Category: News

Latest breaking news and updates

  • Ukraine to give revised peace plans to U.S. as Kyiv readies for more talks with its coalition partners

    Ukraine to give revised peace plans to U.S. as Kyiv readies for more talks with its coalition partners

    KYIV, Ukraine — Ukraine is expected to give its latest peace proposals to U.S. negotiators this week, President Volodymyr Zelensky said, ahead of his urgent talks with leaders and officials from about 30 other countries supporting Kyiv’s effort to end the war with Russia on acceptable terms.

    As tension builds around a U.S. push for a settlement, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron spoke to President Donald Trump by phone Wednesday, according to officials.

    Negotiations are at “a critical moment,” the European leaders said in official statements.

    Trump said the men discussed Ukraine “in pretty strong terms.” He also said Zelensky “has to be realistic” about the war and that European leaders would like a meeting this coming weekend with both the U.S. and Ukraine.

    “We’ll make a determination depending on what they come back with,” the president told reporters during a question-and-answer session at the White House.

    Washington’s goal of a swift compromise to stop the fighting that followed Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022 is reducing Kyiv’s room for maneuvering. Zelensky is walking a tightrope between defending Ukrainian interests and showing Trump he is willing to compromise, even as Moscow shows no public sign of budging from its demands.

    Ukraine’s European allies are backing Zelensky’s effort to ensure that any settlement is fair and deters future Russian attacks, as well as accommodating Europe’s defense interests.

    The French government said Ukraine’s allies — dubbed the “Coalition of the Willing” — will discuss the negotiations Thursday by video. Zelensky said it would include those countries’ leaders.

    “We need to bring together 30 colleagues very quickly. And it’s not easy, but nevertheless we will do it,” he said late Tuesday.

    Zelensky said discussions with the U.S. were scheduled later Wednesday to focus on a document detailing plans for Ukraine’s postwar reconstruction and economic development. Also, Ukraine is finalizing work on a separate, 20-point framework for ending the war. Zelensky said Kyiv expects to submit that document to Washington soon.

    Zelensky says he’s ready for an election

    After Trump called for a presidential election in Ukraine, Zelensky said his country would be ready for such a vote within three months if partners can guarantee safe balloting during wartime and if its electoral law can be altered.

    Zelensky’s openness to an election was a response to comments by Trump in which he questioned Ukraine’s democracy and suggested the Ukrainian leader was using the war as an excuse not to stand before voters. Those comments echo similar remarks often made by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    Zelensky said late Tuesday he is “ready” for an election but needs help from the U.S. and possibly Europe to ensure its security. He suggested Ukraine could hold balloting in 60 to 90 days if that proviso is met.

    “To hold elections, two issues must be addressed: primarily, security — how to conduct them, how to do it under strikes, under missile attacks; and a question regarding our military — how they would vote,” Zelensky said. “And the second issue is the legislative framework required to ensure the legitimacy of elections.”

    Zelensky pointed out previously that balloting can’t legally happen while martial law — imposed due to Russia’s invasion — is in place. He has also asked how a vote could occur when civilian areas of Ukraine are being bombarded and almost 20% of the country is under Russian occupation.

    Zelensky said he has asked lawmakers from his party to draw up legislative proposals allowing for an election while Ukraine is under martial law.

    Ukrainians have on the whole supported Zelensky’s arguments, and have not clamored for an election. Under the law that is in force, Zelensky’s rule is legitimate.

    Putin has repeatedly complained that Zelensky can’t legitimately negotiate a peace settlement because his five-year term that began in 2019 has expired.

    U.S. seeks closer ties with Russia

    A new U.S. national security strategy released Dec. 5 made clear that Trump wants to improve Washington’s relationship with Moscow and “reestablish strategic stability with Russia.” The document also portrays European allies as weak.

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov praised Trump’s role in the Ukraine peace effort, telling the upper house of parliament that Moscow appreciates his “commitment to dialogue.” Trump, Lavrov said, is “the only Western leader” who shows “an understanding of the reasons that made war in Ukraine inevitable.”

    Trump’s peace efforts have run into sharply conflicting demands from Moscow and Kyiv.

    The initial U.S. proposal was heavily slanted toward Russia’s demands. To counter that, Zelensky has turned to his European supporters.

    Zelensky met this week with the leaders of Britain, Germany, and France in London, the heads of NATO and the European Union in Brussels, and then went to Rome to meet the Italian premier and Pope Leo XIV.

    Military aid for Ukraine declines

    Europe’s support is uneven, however, and that has meant a decrease in military aid since the Trump administration this year cut off supplies to Kyiv unless they were paid for by other NATO countries.

