Truly the dumbest timeline: Mexican president formally requests Google Maps does not re-name the Gulf of Mexico, jokes about renaming North America 'América Mexicana'

Rich Stanton

PCGAMER
Fri, January 31, 2025 

Credit: kdow via Getty Images

It is one of life's truisms that, whenever you see something and think "this couldn't possibly get any dumber", it will then proceed to astound and amaze you with just how god damn dumb it can get. Today's exhibit A is US President Donald Trump's idea that the Gulf of Mexico, an enormous body of water that borders Cuba, Mexico and the United States, be re-named as the Gulf of America: And signed an executive order in his first week in office to this effect. Priorities, people, priorities!

If you're looking for an actual reason as to why Trump wants to do this, I suggest looking up the theme song of Team America: World Police. "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 in his inaugural address on January 20. "A short time from now, we are going to be changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America."

This has somewhat inadvertently become a tech story after poor old Google Maps got caught right in the middle. The name change for the Gulf of Mexico and Mount Denali (another Trump bugbear, he's renamed it Mount McKinley) will be applied once its Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is updated:

"When official names vary between countries, Maps users see their official local name," says Google. "Everyone in the rest of the world sees both names. That applies here too."

Mexico has decided it's had quite enough of this, and now Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has written to Google asking that the firm reconsider its decision to rename the Gulf of Mexico in Google Maps. She argues that the US cannot legally change the entire basin's name because the UN convention on the Law of the Sea says a country's sovereign territory only extends 12 nautical miles out.

"[The name change] could only correspond to the 12 nautical miles away from the coastlines of the United States of America," said Sheinbaum at a press conference showing the letter. "It cannot apply to the rest, in this case, the Gulf of Mexico. This is what we explained in detail to Google."

Sheinbaum has previously said Google should not respond to "the mandate of a country" over re-naming "an international sea" and then clearly decided that, if everyone else was clowning around, she may as well join in. "By the way, we are also going to ask for Mexican America to appear on the map," Sheinbaum joked, referring to her suggestion that North America become known as "América Mexicana."

My suspicion is that the Gulf of Mexico is going to remain just that for the majority of the world's population, while the Gulf of America will be a short-lived cause celebre that everyone forgets about in a few years except historians and Wikipedia editors. I'm not going to get into the entire history of this minor ocean's name, other than to note that it's first called the Gulf of Mexico in a map dated 1550 and a written account of 1552. There have been other names over time (though "Gulf of America" is notably absent) but, since the 17th century, the Gulf of Mexico has been by far the most common name.

But you can never say never with someone like Trump, and he does seem to have a weirdly determined interest in this rather nationalistic little play.

"For us it is still the Gulf of Mexico," says Sheinbaum. "And for the entire world it is still the Gulf of Mexico." As for Google Maps… sometimes, the only winning move is not to play.

Mexico isn't happy with Google Maps' decision to rename the Gulf of Mexico

Will Sattelberg
Fri, January 31, 2025

Google Maps on a Galaxy S25 Ultra showing the Gulf of Mexico

Mexico's president challenged Google's decision to recognize Trump's renaming of the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.


Mexico doesn't believe the US has the ability to rename bodies of water outside its jurisdiction, and therefore, Google's actions are incorrect.


Google has yet to officially update the names on Google Maps, as it's waiting for an update to the US Geographic Names System.

Not even two weeks into the second Trump administration, Google has found itself stuck in a tiff between neighboring countries. After the Maps team announced its intentions to rename the Gulf of Mexico and Denali to the Gulf of America and Mount McKinley, respectively, Mexico is pushing back. In a letter addressed to Google, Mexico's president is claiming the Maps team is incorrect to rename the Gulf of Mexico for any user, regardless of where they're physically located.

In a letter issued on Thursday, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum claimed Trump's decision to unilaterally rename the Gulf of Mexico violated the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and therefore, Google's decision to follow the name change is incorrect. As reported by Reuters, Sheinbaum went a step further, pushing Google to deliver search results for the 17th-century "Mexican America" map displayed in an earlier press conference whenever searching for "Mexican America" (via Android Authority).

At the core of Sheinbaum's case is the UN treaty, which states the US cannot rename any specific body of water lying outside of its jurisdiction because every individual country's sovereign territory ends 12 nautical miles off the coast. In other words, Trump is free to rename the coastline extending outside of the continental US, but the body of water remains the "Gulf of Mexico."

Google Maps hasn't made its changes official just yet

But they're still presumably on their way

Google has yet to roll this change out to end users; it's waiting on the US Geographic Names System to officially update both the Gulf of Mexico and Denali with Trump's new (or, in Denali's case, old) names. In the case of the Gulf of Mexico in particular, it'll only appear to those located within the US as the "Gulf of America." Google Maps users based in Mexico will still see the Gulf of Mexico, while those outside both of these verbally-sparring nations will see both names.

It'll likely take a court ruling or a similar action from on high to change Trump's mind on this subject, but Google doesn't necessarily need to stick with its initial decision. The Apple Maps team — Google's biggest rival, at least on iPhones and other iOS devices — have remained silent on their decision to rename the body of water. Currently, searching for the "Gulf of America" brings up no matching results, though that's technically the case with Google Maps at this moment as well. Both services recognize Denali and Mount McKinley, though only Google manually changes "Mount McKinley" back to Denali at this moment.


Google says Gulf of Mexico will change to Gulf of America in Maps app: Here's how

Gabe Hauari, Elizabeth Weise and Trevor Hughes, USA TODAY
Sat, February 1, 2025 



President Donald Trump signed an executive order last week requiring the federal government to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America on official maps, a move that could take months to enact.

But Google is readying for the change.

The tech giant said on social media Monday it will apply the name change when it has been updated in official government sources. The company also said it will start using the name Mount McKinley to refer to the mountain in Alaska currently called Denali, another renaming decision from Trump.

Here's what we know so far.

How does Google Maps make changes?

"We've received a few questions about naming within Google Maps," the company said on X Monday. "We have a longstanding practice of applying name changes when they have been updated in official government sources."

"For geographic features in the U.S., this is when Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is updated," the company said. "When that happens, we will update Google Maps in the U.S. quickly to show Mount McKinley and Gulf of America."

"Also longstanding practice: When official names vary between countries, Maps users see their official local name," Google said. "Everyone in the rest of the world sees both names. That applies here too."

How long has it been called the Gulf of Mexico?

The Gulf of Mexico has been so named at least since the late 1600s, when it was used to describe the body of water that's bordered to the north by the United States' southern coast, from Texas to Florida. It also wraps around Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula.

It is the ninth largest body of water in the world, according to the National Parks Service.

Roughly the size of Alaska, it covers more than 615,000 square miles and is almost a thousand miles wide east to west and 660 miles wide north to south.

