LP_468x60
on-the-record-468x60-white

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump has audaciously claimed virtually unlimited power to bypass Congress and impose sweeping taxes on foreign products.

Now a federal appeals court has thrown a roadblock in his path.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled Friday that Trump went too far when he declared national emergencies to justify imposing sweeping import taxes on almost every country on earth. The ruling largely upheld a May decision by a specialized federal trade court in New York. But the 7-4 appeals court decision tossed out a part of that ruling striking down the tariffs immediately, allowing his administration time to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The ruling was a big setback for Trump, whose erratic trade policies have rocked financial markets, paralyzed businesses with uncertainty and raised fears of higher prices and slower economic growth.

Which tariffs did the court knock down?

The court’s decision centers on the tariffs Trump slapped in April on almost all U.S. trading partners and levies he imposed before that on China, Mexico and Canada.

Trump on April 2 — Liberation Day, he called it — imposed so-called reciprocal tariffs of up to 50% on countries with which the United States runs a trade deficit and 10% baseline tariffs on almost everybody else.

The president later suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to give countries time to negotiate trade agreements with the United States — and reduce their barriers to American exports. Some of them did — including the United Kingdom, Japan and the European Union — and agreed to lopsided deals with Trump to avoid even bigger tariffs.

Those that didn’t knuckle under — or otherwise incurred Trump’s wrath — got hit harder earlier this month. Laos got rocked with a 40% tariff, for instance, and Algeria with a 30% levy. Trump also kept the baseline tariffs in place.

Claiming extraordinary power to act without congressional approval, Trump justified the taxes under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act by declaring the United States’ longstanding trade deficits “a national emergency.”

In February, he’d invoked the law to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, saying that the illegal flow of immigrants and drugs across the U.S. border amounted to a national emergency and that the three countries needed to do more to stop it.

The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to set taxes, including tariffs. But lawmakers have gradually let presidents assume more power over tariffs — and Trump has made the most of it.

The court challenge does not cover other Trump tariffs, including levies on foreign steel, aluminum and autos that the president imposed after Commerce Department investigations concluded that those imports were threats to U.S. national security.

Nor does it include tariffs that Trump imposed on China in his first term — and President Joe Biden kept — after a government investigation concluded that the Chinese used unfair practices to give their own technology firms an edge over rivals from the United States and other Western countries.

Why did the court rule against the president?

The administration had argued that courts had approved then-President Richard Nixon’s emergency use of tariffs in the economic chaos that followed his decision to end a policy that linked the U.S. dollar to the price of gold. The Nixon administration successfully cited its authority under the 1917 Trading With Enemy Act, which preceded and supplied some of the legal language later used in IEEPA.

In May, the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York rejected the argument, ruling that Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs “exceed any authority granted to the President’’ under the emergency powers law. In reaching its decision, the trade court combined two challenges — one by five businesses and one by 12 U.S. states — into a single case.

On Friday, the federal appeals court wrote in its 7-4 ruling that “it seems unlikely that Congress intended to … grant the President unlimited authority to impose tariffs.”

A dissent from the judges who disagreed with Friday’s ruling clears a possible legal path for Trump, concluding that the 1977 law allowing for emergency actions “is not an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority under the Supreme Court’s decisions,” which have allowed the legislature to grant some tariffing authorities to the president.

So where does this leave Trump’s trade agenda?

The government has argued that if Trump’s tariffs are struck down, it might have to refund some of the import taxes that it’s collected, delivering a financial blow to the U.S. Treasury. Revenue from tariffs totaled $159 billion by July, more than double what it was at the same point the year before. Indeed, the Justice Department warned in a legal filing this month that revoking the tariffs could mean “financial ruin” for the United States.

It could also put Trump on shaky ground in trying to impose tariffs going forward.

“While existing trade deals may not automatically unravel, the administration could lose a pillar of its negotiating strategy, which may embolden foreign governments to resist future demands, delay implementation of prior commitments, or even seek to renegotiate terms,” Ashley Akers, senior counsel at the Holland & Knight law firm and a former Justice Department trial lawyer, said before the appeals court decision.

The president vowed to take the fight to the Supreme Court. “If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America,” he wrote on his social medial platform.