    Foreign military help for Ukraine fell sharply over the summer, and that trend continued through September and October, a German body that tracks international help for Ukraine said Wednesday.

    Average annual aid, mostly provided by the U.S. and Europe, was about 41.6 billion euros ($48.4 billion) between 2022–24. But so far this year Ukraine has received just 32.5 billion euros ($37.8 billion), the Kiel Institute said.

    This year, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden have substantially increased their help for Ukraine, while Germany nearly tripled its average monthly allocations and France and the U.K. both more than doubled their contributions, the Kiel Institute said.

    On the other hand, it said, Spain recorded no new military aid for Kyiv in 2025 while Italy reduced its low contributions by 15% compared with 2022–2024.

  • WTF? Embracing profanity is one thing both political parties seem to agree on

    WTF? Embracing profanity is one thing both political parties seem to agree on

    WASHINGTON — As he shook President Barack Obama’s hand and pulled him in for what he thought was a private aside, Vice President Joe Biden delivered an explicit message: “This is a big f— deal.” The remark, overheard on live microphones at a 2010 ceremony for the Affordable Care Act, caused a sensation because open profanity from a national leader was unusual at the time.

    More than 15 years later, vulgarity is now in vogue.

    During a political rally Tuesday night in Pennsylvania that was intended to focus on tackling inflation, President Donald Trump used profanity at least four times. At one point, he even admitted to disparaging Haiti and African nations as “shithole countries” during a private 2018 meeting, a comment he denied at the time. And before a bank of cameras during a lengthy cabinet meeting last week, the Republican president referred to alleged drug smugglers as “sons of bitches.”

    While the Biden incident was accidental, the frequency, sharpness, and public nature of Trump’s comments are intentional. They build on his project to combat what he sees as pervasive political correctness. Leaders in both parties are seemingly in a race now to the verbal gutter.

    Vice President JD Vance called a podcast host a “dips—” in September. In Thanksgiving remarks before troops, Vance joked that anyone who said they liked turkey was “full of s—.” After one National Guard member was killed in a shooting in Washington last month and a second was critically injured, top Trump aide Steven Cheung told a reporter on social media to “shut the f— up” when she wrote that the deployment of troops in the nation’s capital was “for political show.”

    Among Democrats, former Vice President Kamala Harris earned a roar of approval from her audience in September when she condemned the Trump administration by saying “these motherf— are crazy.” After Trump called for the execution of several Democratic members of Congress last month, Sen. Chris Murphy (D., Conn.) said it was time for people with influence to “pick a f— side.” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said the administration cannot “f— around” with the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who on Monday announced her Senate campaign in Texas, did not hold back earlier this year when asked what she would tell Elon Musk if given the chance: “F— off.”

    The volley of vulgarities underscore an ever-coarsening political environment that often plays out on social media or other digital platforms where the posts or video clips that evoke the strongest emotions are rewarded with the most engagement.

    “If you want to be angry at someone, be angry at the social media companies,” Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican, said Tuesday night at Washington National Cathedral, where he spoke at an event focused on political civility. “It’s not a fair fight. They’ve hijacked our brains. They understand these dopamine hits. Outrage sells.”

    Cox, whose national profile rose after calling for civility in the wake of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination in his state, approved an overhaul of social media laws meant to protect children. A federal judge has temporarily blocked the state law.

    Tough political talk is nothing new

    Tough talk is nothing new in politics, but leaders long avoided flaunting it.

    Recordings from Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration, for instance, revealed a crude, profane side of his personality that was largely kept private. Republican Richard Nixon bemoaned the fact that the foul language he used in the Oval Office was captured on tape. “Since neither I nor most other Presidents had ever used profanity in public, millions were shocked,” Nixon wrote in his book In the Arena.

    “Politicians have always sworn, just behind closed doors,” said Benjamin Bergen, a professor at the University of California-San Diego’s Department of Cognitive Science and the author of What the F: What swearing reveals about our language, our brains, and ourselves. “The big change is in the past 10 years or so, it’s been much more public.”

    As both parties prepare for the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 presidential campaign, the question is whether this language will become increasingly mainstream. Republicans who simply try to imitate Trump’s brash style do not always succeed with voters. Democrats who turn to vulgarities risk appearing inauthentic if their words feel forced.

    For some, it is just a distraction.

    “It’s not necessary,” said GOP Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, who is retiring next year after winning five elections in one of the most competitive House districts. “If that’s what it takes to get your point across, you’re not a good communicator.”

    There are risks of overusing profanity

    There also is a risk that if such language becomes overused, its utility as a way to shock and connect with audiences could be dulled. Comedian Jerry Seinfeld has talked about this problem, noting that he used swear words in his early routines but dropped them as his career progressed because he felt profanity yielded only cheap laughs.