The Gulf's shoreline is about 3,540 miles ‒ more than half of it bordering Mexico's coast, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, although that does not account for the myriad bays and inlets.

Who is in charge of renaming geographical places?

Renaming geographical place names is the work the U.S. Board on Geographic Names. The federal office has the power to rename geographic places within the United States.

"The BGN is responsible by law for standardizing geographic names throughout the federal government and discourages name changes unless there is a compelling reason," the Board of Geographic Names says on its website. "Further, changing an existing name merely to correct or re-establish historical usage should not be a primary reason to change a name."

Those changes would not necessarily be binding on the states bordering the gulf or for other countries. But at least one state has already embraced it.

In a state of emergency declaration last Tuesday about cold weather there, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said, "Whereas an area of low pressure moving across the Gulf of America, interacting with Arctic air, will bring widespread impactful weather to North Florida beginning Tuesday."

Gabe Hauari is a national trending news reporter at USA TODAY. You can follow him on X @GabeHauari or email him at Gdhauari@gannett.com.

Democrats want answers on cost-cutting prescription payment models abandoned by Trump

Joseph Choi
Fri, January 31, 2025 



House Democrats want to know what the Trump administration plans to do after it rescinded a Biden-era executive order to study potential payment models for lowering prescription drug costs, looking to the acting heads of health agencies for answers.

A group of 51 House Democrats led by Rep. Shontel Brown (Ohio) wrote to Dorothy Fink, acting Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary, and Jeff Wu, acting Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) administrator, asking for answers on how Trump’s rescinding of Executive Order 14087 could affect the future of the prospective payment models developed by the Biden administration.

In 2022, then-President Biden issued the executive order asking the HHS secretary to look into “new health care payment and delivery models that would lower drug costs and promote access to innovative drug therapies for beneficiaries enrolled in the Medicare and Medicaid programs.”

Trump rescinded the order on Day 1 of his second term.

The executive order was meant to complement the cost-cutting measures included in the Inflation Reduction Act.

In response to Biden’s order, HHS presented three different proposals:

Setting a $2 monthly co-pay limit on select generic drugs for Medicare Part D beneficiaries


Incentivizing manufacturers to “expedite and complete confirmatory clinical trials” to reduce CMS costs

Pooling bargaining power across multiple states when making outcomes-based agreements with manufacturers of high-cost specialty drugs

Though these models were looked into by HHS, none of them were ultimately implemented during Biden’s term. Still, House Democrats said they’re concerned about losing the potential cost-saving value of these proposals.

“Each model holds significant potential to address affordability, equity, and access to critical treatments. Understand that 3 in 10 adults report not taking prescribed medicine at some point in the past year due to the rising costs,” the lawmakers wrote. “The revocation of this Executive Order will jeopardize these initiatives and obstruct the advancement of healthcare equity.”

Brown said in a statement, “The American people deserve answers: Have these programs have been cancelled? And if so, what is Trump’s plan to lower, not raise drug prices?”

The lawmakers asked Fink and Wu how Trump’s rescission of the executive order could affect the further development and implementation of the cost-saving models, how HHS and CMS plan to address any gaps created by the rescission and what measures will be implemented to address “gaps in access to innovative therapies that impact vulnerable communities.”

Other Democratic House representatives who signed the letter include Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), Chris Pappas (N.H.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), Bennie Thompson (Miss.) and Kweisi Mfume (Md.).

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Things to know about how Trump's policies target transgender people

GEOFF MULVIHILL
Fri, January 31, 2025


President Donald Trump has targeted transgender and nonbinary people with a series of executive orders since he returned to office.

He has done it with strong language. In one executive order, he asserted “medical professionals are maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children under the radical and false claim that adults can change a child’s sex.”

That's a dramatic reversal of the policies of former President Joe Biden's administration — and of major medical organizations — that supported gender-affirming care.

American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Sruti Swaminathan said that to be put into effect, provisions of the orders should first go through federal rulemaking procedures, which can be years long and include the chance for public comment.

“When you have the nation’s commander-in-chief demonizing transgender people, it certainly sends a signal to all Americans,” said Sarah Warbelow, the legal director at Human Rights Campaign.

Things to know about Trump's actions:

Recognizing people as only men or women

On Trump's first day back in office, he issued a sweeping order that signaled a big change in how his administration would deal with transgender people and their rights.

It questions their existence by saying the government would recognize only two unchangeable sexes: female and male.

The stated purpose is to protect women. “Efforts to eradicate the biological reality of sex fundamentally attack women by depriving them of their dignity, safety, and well-being,” the order says.

The document calls on government agencies to use the new definitions of the sexes, and to stop using taxpayer money to promote what it calls “gender ideology,” the idea broadly accepted by medical experts that gender falls along a spectrum.

Federal agencies have been quick to comply. Andrea Lucas, the acting chair of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, for example, announced this week that she would remove identity pronouns from employees' online profiles and disallow the “X” gender marker for those filing discrimination charges.

"Biology is not bigotry. Biological sex is real, and it matters,” Lucas said in a statement.

On Friday, information about what Trump calls “gender ideology” was removed from federal government websites and the term “gender” was replaced by “sex” to comport with the order. The Bureau of Prisons stopped reporting the number of transgender incarcerated people and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removed lessons on building supportive school environments for transgender and nonbinary students.

Researchers have found less than 1% of adults identify as transgender and under 2% are intersex, or born with physical traits that don't fit typical definitions for male or female.

Requests denied for passport gender markers

In the order calling for a new federal definition of the sexes, Trump included some specific instances in which policy should be changed, including on passports.

The State Department promptly stopped granting requests for new or updated passports with gender markers that don't conform with the new definition.

The agency is no longer issuing the documents with an “X” that some people who identify as neither male nor female request and will not honor requests to change the gender markers between “M” and “F” for transgender people.

The option to choose “X” was taken off online passport application forms Friday.

The ACLU says it's considering a lawsuit.

Transgender women moved into men's prisons

Trump's initial order called for transgender women in federal custody to be moved to men's prisons. Warbelow, from Human Rights Campaign, said her organization has received reports from lawyers that some have been.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons did not immediately respond to requests for information about such moves.

There have been at least two lawsuits trying to block the policy. In one, a federal judge has said a transgender woman in a Massachusetts prison should be housed with the general population of a woman's prison and continue to receive gender-affirming medical care for now.

Opening the door to another ban on transgender service members

Trump set the stage for a ban on transgender people in the military, directing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to come up with a new policy on the issue by late March.

In the executive order, the president asserted that being transgender “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life.”

Trump barred transgender service members in his first term in office, but a court blocked the effort.

A group of active military members promptly sued over the new order this week.

Defunding gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth

Trump called for halting the use of federal money to support gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth under 19 years old.

The care in question includes puberty blocking drugs, hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgery, which is rare for minors.

If fully implemented, the order would cut off government health insurance including Medicaid and TRICARE, which serves military families, for the treatments.