Trump does have alternative laws for imposing import taxes, but they would limit the speed and severity with which he could act. For instance, in its decision in May, the trade court noted that Trump retains more limited power to impose tariffs to address trade deficits under another statute, the Trade Act of 1974. But that law restricts tariffs to 15% and to just 150 days on countries with which the United States runs big trade deficits.

The administration could also invoke levies under a different legal authority — Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 — as it did with tariffs on foreign steel, aluminum and autos. But that requires a Commerce Department investigation and cannot simply be imposed at the president’s own discretion.

Paul Wiseman And Lindsay Whitehurst, The Associated Press


WASHINGTON (AP) — A Social Security official who has filed a whistleblower complaint alleging the Department of Government Efficiency officials mishandled Americans’ sensitive information says he’s resigning his post because of actions taken against him since making his complaint.

Charles Borges, the agency’s chief data officer, alleged that more than 300 million Americans’ Social Security data was put at risk by DOGE officials who uploaded sensitive information to a cloud account not subject to oversight. His whistleblower disclosure was submitted to the special counsel’s office on Tuesday.

In a letter to SSA Commissioner Frank Bisignano, Borges claimed that since filing his whistleblower complaint, the agency’s actions make his duties “impossible to perform legally and ethically” and have caused him “physical, mental and emotional distress.”

“After reporting internally to management and externally to regulators, serious data and security and integrity concerns impacting our citizens’ most sensitive personal data, I have suffered exclusion, isolation, internal strife, and a culture of fear, creating a hostile work environment and making work conditions intolerable,” Borges added.

The Project Government Accountability Office, which is representing him in his whistleblower case, posted Borges’ resignation letter on its website Friday evening. Borges declined to comment.

“He no longer felt that he could continue to work for the Social Security Administration in good conscience, given what he had witnessed,” his attorney Andrea Meza said in a statement. She added that Borges would continue to work with the proper oversight bodies on the matter.

In his whistleblower’s complaint, Borges said the potentially sensitive information put at risk by DOGE’s actions includes health diagnoses, income, banking information, familial relationships and personal biographic data.

“Should bad actors gain access to this cloud environment, Americans may be susceptible to widespread identity theft, may lose vital healthcare and food benefits, and the government may be responsible for re-issuing every American a new Social Security Number at great cost,” said the complaint.

Borges had served as the Social Security Administration’s chief data officer since January.

The SSA declined to comment on Borges’ resignation or allegations against the agency in his letter to colleagues.

President Donald Trump’s DOGE has faced scrutiny as it received unprecedented access from the Republican administration to troves of personal data across the government under the mandate of eliminating waste, fraud and abuse.

Labor and retiree groups sued SSA earlier this year for allowing DOGE to access Americans’ sensitive agency data, though a divided appeals panel decided this month that DOGE could access the information.

___

Aamer Madhani, The Associated Press


NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A federal appeals court is set to decide whether a Texas law to give police broad powers to arrest migrants suspected of illegally entering the U.S. can take effect.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday vacated an earlier ruling by a three-judge panel that the law is unconstitutional, and now the full court will consider whether the law can take effect.

The Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 4 in 2023, but a federal judge in Texas ruled the law was unconstitutional. Texas then appealed that ruling.

Under the proposed law, state law enforcement officers could arrest people suspected of entering the country illegally. Once in custody, they could agree to a Texas judge’s order to leave the country or face a misdemeanor charge for entering the U.S. illegally. Migrants who don’t leave after being ordered to do so could be arrested again and charged with a more serious felony.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in a social media post on Friday that the court’s decision was a “hopeful sign.”

Associated Press, The Associated Press


WASHINGTON — A United States federal appeals court ruled on Friday that many of U.S President Donald Trump’s tariffs are illegal — but it allowed for the levies to remain in place as the case likely makes its way to the Supreme Court.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and his fentanyl-related duties exceeded the powers of the national security statute he used to impose the levies.

Trump used the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977 to hit nearly every country with tariffs. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, is a national security statute that gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency.

IEEPA doesn’t mention the word “tariff” and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress.

The Liberty Justice Center, which represented some of the businesses fighting the duties, said the president cannot impose tariffs on his own.

“The president cannot impose tariffs on his own, and IEEPA does not give him unlimited, unilateral tariff authority,” the centre said in a post on social media.

The centre said the decision protects American businesses and consumers from the uncertainty and harms the unlawful tariffs have caused.