    “I felt like well I just got a laugh because I said f— in there,” he said in a 2020 interview on the WTF podcast with fellow comedian Marc Maron. “You didn’t find the gold.”

    White House spokesperson Liz Huston said Trump “doesn’t care about being politically correct, he cares about making America great again. The American people love how authentic, transparent, and effective the President is.”

    But for Trump, the words that have generated the most controversy are often less centered in traditional profanity than slurs that can be interpreted as hurtful. The final weeks of his 2016 campaign were rocked when a tape emerged of him discussing grabbing women by their genitals, language he minimized as “locker room talk.” His “shithole” remark in 2018 was widely condemned as racist.

    More recently, Trump called Bloomberg reporter Catherine Lucey “piggy,” comments that his press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, defended as evidence of a president who is “very frank and honest.” Trump’s use of a slur about disabled people prompted an Indiana Republican whose child has Down syndrome to come out in opposition to the president’s push to redraw the state’s congressional districts.

    On rare occasions, politicians express contrition for their choice of words. In an interview with The Atlantic published last week, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, dismissed Harris’ depiction of him in her book about last year’s presidential campaign by saying she was “trying to sell books and cover her a—.”

    He seemed to catch himself quickly.

    “I shouldn’t say ‘cover her a—,” he said. “I think that’s not appropriate.”

  • ‘Everything is up for consideration’ as Wallingford-Swarthmore tackles $2.6 million budget deficit

    ‘Everything is up for consideration’ as Wallingford-Swarthmore tackles $2.6 million budget deficit

    Standing before a room full of parents, administrators, and taxpayers on Monday morning, Wallingford-Swarthmore School District Superintendent Russell Johnston opened the conversation: “None of us is as smart as all of us.”

    At the listening session at Strath Haven Middle School, Johnston and members of the Wallingford-Swarthmore administration took suggestions from the public and laid out the district’s dire budget issues, which came into the public eye at a board meeting last month.

    The main message Johnston came to deliver: As Wallingford-Swarthmore works to cut its budget, everything is on the table, no idea is too big, and no cut is too small.

    “None of this is easy and, like I said, everything is up for consideration right now,” Johnston said, emphasizing that the district is “turning over every stone” and is eager to hear good ideas.

    The Wallingford-Swarthmore School District is facing a $2.6 million budget deficit for the 2027-28 school year. Administrators say the shortfall is due to a combination of factors, including runaway spending, rising staffing costs, a stagnant revenue base, and costly infrastructure repairs, which are needed due to years of deferred maintenance.

    At the community meeting (which was the first of two sessions that took place on Monday), Johnston and colleagues broke down expenses related to staffing, transportation, special services, curriculum, and the district’s long-range capital plan, which was approved in June.

    The conversation stretched across the big picture and the nitty-gritty.

    How often should classrooms be deep-cleaned? How important is renovating the swimming pool? Should the district run late buses for students in after-school clubs? Could the number of district administrators be reduced?

    Suzanne Herron, a parent of young children in the district, said the meeting felt “thoughtful and transparent.”

    “I walked out of there feeling pretty confident that they were going to think about the right things,” Herron said.

    Johnston took the helm of Wallingford-Swarthmore in May, closing an embattled chapter for the Delaware County school district. The district parted ways with its former superintendent, Marseille Wagner, with a $330,000 payout in August 2024. Wagner was accused of spending excessively on administrative initiatives and facilitating an unhealthy work environment for staff, including pitting staffers against one another and dismissing efforts for consensus building.

    The district and Wagner said in a statement at the time that they had “mutually agreed to amicably end their contractual agreement.”

    Wagner’s tenure hung over the conversation at Strath Haven Middle School. Attendees asked how many administrators had been added under the prior superintendent and how the administrator-to-student ratio compared with neighboring districts (administrators said they didn’t have exact numbers off the top of their heads). One parent said that while she was grateful for the open discussion, she struggled to understand how the district got to such a dire place.

    Parents also raised concerns that a disconnect remains between school needs and what taxpayers, especially those without children in the district, see as wasteful spending

    In contrast to neighboring districts like Rose Tree Media and Radnor, which are home to a mix of residential and commercial properties that feed their tax bases, Wallingford-Swarthmore is small and largely residential. This means its school district tax base is powered almost completely by homeowners, many of whom feel stretched thin by the growing tax burden. Swarthmore College, a major presence in the borough, pays limited taxes as a 501(c)3 nonprofit.

