Monday, January 20, 2025

Think Trump can’t be president after his second term is up in January 2029? Think again.

January 20, 2025



REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo
U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin hold a bilateral meeting at the G20 leaders summit in Osaka, Japan June 28, 2019.

When Donald Trump met with congressional Republicans shortly after his November 2024 election victory, he floated the idea of another term: “I suspect I won’t be running again unless you say, ‘He’s so good we’ve got to figure something else out.’”


At first glance, this seems like an obvious joke. The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution is clear that Trump can’t be elected again. The text of the amendment states:
“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”


That amendment was passed in response to Franklin Roosevelt’s four elections to the presidency. Since George Washington had stepped down at the end of his second term, no president had sought a third term, much less a fourth. The amendment was clearly meant to prevent presidents from serving more than two terms in office.
Franklin D. Roosevelt delivers his fourth inaugural address on Jan. 20, 1945.
Abbie Rowe, National Archives and Records Administration. Office of Presidential Libraries. Harry S. Truman Library, via Wikimedia Commons

Because Trump has been elected president twice already, the plain language of the amendment bars him from being elected a third time. Some have argued that since Trump’s terms were nonconsecutive, the amendment doesn’t apply to him. But the amendment makes no distinction between consecutive and nonconsecutive terms in office.

Though the 22nd Amendment prohibits Trump from being elected president again, it does not prohibit him from serving as president beyond Jan. 20, 2029. The reason for this is that the 22nd Amendment only prohibits someone from being “elected” more than twice. It says nothing about someone becoming president in some other way than being elected to the office.
Skirting the rules

There are a few potential alternate scenarios. Under normal circumstances, they would be next to impossible. But Donald Trump has never been a normal president.

On issue after issue, Trump has pushed the outer limits of presidential power. Most importantly, he has already shown his willingness to bend or even break the law to stay in office. And while Trump claims he’s only joking when he floats the idea of a third term, he has a long history of using “jokes” as a way of floating trial balloons.

Furthermore, once he leaves office, Trump could once again face the prospect of criminal prosecution and possibly jail time, further motivating him to stay in power. As Trump’s second term progresses, don’t be surprised if Americans hear more about how he might try to stay in office. Here is what the Constitution says about that prospect.
Other ways to become president

Nine people have served as president without first being elected to that office. John Tyler, Millard Fillmore, Andrew Johnson, Chester Arthur, Theodore Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson and Gerald Ford were all vice presidents who stepped into the office when their predecessors either died or resigned.

The 22nd Amendment does not bar a term-limited president from being elected vice president. On the other hand, the 12th Amendment does state that “no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of the President shall be eligible to that of the Vice-President of the United States.”

It’s not clear whether this restriction applies to a two-term president who is ineligible for a third term because of the 22nd Amendment – or whether it merely imposes on the vice president the Constitution’s other criteria for presidential eligibility, namely that they be a natural-born citizen of the United States, at least 35 years of age and have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years.

That question would have to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. Should the justices decide in Trump’s favor – as they have recently on questions regarding the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause and presidential immunity – then the 2024 ticket of Trump-Vance could become the 2028 Vance-Trump ticket. If elected, Vance could then resign, making Trump president again.

No resignation needed


But Vance would not even have to resign in order for a Vice President Trump to exercise the power of the presidency. The 25th Amendment to the Constitution states that if a president declares that “he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office … such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.”

In fact, the U.S. has had three such acting presidents – George H.W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Kamala Harris. All of them held presidential power for a brief period when the sitting president underwent anesthesia during medical procedures; Cheney did it twice.

In this scenario, shortly after taking office on Jan. 20, 2029, President Vance could invoke the 25th Amendment by notifying the speaker of the House and the president pro tempore of the Senate that he is unable to discharge the duties of president. He would not need to give any reason or proof of this incapacity.

Vice President Trump would then become acting president and assume the powers of the presidency until such time as President Vance issued a new notification indicating that he was able to resume his duties as president.

‘Tandemocracy’

But exercising the power of the presidency doesn’t even necessarily require being president or acting president.

Trump has repeatedly expressed his admiration for autocratic Russian President Vladimir Putin, so he might want to follow the example of the Medvedev-Putin “tandemocracy.”


Russian leaders Vladimir Putin, left, and Dmitry Medvedev have collaborated to hold power for more than a quarter-century, despite laws imposing term limits or other restrictions. Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images


In 2008, term limits in the Russian constitution prevented Putin from running for president after two consecutive terms. Instead, he selected a loyal subordinate, Dmitry Medvedev, to run for president.

When elected, Medvedev appointed Putin as his prime minister. By most accounts, Putin remained firmly in power and made most of the important decisions. Following this example, a future Republican president could appoint Trump to an executive branch position from which he could still exercise power.

In 2012, Putin was able to run for president again, and he and Medvedev once again swapped roles. Since then, Putin has succeeded in amending the Russian Constitution to effectively allow him to remain president for the rest of his life.
Using a figurehead

Then again, Trump might just want to avoid all of these legal subterfuges by following the example of George and Lurleen Wallace. In 1966, the Alabama Constitution prevented Wallace from running for a third consecutive term as governor. Still immensely popular and unwilling to give up power, Wallace chose to have his wife, Lurleen, run for governor. It was clear from the beginning that Lurleen was just a figurehead for George, who promised to be an adviser to his wife, at a salary of $1 a year.

The campaign’s slogan of “Two Governors, One Cause,” made it clear that a vote for Lurleen was really a vote for George.

Lurleen won in a landslide.

According to one account of her time in office, the Wallaces had “something of a Queen-Prime Minister relationship: Mrs. Wallace handles the ceremonial and formal duties of state. Mr. Wallace draws the grand outlines of state policy and sees that it is carried out.”

Trump’s wife was not born a U.S. citizen and therefore isn’t eligible to be president. But as the head of the Republican Party, Trump could ensure that the next GOP presidential candidate was a member of his family or some other person who would be absolutely loyal and obedient to him. If that person went on to win the White House in 2028, Trump could serve as an unofficial adviser, allowing him to continue to wield the power of the presidency without the actual title.

Philip Klinkner, James S. Sherman Professor of Government, Hamilton College

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Inside Trump's $200 million exercise in legalized bribery




OPINION
Joe Conason
ALTERNET
January 19, 2025

Legalized bribery is still bribery -- and there is no other way to describe the celebration that marks the second presidential inauguration of Donald Trump.

With the menacing manner of a mob boss, Trump has extorted million-dollar contributions from dozens of corporations that fear federal retribution against their shareholders or management (as in the case of Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg, who coughed up his million after Trump literally threatened him with "life in prison" not so long ago).

No doubt many of the corporate and billionaire donors are keen to prove their loyalty to a new administration that promises to uphold their interests. They know better than to worry about Republican proclamations that their party now represents "working class" Americans. Nobody who has glanced at Project 2025 or read Elon Musk's posts could harbor any such illusions -- and surely the inaugural donors from outfits such as General Motors, the pharmaceutical lobby, Pratt Industries, Uber, Amazon and Microsoft do not.

Many of the corporations currently greasing Trump withheld donations from his 2016 festivities, apparently repelled by the racism, misogyny and propensity for violence he had flaunted during the campaign. Some combination of fear and greed has overcome any such scruples this year.

Ralph Nader's Public Citizen, a nonprofit that monitors corporate influence, is tracking the payments of tribute, and even its jaded staffers are shocked by the Trump inaugural's brazen style. Said Craig Holman, a government ethics expert at the Nader group: "The record-breaking cesspool of special interest financing for the Trump-Vance Inaugural Committee raises serious concerns about the ability of corporations and wealthy special interests to purchase influence over public policy or lucrative government contracts."

Estimates of the amount that the presidential inauguration committee will collect from both eager and reluctant donors range up to $200 million, a record sum certain to prompt boasting from Trump and his minions. Impressive though it is, the inaugural hoard only represents a down payment on what portends to be four years of unprecedented and gluttonous corruption.

If you wonder why Trump needs $200 million for this little event, so does everyone who ever ran a prior inauguration. Due to frigid weather in Washington, the 47th president will take the oath of office indoors at a ceremony paid for by the taxpayers. Then the Trump-Vance committee will host only three inaugural balls -- a tiny schedule compared with the number of balls held by his predecessors -- plus a few events at his Trump National Golf Club, miles from the capital.

In other words, they're spending almost none of that big haul.

Yet while the actual expense of parties and fireworks will be nominal, the opportunities for grift are vast. As in so many instances during Trump's first presidency, those golf club events are siphoning big money from the inaugural fund into his business accounts.

The Trumps ran the same kind of scam eight years ago, when the 2016 inaugural committee inked massively overpriced contracts for rooms and services purchased from the Trump hotel in Washington. That pattern continued during his administration, with big profits booked from taxpayers footing hotel and resort bills for Secret Service agents protecting Trump and his family.