The president in a social media post said “ALL TARIFFS ARE STILL IN EFFECT!” and called the court “highly partisan.”

“If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country,” Trump said in a post soon after the decision came down. “It would make us financially weak, and we have to be strong.”

White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement to The Canadian Press that “President Trump lawfully exercised the tariff powers granted to him by Congress to defend our national and economic security from foreign threats.”

“The President’s tariffs remain in effect, and we look forward to ultimate victory on this matter,” Desai said.

Trump hit Canada with economywide duties in March after he declared an emergency at the northern border related to the flow of fentanyl. He partially paused levies a few days later for imports that comply with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade.

Trump increased the tariffs on Canada to 35 per cent at the start of August, with the White House citing fentanyl and retaliatory tariffs as justification for the increase.

U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border.

Trump took his trade war to the world in April with duties on nearly every country, saying America’s trade deficits amounted to a national emergency. A handful of countries have made agreements with the Trump administration but significant tariffs remain in place.

At least eight lawsuits are challenging the tariffs.

Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum, copper and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 29, 2025.

Kelly Geraldine Malone, The Canadian Press


In a letter sent Thursday to Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, President Donald Trump said he would not be spending $4.9 billion in congressionally approved foreign aid — effectively cutting the budget without going through the legislative branch. The letter was posted Friday morning on the X account of the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Trump’s move rests on a tool not used in nearly 50 years, known as a pocket rescission: A president submits a request to Congress to not spend approved funds toward the end of the fiscal year so that Congress can’t act on the request in the 45-day time frame, and the money goes unspent as a result. The fiscal year draws to a close at the end of September.

Such a move, if standardized by the White House, could effectively bypass Congress on key spending choices and potentially wrest some control over spending from the House and the Senate.

Here’s the latest:

Guatemala tells US it can take in hundreds of migrant children

Foreign Affairs Minister Carlos Martínez said his government is willing to receive hundreds of Guatemalan minors who arrived unaccompanied and are being held in U.S. facilities.

The Central American nation is particularly concerned about minors who could age out of facilities for children and be sent to adult detention centers, he said. The exact number of children to be returned remains in flux, but the figure officials are currently discussing is a little over 600.

That would be almost double what Guatemala previously agreed to. The head of the country’s immigration service said last month that the government was looking to repatriate 341 unaccompanied minors who were being held in U.S. facilities.

Martínez said no date has been set yet for the return of the children.

Trump vows appeal of court ruling that his sweeping tariffs are unconstitutional

“If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America,” the president said on his social media platform.

Appeals court finds Trump’s sweeping tariffs unconstitutional but leaves them in place for now

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that the president had no legal right to impose the sweeping tariffs but left in place for now his effort to build a protectionist wall around the economy.

The court found that Trump was not legally allowed to declare national emergencies and impose import taxes on almost every country, largely upholding a decision by a specialized federal trade court.

But the court tossed out a part of that ruling striking down the tariffs immediately, allowing the administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The decision complicates Trump’s ambitions to upend decades of trade policy unilaterally. Trump has alternative laws for imposing import taxes, but they would limit the speed and severity with which he could act.

His tariffs — and their erratic rollout — have shaken global markets, alienated trading partners and allies and raised fears of inflation and slower economic growth.

Missouri’s Republican governor orders redraw of US House districts as redistricting fight expands

Gov. Mike Kehoe is calling Missouri lawmakers into a special session to redraw the state’s districts as part of a growing national battle between Republicans and Democrats seeking an edge in next year’s congressional elections.

Kehoe’s announcement Friday came just hours after Texas GOP Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law a new congressional voting map designed to help Republicans gain five more seats in the midterm elections.

It marked a win for President Donald Trump, who has been urging Republican-led states to reshape districts to give the party a better shot at retaining control of the House.

Republican-led Texas took up the task first and was quickly countered by Democratic-led California. Missouri would become the third state to pursue an unusual mid-decade redistricting for partisan advantage.

Missouri is represented in the House by six Republicans and two Democrats. Republicans hope to gain one more seat.

The special session is to begin Sept. 3.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has US visa revoked

Abbas and 80 other Palestinian Authority officials had their visas revoked by Secretary of State Marco Rubio ahead of next month’s annual high-level meeting of the U.N. General Assembly.