    On top of local taxes, Delaware County is expected to increase residential property taxes by 19% for next year. That’s in addition to the 23% increase the county approved for 2025.

    Joyce Federman, an attendee who recently moved to the area and does not have children in the school district, said she has been “staggered” by the amount of school taxes she pays.

    “My tax burden is unbearable,” she added.

    District officials emphasized that there will be continued opportunities for feedback as the budget process continues. The school board finance committee is set to present a potential budget reallocation strategy on Tuesday, and the board is set to vote on reallocation expectations on Dec. 22. A budget must be adopted by June.

    This suburban content is produced with support from the Leslie Miller and Richard Worley Foundation and The Lenfest Institute for Journalism. Editorial content is created independently of the project donors. Gifts to support The Inquirer’s high-impact journalism can be made at inquirer.com/donate. A list of Lenfest Institute donors can be found at lenfestinstitute.org/supporters.

  • A North Philly gang hit man, ‘the very worst’ of society, taken into custody for three killings, officials say

    A North Philly gang hit man, ‘the very worst’ of society, taken into custody for three killings, officials say

    A North Philadelphia street-gang hit man wanted in connection with three killings, including the execution-style shooting of a 16-year-old boy, was taken into custody Wednesday morning in Delaware County, officials said.

    Tyvine “Blumberg Eerd” Jones, 25, was apprehended by U.S. marshals in an apartment where he had been hiding at the Stratford Court complex in Lansdowne, authorities said. Jones was considered one of the city’s most wanted fugitives, and in October, marshals issued a $5,000 reward for information leading to his arrest.

    Eric Gartner, the United States marshal for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, said Jones’ “unrestrained existence serves only to diminish our great city,” and his arrest demonstrates the agency’s commitment to keep Philadelphians safe.

    Investigators say Jones is a suspect in three slayings that took place between 2020 and 2022: the killings of Heyward Garrison, 16, Wesley Rodwell, 20, and Ryan Findley, 23.

    Jones is a self-identified member of the Blumberg gang, which federal prosecutors say operates in the area around the now-shuttered Norman Blumberg Apartments on Oxford Street in North Philadelphia.

    Members of the gang, including its onetime leader, Edward Stinson, have been convicted of drug trafficking in that area, and others have been tied to assaults and shootings.

    Stinson, federal prosecutors wrote in court filings, ran a round-the-clock crack cocaine distribution ring that sucked in teenagers, single mothers, and other vulnerable people.

    Jones was an associate of Anthony “Blumberg Geez” Watson, and the two recorded rap songs together. In one song, “Blow Up,” the two brag about stalking and shooting their criminal rivals.

    Like Jones, Watson, 21, was sought by investigators as a suspect in Garrison’s killing, but he was gunned down in an unrelated shooting after a year on the run.

    Garrison was found shot multiple times in the back of a Honda Pilot parked near 22nd and Diamond Streets in August 2020.

    Two years later, in May 2022, Rodwell was slain on Erie Avenue near 16th Street in a broad-daylight shooting.

    And in September 2022, Findley was killed on Creston Street near Oakland in Oxford Circle.

    Investigators say Jones was involved in all three killings. When announcing the reward for his arrest, Supervisory Deputy U.S. Marshal Robert Clark called Jones “the very worst society has to offer” and said he demonstrated a complete disregard for human life.

  • The White House says the midterms are all about Trump. Democrats aren’t so sure

    The White House says the midterms are all about Trump. Democrats aren’t so sure

    WASHINGTON — A Dallas congresswoman opened her Senate campaign by telling voters that she “has gone toe to toe with Donald Trump.” Her Democratic primary opponent insisted that Americans are tired of “politics as a blood sport.”

    The divergent approach highlights how U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett and State Rep. James Talarico are navigating a race where Democrats hope to break a three-decade losing streak in Texas. It also reflects a broader divide within the party, with some candidates continuing to focus on Trump while others barely mention his name.

    Figuring out the best approach will be critical for Democrats who are grasping for a path back to power in the 2026 midterm elections that will determine control of Congress and are already maneuvering for the 2028 presidential race.

    Republicans, by contrast, have been crystal clear.

    Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, said in a recent podcast interview that the Republican president will campaign aggressively next year and the party will “put him on the ballot.”

    “He is the greatest vote energizer in the history of politics,” said Neil Newhouse, a veteran Republican pollster. “But the challenge is that he does it as much for Democrats as he does for Republicans.”

    Crockett takes on Trump

    In her campaign launch video, Crockett was silent as audio of Trump’s insults played, including multiple times that he has called her a “very low-IQ person.” At the end of the video, she breaks out into a smile.

    On Monday, she addressed the president more directly.