Where will all the money go? In 2017, the Trump inaugural raised $107 million, a total far in excess of what the committee spent on its events. The committee -- whose top staff included notorious crooks Rick Gates and Elliot Broidy -- never presented any accounting of its expenditures, let alone an audit. Tens of millions of dollars simply disappeared.

The official story is that funds not spent on this week's inaugural will be transferred to the newly formed Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Fund Inc. -- with the supposed purpose of establishing a repository and museum memorializing his presidency.

Maybe that will happen someday. But the sordid history of the Trump Foundation, ordered to shut down after the New York state attorney general proved its myriad abuses, showed that the Trumps are familiar with every trick for stealing from a nonprofit. The likelihood is that most or all of the tainted inaugural lucre will wind up in their pockets.

Day One won't see a peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia, a drop in grocery prices, or anything else that Trump promised during his campaign. The customary grifting will resume promptly, however. In fact, it has already begun.



It's time to wake up: The GOP isn't interested in democracy
AlterNet
January 20, 2025 



There’s no compromising with evil, although some Democrats apparently think they can. Evil, by its very nature, will always win in such situations, even when it appears to have compromised or cooperated.

“Evil” is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as “a force that causes bad things to happen.”

In a democracy—derived from the Greek root demos, meaning “the people”—the core principle is governance that serves the collective well-being of its citizens. When decisions or actions prioritize the interests of a small, privileged group or industry over the needs of the majority, they undermine this principle.

Such actions can be rightly viewed as “a force that causes bad things to happen” for the broader population, eroding trust and equality within the system. Evil, in other words.

Today’s Republican Party is now fully in the service of:

— The fossil fuel industry, which is threatening all life on Earth and just this week helped light Los Angeles on fire.

— The for-profit health insurance industry, which is (according to The Lancet) responsible for over 65,000 Americans dying unnecessarily every year.
— A group of rightwing billionaires who appear committed to replacing American democracy with oligarchy, which, as noted before, eventually morphs into tyranny.
— The gun industry, responsible for terrorizing and psychologically scarring our nation’s schoolchildren with active shooter drills, not to mention the highest gun homicide rate in the developed world.

— For-profit movements to end/privatize public school and keep college unaffordable.
— An investment industry financializing housing, which has caused a crisis of affordability and widespread homelessness.
— The predators in the banking industry who crashed our economy on George W. Bush’s watch and then walked away with hundreds of billions in taxpayer money.

The list, of course, goes on (including the GOP’s loyalty to the military/industrial complex and Putin), but the point is that all of these portend such dramatically terrible consequences for average Americans that they could realistically be termed “evil.”

And now a few Democrats apparently think they can “compromise” with these proudly in-the-service-of-evil people. It’s a terrible mistake.

Take the Laken Riley Act. It contains a provision that would give Trump the power to detain any undocumented immigrant in America who’s accused of a crime, including such minor crimes as shoplifting, with life imprisonment.













As Michelle Goldberg wrote this week for The New York Times:

“It mandates federal detention without bail for migrants who are merely arrested for any theft-related crimes, with no provision to free them if the charges are later dropped. …
“The bill applies to many immigrants who are authorized to be here, including Dreamers and those with temporary protected status. And the legislation contains no exemption for minors. As Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University, told me, the Laken Riley Act could mandate the indefinite detention of a juvenile child of asylum-seekers arrested for swiping a candy bar, even if he or she didn’t do it.”

And yet John Fetterman and Ruben Gallego — who both ran for office as principled progressives — have jumped on board, co-sponsoring the legislation.

Presumably they haven’t done their homework, which is problematic itself, but they also should have known that any legislation that includes explicit attacks on President Biden (“victims of the Biden administration’s open borders policies”) as part of its original language is a GOP stalking horse.

You can’t compromise with evil.


That’s not to say that Democrats and Republicans can’t have interests that overlap where they can work together.

But this illustrates the very real danger of collaborating with people who are not operating in good faith, and whose allegiance is to billionaires and predators instead of to their constituents and the people of the United States. Who will do or say just about anything to please their funders and/or Donald Trump.

Like yesterday when Mike Johnson, whose state got $1.7 billion in federal aid to deal with Hurricanes Laura, Delta, and Ida, just told CNN that if California — which Trump hates, and whose governor he wants to prevent from ever becoming president — wants disaster aid:

“I think there should be conditions on that aid.”

Historically, disasters brought Americans together. It’s a human instinct, among normal people, to reach out to care for other humans in crisis.

But not with Trump and today’s GOP: they are absolutely set on exploiting this climate-change-driven disaster in California to destroy Democrats. Trump is leading the charge, and elected Republicans and rightwing media are enthusiastically jumping on board.

And for some inexplicable reason, outside of Gavin Newsome, most Democrats are not aggressively fighting back. They should instead be using his and the GOP’s outrageous efforts to exploit this disaster to hammer them.

As Steve Schmidt wrote in his The Warning newsletter:

“Being nice to Trump means being capitulant. When it comes to kneeling in front of the man whom Scarborough called Hitler, there is nothing civil about it. In fact, it is as indecent an act as there is.”

The preeminent advantage evil people have when they go into politics, after all, is their willingness and ability to lie without compunction. Trump is the master at it, and now it’s demanded of every Republican every time they show up on a Sunday show.

Normal humans always want to give the benefit of the doubt, to trust others, to assume the best, and evil liars actively exploit this for their own gain.

Like when Republicans said that cutting taxes on billionaires will help average people, that a national healthcare system and free college won’t work in America, that more guns means less violence, or that Iraq played a role in 9/11 and had weapons of mass destruction.


Or look at how Trump has endorsed Putin’s attack on Ukraine and Xi’s designs on Taiwan — complete violations of the post-WWII rules-based-order — by proclaiming that America would consider using military force to annex Panama and/or Greenland.

We’re already seeing the evil that Republicans have embraced this new year being actively normalized by our media; yesterday’s Senate hearings with Pete Hegseth were a great example. In any other era, any other incoming administration in American history, a man who broke trust with three wives and was repeatedly accused of drunkenness on the job wouldn’t get past the first interview and would shock the press.

But this incoming administration is being run by a man with 34 felony convictions, a credible allegation of rape, who himself cheated on each of his three wives just like Hegseth allegedly did. Evil, it turns out, flows from the top down.

Next up, to fund their tax cuts for billionaires, Republicans will most likely attach a debt-ceiling suspension or increase to must-pass legislation favored by Democrats or disaster aid. And if it’s held up by principled opposition, the media will probably bow to Republican framing, blaming Democrats.

The next two years are going to be very dangerous for Democratic legislators. They’ll be wined and dined by evil people, threatened and vilified if they don’t cave in, and praised in the media when they do.

Billionaires and their agents will reach out to some the way they did with Kyrsten Sinema, and a few Democratic senators will probably fall under their sway. It looks like John Fetterman is already leaning in that direction.

They need to remember Winston Churchill’s sage advice:
"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life."

Evil never surrenders: It’s time to stand up and fight.




'One million percent totally insane': Critics pan Trump's second inaugural speech

Sarah K. Burris
January 20, 2025 
RAW STORY

Donald Trump (Reuters)

Donald Trump's inauguration speech was an outright insult both to the American people and the English language, as critics online painted it.


CNN commentator Maria Cardona weighed in on Trump's claim that California's wildfires were being allowed to spread “without even a token of defense.”

"What an insult to all the amazing firefighters who put their lives on the line to bring the LA fires under control! Trump starts out with a speech filled with massive lies, deceit, insults as he trashes the country to uplift his own deviance," she said on 

AFJustice editor Zack Ford, on the other hand, pointed out some of the speech's grammatical errors and observed that "I don't think you can be 'far more exceptional.'"

He also noted Trump's ongoing ignorance about what "asylum" means. Trump has long believed that those seeking asylum are also those who come from insane asylums and are being sent to the U.S. Applying for asylum is a legal distinction for those leaving their countries under fear of persecution and under fears of serious human rights violations. They are refugees before the international community has recognized them as such, explained Amnesty International.

"Even in his scripted inauguration speech (Stephen Miller-written?), Trump is pushing the inane idea that asylum-seekers are coming from mental asylums," commented former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan.

New York Times reporter Glenn Thrush noted Trump is already preparing to take credit for former President Joe Biden's work, "Many of the crises Trump has vowed to address (taming inflation, ridding cities of violent crime, building the world's most formidable military...) are already well on the way to be solved..."

CNN's Jim Acosta mentioned Trump's announcement the United States would take back the Panama Canal, and he wondered if this meant a war with Panama.

Reporter James Fallows called this Panama obsession "one million percent total insane bull s--t."