It also calls on Congress to adopt a law against the care, though whether that happens is up to lawmakers.

Twenty-six states already have passed laws banning or limiting gender-affirming care for minors, so the change could be smaller in those places.

Some hospitals have paused some gender-affirming care for people under 19 following the executive order while they evaluate how it might apply to them.

Barring schools from helping student social transitioning

Another executive order this week seeks to stop “radical indoctrination” in the nation's school system.

It calls on the Education Department to come up with a policy blocking schools from using federal funds to support students who are socially transitioning or using their curriculum to promote the idea that gender can be fluid, along with certain teachings about race.

The order would block schools from requiring teachers and other school staff to use names and pronouns that align with transgender students' gender identify rather than the sex they were assigned at birth.

Some districts and states have passed those requirements to prevent deadnaming, the practice of referring to transgender people who have changed their name by the name they used before their transition. It is widely considered insensitive, offensive or traumatizing.

McBride: Trump administration using transgender people ‘as a pawn’

Brooke Migdon
Fri, January 31, 2025 


Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.), the first openly transgender person elected to Congress, on Friday condemned recent executive orders issued by President Trump that target transgender rights and accused the administration of using transgender Americans to further a political agenda.

Trump, since he first took office on Jan. 20, has signed a bevy of executive orders to roll back transgender rights and certain federal nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ people. An order issued during his first hours in office declared the government recognizes only two sexes, male and female, and broadly prevents federal dollars from being spent on what Trump and his administration call “gender ideology.”

Federal prison officials, in compliance with the order, had attempted to move an incarcerated transgender woman to a men’s facility and deny her access to gender-affirming care before a Massachusetts judge stepped in to block them.

The Office of Personnel Management instructed federal agency heads this week to bar trans employees from using restrooms that match their gender identity and place workers whose job descriptions involve “promoting gender ideology” on administrative leave because of the order.

Three more executive orders signed this week target schools that teach “radical gender ideology,” transgender people serving openly in the military, and access to gender-affirming care for minors. Hospital systems in states across the country said they are pausing treatment for trans youth over fear the Trump administration could take away their funding.

“Since January 20th, I’ve heard from transgender constituents and their families who are living in fear of the Trump Administration’s relentless attacks on them,” McBride said Friday in a lengthy statement on the social platform X.

“Many Americans have good faith questions about topics regarding trans people, but this administration’s sweeping and malicious policies exploit those questions for political purposes,” McBride said. “I will not let my trans constituents — or any Delawarean — be used as a pawn in the Trump Administration’s efforts to purge patriots from federal service and gut lifesaving programs all in pursuit of lining the pockets of the uber wealthy. And I will continue to pull back the curtain on this administration’s blatant effort to divide this nation at the expense of working people.”

“Each time the Trump administration attacks a small vulnerable community, the ripple effects of hate echo across our society,” she added. “In Delaware, we have the capacity to be the antidote to this hate — where we see one another as neighbors and treat one another with respect.”

McBride’s comments mark a shift in tone for the first-term lawmaker, who has tended to stay above the fray, characterizing attacks on transgender rights — and her, personally — as “an effort to distract” from issues such as lowering costs of health care and groceries.

In November, after Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) implemented a new policy barring transgender people from facilities that best align with their gender identity at the Capitol, McBride said she would comply. “I’m not here to fight about bathrooms,” she said.

In a recent interview with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, McBride said the Trump administration’s targeting of transgender people is part of “a strategy of misdirection.”

“This is a strategy as old as time,” she said. “Right-wing leaders will often target vulnerable and misunderstood communities in order to distract from what they’re doing that is deeply unpopular with the American people.”

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. T

Three Transgender Women Sue Trump Administration Over ‘Life Or Death’ Prison Transfer Plan

Jessica Schulberg
Fri, January 31, 2025

Three incarcerated transgender women sued the Trump administration on Thursday, alleging that the president’s executive order directing government officials to move them to men’s prisons and cut off their access to health care violates the U.S. Constitution and federal law.

The women, identified as Jane Doe, Mary Doe and Sara Doe, will face a high risk of harassment, abuse, violence and sexual assault if moved to men’s facilities, they wrote in their complaint. When Mary was previously incarcerated in men’s BOP facilities, she was raped multiple times, according to the complaint.

If the plaintiffs lose access to their hormone therapy and other care, they are likely to experience worsening gender dysphoria — which increases the risk of suicidality and depression — as well as other adverse health outcomes, the complaint alleged.

Openly transgender people account for less than 1% of people in federal prisons, according to Bureau of Prisons data accessed on Jan. 27. (BOP no longer publishes the number of trans people behind bars; the agency’s stats online now refer only to “inmate sex.”)

In the days following Trump’s executive order, lawyers and advocates told HuffPost that trans women in BOP facilities throughout the country were being placed in solitary confinement and notified that they would soon be transferred to men’s facilities. The United Nations recognizes prolonged solitary confinement as a form of torture.

On Jan. 24, Jane and Mary were removed from the general population and placed in segregation with other transgender women, according to the complaint. BOP officials told them their transfer paperwork had already been processed and that they would be moved no later than Jan. 30.

Sara was placed in solitary on Jan. 25 and was told that her cell was being cleaned out, in anticipation of her transfer. Her mother and sister emailed prison officials, pleading for them to reconsider.

“Sending her to an all-male prison will be the end of her. No one deserves this. There needs to be another way, we beg for your sympathy,” they wrote. “She will get sexually assaulted and even possibly killed for being who she is. … This could mean life or death and she has not received a death penalty as her sentence.”

In response, BOP officials said they could not house Sara at a women’s facility because of the executive order.

On Jan. 26, a transgender woman incarcerated in Massachusetts filed the first known legal challenge to Trump’s executive order. Shortly after, the plaintiff, identified as Maria Moe, as well as Jane, Mary and Sara, were returned to general population housing. The day the Massachusetts lawsuit was filed, the federal judge overseeing the case temporarily blocked Moe from being transferred to a men’s facility.

Similarly to the first suit, this case alleges that the executive order violates constitutional protections granted by the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause and the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. It also argues that Trump’s order failed to comply with federal laws governing changes to rulemaking within the Bureau of Prisons.

The Prison Rape Elimination Act, a law enacted in 2003 and implemented in 2012, requires prison officials to conduct housing reviews for incarcerated trans people at least twice a year to determine, on a case-by-case basis, where they should be imprisoned. The law states that the individual’s views on their own safety should “be given serious consideration,” but it does not provide meaningful guidance on how housing decisions should be made.

Transferring transgender individuals without conducting an individualized assessment violates federal law, the women’s suit alleges.

As of earlier this week, the BOP website included the 2022 Transgender Offender Manual, which echoed the PREA language. By Friday, the BOP had taken its policies and forms offline. “This content is temporarily unavailable as we implement the Executive Order on ’Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” the website read.