    “Trump, I know you’re watching, so let me tell you directly,” Crockett said. “You’re not entitled to a damn thing in Texas. You better get to work because I’m coming for you.”

    Trump responded the next day, telling reporters aboard Air Force One that her candidacy is “a gift to Republicans” and “I can’t even believe she’s a politician, actually.”

    For nearly a decade, Democrats have used their criticism of Trump to draw attention and fuel fundraising. Governors who are considered potential 2028 presidential contenders, including California’s Gavin Newsom and Illinois’ JB Pritzker, saw their profiles rise as they positioned themselves as staunch Trump opponents.

    U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly (D., Ariz.) recently participated in a video telling service members that they should not follow “illegal orders.” Trump responded by accusing him of “seditious behavior” that’s “punishable by death.”

    Kelly started a national media tour and sent out a flurry of fundraising emails, both for himself and other Democrats. He said Trump has bullied everyone in his career, “but not now, because I won’t let it happen.”

    When it comes to running for office, “Trump is the red meat that drives donors,” said John Anzalone, a longtime Democratic pollster.

    “There are clearly some candidates that are playing towards the donor world that don’t actually make a great argument for winning races. But it’s great for clicks and making money. And money is the first primary that you need to win.”

    Talarico charts a different course

    Talarico has built a following with a less combative style. The former schoolteacher who is working toward a master’s degree in divinity at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary gained attention by posting viral social media content challenging Republicans’ claims to Christian values. He has focused less on Trump or other politicians.

    “The biggest divide in our country is not left versus right. It’s top versus bottom,” Talarico said in the video launching his campaign.

    There are echoes of other Democratic successes this year, such as when candidates for governor won in New Jersey and Virginia by focusing on affordability concerns.

    Voters in those states were much likelier to say they were voting to oppose Trump than to support him, according to the AP Voter Poll. For example, 71% of voters for Democrat Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey said their decision in the governor’s race was motivated at least partially by opposition to Trump.

    But Sherrill recently said that it is not enough for Democrats to rely solely on anti-Trump fervor.

    “Trump makes a difference. He’s a forcing mechanism to coalesce the party,” Sherrill said. “But to really turn out the vote in a really strong manner, you have got to run a really sharp campaign.”

    When Democrats talk about Trump, they have to connect his actions to voters’ everyday lives, she said.

    “You can’t just say, oh, I’m so upset that Trump demolished the East Wing of the White House,” she said. “You have to say, look, there’s a tariff regime that is being run that is enriching the president to the tune of $3 billion, and you’re paying more for everything from your cup of coffee in the morning to the groceries that you’re buying to cook your family dinner at night.”

    It is an approach that could have more staying power in the coming years.

    “In the not-too-distant future, Trump will not be on the ballot and that will be a challenge for both parties,” said Austin Cook, a senior aide for Democrat Elissa Slotkin’s successful U.S. Senate campaign in Michigan last year. “He is a starting gun for Democratic enthusiasm. But soon we won’t have him as a foil.”

    Republicans need Trump to turn out voters

    Republicans have little choice but to enlist Trump’s help, considering his enduring support among voters who are less likely to turn out during the midterms.

    “They need to energize Republican voters and the only real way to energize Republican voters and get them out to vote is by enlisting Trump in the campaign,” said Newhouse, who is advising some of the party’s U.S. Senate candidates.

    He warned that Trump’s popularity does not necessarily transfer to candidates he supports, “but there isn’t an alternative.”

    “What they are trying to do here is basically wrap themselves up in him, hope that his approval and the economic numbers improve and get their voters out to the polls to match the Democrats’ intensity,” Newhouse said.

    The White House has said that Trump will be on the road more in the coming months. He hosted his first rally in a while in Pennsylvania on Tuesday evening, where he blamed Democrats for inflation.

    “They gave you high prices,” he said, adding that “we’re bringing those prices down rapidly.”

  • FIFA World Cup could bring 17,000 Airbnb guests to the Philly region

    FIFA World Cup could bring 17,000 Airbnb guests to the Philly region

    Airbnb expects to host 17,000 guests at its short-term rentals across the Philadelphia region when the FIFA World Cup comes to town next summer.

    That’s according to a new report done by Deloitte at Airbnb’s behest and released last week. Airbnb guests are expected to spend about $52 million on average during their stays in the Philly region, and about $14 million of that total will be spent on the rentals.

    Over the course of the six matches in June and July, Airbnb hosts are expected to rake in about $1,900 on average, totaling about $8 million in earnings for all area hosts, according to the report.

    Officials from Philadelphia Soccer 2026 have estimated that the World Cup will bring 500,000 visitors to the region. Airbnb’s report estimates that 149,000 of them will require overnight accommodations.