Mother Jones' Washington Bureau chief David Corn referred to the irony of Trump invoking "law and order" while speaking "in the spot where his violent brownshirts, incited by his lies, brutally assaulted law enforcement officers and injured 140 cops. It’s nuts."

Yale Law School professor Scott Shapiro saw one inaugural photo of Trump pointing to Chief Justice John Roberts while shaking his hand. “Thanks Judge for the permission to commit crimes," Shapiro imagined Trump saying.


'I'm in hell': Rolling Stone reporter unloads after being forced to cover Trump rally

Travis Gettys
January 20, 2025 
RAW STORY

A magazine reporter assigned to cover Donald Trump's pre-inauguration "victory rally" had an intrusive thought that plagued him throughout the event.

Asawin Suebsaeng, a senior political reporter for Rolling Stone, attended the twice-impeached convicted felon president's rally Sunday at Capital One Arena in Washington, D.C., and he found that he kept involuntarily scribbling “this is hell, we live in hell, I’m in Hell”over and over.

"The jubilant Village People aside, this is a scenario that we were raised and taught in our schools to believe was not practically or legally possible in our time," Suebsaeng wrote. "This is, we were assured at school, something that occurs in Europe, especially in bygone decades of empire, world wars, and global cold war. Maybe it’s something that unfolds during the democratic backsliding of Latin American nations, particularly the poorer ones. The Middle East. The Philippines. Other places we can’t locate on a map without cheating or a hint, and in countries and regions we can barely deign to pronounce correctly."

"Not here," he added. "At least that’s what we were told again, and again, and again, and then again."

Given what Trump did in his final year in office during his first term, Suebsaeng wrote, a second term should have been unimaginable.

"Openly working to steal a presidential election you lost and then causing American civilians to die in the process was once considered universally, permanently disqualifying in modern America," Suebsaeng wrote. "Now? What can you do but laugh. It’s clear to everyone willing to honestly examine the thought that the American ideal came with a massive and unspoken asterisk. From now until the end of time, we will never not be the country that allowed the host of Celebrity Apprentice to bring us to the brink of democratic and constitutional hemorrhage."

Trump and his team boasts that he mounted the “greatest political comeback” in American history, a claim that disgusts Suebsaeng.

"They are not entirely wrong — though there is a casual depravity to talking about it, like it’s part of a Friends-replacement TV show that Trump used to star on, instead of the abomination that it is," Suebsaeng wrote. "But no matter how venal or fascistic Trump is, he was never the sole author of this violent tragicomedy that we’ve endured for a decade, and will continue to endure for years. One morally vacant aristocrat could not have accomplished today on his own."

Trump's comeback is the result of a collapse and failure by every major institution, the reporter wrote.

"This is all happening because everyone — every one — who was supposed to protect the American people from this failed in the most miserable, unforgivable ways," Suebsaeng wrote. "It was a catastrophic top-to-bottom failure that many millions of people at home and abroad will be living with, now and long after Trump is no longer leader of a nominally free world. Every institution you may have believed had value revealed itself to be for-sale or out-to-lunch."


Trump rages about Hannibal Lecter and 'transgender insanity' as he warns of executive order


REUTERS/Carlos Barria
Donald Trump, JD Vance and his wife Usha Vance attend a service at St. John's Church on the inauguration day of his second Presidential term in Washington, U.S. January 20, 2025.

January 20, 2025

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump rallied a packed arena Sunday in the nation’s capital ahead of his inauguration Monday, heralding an era of “the Trump effect” and vowing to “act with historic speed and strength and fix every single crisis facing our country.”

Shortly after his swearing-in, Trump is expected to issue pardons for rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, who he said are “J6 hostages.” Trump also plans a barrage of executive orders curtailing immigration and undoing President Joe Biden’s energy policies

The victory rally, streamed live on C-SPAN from the Capital One Arena in downtown Washington, D.C., featured live music from Kid Rock, Lee Greenwood and, at the conclusion, a surreal performance of the 1978 disco hit “YMCA” by the Village People, as Trump danced along with them. Trump often played the song at his campaign rallies.

Assorted incoming administration officials and celebrities delivered speeches that railed against transgender people, DEI initiatives and immigration at the U.S. southern border. Vice President-elect J.D. Vance was not among the speakers.

Trump spoke for just over an hour, repeating his campaign trail themes about fictional cannibal Hannibal Lecter, SpaceX rockets, an “invasion” of migrants and “transgender insanity.”

He also promised to declassify records related to the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy, and claimed that Apple CEO Tim Cook told him Sunday about “a massive investment in the United States because of our big election win.”

“I’m thrilled to be back with so many friends, supporters and true American patriots on the eve of taking back our country,” Trump told a cheering crowd in the arena, which has a capacity of about 20,000.

On Monday it will also host Trump supporters who held tickets to sit in the audience at the Capitol before the ceremony was moved inside due to forecasts of low temperatures, as well as an inauguration parade on Monday afternoon.

Trump touted the return Sunday of the popular app TikTok and the “epic ceasefire agreement” between Israel and Hamas.

The incoming president said war in the Middle East would not have happened had the 2020 election not been “rigged” — a false claim he’s repeated over the last four years.

Trump and Vance will be sworn in Monday indoors in the Capitol rotunda. The four-year term for Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris ends at noon, as stipulated in the Constitution’s 20th Amendment.

Emergency declaration

Among the executive orders Trump plans will be an emergency declaration on the U.S.-Mexico border, the Wall Street Journal reported Sunday.

“You’re going to see executive orders that are going to make you extremely happy, lots of them,” he told rallygoers. “By the time the sun sets tomorrow evening, the invasion of our borders will have come to a halt.”

Trump later told the crowd: “Somebody said yesterday, ‘Sir, don’t sign so many in one day. Let’s do it over a period of weeks.’ I said, ‘Like hell we’re going to do it over weeks.’”

Also on his list of day-one executive orders is extending the deadline for TikTok to find a new owner, a mandate set forth in a bipartisan law last year. Without an extension, companies that distribute or maintain TikTok will face fines up to $5,000 per user on the popular video platform app.

The order will “confirm that there will be no liability for any company that helped keep TikTok from going dark before my order,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform hours ahead of the rally.

TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew was expected to sit on the dais Monday during Trump’s inauguration, but seating arrangements for the indoor ceremony remained unclear.

Trump invited tech billionaire Elon Musk to the stage with him Sunday. The mogul he’s tasked with making recommendations to cut trillions in federal spending told the crowd “we’re looking forward to making a lot of changes.”

Speakers vilify ‘radical left,’ Harris


A parade of speakers introduced the president-elect. Trump’s son Eric, standing alongside his wife Lara and their two children, declared “The bulls--- ends right now.”

Stephen Miller, incoming White House deputy chief of staff for policy, touted “ending the border invasion, sending the illegals home and taking America back,” and ridding children’s playgrounds of “piles of needles.”

Miller denied the very existence of transgender people.

“We’re not going to let the radical left indoctrinate our children into believing there’s 435 genders because President Trump knows there are men and there are women, and it is not up to you whether you’re a man or a woman. That’s a decision that’s made by God, and it can’t be changed,” Miller said.

There are an estimated 2 million transgender people in the U.S., according to the Human Rights Campaign. Gender dysphoria — defined as psychological distress resulting from incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and current gender identity — is widely recognized by the medical community. Transgender youth experience disparate health outcomes and increased stigmatization and suicidal behavior, according to a 2024 report published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Right-wing media personality Megyn Kelly delivered remarks during which for several minutes she slammed singer and actress Jennifer Lopez and media magnate Oprah Winfrey for their support of Harris during the 2024 election.

“But of course the fakest person involved on that side of the aisle was the woman at the top, Kamala Harris herself,” Kelly said.

The former Fox News host said the vice president used a “fake Jamaican accent, her fake Eastern European accent, her fake Spanish accent. It was like spending the day at Joe Biden’s southern border nonstop, right?”

Similar criticisms were made repeatedly by Republicans during the campaign and a Fox News reporter in September pressed White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre about Harris’ accent. “The question is just insane,” said Jean-Pierre, saying Americans cared more about the economy, health care and lowering costs, HuffPost reported.
Jab at media

The rally kicked off with a prayer from a duo dubbed “Girls Gone Bible” followed moments later by a musical set from Kid Rock.

In a video message to his “rock ‘n roll patriots,” Trump told the crowd “Let’s make America rock again” as Kid Rock launched into his new song “We the People” that featured the chorus line “Let’s Go Brandon.” “Brandon” was the name used by Trump supporters to insult Biden.

While performing his 1999 hit “Bawitdaba,” Kid Rock ad-libbed “The mainstream media can suck my” — without finishing the sentence.