That’s according to a State Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity Friday to discuss visa issues that are normally confidential.

The State Department said earlier in a statement that the move was in “our national security interests” and accused the officials of “undermining the prospects for peace.”

The Palestinian Authority said it “expressed its deep regret and astonishment” at the visa decision, which “contravenes international law and the Headquarters Agreement, especially since the State of Palestine is an observer member of the United Nations.”

— Matthew Lee

Senator says Trump administration plans to remove 700 Guatemalan children

A U.S. Senator says the Trump administration is planning to remove nearly 700 Guatemalan children who had come to the U.S. without their parents.

Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon said in a letter to the Office of Refugee Resettlement that according to reports from unidentified whistleblowers the office has finalized a plan to deport the children in their custody back to Guatemala.

Wyden said the removals would violate the office’s “child welfare mandate and this country’s long-established obligation to these children.”

The office within the Department of Health and Human Services is responsible for migrant children who arrive in the U.S. alone.

The White House and the Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the latest move, which was first reported by CNN. The Guatemalan government declined to comment.

US warns Russia to move toward peace and meet with Ukraine or face possible sanctions

A senior U.S. diplomat at the United Nations delivered the warning at a U.N. Security Council meeting on Ukraine saying Russia’s latest drone and missile attacks resulting in numerous civilian casualties “cast doubt on the seriousness of Russia’s desire for peace.”

“These strikes must stop immediately,” Minister-Counselor John Kelley said. “Russia must decide now to move toward peace. The leaders of Russia and Ukraine must agree to meet bilaterally.”

Kelley noted President Donald Trump’s warning that the U.S. could take “further economic measures … if Russia instead chooses to continue this war, measures which could have far-reaching impact on Russia’s future economic prosperity.”

“The United States calls on the Russian Federation to avoid these consequences by stopping the violence and engaging constructively to end the war,” said Kelley, who is the U.S. Mission’s political coordinator.

Trump administration tells states to change sex ed lessons or lose funding

The Department of Health and Human Services this week told 40 states to change parts of sex ed lessons that focus on LGBTQ+ issues.

If they don’t comply in 60 days, they’ll lose federal money for the lessons.

The money comes through the Personal Responsibility Education Program and is aimed at teaching homeless students, those in foster programs, minorities and those in rural areas and places with high rates of teen pregnancy.

The push to change the lessons is part of a broader effort to eliminate what Trump calls “gender ideology.”

But some states have laws that require teaching about LGBTQ+ issues.

Administration cancels grants for offshore wind, continuing attack on industry Trump hates

The Transportation Department on Friday canceled $679 million in federal funding for a dozen offshore wind projects.

The move was the latest attack by the Trump administration on the reeling U.S. offshore wind industry and comes days after the administration abruptly halted construction last week of a nearly complete wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island and Connecticut.

Funding for projects in 11 states was rescinded, including $435 million for a floating wind farm in Northern California and $47 million to boost an offshore wind project in Maryland that the Interior Department has pledged to cancel.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said that under Trump, “we are prioritizing real infrastructure improvements over fantasy wind projects that cost much and offer little.”

UN says US withholding over $1 billion will make finances challenging

U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said the United Nations will follow up with U.S. authorities to get more details on Friday’s White House announcement.

Trump said in a letter he would not be spending $4.9 billion in foreign aid approved by Congress including $520 million for the U.N. regular budget and other U.N. agencies and $838 million for international peacekeeping.

“What can I tell you?,” Dujarric said. “This is going to make our budget situation, our liquidity situation that much more challenging.”

Appeals court blocks Trump administration from ending legal protections for 600,000 Venezuelans

A federal appeals court on Friday blocked the Trump administration’s plans to end protections for 600,000 people from Venezuela who have had permission to live and work in the United States.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s ruling that maintained temporary protected status for Venezuelans while the case proceeded through court.

U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of San Francisco found in March that plaintiffs were likely to prevail on their claim that the administration overstepped its authority in terminating the protections and were motivated by racial animus in doing so. Chen ordered a freeze on the terminations, but the Supreme Court reversed him without explanation, which is common in emergency appeals.

It is unclear what effect Friday’s ruling will have on the estimated 350,000 Venezuelans whose protections expired in April. Protections for another group of 250,000 Venezuelans are set to expire Sept. 10.