    Each Airbnb guest is expected to spend about $109 a night on average on the rentals, as well as another $301 a night on food, entertainment, and other expenses, according to the company’s report.

    Airbnb guests will have a total impact of about $167 million, including direct and indirect spending, the report projected, and that activity is expected to spur additional spending in the city over the following five years.

    Some experts, however, caution that the long-term economic impacts of one-off sporting events tend to be overestimated, saying they usually lead to only temporary boosts to local economies.

    Six World Cup matches are set to take place at Lincoln Financial Field between mid-June and July 4, 2026. The full schedule of events was announced Saturday, and powerhouses Brazil and France will be among the teams playing in Philadelphia. Fans can enter a lottery to purchase tickets, which will be subject to dynamic pricing that fluctuates depending on demand.

    After the games were announced, some people went online to secure their short-term rentals. All host cities saw a 33% spike in new bookings last weekend, according to AirDNA, a site that analyzes data on short-term rentals. In Philadelphia, occupancy across all game days has reached 20%, a year and a half ahead of the event.

    The World Cup will coincide with Philadelphia’s celebration of the United States’ 250th birthday.

    Airbnb has more than 8,300 listings in the Philadelphia region, which brings in $29.4 million in annual revenue, according to AirDNA.

    In 2023, Airbnbs in the city became more strictly regulated, with hosts now required to have permits and licensing.

  • Judge orders Trump to end California National Guard troop deployment in Los Angeles

    Judge orders Trump to end California National Guard troop deployment in Los Angeles

    The Trump administration must stop deploying the California National Guard in Los Angeles and return control of the troops to the state, a federal judge ordered Wednesday in an emphatic ruling.

    U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction sought by California officials, but also put the decision on hold until Monday, presumably to give the administration a chance to appeal.

    In an extraordinary move, President Donald Trump called up more than 4,000 California National Guard troops in June without Gov. Gavin Newsom’s approval to further the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. The number had dropped to several hundred by late October, but California remained steadfast in its opposition to Trump’s command of the troops.

    White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson suggested in a statement that the administration would appeal Breyer’s ruling, saying it looked forward to “ultimate victory on the issue.”

    “President Trump exercised his lawful authority to deploy National Guard troops to support federal officers and assets following violent riots that local leaders like Newscum refused to stop,” she said, using a pejorative moniker Trump has used to refer to the Democratic governor.

    California Attorney General Rob Bonta said the ruling was a victory for democracy and the rule of law, and he accused the administration of playing “political games” with the troops.

    “But the President is not king,” he said in a statement. “And he cannot federalize the National Guard whenever, wherever, and for however long he wants, without justification.”

    Breyer rejected the administration’s arguments that he could not review extensions of a Guard deployment and that it still needed Guard troops in Los Angeles to protect federal personnel and property, saying the first claim was “shocking” and the second one bordered on “misrepresentation.”

    “The Founders designed our government to be a system of checks and balances,” added Breyer, a nominee of President Bill Clinton, a Democrat. “Defendants, however, make clear that the only check they want is a blank one.”

    The 100 or so California troops that remain in Los Angeles are guarding federal buildings or staying at a nearby base and are not on the streets with immigration enforcement officers, according to U.S. Northern Command.

    California argued that conditions in Los Angeles had changed since Trump first deployed the troops following clashes between federal immigration officers and people protesting his stepped-up enforcement of immigration laws. During one demonstration, protesters threw rocks at Border Patrol vehicles. One man later pleaded guilty to throwing a Molotov cocktail.

    The Republican administration has extended the deployment until February while also trying to use California Guard members in Portland, Ore. as part of its effort to send the military into Democratic-run cities over the objections of mayors and governors. It also sent some California National Guard troops to Illinois.

    In his ruling, Breyer accused the Trump administration of “effectively creating a national police force made up of state troops.”

    The idea that risks from demonstrations in the Los Angeles area could not be managed today without the National Guard defied “common sense,” the judge wrote.

    “After all, local law enforcement like the LAPD, the LASD, and the California Highway Patrol (“CHP”) have not only been willing to manage the protests, but have capably done so since June,” he wrote.

    The June call-up was the first time in decades that a state’s national guard was activated without a request from its governor and marked a significant escalation in the administration’s efforts to carry out its mass deportation policy. The troops were stationed outside a federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles where protesters gathered and later sent on the streets to protect immigration officers as they made arrests.

    California sued, arguing that the president was using Guard members as his personal police force in violation of a law limiting the use of the military in domestic affairs. The administration said courts could not second-guess the president’s decision that violence during the protests made it impossible for him to execute U.S. laws with regular forces and reflected a rebellion, or danger of rebellion.