3 trans women file emergency request not to be transferred to male prisons

Lisa Fernandez
Fri, January 31, 2025 

3 trans women file emergency request not to be transferred to male prisons


WASHINGTON, D.C. - Three transgender women are asking for "emergency relief" to not be transferred to male prisons across the country, saying they will face harm, humiliation and possible sexual assault, which they have suffered in the past.

What we know

The request was filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, on behalf of Jane, Mary and Sara Doe, who are currently in women's prisons at Bureau of Prisons locations that were redacted in the court filing.

They are being represented by two San Francisco law firms, as well as attorneys in Boston and Baltimore. The suit was filed against Acting Attorney General James R. McHenry III and Acting BOP Director William Lothrop.

The BOP did not immediately comment on the suit.

What we don't know

As of Friday, a judge had not been assigned to the case, so it's unclear how the request will play out.

What they're saying

The transgender women have been incarcerated in women's prisons and their lawyers say if they are transferred to a men's prison they will not be safe. They say that the women will be subjected to strip searches and showering in front of men.

For example, Mary Doe had previously been held at a men's facility where she had been "raped multiple times," the court filing states.

The women are also at risk of losing to medical care they need to treat their gender dysphoria, which will "put them at high risk of serious harm" and which is a violation of the 5th and 8th amendments in the Constitution, the suit alleges.
ADVERTISEMENT


Before President Donald Trump took office, the BOP took an individualized process to determine appropriate housing for transgender women, consistent with the federal Prison Rape Elimination Act, known as PREA.

The other side

But on Jan. 20, Trump issued an executive order on "gender ideology," where they will lose gender-affirming medical treatments and the U.S. government no longer recognizes transgender people. The directive told the attorney general and Homeland Security secretary "shall ensure males are not detained in women's prisons or housed in women's detention centers" and that no federal money will go to medical care like replacement hormones.

Trump issued several other executive orders against the transgender community as well, including cutting federal support for gender transitions for people younger than 19, ordering federally run insurance programs like Medicare to exclude gender-affirming care, which occurs in some states. Separately, Trump also directed the Pentago to conduct a review that could bar transgender people from military service.

Four days later, the three transgender plaintiffs were placed in separate housing with other transgender women. They were also told that because of Trump's executive order they will be "imminently transferred to men's facilities," the court filing states.
ADVERTISEMENT


On Jan. 28, Jane and Mary Doe were returned to the general population after the BOP staff learned they contacted lawyers, including the Rosen, Bien, Galvan & Grunfeld and National Center for Lesbian Rights, both in San Francisco. But correctional officers continue to tell the women they will soon be moved to men's prisons.

Sarah Doe's family emailed officials begging for their sympathy.

"She will get sexually assaulted and even possibly killed for being who she is," the family wrote. "She is a citizen designated as a female and deserves protection like any other human."

Click to open this PDF in a new window.

Judge blocks transfer of transgender woman to men’s facility

Brooke Migdon
Fri, January 31, 2025 


Judge blocks transfer of transgender woman to men’s facility

A Massachusetts judge has temporarily blocked federal prison officials from transferring an incarcerated transgender woman to a men’s facility and denying her access to gender-affirming care, as an executive order issued by President Trump had instructed them.

U.S. District Judge George O’Toole issued the temporary restraining order Sunday while the case was sealed. At a hearing in Boston on Thursday, O’Toole confirmed from the bench that the inmate, identified in court filings by the pseudonym Maria Moe, is back in general population after prison officials moved her to a “special housing unit” and receiving her hormone therapy, her lawyers said.

O’Toole, an appointee of former President Clinton, ordered the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) not to change from that position until he decides whether to issue a longer injunction.

Moe sued the Trump administration Sunday over an executive order declaring the government recognizes only two sexes, male and female, and broadly preventing federal dollars from being spent on what Trump and his administration call “gender ideology.”

The order, which Trump signed on his first day back in office, explicitly prohibits women’s prisons and detention centers from housing transgender female inmates. It directs the incoming attorney general to ensure BOP complies with the order, including its prohibition on using federal funds to cover inmates’ gender-affirming care.

Moe’s attorneys had argued that transferring Moe, who began taking hormones as a teenager and has no violent disciplinary history, to a men’s facility would put her at “an extremely high risk of harassment, abuse, violence, and sexual assault.”

She has never been housed in a men’s facility, and until this month, her sex was listed as “female” on BOP records. Prison staff moved Moe to a “special housing unit” on Jan. 25 as they prepared to transfer her in compliance with Trump’s executive order, where she had no contact with others for at least four days, her lawyers said.

“The outcome of yesterday’s hearing was a huge relief to Maria Moe. She is back in general population and receiving necessary medical care,” said Jennifer Levi, an attorney with GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, representing Moe with the National Center for Lesbian Rights and a private law firm, Lowenstein Sandler LLP. “Trump’s Gender Ideology Executive Order is contrary to the health and safety of incarcerated people, undermines prison security for all, and protects no one. It’s part of a seemingly sustained attack on transgender people’s inclusion in civic life.”

“The Courts remain an important backstop,” Levi said Friday in an emailed statement. “This is a great first step in the case.”

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. 

McBride: Trump administration using transgender people ‘as a pawn’

Brooke Migdon
Fri, January 31, 2025 


Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.), the first openly transgender person elected to Congress, on Friday condemned recent executive orders issued by President Trump that target transgender rights and accused the administration of using transgender Americans to further a political agenda.

Trump, since he first took office on Jan. 20, has signed a bevy of executive orders to roll back transgender rights and certain federal nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ people. An order issued during his first hours in office declared the government recognizes only two sexes, male and female, and broadly prevents federal dollars from being spent on what Trump and his administration call “gender ideology.”

Federal prison officials, in compliance with the order, had attempted to move an incarcerated transgender woman to a men’s facility and deny her access to gender-affirming care before a Massachusetts judge stepped in to block them.

The Office of Personnel Management instructed federal agency heads this week to bar trans employees from using restrooms that match their gender identity and place workers whose job descriptions involve “promoting gender ideology” on administrative leave because of the order.

Three more executive orders signed this week target schools that teach “radical gender ideology,” transgender people serving openly in the military, and access to gender-affirming care for minors. Hospital systems in states across the country said they are pausing treatment for trans youth over fear the Trump administration could take away their funding.

“Since January 20th, I’ve heard from transgender constituents and their families who are living in fear of the Trump Administration’s relentless attacks on them,” McBride said Friday in a lengthy statement on the social platform X.

“Many Americans have good faith questions about topics regarding trans people, but this administration’s sweeping and malicious policies exploit those questions for political purposes,” McBride said. “I will not let my trans constituents — or any Delawarean — be used as a pawn in the Trump Administration’s efforts to purge patriots from federal service and gut lifesaving programs all in pursuit of lining the pockets of the uber wealthy. And I will continue to pull back the curtain on this administration’s blatant effort to divide this nation at the expense of working people.”