▶ Read more about Venezuela immigrants

Texas governor signs new voting maps pushed by Trump to gain five GOP seats in Congress in 2026

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday signed into law a new congressional voting map designed to help Republicans gain more seats in the 2026 midterm elections, delivering a win for President Donald Trump and his desire to hold onto a slim GOP majority in the U.S. House.

The Texas map drafted in rare mid-decade redistricting prompted fierce protests from Democrats and sparked a gerrymandering tug-of-war for voters in states across the country.

Before Texas lawmakers passed their new map, California had passed a bill that will ask voters to approve new Democratic-leaning districts to counter any Republican gains in Texas.

The incumbent president’s party usually loses congressional seats in the midterm election. On a national level, the partisan makeup of existing districts puts Democrats within three seats of a majority.

▶ Read more about redrawn Texas maps

Trump is planning to send officers to Chicago for an immigration crackdown, AP sources say

The Trump administration is planning to send officers to Chicago for an immigration crackdown in its latest move to expand federal law enforcement presence in major Democratic-run cities.

That’s according to two U.S. officials who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because plans have not been made public.

A Homeland Security Department official says operations in the nation’s third-largest city are expected to last about 30 days and may start as early as Sept. 5. Another U.S. official said timing for what could be a sustained operation resembling Los Angeles is awaiting final approval.

The Trump administration asked the military this week for use of the Naval Station Great Lakes, north of Chicago, to support immigration enforcement.

— Rebecca Santana and Elliot Spagat

Republican chair of Senate Appropriations Committee criticizes Trump’s funding move

Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, says in a carefully-worded statement that its an “attempt to undermine the law” for President Donald Trump’s to cancel roughly $5 billion in foreign aid that was already approved by lawmakers.

“Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law,” Collins, a Maine Republican, said.

She has been pushing for Congress to work through a series of annual appropriations bills — something it has not done successfully for years. But as Trump seeks to dominate the federal government, Collins, a moderate Republican, has found herself increasingly at odds with the president.

“Instead of this attempt to undermine the law, the appropriate way is to identify ways to reduce excessive spending through the bipartisan, annual appropriations process,” she said.

Dems say government funding negotiations face setback after Trump cancels foreign aid

President Donald Trump’s move to cancel nearly $5 billion in foreign aid without congressional approval is enraging Democrats, setting up a clash over funding ahead of a potential government shutdown at the end of September.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, who was essential to preventing a government shutdown in March, said in a statement that Trump’s move was a sign that Republicans would not work across the aisle to pass another funding package in the coming weeks.

Republicans control both chambers of Congress, but will need votes from some Democrats to meet the Senate’s 60-vote threshold.

“Today’s announcement of the administration’s plan to advance an unlawful ‘pocket rescission’ package is further proof President Trump and congressional Republicans are hellbent on rejecting bipartisanship and ‘going it alone’ this fall,” Schumer, a New York Democrat, said in a statement.

Schumer and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries have been calling on Republican leaders to meet with them to discuss a funding package, but say they have so far refused.

Palestinian UN ambassador says the Palestinians will respond to US revocation of visas of Palestinian officials

Riyad Mansour told U.N. reporters that he had just learned about Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s decision to revoke visas of a number of Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization officials ahead of next month’s annual gathering of world leaders at the UN General Assembly.

“We will see exactly what it means and how it applies to any of our delegation, and we will respond accordingly,” he said.

Mansour said Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is leading the delegation to the high-level meetings and is expected to address the General Assembly –- as he has done for many years –- and to attend a high-level meeting on the afternoon of Sept. 22 on a two-state solution co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia.

The State Department said Palestinian representatives assigned to the Palestinian Authority mission at the United Nations, which is led by Mansour, will be granted waivers so they can continue their New York-based operations.

Trump’s ‘pocket rescission’ is a rarely used flex on Congress. Here’s why some say its illegal

Trump’s budget office is telling Congress it won’t spend funding for nearly $5 billion in foreign aid projects that had already been approved by lawmakers, just weeks before the end of the fiscal year.

It’s a flex on Congress’s authority that hasn’t been used in nearly 50 years, in part because it’s so legally dubious. Here’s why.

