million Afrikaners in South Africa’s population of 62 million.

Afrikaners are divided over Trump’s claims. Some say they face discrimination, but a group of leading Afrikaner business figures and academics said in an open letter last month that “the narrative that casts Afrikaners as victims of racial persecution in post-apartheid South Africa” is misleading.

Afrikaners’ Dutch-derived language is widely spoken in South Africa and is one of the country’s 12 official languages. Afrikaners are represented in every aspect of society. Afrikaners are some of South Africa’s richest entrepreneurs and some of its most successful sports stars, and also serve in government. Most are largely committed to South Africa’s multiracial democracy.

Trump claims they’re being ‘killed and slaughtered’

Trump asserted that Afrikaners “are being killed and slaughtered, and their land and farms are being illegally confiscated.” The president’s comments are in reference to a relatively small number of attacks on Afrikaner farmers that he and others claim are racially motivated.

Trump has also pointed to a highly contentious law introduced by the South African government that allows land to be appropriated from private owners without compensation. Some Afrikaners fear that law is aimed at removing them from their land in favor of South Africa’s poor Black majority. Many South Africans, including opposition parties, have criticized the law, but it hasn’t led to land confiscations.

Trump first made baseless claims of widespread killing of white South African farmers and land seizures during his first term in response to allegations aired on conservative media personality Tucker Carlson’s former show on Fox News. Trump ordered then-U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to look into the allegations, but nothing came of any investigation.

South Africa rejects the claims

The South African government said in response to Trump’s social media post that his claims were “not substantiated by fact.” It has said that Trump’s criticism of South Africa over Afrikaners is a result of misinformation because it misses the context that Black farmers and farmworkers are also killed in rural attacks, which make up a tiny percentage of the country’s high violent crime rate.

There were more than 26,000 homicides in South Africa in 2024. Of those, 37 were farm murders, according to an Afrikaner lobby group that tracks them. Experts on rural attacks in South Africa have said the overriding motive for the violent farm invasions is robbery and not race.

Other pressure on South Africa

Trump said it is a “total disgrace” that the G20 summit — a meeting of the leaders of the 19 top rich and developing economies, the European Union and the African Union — is being held in South Africa. He had already said he wouldn’t attend, and Vice President JD Vance was due to go in his place. The U.S. will take on the rotating presidency of the G20 after South Africa.

Trump also said in a speech last week that South Africa should be thrown out of the G20.

Trump’s criticism of Africa’s most developed economy has gone beyond the issue of Afrikaners. His executive order in February said South Africa had taken “aggressive positions towards the United States and its allies,” specifically with its decision to accuse Israel of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza at the United Nations’ top court.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio boycotted a G20 foreign ministers meeting in South Africa in February after deriding the host country’s G20 slogan of “solidarity, equality and sustainability” as “DEI and climate change.”

AP Africa news: https://apnews.com/hub/africa