“Each time the Trump administration attacks a small vulnerable community, the ripple effects of hate echo across our society,” she added. “In Delaware, we have the capacity to be the antidote to this hate — where we see one another as neighbors and treat one another with respect.”

McBride’s comments mark a shift in tone for the first-term lawmaker, who has tended to stay above the fray, characterizing attacks on transgender rights — and her, personally — as “an effort to distract” from issues such as lowering costs of health care and groceries.

In November, after Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) implemented a new policy barring transgender people from facilities that best align with their gender identity at the Capitol, McBride said she would comply. “I’m not here to fight about bathrooms,” she said.

In a recent interview with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, McBride said the Trump administration’s targeting of transgender people is part of “a strategy of misdirection.”

“This is a strategy as old as time,” she said. “Right-wing leaders will often target vulnerable and misunderstood communities in order to distract from what they’re doing that is deeply unpopular with the American people.”

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. 

‘Sustainable Transport Is Inevitable’ Says Musk While Trump Continues Trashing EV Support


Owen Bellwood

JALOPNIK
Fri, January 31, 2025

Photo: Brandon Bell (Getty Images)

Good morning! It’s Friday, January 31, 2025, and this is The Morning Shift, your daily roundup of the top automotive headlines from around the world, in one place. Here are the important stories you need to know.

1st Gear: Musk And Trump Don’t See Eye-To-Eye On Everything

President Donald Trump and Tesla boss Elon Musk may seem like an odd match on the surface, but they’ve been getting on like a house on fire since Trump realized he needed Musk’s billions to get back into the White House. Less than a year after the pair became best buds, trouble might be brewing and it appears as though they no longer see eye-to-eye on everything.

Trump lamented electric vehicles for most of his campaign, promising to bring an end to support for the switch to electric power as soon as he set foot back in Washington. Despite appearing to soften those views once Musk’s millions started rolling in, the “Home Alone 2” actor made good on those promises once he took office and has already pushed to scrap a $7,500 tax break available to EV buyers and pulled support for new EV charging infrastructure across America.

When Musk was asked about Trump’s moves to slash support for electric vehicles, the Tesla boss made a rare departure from the party line and said he thinks “sustainable transport is inevitable,” reports InsideEVs. Musk’s comments came when he was asked if the new administration’s cuts could hit uptake of EVs in the U.S.:

“At this point, I think that sustainable transport is inevitable,” Musk said. “I’m highly confident that all transport will be autonomous, electric, including aircraft, and that simply, it can’t be stopped.” He likened the rise of electric vehicles to the advent of the steam engine or the internal combustion engine.

“Even if you’ve been the biggest horse advocate on Earth... like, ‘horses are the way, not these new-fangled automobiles,’ you can’t stop the advent of the automobile and you can’t stop the advent of electric cars,” Musk said. “It’s going to happen.”

He added, “The only thing holding back electric cars was range, and that is a solved problem.”

It’s annoying to admit, but Musk might have a point. Last year, sales of electric cars in America hit record levels, and while deliveries of Tesla cars are dropping, sales of EVs made by other automakers are rising every month. What’s more, sales of combustion engine cars have been in decline since 2018, with electric and hybrid models taking up the slack.

Musk’s opinions on the future of transport also echo what fellow EV startup boss RJ Scaringe said just last week. The Rivian boss said that the future of personal transport was “going to be electric” no matter what the Trump administration said about drilling for more American oil.

Trump staked his claim to the White House on the backing of billionaires and businessmen, but is this the first sign that his policies are out of touch with what his backers want?

2nd Gear: High Warranty Costs Are Crippling JLR

Let’s take a break from the awful world of American politics with a quick check in to see how things are in the awful world of Jaguar Land Rover. As you might expect, they’re not great and the company saw profits drop as it struggled with mounting warranty costs.

Across Jaguar and Land Rover, the two brands raked in $651 million during the fourth quarter of 2024, reports Automotive News. Deliveries for the year were down by 2.6 percent, but it was the amount JLR spent on repairs that really hit its latest results:

Operating profit fell 17 percent to 523 million pounds ($651 million) in the quarter compared with the same period the year on higher costs for sales incentives. Automakers globally had to increase discounting last year to boost sales as inflation hit consumers’ spending power.

“We are not immune to the market conditions,” Richard Molyneux, JLR’s chief financial officer, said on parent company Tata Motors’ earnings call on Jan. 29.

Warranty costs shaved 163 million pounds from the overall profit figure, the company said. Molyneux partly blamed the increase on rising sales in the U.S. “where warranty costs are high.”

As well as lost money thanks to all those fixes, Jaguar also lost out as sales for the year were down. Deliveries took a big hit due to reduced demand in China, and the company decided to stop selling any brand new cars in the UK in 2024.

The drop in deliveries in select markets did mean that JLR had a new sales king for the past year. That’s right, America bought more cars from the British automaker than any other global market. The boost Stateside was reportedly due to demand for the Range Rover and Defender models, which Jag said “resonate strongly with the U.S. consumers.”

Now, if only Jaguar could come up with a car that resonates with real people rather than fictitious British bad guys, then the whole company may see its fortunes improve. But let’s not get too ahead of ourselves here.

3rd Gear: Tesla Income Boosted By $600 Million Bitcoin Gains

If Jaguar did want to find a quick fix for its money troubles, it could take a leaf out of Tesla’s book and plow millions into Bitcoin. The American automaker reportedly pocketed almost $600 million last year thanks to its digital assets, according to its latest financial results.

New accounting regulations mean that Tesla includes gains from digital assets in its profit tally for the year, and last year the automaker made millions thanks to its Bitcoin stash, reports Business Insider. Tesla’s gains on Bitcoin accounted for nearly $600 million of its net income in the fourth quarter of 2024:

Tesla’s finance chief, Vaibhav Taneja, confirmed on the company’s earnings call that there was a “$600 million mark-to-market benefit from bitcoin due to the adoption of a new accounting standard for digital assets.”

The Financial Accounting Standards Board recently changed its policy to allow companies to mark their digital assets to market each quarter. Previously, they had to report their holdings at the lowest value those assets had ever reached under their ownership.

Tesla had been carrying its bitcoin hoard on its balance sheet at $184 million but marked it up to $1.076 billion last quarter. The fair market value of its digital assets was $729 million at the end of September, meaning they rose in value by nearly $350 million last quarter as bitcoin soared to record highs.

Tesla plowed roughly $1.5 billion into Bitcoin back in January 2021 as a means of diversifying its investments, explains Business insider. At the time, the token was valued at around $40,000, but is now worth more than $100,000.