Prior to the rally, Trump and Vance participated in a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery. They also visited three graves of servicemembers who were killed in the 2021 U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Several of Trump’s Cabinet nominees attended the ceremony, including Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who’s been tapped as secretary of state; Fox News TV host Pete Hegseth, the nominee for secretary of defense; and current and former U.S. representatives Elise Stefanik and Tulsi Gabbard, nominees for ambassador to the United Nations and director of national intelligence.

Last updated 9:13 p.m., Jan. 19, 2025

New Jersey Monitor is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Jersey Monitor maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Terrence T. McDonald for questions: info@newjerseymonitor.com
'WTF?' World reacts to Trump’s vow of US expansionism


Donald Trump’s son, Donald Jr (second right), visits Greenland in January 2025. AP/Alamy

Brett Wilkins
Common Dreams
January 21, 2025

While the global far-right cheered President Donald Trump's return to the White House on Monday, world leaders, elected officials, activists, and others from across the rest of the political spectrum reacted with trepidation as the Republican vowed to expand the nation's territory for the first time in nearly 80 years and threatened the sovereignty of a U.S. trade and security partner.

In his second inaugural addressTrump promised a foreign policy that "expands our territory," as well as the renewed pursuit of "Manifest Destiny"—the 19th-century belief that God intended the United States to control the continent from coast to coast—beyond Earth by "launching American astronauts to plant the stars and stripes on the planet Mars."

In the United States, Monday's inauguration coincided with the federal holiday honoring the assassinated civil rights champion Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., whom Trump mentioned in his speech. Some observers noted the incongruity of Trump's message with King's anti-war ethos.

"How dare Donald Trump invoke Dr. King," pan-African studies professor and Black Lives Matter Los Angeles co-founder Melina Abdullah fumed on social media. "Trump IS the embodiment of the three evils that MLK warned of: racism, materialism, and militarism."

Indigenous voices reminded listeners that belief in Manifest Destiny fueled genocidal violence against Native Americans.


"Trump is really going after Native Americans with references to Manifest Destiny, the frontier, Wild West, and erasing Denali's name," attorney Brett Chapman, a direct descendant of the Ponca Cshief White Eagle, said on social media. "This anti-Indigenous inaugural address sounds like one from the 1800s when presidents deployed the U.S. military on Native Americans seeking rights."

In his speech, Trump falsely accused China of "running the Panama Canal," said that Panama—which was last invaded by American forces in 1989—is overcharging U.S. ships to use the crucial waterway, and warned that "we're taking it back."

As angry demonstrators rallied outside the U.S. Embassy in Panama City, right-wing Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino issued a statement refuting Trump's threats and accusations and declaring that "the canal is and will continue to be Panamanian."



Trump's threat follows his refusal earlier this month to rule out the use of military force in order to conquer the Panama Canal or Greenland, a territory of NATO ally Denmark.

South American progressives were left stunned by parts of Trump's address.

"In his inauguration speech, Donald Trump made it clear that reality surpasses fiction," Carol Dartora, a leftist lawmaker in the lower chamber of Brazil's National Congress, said in a video posted online. "Then the U.S. president exuded machismo, imperialism, and xenophobia, especially against immigrants."

Across the Atlantic, former center-right Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt said: "Now we know that President Trump wants to 'expand our territory.' That's a dangerous statement in itself, but then others around the world might also be inspired to do the same. It's a recipe for global instability."German author, filmmaker, and journalist Annette Dittert responded to Trump's expansionist pledge with a popular three-letter internet acronym: "'We will become a nation that expands our territory?' WTF?"

Trump vows US ‘taking back’ Panama Canal despite ‘peacemaker’ pledge


By AFP
January 20, 2025

US President Donald Trump took aim at Panama in his inaugural address
 - Copyright POOL/AFP SAUL LOEB

Shaun TANDON

President Donald Trump on Monday cast himself as a peacemaker in his second inaugural address, but immediately vowed that the United States would be “taking back” the Panama Canal.

Trump issued the threat without explaining details after weeks of refusing to rule out military action against Panama over the waterway, which the United States handed over at the end of 1999.

“Above all, China is operating the Panama Canal, and we didn’t give it to China, we gave it to Panama. And we’re taking it back,” Trump said after being sworn in inside the US Capitol.

Panama maintains control of the canal but Chinese companies have been steadily increasing their presence around the vital shipping link between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino swiftly denied that any other nation was interfering in the canal, which he said his country operated with a principle of neutrality.

“The canal is and will remain Panama’s,” Mulino said, calling for dialogue to address any issues.

At his inauguration, Trump said that the United States has been “treated very badly from this foolish gift that should have never been made.”

“The purpose of our deal and the spirit of our treaty has been totally violated. American ships are being severely overcharged and not treated fairly in any way, shape or form, and that includes the United States Navy,” he said.

Marco Rubio, Trump’s choice for secretary of state, stopped short of threatening military action during his confirmation hearing last week but warned that China through its influence could effectively shut down the Panama Canal to the United States in a crisis.

“This is a legitimate issue that needs to be confronted,” Rubio said.

Trump has also not ruled out force to seize Greenland, an autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark where Russia has been increasingly active as ice melts due to climate change.

The Panama Canal was built by the United States mostly with Afro-Caribbean labor and opened in 1914.

Former US president Jimmy Carter, who died last month, negotiated its return in 1977, saying he saw a moral responsibility to respect a less powerful but fully sovereign nation.


– ‘Peacemaker and unifier’ –

Trump pledged an “America First” policy of prioritizing US interests above all else. He has put a focus on cracking down on undocumented immigration and said he will deploy the military to the border with Mexico.

But Trump also cast himself as a peacemaker and pointed to a Gaza ceasefire deal whose implementation began Sunday.

“My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier. That’s what I want to be — a peacemaker and a unifier,” he said.

The Gaza ceasefire, which includes an exchange of hostages and prisoners, follows the outlines of a proposal outlined in May by then-president Joe Biden, but it was pushed through after intensive last-minute diplomacy by envoys of both Biden and Trump.

Trump has also promised to end the war in Ukraine by pushing for compromises — a contrast to Biden’s approach of supporting Kyiv to a potential military victory.

Despite Trump’s vow to be a unifier, he immediately fired a symbolic but provocative shot above the bow to Mexico.

He said in his address that the United States would start referring to the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America” — making the water body the latest in the world whose name is disputed between neighbors.

“America will reclaim its rightful place as the greatest, most powerful, most respected nation on Earth, inspiring the awe and admiration of the entire world,” Trump said.


Hillary Clinton can't stop herself from laughing at Trump during inauguration speech

Jennifer Bowers Bahney
January 20, 2025
RAW STORY

Hillary Clinton laughing (Krista Kennell / Shutterstock.com)
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton couldn't help but laugh when Donald Trump said that he was signing an executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.

Trump made the vow during his inaugural address inside the Capitol on Monday.

"America will reclaim its rightful place as the greatest, most powerful, most respected nation on earth inspiring the awe, admiration of the entire world" Trump said during his inauguration speech. "A short time from now, we will be changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America and we will be restoring the name of a great president, William McKinley, to Mount McKinley, where it should be and where it belongs."

Clinton can be seen giggling to herself while keeping her eyes lowered. No one around her seemed to notice.

CBS News reported, "During the transition, Mr. Trump had vowed to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said last week that she would direct her staff to draft legislation for the renaming that would make it effective on federal maps and administrative policy. While the name change could be applied for federal references, other nations would have no obligation to follow suit."

According to the U.S. State Department, the Gulf of Mexico is officially split between the U.S. and Mexico beginning at the center of the mouth of the Rio Grande, with the U.S. having "maritime jurisdiction" over its portion and Mexico having jurisdiction over its portion.

Earlier in the day Trump fans watching the inauguration on screens at the Capital One arena loudly booed and chanted, "Lock her up!" as Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, took their seats at the Capitol.

Trump started the "Lock her up!" chants when he ran against Clinton — whom he called "Crooked Hillary" — for the presidency in 2016.


 Ron Johnson 'totally supportive' as MAGA economist calls to rename Greenland to Trumpland

RAW STORY
January 20, 2025 

U.S. Senate/screen grab
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) said he was "totally supportive" of purchasing Greenland after MAGA economist Stephen Moore suggested renaming the autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark to "Trumpland."

During a Sunday "Inaugural 2025" discussion of Trumpenomics 2.0 sponsored by Moore's Unleash Prosperity think tank, the economist presented a map with "Trumpland" in place of Greenland. The map also featured the "Gulf of America" for the Gulf of Mexico and named Canada the 51st state. Mexico was called "The Other Side of the Wall."

"This is the map of what the United States might look like. And I want to get serious.," Moore announced. "By the way, I don't think we should call it Greenland anymore. It should be called Trumpland, right?


"What do you think about the idea of the United States purchasing Greenland?" he asked.