Usually, funding rescissions from the White House have to be approved by Congress, but because this rescission request was made so close to the end of the fiscal year, Congress doesn’t have time to act within the 45-day window it’s given under law to either accept or reject the request.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office, which acts as a watchdog for Congress, has already weighed in to say that such a move — called a “pocket rescission” — is illegal. Essentially, it allows a president to subvert Congress’ constitutional power over government funds.

But the White House went ahead and did it anyway, setting up a clash with lawmakers as they try to work out a funding package in the coming weeks.

The Associated Press




The BC General Employees’ Union says provincial public sector workers have voted to approve strike action.

More coming.

The Canadian Press


WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is planning to remove nearly 700 Guatemalan children who had come to the U.S. without their parents, according to a letter sent Friday by Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon.

The removals would violate the Office of Refugee Resettlement’s “child welfare mandate and this country’s long-established obligation to these children,” Wyden told Angie Salazar, acting director of the office within the Department of Health and Human Services that is responsible for migrant children who arrive in the U.S. alone.

“Unaccompanied children are some of the most vulnerable children entrusted to the government’s care,” the Democratic senator wrote, asking for the deportation plans to be terminated. “In many cases, these children and their families have had to make the unthinkable choice to face danger and separation in search of safety.”

Quoting unidentified whistleblowers, Wyden’s letter said children who do not have a parent or legal guardian as a sponsor or who don’t have an asylum case already underway, “will be forcibly removed from the country.”

It is another step in the Trump administration’s sweeping immigration enforcement efforts, which include plans to surge officers to Chicago for an immigration crackdown, ramping up deportations and ending protections for people who have had permission to live and work in the United States.

The White House and the Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the latest move, which was first reported by CNN. The Guatemalan government declined to comment.

“This move threatens to separate children from their families, lawyers, and support systems, to thrust them back into the very conditions they are seeking refuge from, and to disappear vulnerable children beyond the reach of American law and oversight,” Wyden’s letter says.

Due to their young age and the trauma unaccompanied immigrant children have often experienced getting to the U.S., their treatment is one of the most sensitive issues in immigration. Advocacy groups already have sued to ask courts to halt new Trump administration vetting procedures for unaccompanied children, saying the changes are keeping families separated longer and are inhumane.

In July, the head of Guatemala’s immigration service said the government was looking to repatriate 341 unaccompanied minors who were being held in U.S. facilities.

“The idea is to bring them back before they reach 18 years old so that they are not taken to an adult detention center,” Guatemala Immigration Institute Director Danilo Rivera said at the time. He said it would be done at Guatemala’s expense and would be a form of voluntary return.

The plan was announced by President Bernardo Arévalo, who said then that the government had a moral and legal obligation to advocate for the children. His comments came days after U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem visited Guatemala.

Migrant children traveling without their parents or guardians are handed over to the Office of Refugee Resettlement when they are encountered by officials along the U.S.-Mexico border. Once in the U.S., they often live in government-supervised shelters or with foster care families until they can be released to a sponsor — usually a family member — living in the country.

They can request asylum, juvenile immigration status or visas for victims of sexual exploitation.

The idea of repatriating such a large number of children to their home country raised concerns with activists who work with children navigating the immigration process.

“We are outraged by the Trump administration’s renewed assault on the rights of immigrant children,” said Lindsay Toczylowski, president and CEO of Immigrant Defenders Law Center. “We are not fooled by their attempt to mask these efforts as mere ‘repatriations.’ This is yet another calculated attempt to sever what little due process remains in the immigration system.”

___

Gonzalez reported from McAllen, Texas. AP writers Sonia Pérez D. in Guatemala City and Tim Sullivan in Minneapolis contributed to this report.

Rebecca Santana, Amanda Seitz And Valerie Gonzalez, The Associated Press


British Columbia’s attorney general says the province has begun to receive the initial payment from its multi-billion-dollar share of the settlement in a pan-Canadian lawsuit against big tobacco companies over health damages.

A statement from Niki Sharma says the province has begun receiving the $936-million-dollar payment, part of B.C.’s share of more than $3.6 billion over 18 years.

It’s part of a $32.5-billion Canadian settlement between JTI-Macdonald Corp., Rothmans, Benson & Hedges and Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. and their creditors after more than five years of negotiations.

Sharma says no amount of money will bring back those who have died from tobacco-related illnesses or make up for “lives ruined by addiction.”

But she says the payment is a welcome step in the province’s mission to see justice delivered for B.C. residents.