That enormous increase in value doesn’t mean that Tesla saw its investment in the cryptocurrency rise by 250 percent, as it actually offloaded about 75% of its Bitcoin stash in 2022. If Tesla had held on to that initial $1.5 billion investment it could now be worth as much as $375 billion.

4th Gear: Honda Recalls Almost 300,000 Cars With Engine Issues

Finally let’s round out another week of Morning Shifts with one final recall. This week, we’ve already clocked recalls from the likes of Ford and Kia, but now it’s Honda’s turn to uncover a glaring issue that impacts thousands of cars.

The Japanese automaker has announced a recall of almost 300,000 cars over fuel injection issues in select Honda and Acura models, reports ABC News. The recall is due to software issues uncovered with the fuel injection electronic control unit:

“Due to improper programming of the FI-ECU, sudden changes in the throttle could illuminate the check engine light and cause the engine to lose drive power, hesitate and/or stall, increasing the risk of a crash or injury,” the company stated in a Jan. 29 press release. “American Honda self-diagnosed this issue by monitoring telematics information and determined the need to perform the software update of the supplier part.”

Honda said it will contact registered owners of all affected models by mail in March, at which time they can take their vehicle to an authorized Honda or Acura dealer to update the software free of charge.

American Honda said it announced the recall “to encourage owners of affected vehicles to take them to an authorized dealer for repair as soon as they receive notification.”

The software glitch has been uncovered in 2023-2025 Honda Pilot models, as well as the 2022-2025 Acura MDX Type S and 2021-2025 Acura TLX Type S. So far, Honda says it “has not received any confirmed reports of crashes or injuries related to this issue,” adds ABC News.

If you are worried that your car might be affected by a recall, there are a few easy ways to check if it’s the case. First up, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has a super handy app that you can use to see if your vehicle is impacted by a recall, or you can head to the regulator’s website and plug your VIN into its recall search tool.

Zeldin: Anyone who isn’t ‘committed to’ Trump’s directives shouldn’t be at EPA

Rachel Frazin
Fri, January 31, 2025



Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin said Friday that anyone who is uncommitted to carrying out President Trump’s directives may not belong at the agency.

“I don’t believe that anyone should be here at EPA who is not committed to the agency mission and the lawful directives coming from the duly elected president of the United States,” Zeldin told reporters.

However, he also said he valued people who may have different opinions on how to best carry out Trump’s policies.

“I love hearing a diversity of view and thought on decisions that we have to make here within the agency,” Zeldin said.

“When a lawful directive comes from the president of the United States, any president of the United States, to have an agency achieve a goal within a deadline, there are oftentimes many different ways to get that done,” he added.

Zeldin, who was confirmed to lead the EPA on Wednesday, also predicted that there will be “a headcount reduction in agencies all across the federal government.”

“For us, we have to closely monitor who is deciding to stay and who’s deciding to go, and making sure that we’re filling all of our most important positions with urgency,” he added.

His comments come after the Trump administration sent a memo to federal employees offering buyouts if they do not wish to return to work. It also comes after Trump has indicated that he could use a tool called “Schedule F” to make it easier to fire career officials.

Opponents of doing so have expressed concerns that such cuts could result in a “brain drain” at science agencies like the EPA.


Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. 

EPA workers receive emails warning their employment could be terminated

THIS IS WHAT DEREGULATION LOOKS LIKE

Literally every day, folks are afraid to turn their computers on. They don’t know what message will be coming out next.

Hannah Rabinowitz, Ella Nilsen, Alayna Treene and Rene Marsh, 

CNN
Fri, January 31, 2025 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency building , in Washington.


More than 1,100 employees at the Environmental Protection Agency received notice this week that they were deemed to be on probationary status and warning they could be fired immediately, according to an email obtained by CNN.

Probationary employees receiving the email have been working at the agency for less than a year. The emails began to go out late on Wednesday afternoon, according to an EPA union official.

The same message will be sent to other agency workforces, a White House official said. Across the US government, the latest data shows there are more than 220,000 employees on probation.

“As a probationary/trial period employee, the agency has the right to immediately terminate you pursuant to 5 CFR § 315.804,” the EPA email to probationary employees reads. “The process for probationary removal is that you receive a notice of termination, and your employment is ended immediately.”

“Each employee’s status will be determined individually,” the email adds.

The email also spells out an appeals process employees can take to see if they are eligible for extra protection.

The approach is similar to how Elon Musk, now a key Trump adviser, handled layoffs when he bought Twitter — make a new email alias (in this case, notice@epa.gov) and then send mass termination letters to everyone on it.

The US Office of Personnel Management declined to comment, and the White House and EPA did not respond to requests for additional comment.

The EPA union official said these probationary employees aren’t the same as at-will employees; they have less protection than tenured employees, but they have rights to appeal.

The union official said EPA will have to make a finding as to every single probationary employee that is being let go – either that their performance is poor or that they had a disciplinary issue. Veterans and those with tenure have extra layers of protection. Attorneys who work at the EPA and AFGE, the union representing a large number of EPA employees, are counseling people who are probationary employees on how to respond to these emails and waiting to see what further action is taken.

The EPA emails come after the Office of Personnel Management sent a mass email to federal workers Tuesday night telling them if they resign now, they would be paid through September 30 even though they likely wouldn’t have to work, or could at least keep working remotely.

The email specified that those who choose not to opt into the program – referred to as a “deferred resignation” offer – can’t be given “full assurance regarding the certainty” of their position or agency moving forward. It added that, should their job be eliminated, they “will be treated with dignity and will be afforded the protections in place for such positions.”

The email, sent from a new government alias HR1@opm.gov, contained the subject line “Fork in the Road,” the same subject line of an ultimatum message Musk sent to his employees at Twitter in 2022.

Musk has made clear in recent months that a top priority for the Department of Government Efficiency, which he is helming, would be to rid the federal workforce of employees deemed as underperforming.

Marie Owens Powell, president of American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, said morale at EPA was suffering.

“It’s bad, it’s probably the worst I’ve ever seen,” she said. “I’ve never seen anything like this. Literally every day, folks are afraid to turn their computers on. They don’t know what message will be coming out next.”

Mass layoffs of probationary employees could disproportionately impact younger workers, said Rob Shriver, acting director of OPM under President Joe Biden.

“There has been a longstanding struggle to get younger people interested in public service,” Shriver said. “We worked hard to fix that, hiring roughly 13% more people under the age of 30 in 2024 than 2023. That progress could now be undone as these young people are going to be particularly affected by this.”

 CNN.com

Duke Energy promised to limit emissions at four new gas plants. It’s already back-tracking

Lisa Sorg
Sat, February 1, 2025 at 4:00 AM MST·7 min read



Duke Energy’s STAR facility burns coal ash to be reused in cement in Goldsboro


Duke Energy’s STAR facility burns coal ash to be reused in cement in Goldsboro (Photo: Lisa Sorg/Inside Climate News)

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. Sign up for their newsletter here.