    Breyer said in Wednesday’s decision the suggestion there was danger of rebellion was even more “farfetched” when the administration extended the deployment than it was in June.

    Breyer initally issued a temporary restraining order that required the administration to return control of the Guard members to California, but an appeals court panel put that decision on hold.

    After a trial, Breyer ruled in September that the deployment violated the law.

    Other judges have blocked the administration from deploying National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, and Chicago.

  • Justice Department can unseal records from Epstein’s 2019 sex trafficking case, judge says

    Justice Department can unseal records from Epstein’s 2019 sex trafficking case, judge says

    NEW YORK — Secret grand jury transcripts from Jeffrey Epstein’s 2019 sex trafficking case can be made public, a judge ruled Wednesday, joining two other judges in granting the Justice Department’s requests to unseal material from investigations into the late financier’s sexual abuse.

    U.S. District Judge Richard Berman reversed his earlier decision to keep the material under wraps, citing a new law that requires the government to open its files on Epstein and his longtime confidant Ghislaine Maxwell. The judge previously cautioned that the 70 or so pages of grand jury materials slated for release are hardly revelatory and “merely a hearsay snippet” of Epstein’s conduct.

    On Tuesday, another Manhattan federal judge ordered the release of records from Maxwell’s 2021 sex trafficking case. Last week, a judge in Florida approved the unsealing of transcripts from an abandoned Epstein federal grand jury investigation in the 2000s.

    The Justice Department asked the judges to lift secrecy orders after the Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump last month, created a narrow exception to rules that normally keep grand jury proceedings confidential. The law requires that the Justice Department disclose Epstein-related material to the public by Dec. 19.

    The court records cleared for release are just a sliver of the government’s trove — a collection of potentially tens of thousands of pages of documents including FBI notes and reports; transcripts of witness interviews, photographs, videos and other evidence; Epstein’s autopsy report; flight logs and travel records.

    While lawyers for Epstein’s estate told Berman in a letter last week that the estate took no position on the Justice Department’s unsealing request, some Epstein victims backed it.

    “Release to the public of Epstein-related materials is good, so long as the victims are protected in the process,” said Brad Edwards, a lawyer for some victims. “With that said, the grand jury receives only the most basic information, so, relatively speaking, these particular materials are insignificant.”

    Questions about the government’s Epstein files have dominated the first year of Trump’s second term, with pressure on the Republican intensifying after he reneged on a campaign promise to release the files. His administration released some material, most of it already public, disappointing critics and some allies.

    Berman was matter of fact in his ruling Wednesday, writing that the transparency law “unequivocally intends to make public Epstein grand jury materials and discovery materials” that had previously been covered by secrecy orders. The law “supersedes the otherwise secret grand jury materials,” he wrote.

    The judge, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, implored the Justice Department to carefully follow the law’s privacy provisions to ensure that victims’ names and identifying information are redacted, or blacked out. Victim safety and privacy “are paramount,” he wrote.

    In court filings, the Justice Department informed Berman that the only witness to testify before the Epstein grand jury was an FBI agent who, the judge noted, “had no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and whose testimony was mostly hearsay.”

    The agent testified over two days, on June 18, 2019, and July 2, 2019. The rest of the grand jury presentation consisted of a PowerPoint slideshow and four pages of call logs. The July 2 session ended with grand jurors voting to indict Epstein.

    Epstein, a millionaire money manager known for socializing with celebrities, politicians, billionaires and the academic elite, killed himself in jail a month after his 2019 arrest. Maxwell was convicted in 2021 by a federal jury of sex trafficking for helping recruit some of Epstein’s underage victims and participating in some of the abuse. She is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

    Maxwell’s lawyer told a judge last week that unsealing records from her case “would create undue prejudice” and could spoil her plans to file a habeas petition, a legal filing seeking to overturn her conviction. The Supreme Court in October declined to hear Maxwell’s appeal.

    Maxwell’s grand jury records include testimony from the same FBI agent and a New York Police Department detective.

    Judge Paul A. Engelmayer sought to temper expectations as he approved their release on Tuesday, writing that the materials “do not identify any person other than Epstein and Maxwell as having had sexual contact with a minor.”

    “They do not discuss or identify any client of Epstein’s or Maxwell’s,” wrote Engelmayer, an appointee of President Barack Obama, a Democrat. “They do not reveal any heretofore unknown means or methods of Epstein’s or Maxwell’s crimes.”