"Well, first, I understand the strategic importance of both Greenland and the Panama Canal," Johnson replied. "So I know the mainstream media, or legacy media, is criticizing and ridiculing Trump for it. It's not insane by any stretch of imagination."


"So if we can do a good deal of Greenland, I'd be totally supportive of it," he added.






















TRUMPVILLE

Trump says wants to declare national emergency, use military at Mexico border


By AFP
January 20, 2025


Donald Trump repeatedly criticized the number of people crossing the US-Mexico border during his presidential campaign - Copyright AFP/File ERNESTO BENAVIDES

Donald Trump will issue a raft of executive orders aimed at reshaping how the United States deals with citizenship and immigration, he said on Monday minutes after his inauguration.

The 47th president will set to work almost immediately with a series of presidential decrees intended to drastically reduce the number of migrants entering the country.

“First, I will declare a national emergency at our southern border,” Trump said.

“All illegal entry will immediately be halted, and we will begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal aliens back to the places from which they came.

“I will send troops to the southern border to repel the disastrous invasion of our country,” he said.

Trump, who campaigned on a platform of clamping down on migration and whose policies are popular with people who fret over changing demographics, also intends to put an end to the centuries-old practice of granting citizenship automatically to anyone born in the United States.

“We’re going to end asylum,” White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly told reporters, and create “an immediate removal process without possibility of asylum. We are then going to end birthright citizenship.”

The notion of birthright citizenship is enshrined in the US Constitution, which grants anyone born on US soil the right to an American passport.

Kelly said the actions Trump takes would “clarify” the 14th Amendment — the clause that addresses birthright citizenship.

“Federal government will not recognize automatic birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens born in the United States,” she said.

Kelly said the administration would also reinstate the “Remain in Mexico” policy that prevailed under the last Trump administration.

Under that rule, people who apply to enter the United States at the Mexican border were not allowed to enter the country until their application had been decided.

“We’re going to… reinstate Remain in Mexico and build the wall,” she said.

Kelly said Trump would also seek to use the death penalty against non-citizens who commit capital crimes, such as murder.

“This is about national security. This is about public safety, and this is about the victims of some of the most violent, abusive criminals we’ve seen enter our country in our lifetime, and it ends today,” she said.



– Court challenges –



Many of Trump’s executive actions taken during his first term were rescinded under Joe Biden, including one using so-called Title 42, which was implemented during the Covid-19 pandemic preventing almost all entry to the country on public health grounds.

The changes under Biden led to an influx of people crossing into the United States, and images of thousands of people packing the border area.

Trump and his allies characterized this as Biden’s “open border” policy, and spoke regularly of an “invasion.”

The incoming president frequently invoked dark imagery about how illegal migration was “poisoning the blood” of the nation, words that were seized upon by opponents as reminiscent of Nazi Germany.

While US presidents enjoy a range of powers, they are not unlimited.

Analysts say any effort to alter birthright citizenship will be fraught.

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a Senior Fellow American Immigration Council, said the 14th Amendment was “crystal clear” in granting citizenship to anyone born in the United States, with the exception of children of foreign diplomats.

“We have had birthright citizenship for centuries, and a president cannot take it away with an executive order,” he told AFP.

“We expect rapid court challenges.”

Reichlin-Malik said all sides of the immigration debate recognized that the laws needed reform, but presidential orders were unlikely to achieve lasting change.

“Instituting new travel bans will make the US legal immigration system even more complex and expensive and difficult to navigate than ever,” he said.

“Our immigration system is badly out of date, and executive actions aiming to restrict it even further will harm the United States.”






Emergency Powers Are About to Be Tested

Elizabeth Goitein
Sat 18 January 2025




The nation is bracing itself for what President-Elect Donald Trump has promised will be the largest deportation effort in American history. Trump has vowed to use the military to assist with deportations, relying on emergency and wartime powers such as the Insurrection Actthe National Emergencies Act, and the Alien Enemies Act. In addition to worrying about the impact on immigrant families, wider communities, and the economy, many Americans are wondering—is this legal?

The deportation of undocumented individuals who are ineligible for asylum or other legal protection is, of course, well within the government’s authority under current immigration law. (As a policy matter, President Joe Biden has chosen to focus on those who have committed serious crimes—a policy that Trump is set to undo, presumably to facilitate broader deportation efforts.) But deploying the military raises an entirely different set of legal questions. Even under the potent authorities Trump has cited, the actions he proposes to take would be, at a minimum, an abuse of power, and they might well be illegal to boot.

Some degree of military involvement in immigration enforcement is already permitted—and has occurred under multiple administrations—without recourse to emergency powers. This may be surprising to many Americans. Anglo-American law has a long tradition of military noninterference in civilian affairs, for the simple reason that an army turned inward can quickly become an instrument of tyranny. In the United States, this tradition finds expression in an 1878 statute, the Posse Comitatus Act, that prohibits federal armed forces from participating in law-enforcement activities unless expressly authorized by law. Although not every American is familiar with the act, the principle it enshrines is deeply embedded in the public consciousness.

Less well known is the fact that the Posse Comitatus Act is riddled with exceptions and loopholes. For one thing, courts have construed the law to bar only direct participation in core law-enforcement activities, such as arrests or seizures. Federal forces may still provide indirect support to law-enforcement agencies in a number of ways, including conducting reconnaissance, sharing intelligence, and furnishing and operating equipment. In the 1980s, Congress passed several laws authorizing active-duty armed forces to provide these types of assistance.

In addition, the act applies only to federal armed forces. It does not apply to the National Guard—military units within the states that usually operate under state authority—unless the president has called Guard forces into federal service, at which point they become part of the federal military. Congress has passed a law authorizing Guard forces to perform federal missions at the request of the president or secretary of defense even when they haven’t been called into federal service. (Governors have the right to refuse such missions.) The Posse Comitatus Act does not apply to these operations, because the Guard forces remain, at least nominally, under state command and control.

These gaps in the act’s coverage have enabled military involvement in the enforcement of immigration and customs laws at the U.S.-Mexico border for decades, beginning in the 1980s and ramping up after 9/11. Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Trump sent thousands of National Guard forces to the border, where they provided support to the Department of Homeland Security in the form of surveillance, transportation, equipment, and the erection of barriers. Trump also deployed active-duty armed forces, as did President Biden. In the summer of 2023, 2,500 National Guard forces and 1,500 active-duty armed forces were stationed at the border.

The seemingly permanent militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border may not violate the Posse Comitatus Act, but it has led to a variety of harms. When thousands of soldiers are routinely arrayed at the border, Americans receive the message that migrants are a threat to national security and public safety—a baseless notion that underlies and fuels support for Trump’s anti-immigration platform. Prolonged deployments at the border are also bad for the military, as they undermine service members’ morale and divert resources and personnel from core military functions.

Trump now reportedly seeks to double down on the militarization of immigration enforcement by invoking a trio of emergency authorities, beginning with the Insurrection Act of 1807—the primary statutory exception to the Posse Comitatus Act. The Insurrection Act gives the president broad powers to deploy federal armed forces (including the federalized National Guard) to quell civil unrest or enforce the law. The criteria for deployment are written in vague, archaic terms that provide few clear constraints. To make matters worse, the Supreme Court held in 1827 that the president is the sole judge of whether the criteria for deployment have been met. In other words, courts generally cannot review a president’s decision to invoke the law.
ADVERTISEMENT


Although a top aide has said that Trump will invoke the Insurrection Act, the Trump team has provided scant detail on how he plans to use federal forces once deployed. Given that nonemergency authorities already authorize substantial military support to civilian law enforcement, it’s conceivable that Trump’s purpose in invoking the Insurrection Act is purely symbolic—a performative act of “shock and awe.” (The very name of the law suggests that immigrants are attacking from within and must be defeated through force.) At least in theory, though, the law could allow federal forces to perform core law-enforcement functions, such as apprehending and detaining immigrants, in any state in the country and against any governor’s wishes.

Such a use of the Insurrection Act would go beyond a mere expansion of existing military activities. Soldiers rolling into American towns in armored vehicles, knocking on doors, and carting people off to military detention facilities would create risks and harms that current border operations do not. For one thing, direct interactions between military personnel and civilians in fraught circumstances carry a significant potential for violence. After all, soldiers are trained to fight; few receive training in how to peaceably enforce civilian laws while respecting civil liberties. Furthermore, the visible presence of soldiers deployed in the streets would be both alarming and chilling for many Americans. Some would undoubtedly feel less comfortable engaging in protests against Trump’s policies or other basic acts of personal expression.
Heavy involvement of the military in immigration enforcement would also require a massive infusion of resources, both financial and human. That’s where Trump’s plan to declare a national emergency might come in. Under the National Emergencies Act, presidential declarations of national emergency unlock enhanced powers contained in 150 provisions of law spanning almost every area of governance, including military deployment, commerce, transportation, communications, agriculture, and public health. These provisions can supply both additional authority and additional resources for presidential action in a crisis.