The attorney general says the settlement sends a message that the B.C. government “will not stand idly by while multinational companies engage in deceptive practices that cause widespread harm at significant cost to people.”

Sharma has previously said the money B.C. receives will go directly toward strengthening the health-care system and helping offset government spending on care for people who suffer smoking-related illnesses.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 29, 2025.

The Canadian Press


WASHINGTON (AP) — A grand jury refused to indict a man who was captured on video hurling a sandwich at a federal agent. Prosecutors dropped another case after complaints that police illegally searched a man’s satchel and found a gun. Judges, too, have balked at keeping several defendants in jail, citing weak evidence and dubious charging decisions.

President Donald Trump’s crackdown on crime in the nation’s capital has generated a torrent of charges against people caught up in a surge of street patrols. Judges, defense attorneys and even grand jurors are already poking holes in many cases.

“I’ve seen things over the past 72 hours that I’ve never seen in federal court,” U.S. District Judge Zia Faruqui said Wednesday during a hearing for a man who was jailed for five days on a misdemeanor marijuana possession charge. Later, he added: “It feels like some sort of bizarre nightmare.”

Civil liberties are at stake, legal figures say

Trump has framed the three-week-old operation as a campaign to eradicate rampant crime and “take our capital back.” The judges and lawyers adjudicating the criminal cases say they’re striving to strike a delicate balance between protecting public safety and preserving civil liberties.

Teams of federal agents and troops are patrolling the streets of Washington, D.C., helping police arrest hundreds of people. The courts are struggling to keep up with the burgeoning caseload. Some people have been held in jail for days while waiting to appear before a federal judge in district court.

Edwin Jonathan Rodriguez, a 25-year-old recent college graduate, has a permit to carry a concealed firearm in Maryland. But he spent eight days in jail after police stopped his car near The Wharf neighborhood in Washington on Aug. 19 and said they found his registered gun, around 20 ounces of marijuana and drug paraphernalia.

U.S. Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey wasn’t buying the government’s contention that Rodriguez is a dangerous drug dealer.

“The cases in which drug dealers register their guns are exceptionally rare,” Harvey said as he ordered Rodriguez’s release. “The government’s case has got some challenges.”

Police officers and unspecified “federal partners” stopped Rodriguez because he was driving a Lexus with a license plate on the back but not the front of the vehicle, prosecutors said in a court filing. Defense attorney Joseph Scrofano accused law enforcement of jumping to baseless conclusions about the contents of the car.

“We don’t hold people based on assumptions,” Scrofano said. “We hold people based on evidence.”

Rodriguez, a budding architect who graduated from Morgan State University in December, doesn’t have a criminal record. But he faces a charge that carries a mandatory minimum prison sentence of five years if he’s convicted.

The number of those arrested is rising

The White House says over 1,200 people have been arrested and 135 firearms have been seized since the surge started on Aug. 7. The city’s police department says crime rates have plunged in the district, including a 60% decrease in carjackings, a 56% drop in robberies and a 58% reduction in violent crimes as of Wednesday compared to the same one-week period in 2024.

Over 30 people arrested during the crackdown have been charged in district court, where the most serious crimes are prosecuted. Approximately half of them are charged with assaulting officers, agents or National Guard members, according to an Associated Press review of court records. The rest are charged with illegally possessing guns, drugs or both.

The volume of cases in district court pales in comparison to the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, which led to charges against nearly 1,600 people in the same courthouse. But the riot arrests were staggered across four years and all 50 states, easing the burden on the court.

Former federal prosecutor Michael Romano, who spent more than 17 years at the Justice Department and helped supervise Capitol riot prosecutions, said he never had a grand jury refuse to return an indictment in one of his cases. He said the Trump administration’s efforts to appear tough on crime may have backfired with many D.C. residents, who serve on federal grand juries.

“Sometimes when you arrest people with scant evidence and you overcharge them, the community doesn’t like it and the evidence won’t support it,” said Romano, who resigned from the department earlier this year. “This illustrates the danger of having a Justice Department where attorneys can’t do their job and can’t properly evaluate whether cases are going to be good or not.”

‘We will not simply go along with the flow’

At least three people have been arrested on assault charges for spitting on federal agents or troops on patrol. A viral video captured a Justice Department attorney hurling a “sub-style” sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection agent. But a grand jury refused to indict him on a felony charge — an extraordinarily rare failure for prosecutors.