  • Only N.J. residents can end their lives through the state’s aid-in-dying law, appeals court rules

    Only N.J. residents can end their lives through the state’s aid-in-dying law, appeals court rules

    New Jersey is among the 10 states that allow physicians to assist terminally ill patients in ending their own lives, under certain conditions. But those patients must be New Jersey residents, a federal appeals court ruled.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit said last week that New Jersey’s limit of the aid-in-dying law to state residents is constitutional, keeping on the books a significant hurdle for people from neighboring states — including Pennsylvania and Delaware — where the practice is not permitted.

    “In our federal system, states are free to experiment with policies as grave as letting doctors assist suicide. Other states are free to keep it a crime,” U.S. Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas wrote in the opinion. “This novel option does not appear to be a fundamental privilege, let alone a fundamental right, that states must accord visitors.”

    Jess Pezley, a staff attorney at the legal arm of Compassion and Choices, a nonprofit advocacy organization that brought the lawsuit challenging the residency requirement, said aid in dying “remains a critically important option for all terminally ill people who wish to receive healthcare in the state of New Jersey.”

    The “ruling means that terminally ill patients who do not live in an authorized jurisdiction will continue to have to travel” to states like Oregon and Vermont that permit the practice for nonresidents, Pezley said in a statement.

    Aid in dying is a controversial concept. While some argue the law creates a pathway for empowerment over end of life, others worry that it can lead to coercion and expansion beyond the terminally ill in a country that has a dark history in how it treats people with disabilities.

    The residency requirement is meant to protect physicians from liability in states where assisting in suicide is a criminal offense, proponents of the restriction argue, and to prevent medical tourism in states with the option.

    The law does not specify how long a person must live in New Jersey but sets other qualifying requirements: A patient must have a New Jersey driver’s license, be registered to vote in the state, have filed income taxes as a New Jersey resident in the last year, or have another official government record that confirms residency.

    New Jersey enacted a medical aid-in-dying law in 2019. Last year, 122 people ended their lives through the program in the Garden State, according to New Jersey’s chief medical examiner. Nearly 70% of the patients had cancer and their average age was 72.

    The law allows adults who are residents of New Jersey and are expected to die within six months to obtain a prescription for a lethal drug cocktail. They must be able to make their own decisions and administer the medication by themselves.

    The ruling is the latest development in a lawsuit filed in August 2023 by a Camden County physician, Paul Bryman, who assists terminally ill patients in ending their lives on their own terms. He challenged the residency requirement, saying the law prohibits him from treating all patients equally because of where they live.

    Bryman’s suit originally included another New Jersey physician, Deborah Pasik, and two cancer patients, Judith Govatos of Delaware and Andy Sealy of South Philadelphia. Pasik has since retired, and Govatos, 81, and Sealy, 44, died before the court made its ruling.

    The lawsuit argued the prohibition “discriminates” against patients like Govatos and Sealy by not allowing them to receive “specific medical care after crossing State lines into New Jersey, even though they would otherwise qualify for this care.”

    New Jersey officials asked a federal district judge to dismiss the case, arguing that no court has recognized aid in dying as a constitutional right. The state further said that the residency requirement was among the “safeguards” in a policy that has “extraordinarily high stakes.”

    The judge tossed out the lawsuit in 2024.

    “And the residence requirement makes sense: While medical aid in dying is permitted in New Jersey, it is indistinguishable from the criminal act of assisted suicide in neighboring states,” District Judge Renee Marie Bumb wrote in her opinion. “By limiting the pool of eligible patients to State residents, the requirement is rationally related to the legitimate objective of protecting from out-of-state liability providers and advocates who assist terminally ill patients in seeking medical aid in dying.”

    Compassion and Choices appealed the ruling to the Third Circuit, where the plea met a similar fate.

    “The Constitution leaves moral questions like these to the states,” Bibas wrote. “New Jersey has answered them carefully.”

  • Two windows were smashed at Philly’s federal courthouse, the U.S. Marshals said

    Two windows were smashed at Philly’s federal courthouse, the U.S. Marshals said

    Federal authorities are searching for someone who shattered two windows at Philadelphia’s federal courthouse this week.

    The vandalism occurred late Monday night when someone used a cobblestone brick to smash two glass windows at the front entrance of the James A. Byrne U.S. Courthouse on the 600 block of Market Street, said Supervisory Deputy U.S. Marshal Robert Clark.

    Clark said it was not clear if the attack was targeted. Authorities were also looking into whether there was any link to another report of windows being smashed around the same time that night a few blocks away in Old City, he said.

    Investigators were reviewing surveillance video in hopes of identifying a suspect, Clark said, and the brick that was used was left at the scene.

    The courthouse is where most of the region’s federal civil and criminal cases are heard. It also houses the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.