Trump has used these powers before. In 2019, Trump declared that unlawful migration at the southern border constituted a national emergency. He invoked an emergency power that frees up funding for “military construction” projects, which he used to secure funds Congress had refused to allocate for the border wall. He might well reprise this effort, and he could attempt to use the same provision to fund the construction of military bases that would serve as immigrant-detention facilities. He could also use emergency powers to call up reservists, amplifying the manpower available to detain and deport immigrants. Indeed, Biden did exactly that in 2023 to supplement forces at the southern border.

Finally, Trump has pledged to invoke the Alien Enemies Act—the last remaining vestige of the notorious 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts. A president may invoke this law when Congress has declared war or when the president proclaims an “invasion” by a foreign government. It allows the president to detain and deport immigrants, including green-card holders and others lawfully in the country, who are not U.S. citizens and who were born in the enemy nation. Immigrants targeted under the act are not entitled to the hearings and other procedural protections afforded by immigration law.

The act was last used in World War II to implement the internment of more than 31,000 noncitizens of Japanese, German, and Italian descent. (U.S. citizens of Japanese descent were detained under a separate authority.) Congress and the U.S. government have since apologized for much of this shameful episode in our nation’s history.

According to reporting in Rolling Stone, Trump may claim that migration from Mexico and other countries south of the border constitutes an “invasion” perpetrated by drug cartels that are operating as de facto governments in those regions. The Alien Enemies Act does not itself authorize military deployment, but it could be combined with the Insurrection Act and other authorities to significantly expand the military’s remit. Most notably, if Trump were successful in invoking these laws, they could allow troops to detain and deport not just undocumented individuals but people who are lawfully present in the United States.

There is no question that the authorities Trump has cited grant the president sweeping powers. The Brennan Center, where I work, has called attention to the dangers posed by each of them. My colleagues and I have urged Congress to reform the laws in order to incorporate safeguards against presidential overreach (or, in the case of the Alien Enemies Act, to repeal it).

But there is also no question that Trump’s proposed actions, as he and his allies have framed them, would be a staggering abuse of these authorities—and quite possibly illegal. Despite the permissive language of the Insurrection Act, it was clearly intended for crises that could not be solved by civilian government actors. That is why it has been invoked only 30 times in the nation’s history and has lain dormant for the past 33 years. In keeping with tradition and constitutional principles, the Justice Department has interpreted the law narrowly, asserting that it should be used only as a “last resort”—specifically, when state and local authorities request military assistance, are obstructing federal law, or have “completely broken down.”

There are many ways to address unlawful immigration short of deploying federal troops. Last spring, for instance, the Senate voted twice on a bipartisan bill that would have dramatically tightened border security. Republicans blocked the measure—reportedly at Trump’s behest, so that he could continue to make the porous border a central focus of his campaign. Having actively obstructed an effort to ramp up civilian enforcement of immigration laws, Trump can hardly argue that military deployment is a “last resort.”

His cynical behavior could open the door to a legal challenge. Although the Supreme Court has generally barred judicial review of Insurrection Act invocations, it has suggested on various occasions that there might be an exception for deployments undertaken in bad faith. That’s because all of the president’s actions, even those committed to his discretion under Article II of the Constitution, must be consistent with the express constitutional obligation to faithfully execute the law.

In addition, the Supreme Court has distinguished between a president’s decision to invoke the Insurrection Act (which is usually not subject to judicial review) and any actions taken by the military after deployment (which are squarely within the courts’ purview). Soldiers deployed under the act must comply with the Constitution and other applicable federal law. If people’s legal rights were violated under a Trump-ordered deployment—for instance, if military detention conditions failed to meet basic human needs—courts would be able to intervene.

Just as invoking the Insurrection Act would be inconsistent with the law’s intent, declaring a national emergency would be a misuse of emergency powers. To be sure, America’s broken immigration system has led to unprecedented numbers of unlawful border crossings. Emergency powers, however, are designed to address sudden, unexpected crises that can’t be handled by Congress through ordinary legislation. There is nothing sudden or unexpected about the problems at the southern border, and Congress can—and should—address those problems through reform of the immigration system.

As a legal matter, courts will be reluctant to second-guess Trump’s decision to declare an emergency. But they will be less deferential in reviewing whether his administration’s actions are authorized under the specific powers he invokes. Although Trump has not identified which powers he plans to use, none of the 150 provisions available during a national emergency is designed to facilitate deportation. Trump will likely be stretching some of these laws beyond their permissible limits. (During his first administration, some courts struck down his use of the military-construction authority to build the border wall.) Courts will also review whether the actions Trump takes pursuant to a national-emergency declaration comport with other federal laws and constitutional rights.

Perhaps the most glaring abuse would be invoking the Alien Enemies Act. The history and design of the law make clear that it is a wartime authority only. It was intended to address armed attacks by foreign nations, not people fleeing political persecution, drug- and gang-related violence, or economic hardship. Even if a significant portion of migrants were criminals—a myth contradicted by all available evidence—that would not render their border crossing an act of war.

Moreover, whether in wartime or peacetime, the Alien Enemies Act suffers from grave constitutional flaws. It permits the targeting of individuals based solely on their ancestry, rather than their conduct, and it allows those individuals to be detained and deported without a hearing. As a recent Brennan Center report argues, these powers are fundamentally inconsistent with modern understandings of constitutional equal-rights and due-process protections.

Whether the Supreme Court would uphold the actions Trump has threatened is impossible to say with any certainty. In recent years, the Supreme Court has occasionally taken positions previously thought inconceivable, and overturned numerous long-standing precedents. But regardless of how the Supreme Court may rule, these actions should rightly be understood as an abuse of power, an abuse of the public trust, and an abuse of the law. And as soon as there is an opportunity, Congress must reform the emergency authorities in question so that no president can ever commit such abuses in the future.


Trade wars, culture wars, and anti-immigration: Trump's big promises

Antoine BOYER and Aurélia END
Sun 19 January 2025


US President-elect Donald Trump and his wife Melania at a candlelight dinner at the National Building Museum in Washington, DC, on the eve of his inauguration
 (Jim WATSON) (Jim WATSON/AFP/AFP)

A sweeping deportation program, "drill, baby, drill," and peace for Ukraine: President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to move big and fast when he returns to the White House on Monday.

Here is a look at his sensational but frequently vague promises for a second term -- much of them likely to be enacted through executive orders.

- Immigration -

Trump has promised a hardline stance against an estimated 11 million undocumented migrants in the United States.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the Republican billionaire will declare a state of emergency on the border with Mexico, which would unlock additional Department of Defense funding and assets.

He also vowed on the campaign trail to end birthright citizenship, calling it "ridiculous."

Analysts also expect him to issue executive orders on other aspects of immigration policy, including possibly to terminate an app used by migrants hoping to petition for asylum.

However, birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the US Constitution, and any deportation program will face legal challenges as well as potential refusals by some countries to accept deportees.

- Trade wars -

Trump has vowed to slap a 25 percent tariff on goods imported from Mexico and Canada -- top US trading partners -- as punishment for what he says is their failure to stem the flow of drugs and undocumented migrants into the United States.

But is Trump really ready to unleash a trade war with US neighbors, rupturing a North American free trade agreement? Some see this -- and an even more provocative suggestion that Canada should be absorbed into the United States -- as pre-negotiation bluster.

Beijing should also buckle up.

Trump has threatened to impose a 10 percent tariff on Chinese products, adding to existing tariffs that date back to his first term. Trump accuses China of failing to crack down on the production of chemical components used to make fentanyl.

- January 6 pardons -


The president-elect has suggested he might pardon some or all of the people involved in the January 6, 2021 riot at the US Capitol, when his supporters tried to overthrow the 2020 election in which he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

Trump has described them as "hostages" and "political prisoners."

He told a pre-inauguration rally that his supporters would be "very happy" with the decision he plans to make on the matter on his first day in office.

More than 1,500 people have been charged with federal crimes in the deadly assault, and more than 1,100 of them have been sentenced.

- Wars and diplomacy -


Trump warned that "all hell will break out in the Middle East" if Hamas does not release Israeli hostages before his inauguration -- and promptly took credit when a ceasefire and hostage release deal negotiated by the Biden Administration was announced Wednesday.

Trump also says he intends to quickly end Russia's war against Ukraine, though it is unclear when or how he plans to do that.

After promising over the summer to end the nearly three-year conflict "in 24 hours," Trump more recently suggested a timeline of several months.

- Climate -


Climate skeptic Trump has promised to "drill, baby, drill" for oil and gas.