Environmental advocates in North Carolina are angry after 10 utilities and power companies, including Duke Energy, sent a letter Jan. 15 to Lee Zeldin, confirmed on Wednesday as EPA administrator, asking him to weaken environmental regulations over coal ash and natural gas.

These regulations help protect air and water from toxic chemicals as well as reduce greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change.

The Senate confirmed Zeldin on a largely party line, 56-42 vote, with three Democrats voting in favor. Zeldin has in recent years advocated unleashing fossil fuel production.

Canary Media first reported the existence of the letter.

The power companies alleged, without citing evidence, that stronger EPA rules for the fossil fuel industry, enacted under previous administrator Michael Regan, “individually and collectively threaten the reliability of the power grid, jeopardize national security, are a drag on economic growth, increase inflation and hinder the expansion of electric power generation to support the critical development and deployment of artificial intelligence and related technologies.”

A Duke Energy spokesman declined to comment, saying the letter summarizes the utility’s stance.

Coal ash contains several harmful chemicals, including arsenic, cadmium, mercury and lead. Nationwide, chemicals from unlined ash ponds have leaked into the groundwater, which in some instances have contaminated private drinking water wells. Current EPA regulations have attempted to close some loopholes that allowed the contamination to continue unchecked.

“Families of all walks of life depend on these protections for their clean water. The executives who wrote this letter are out of touch if they think anyone voted for arsenic, lead, and mercury from coal ash in their water,” said Nick Torrey, a senior attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center.

Last year, some of these same utilities challenged EPA’s enforcement of these protections and lost in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to the SELC, “which confirmed that the protective standards in EPA’s coal ash rule prohibit leaving coal ash in water and leaking pollutants into the surrounding waterways.”

If Zeldin honors the request, the rollback would not affect Duke’s excavation plans for its 31 unlined coal ash ponds in North Carolina. The utility is legally required under a consent order to excavate all of those ponds, accounting for roughly 126 million tons of ash. It can move the material to lined landfills or process it for reuse, such as in concrete.

Duke has excavated 11 of the basins; deadlines for the remaining sites range from 2028 to 2037.

However, Duke and the other utilities could benefit from weaker rules governing the use of coal ash for “beneficial use.” The utilities asked Zeldin to allow ash that is used on-site at the plants, such as landfill cover for new basins, to qualify as a beneficial use and to be exempt from federal coal ash regulations. “The EPA should apply the same exemption to all beneficial uses, whether off-site or on-site,” the utilities wrote.

Aside from on-site fills or landfills, Duke encapsulates its ash, such as in concrete. The utility used to provide ash for structural fill in North Carolina, but no longer does so, as that use has become unpopular. In several instances ash provided to private developers from Duke and other utilities has become exposed after pavement eroded or sinkholes formed in parking lots.

“They’re taking the first available opportunity to try to push back protections,” said Mikaela Curry, the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign manager. “To me, it just confirms the worst fears in these communities that given any opportunity, Duke will just do whatever they can to advance their own interests, regardless of what the cost is to us on the ground.”

As for natural gas, the power companies asked Zeldin to rescind the EPA’s greenhouse gas rule, enacted last year. The GHG rule directly affects Duke’s natural gas buildout by requiring the utility to limit emissions or install carbon capture technology at two new gas plants it is building at Hyco Lake in Person County. The utility is also constructing two new plants at the Marshall Steam Station in Catawba County. Duke currently burns coal at both locations.t It could continue to do so at Hyco Lake while it transitions to natural gas.

Even after the transition to natural gas the Hyco and Marshall plants would emit thousands of tons of nitrogen oxide, very fine particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds and methane into the air each year.

Duke Energy has received approval from the North Carolina Utilities Commission for the projects. The utility has also received state air permits for the Hyco and Marshall natural gas plants, but construction is not expected to be completed until 2028 or 2029.
ADVERTISEMENT


“The risks and costs of building these plants without regard to climate impacts will only further burden North Carolina which is still recovering from $53 billion in damages from Hurricane Helene.”

– Ridge Graham, Appalachian Voices

Under the current GHG rule, Duke would have to dial down its Hyco Lake plants to no more than 40 percent of generating capacity by 2032. To avoid that limitation, Duke would have to install carbon capture sequestration technology to capture 90 percent of its GHG emissions. However, that technology is not yet commercially viable and isn’t likely to be by the deadline.

Several energy interests have sued the EPA over the GHG rule; the D.C. Circuit could soon rule on the case. In the letter to Zeldin, the power companies asked him to direct the Department of Justice to file a motion with the court to suspend the deliberations and send the rule back to the EPA. “Deadlines are approaching, and States and regulated entities will be forced soon to make choices that may be difficult, if not impossible, to reverse,” the letter reads.

This stance is a reversal from what Duke officials told the Utilities Commission during proceedings about the carbon plan, said Ridge Graham, North Carolina program manager for Appalachian Voices. “Duke said they could comply with the changes,” which are in Section 111 of the Clean Air Act. “The risks and costs of building these plants without regard to climate impacts will only further burden North Carolina which is still recovering from $53 billion in damages from Hurricane Helene.”

The power companies also asked Zeldin to postpone GHG rule deadlines and to begin formally repealing most of its provisions.

Jim Warren is the executive director of NC WARN, which is paying for a lawsuit filed by the Town of Carrboro against Duke Energy over the impacts of climate change. “Such corporate behavior is both reckless and tragic,” Warren said of the letter to Zeldin. “Duke Energy is again leading a campaign to extend and expand the use of fossil fuels despite the devastating impacts on communities and the climate crisis.”

Curry, of the Sierra Club, said if she were to write Zeldin a letter, she would try to appeal to his sense of duty to protect human health and the environment:

“Americans across this country are counting on you to ensure they have the clean air and water they deserve,” she said. “EPA is supposed to work on behalf of the people, not massive energy companies pushing their dirty agenda. We already know that the toxic heavy metals and other pollutants found in coal ash are linked to cancer, heart and thyroid disease, reproductive failure, and can inflict permanent brain damage on children. I would urge Zeldin to consider whether he wants the legacy of his work to be serving the interests of polluters at the cost of life and health to people across our country.”


EPA finalizes rule banning TCE, PCE chemicals

Sara Samora
 Fri, January 31, 2025 



A welcome sign stands outside of the Holcomb Gate on Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, Jan. 8, 2008.

This story was originally published on Manufacturing Dive. 

UPDATE: Jan. 31, 2025: The Environmental Protection Agency delayed its trichloroethylene, or TCE, ban implementation date from Jan. 16 to March 21, according to a Jan. 28 rule in the Federal Register.