“Grand juries, judges, we will not simply go along with the flow,” Faruqui said.

He questioned why people have been locked up for days for relatively minor offenses that typically aren’t handled in district court. Faruqui said he shared his concerns with the leadership of U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office and hopes they can reduce the waits for detention hearings and initial court appearances.

Earlier this week, Pirro and Faruqui verbally sparred over her office’s handling of a case against a man who was arrested at a Trader Joe’s supermarket last month. Police officers said they followed Torez Riley into the grocery store and found two unregistered guns inside his satchel. He was charged with being a felon in possession of firearms, but Pirro’s office dropped the case a week later.

During a hearing Monday, Faruqui said he was “absolutely flabbergasted” that Riley was jailed for a week before his case was dismissed. He said it was “without a doubt the most illegal search I have ever seen in my life.”

Pirro, a former Fox News host whom Trump appointed in May to lead the nation’s largest U.S. Attorney’s office, responded with a statement accusing Faruqui of having “a long history of bending over backwards to release dangerous felons in possession of firearms.”

On Thursday, Harvey ordered the release of a man who was arrested on Aug. 16 after a traffic stop by members of the U.S. Park Police and U.S. Marshals Service. The magistrate pressed a prosecutor to explain why the driver, Amarian Langston, was charged with illegally possessing a handgun that officers found beside a road after he crashed the vehicle. The prosecutor, Kyle McWaters, acknowledged that nobody saw Langston toss the weapon.

Prosecutors separately charged Langston’s girlfriend in D.C. Superior Court, which hears less serious cases and is handling the bulk of the surge-related arrests. McWaters said the law allows the government to charge both with illegally possessing the same gun even though it allegedly belonged to the girlfriend.

Said McWaters: “I’m not saying it’s an easy hill to climb, your honor.”

Michael Kunzelman, The Associated Press



President Donald Trump’s administration this week told 40 states to eliminate parts of lessons that focus on LGBTQ+ issues from federally funded sexual education materials or that they will lose funding.

The move is the latest in a line of efforts since Trump returned to the White House in January to recognize people as only male or female and to eliminate what he calls “gender ideology.”

“Federal funds will not be used to poison the minds of the next generation or advance dangerous ideological agendas,” Acting Assistant Health and Human Service Secretary Andrew Gradison said in a statement.

That position contradicts what the American Medical Association and other mainstream medical groups say: that extensive scientific research suggests sex and gender are better understood as a spectrum than as an either-or definition.

The funds in question in the Personal Responsibility Education Program total over $81 million for the 40 states plus the District of Columbia and five territories where officials were also sent the letter. The officials were told they have 60 days to change the lessons or could lose their grants.

California was warned previously, and the $12 million grant for that state was stripped on Aug. 21.

Now, other states will have until late October to decide whether to comply or give up the funding.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong also suggested there could be legal challenges to the administration’s effort. “Threatening to defund our schools over this is completely unhinged and we’re not going to let Trump steal money from our kids,” he said in a statement.

The grants are used to teach adolescents about abstinence and contraception. They target education for those who are homeless, in foster care, living in rural areas or places with high teen birth rates — and minority groups, including LGBTQ+ populations.

Alison Macklin, spokesperson for SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change, said the grant money is used for things like training sex education instructors and for groups that present lessons in schools or after-school groups.

“This money is essential to states and territories to support sex education,” she said. “They build critical life skills for young people.”

She noted that some states have laws requiring education about lesbian, gay and transgender people.

In the letters, the federal Administration for Children and Families pointed to specific examples in textbooks and curricula that they find objectionable.

For instance, a curriculum used in Alabama encourages the instructor to ask participants to share the pronouns they use.

It also tells the instructor to tell the class that people “may identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or straight. Some may identify as male, female or transgender. All of these differences make us unique. Regardless of how you see yourself, your background, previous relationships or experience, each of you has a place in this group.”

South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster applauded the warnings during a question-and-answer period with reporters this week.

“The things they describe there really have got no business being in there,” he said. “Somebody has gone crazy somewhere trying to put all this stuff” in lessons.

___

Associated Press reporters Jeffrey Collins in Columbia, South Carolina, and Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut, contributed to this article.

Geoff Mulvihill, The Associated Press