He plans to repeal some of Biden's key climate policies, such as tax credits for electric vehicles, which are meant to encourage a transition to a green economy.

Trump also wants to boost offshore drilling, though he might need to secure congressional support to do that. Biden has selected swaths of ocean as protected no-drill areas.

- Transgender rights and race -


"With the stroke of my pen on day one, we're going to stop the transgender lunacy," Trump said in December, vowing to "end child sexual mutilation, get transgender out of the military and out of our elementary schools and middle schools and high schools."

He added the US government would recognize only two genders, male and female.

Also among his plans is cutting federal funding to schools that have adopted "critical race theory," an approach that looks at US history through the lens of racism.

- TikTok lifeline -


Trump has vowed to save the popular Chinese video-sharing app TikTok from a law banning it on national security grounds.

TikTok briefly shut down in the United States as a deadline loomed for its Chinese owners ByteDance to sell its US subsidiary to non-Chinese buyers.

However, it went back online after Trump, who has credited the app with connecting him to younger voters, promised to issue an executive order delaying the ban to allow time to "make a deal."

He said on his Truth Social platform that he "would like the United States to have a 50% ownership position in a joint venture."

abo-ft/bjt/tc/fox


As Trump returns to office, what he's promised to do on Day 1

MEREDITH DELISO
Sun 19 January 2025 



President-elect Donald Trump is on the cusp of returning to the White House, with his inauguration ceremony on Monday.

During his third campaign for the presidency, he laid out what he would do on his first day back in office, even referring to himself as a "dictator" but only on "Day 1."

"We're closing the border and we're drilling, drilling, drilling," he said during a 2023 town hall in Iowa with Fox News host Sean Hannity. "After that, I'm not a dictator."

One task on his apparent to-do list has already become irrelevant. Trump vowed to fire Jack Smith, the special counsel who brought two federal cases against him, "within two seconds" of returning to the White House. Though Smith resigned as special counsel on Jan. 10 after submitting his final report on the probes into allegations of interfering with the 2020 election and unlawfully retaining classified documents after leaving the White House.

Here's what else Trump has said he would do on Day 1:


PHOTO: President-elect Donald Trump speaks to members of the media during a press conference at the Mar-a-Lago Club, Jan. 7, 2025, in Palm Beach, Florida. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Mass deportations and closing the border

With immigration a top issue for voters, Trump has said he's determined to round up and deport millions of migrants living in the U.S. without legal permission.

"On Day 1, I will launch the largest deportation program in American history to get the criminals out," he said during a rally at Madison Square Garden in the closing days of the presidential race. "I will rescue every city and town that has been invaded and conquered, and we will put these vicious and bloodthirsty criminals in jail, then kick them the hell out of our country as fast as possible."

Incoming "border czar" Tom Homan has promised to execute "the biggest deportation operation this country has ever seen."

To do so, Trump has indicated he will seek help from the U.S. military by declaring a national emergency.

Trump has also vowed to close the southern border on his first day in office.

"We're going to close the border. Day 1, the border gets closed," he said during the 2023 town hall with Hannity.

Stephen Miller, Trump's deputy chief of staff of policy, told Fox News following the election that the president-elect would immediately sign executive orders regarding mass deportations and a border closure.

"It is going to be at light speed," Miller said. "The moment that President Trump puts his hand on that Bible and takes the oath of office, as he has said, the occupation ends, liberation day begins. He will immediately sign executive orders sealing the border shut, beginning the largest deportation operation in American history."

Trump has railed against the Biden administration's immigration policies, in part claiming they have made America less safe, though statistics show that U.S.-born citizens are more than twice as likely to be arrested for violent crimes than undocumented immigrants, according to a 2020 Justice Department study cited in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

There are an estimated 11 million unauthorized migrants living in the U.S. without legal immigration status. Removing them could cost billions of dollars per year, according to estimates from the American Immigration Council.

End birthright citizenship

Among other immigration policies, Trump has pledged to sign an executive order on the first day of his new term to end birthright citizenship.

In a 2023 campaign video, Trump said that under the new executive order, at least one parent will have to be a "citizen or a legal resident" for their children to qualify for birthright citizenship.

Such a move, though, is expected to face significant legal hurdles. Under the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, any person born within the territory of the U.S. is a U.S. citizen.

Free some convicted Jan. 6 rioters

Trump has said one of his first acts if elected to a second term would be to "free" some people convicted for their roles in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, whom he continues to claim are "wrongfully imprisoned."

"I am inclined to pardon many of them. I can't say for every single one, because a couple of them, probably they got out of control," he said on his social media platform last March when announcing the promise.

Trump has repeatedly downplayed the violence that ensued that day, referring to the defendants as "J6 hostages," calling for their release.

As of early January, more than 1,580 individuals have been charged criminally in federal court in connection with Jan. 6, with over 1,000 pleading guilty, according to the Department of Justice.



PHOTO: A general view shows the West Front of the U.S. Capitol building as preparations are underway for the upcoming presidential inauguration of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, in Washington, Jan. 15, 2025. (Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters)


Tariffs on Canada and Mexico


Trump posted on his Truth Social platform following the election that one of the first executive orders he will sign when he takes office will be to charge Mexico and Canada with a 25% tariff on all products coming into the United States.

"This Tariff will remain in effect until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country!" he posted. "Both Mexico and Canada have the absolute right and power to easily solve this long simmering problem. We hereby demand that they use this power, and until such time that they do, it is time for them to pay a very big price!"

In response, Mexico's president, Claudia Sheinbaum, warned that any tariff will be met with another and disputed his claims about migration and drugs while blaming the U.S. for Mexico's drug war -- pointing to U.S. consumption and American guns.

Canadian officials said the country "places the highest priority on border security and the integrity of our shared border."

End the Russia-Ukraine war 'within 24 hours'

Trump claimed during a 2023 CNN town hall that if he were president, he could end the war between Russia and Ukraine in 24 hours. Though he did not detail what he wanted an end to look like, dodging on whether he wanted Ukraine or Russia to win.

Asked during an ABC News debate in September if he wants Ukraine to win against Russia, Trump did not directly answer but said that he wants the war to stop.

"I'll get the war with Ukraine and Russia ended. If I'm president-elect, I'll get it done before even becoming president," he said.

Though more recently, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, Trump's pick to serve as the special envoy to Ukraine and Russia, said on Fox News this month that he'd personally like to see the war end within 100 days.

MORE: After charm offensive, Ukraine braces for Trump's return
End 'Green New Deal atrocities'

Trump said in a campaign video last year he would end the "Green New Deal atrocities on Day 1" if reelected.

The Green New Deal -- a public policy initiative to address climate change pitched by Democrats Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey -- was never signed into law, though Trump has used the term to generally refer to the Biden administration's climate and energy policies, like the landmark Inflation Reduction Act.

"To further defeat inflation, my plan will terminate the Green New Deal, which I call the Green New Scam. Greatest scam in history, probably," Trump said during remarks at the Economic Club of New York in September. "[We will] rescind all unspent funds under the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act."

Trump also said during his Republican National Convention address that he will "end the electric vehicle mandate on Day 1." There is no such federal mandate, though recent Environmental Protection Agency regulations are aimed to accelerate the adoption of cleaner vehicle technologies.
Green cards for college graduates

Trump deviated from his usual anti-immigrant rhetoric when he advocated for "automatically" giving noncitizens in the U.S. green cards when they graduate from college -- not just people who go through the vetting process -- during an episode of the "All In" podcast released in June.

"[What] I want to do, and what I will do, is you graduate from a college, I think you should get, automatically as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country. That includes junior colleges, too," Trump said in the episode.

"Anybody graduates from a college, you go in there for two years or four years, if you graduate, or you get a doctorate degree from a college, you should be able to stay in this country," he continued.

Asked on the podcast if he would expand H-1B work visas for tech workers after fixing the border, Trump said "yes."

"Somebody graduates at the top of the class, they can't even make a deal with the company because they don't think they're going to be able to stay in the country. That is going to end on Day 1," Trump said.

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the leaders of Trump's new Department of Government Efficiency, have also voiced their support for H-1B visas, which allow foreign skilled professionals to work in America, saying they are essential because American culture doesn't prioritize success in science and engineering careers compared to other countries.

Some of Trump's far-right supporters have pushed back against support for the visas, arguing they are a way for business leaders to have cheap labor rather than provide job opportunities for Americans.
Reinstate ban on transgender military service

Trump has vowed to reinstate a ban on transgender military service enacted during his first term in 2017, which President Joe Biden repealed in 2021, among other measures that would impact trans people.

"With the stroke of my pen, on day one, we're going to stop the transgender lunacy," Trump said at a Turning Point USA rally in December. "And I will sign executive orders to end child sexual mutilation, get transgender out of the military and out of our elementary schools and middle schools and high school. And we will keep men out of women's sports."

"And that will likewise be done on Day 1," he continued.

Estimates on the number of active transgender service members vary. In 2021, the Department of Defense said there were approximately 2,200 people in the military services who were diagnosed with gender dysphoria and seeking medical care, while noting that was a subset of the transgender population.

If a ban on transgender service members were to be reinstated, the Human Rights Campaign said it "will take swift action to push back against this dangerous and discriminatory ban."

As Trump returns to office, what he's promised to do on Day 1 originally appeared on abcnews.go.com


Trump promises to disrupt immigration. These charts show how that could shake up the US economy.


Adriana Belmonte
·Senior Distribution Editor
Sun 19 January 2025 


During the 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump said he would carry out "the largest deportation in the history of our country." Prior to Monday's inauguration, the New York Times reported that Immigration and Customs Enforcement plans to conduct immigration raids in the days after Trump takes office again.

Deportation at scale could have significant effects on the US economy and labor market.

"A very direct impact of the policies of Trump is: How is that really going to affect the labor markets?" Dany Bahar, a senior fellow at the Center for Global Development, told Yahoo Finance. "Because a lot of the people are coming to actually fill a lot of the positions that are open. And whether we like the term ‘illegal immigration’ or not, if these people are actually filling jobs that are needed for the US economy, that is good for the US economy.”


As of 2023, according to estimates by the nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute (EPI), foreign-born labor accounted for record-high 18.6% of the US workforce. That same year, according to EPI, the US labor force grew by 12.6% — a number that drops to just 0.5% when removing immigrants.

Currently, the US has about 8.1 million job openings and roughly 7 million unemployed Americans.

As Trump begins a second term, here's a detailed look at the relationship between immigration and the US economy.
'The US doesn’t have a border crisis — it has a labor market crisis'

Immigrants to the US include naturalized citizens, lawful permanent residents, temporary lawful residents, and undocumented immigrants. There were 47.8 million immigrants in the US as of 2023, roughly half of which were naturalized citizens and an estimated 11 million of which were undocumented.

People moving to America have varying degrees of education: While advanced degrees are represented at a higher rate among immigrants than native-born citizens in the US, there is also a higher percentage of immigrants without a high school degree.

The latter aspect is why many end up in jobs that American citizens see as "less desirable."

"We have always taken the jobs that nobody else wanted, to be very honest,” Ramiro Cavazos, president and CEO for the US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, told Yahoo Finance. “Right now, no one in this nation is raising their child to be a person that works in the fields or to be a farm worker or to be someone that is doing landscaping work. We have high-tech all the way to low-tech jobs in this country where immigrants are filling those positions, whether they’re documented or not.”

Most undocumented immigrants in the US come through ports of entry, such as airports and shipping locations, or are people who overstayed expired tourism or work visas.

This was especially evident during the COVID pandemic when the job market saw a record number of openings while migrant crossings surged at the southwest border.

In June 2024, President Biden issued an executive order suspending entry for migrants who crossed the border illegally. The order can be discontinued if fewer than an average of 1,500 people per day cross the border in a week but go back into effect if it reaches a specific threshold.

“To understand the impact of the policies that are ultimately going to try to enforce what’s happening at the border and going even one step further and trying to deport people, it’s important to understand the diagnosis of what the problem is,” Bahar said. “The border is a symptom of something, and my research shows that it’s a symptom of something very specific that the US is going through now, which is a very odd labor market. Essentially, what I’m trying to say is the US doesn’t have a border crisis — it has a labor market crisis.”

Research by Bahar found a significant correlation between the strength of the US labor market and the number of migrants trying to enter the US at the southwest border from 2000 to 2023. Essentially, migration goes up when the labor market is strong and down when it weakens.

Bahar noted that during the Biden administration years of 2022 and 2023, over 12 million people crossed the border while something else significant was also happening in the US economy: “The labor markets were as hot as they’ve ever been for at least 25 years.”

If that flow is stopped, Bahar continued, "then your immediate effects are that you’re going to be deepening the problem of labor shortages, which were very lively during COVID. If you remember walking anywhere in this country, everywhere you would see on the street in every single store or establishment was a ‘help wanted’ sign. So that, to me, is the main channel through which migration, or the Trump policies on immigration, will impact the economy."

The magnitude of H-1B

Undocumented immigrants aren't the only ones at risk under Trump's immigration policies. Highly educated immigrants also face some uncertainty in the new Trump administration.

During his 2016 campaign, Trump described the H-1B visa program — which grants highly skilled immigrants the authority to work legally in the US — as "very bad for workers" and called for an end to the program.

Recently, however, he appeared to support his adviser and Tesla CEO Elon Musk's stance on expanding the program. (The South African-born Musk, who became a US citizen in 2002, previously held a H-1B visa and relies on the program for employees at companies he oversees.)


Elon Musk speaks with US President-elect Donald Trump at a viewing of the launch of the sixth test flight of the SpaceX Starship rocket in Brownsville, Texas, on Nov. 19, 2024 Brandon Bell/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

“I’ve always liked the visas, I have always been in favor of the visas — that’s why we have them," Trump told the New York Post. “I have many H-1B visas on my properties. I’ve been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times. It’s a great program."

The cap on new H-1B visas issued per year — 65,000 plus an additional 20,000 for foreign professionals with a master's degree — has remained unchanged since 2006, even as immigration numbers have skyrocketed. In 2023, the number of H-1B applications hit a new high at more than 780,000.

Morgan Bailey, attorney at the law firm Mayer Brown and a former senior official at the Department of Homeland Security, explained to Yahoo Finance that the system is "very controlled in terms of the number of employment-based cases that can be approved each year. And there could be more flexibility in terms of the types of workers that the United States wants to attract, as well as those numbers being able to be increased or decreased depending upon the needs of the country."


Tech companies typically account for most H-1B visa holders, though this may be due to the sheer number of applicants in the specific field.

“It’s basically a lottery, so it doesn’t have any consideration really in terms of the occupation that the individual is working in,” Bailey added, “whereas there could be some aspects of changing that system so that there’s a priority for STEM fields, medical fields, whatever the country feels like there’s a priority for at the moment — and that it wouldn’t be stagnant in terms of every year being that same group that has the priority, but maybe changing that depending upon what the needs are at a given time.”

In any case, there is high demand for H-1B visas within American companies driving global innovation.

Between 2022 and 2024, some of the largest companies in the US — including Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), Amazon (AMZN), Tesla (TSLA), Meta (META), and Google (GOOG) — sponsored a relatively high number of approved H-1B visas.

In 2024, 46% of all Fortune 500 companies — including all 10 of the most valuable public companies in the US — were either founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants or employed an immigrant CEO.

'We're going to have to do something with them'

The legal status of roughly 530,000 DACA recipients, otherwise known as "Dreamers," has become a case study when it comes to Trump's immigration policies.

President Barack Obama put the DACA — Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals — immigration policy into place in 2012. DACA shields undocumented individuals who were brought into the country as children from deportation while allowing them to obtain work authorization (and subsequently pay income taxes).

On his first day in office in 2017, Trump ended the program. A federal judge ruled to keep the program in place in 2018 — but a different judge ruled against the program in 2023, deeming it "unlawful" but keeping protections in place for current recipients. The matter is still being litigated and is expected to make its way to the Supreme Court.

There have been some political developments in recent years as well. In a December 2024 "Meet the Press" interview, Trump appeared to soften his stance on creating a pathway to citizenship.

"The Dreamers, we’re talking many years ago they were brought into this country," Trump said. "Many years ago. Some of them are no longer young people. And in many cases, they’ve become successful. They have great jobs. In some cases, they have small businesses. Some cases, they might have large businesses. And we’re going to have to do something with them. ... I think we can work with the Democrats and work something out.

Data from FWD.us, a bipartisan organization that advocates for immigration reform, found that DACA recipients contribute roughly $11.7 billion to the US economy each year. This includes roughly $566.9 million in mortgage payments, $2.3 billion in rental payments, and $3.1 billion in state and local taxes on an annual basis, according to the Center for American Progress.

In a way, the case of the Dreamers shows how immigration fuels the growing US economy — and how immigration policies can affect those dynamics.

“The bottom line is this: The workforce needs of this nation, they keep growing with the economy that we have, which is booming,” Cavazos said. “25% of the global economy is the US economy. We have about 60% of the Fortune 500 global companies located here. We need to make sure that we don’t become another Germany, another Japan — great economies but basically stagnant economies because they don’t have a strong immigration program.”


FOR CHARTS AND GRAPHS GO HERE 

Adriana Belmonte is a reporter and editor covering politics and healthcare policy for Yahoo Finance. You can follow her on X @adrianambells and reach her at adriana@yahoofinance.com.