The change followed President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20 Regulatory Freeze Pending Review executive order, which requires federal agencies not to publish or implement finalized rules until department heads are in place. From there, Lee Zeldin, who was confirmed to lead the EPA on Jan. 29, will delegate on the next course of action for the rule.

Dive Brief:

Jan. 10: The Environmental Protection Agency finalized two rules last month that ban degreasing chemical trichloroethylene and dry-cleaning solvent perchloroethylene, according to an agency press release.

The ban on TCE, which is used in processes such as battery and polymer manufacturing, will take effect on Jan. 16. Manufacturing with the chemical for consumer use is banned beginning March 17, according to the EPA handout.

The ban on PCE, intended for consumer uses such as brake cleaners and commercial applications such as dry cleaning, takes effect on Jan. 17. The 10-year phase-out begins June 2026, according to the EPA.
Dive Insight:

The EPA estimates it could cost the industry up to $102.4 million over 20 years to implement the TCE changes. For PCE implementation, it could cost up to $43.4 million over 20 years.

The new regulations are in line with President Joe Biden’s Cancer Moonshot initiative to end the disease, according to the EPA press release. The initiative brings together federal agencies, companies and healthcare providers to better understand and prevent exposure to toxic chemicals that could cause cancer, such as PFAS and air pollution, according to the White House.

TCE and PCE are found to cause cancer such as on the kidney and liver, the EPA said in the release. The two chemicals can also damage the body, including the immune system and liver.

A major example of TCE and PCE contamination in the U.S. is Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune in Jacksonville, North Carolina, which the military branch discovered contained the chemicals in the 1980s.

Retired Marine Corps veteran Jerry Ensminger’s family lived on the base during his time in the service. His daughter, Janey, was born there and later died of leukemia.

Ensminger later became an advocate for legislative reform regarding the chemicals alongside fellow Marine Mike Partain, who was born on the base and was later diagnosed with breast cancer.

“I’ve been fighting this issue longer right now than when I served as a Marine,” Ensminger told Stars and Stripes in 2022.

In August 2022, Biden signed the Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act (PACT) Act, which would provide Veteran Administration benefits and care to military veterans exposed to toxins throughout their military service.

The legislation included the Camp Lejeune Justice Act, which extends benefits to veterans and families who lived and worked on Camp Lejeune for at least 30 days between 1953 and 1987 and were exposed to water contaminated with PCE and TCE.

“The Camp Lejeune contaminated drinking water issue has dragged on over the better part of forty years ever since TCE, PCE and other organic solvents were first documented in the base’s drinking water supply in October 1980,” Ensminger said in a statement. “Mike and I welcome this ban on TCE by the EPA and this is proof that our fight for justice at Camp Lejeune was not in vain.”

Hedge funds bet billions on market crash in Trump’s America

Louis Goss
Fri, January 31, 2025

Hedge funds have bet billions of dollars against Donald Trump’s America amid fears of a market crash.

Data from Goldman Sachs show there has been a surge in “short” bets against US stocks, meaning traders will make money when they fall in value, in a sign of growing concerns about the market.

In January, investors have placed 10 times more bets on US stocks falling than equivalent bets that shares in leading American companies would rise, the investment bank said. It suggests many traders are sitting on huge profits from the chaos earlier this week, when shares in big tech stocks slumped following a panic over the success of rival Chinese AI DeepSeek.

The increase in short bets marks a major turnaround in sentiment from November, when hedge funds piled into long bets on US stocks, predicting they would rise.

Hedge funds ploughed billions into so-called “Trump trades” in the immediate wake of the US election in November, on expectations the new president’s tax cuts and tariff policies would boost America’s economy.

A surge in clients giving their money to the funds in the wake of Mr Trump’s victory helped lift the amount of money managed by the industry to all-time highs of over $4.5 trillion (£3.6 trillion).

Mr Trump has also received significant support from high profile fund chiefs, including Bill Ackman, who has become a major opponent to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives since the Oct 7 2023 attacks on Israel.

In the run-up to the elections, Mr Ackman, who founded Pershing Square Capital Management in 2004, publicly endorsed Mr Trump. The billionaire hedge fund manager had previously donated millions to Super PAC organisations supportive of the Democratic Party.

Mr Trump subsequently appointed hedge fund manager and Republican Party donor Scott Bessent as his treasury secretary. Mr Bessent started his career at George Soros’s hedge fund in the 1990s before launching his own investment fund Key Square Group in 2015.

Ken Griffin, who founded Citadel in 1990, later also came out in support of Mr Trump in December, having held back from financially supporting the Republican candidate’s campaign. Mr Griffin, who has donated millions to various Republican candidates and political, had earlier described Mr Trump as a “three-time loser.”

Speaking at the DealBook summit in December, Mr Griffin said Trump’s victory posed an opportunity to end the “regulatory and litigation-induced paralysis” of the Biden era and “bring America back to a nation of principles, of strength, of prosperity and possibility,” according to Politico.

‘Uncertainties persist about Trump’

Individual hedge funds do not typically make their positions public, so it is not known if any of the above are shorting the US market.

Bruno Schneller, managing partner at asset manager Erlen Capital Management, said the increase in short bets against US stocks likely reflect concerns about “macroeconomic uncertainty.”

Analysts at Swiss bank UBS, led by Karim Cherif, head of alternative investments, said: “As the new year unfolds, uncertainties persist regarding Trump’s policies, the global economic trajectory, and central bank actions.”

Separately, Elliott Management, which controls more than $70bn worth of investments, this week warned that Mr Trump’s presidency was fuelling speculative bubbles in markets that threaten to “wreak havoc” if markets crash, according to the Financial Times.

The concerns come as the “magnificent seven” tech companies – Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla – have seen their stock prices surge over the past two years on excitement surrounding artificial intelligence (AI).

Investors have become increasingly concerned about over-investment in leading technology companies. The launch of DeepSeek’s new chatbot earlier this month has heightened those concerns.

This week, concerns surrounding DeepSeek led a major sell-off of stocks in top American tech companies, including computer chip maker Nvidia, which saw almost $600bn knocked off its valuation.

DeepSeek itself is owned by Chinese hedge fund High Flyer, which uses algorithmic trading techniques to place bets on market movements. Liang Wenfeng, High Flyer’s chief executive, is also DeepSeek’s chief executive.

Top hedge fund Elliott Management fears Trump is inflating a crypto bubble that faces 'inevitable' collapse, report says

Filip De Mott
Fri, January 31, 2025 

Business Insider

Getty Images; Jenny Chang-Rodriguez/BI

Elliott Management said a crypto collapse could "wreak havoc in ways we cannot yet anticipate."


The White House's boosting of crypto is fueling speculation, it said in a letter.


The letter questioned why the administration would embrace alternative reserve assets that threaten the dollar's role.


Cryptocurrencies are riding a speculative mania bound for a dramatic collapse, and the Trump administration is only helping inflate the bubble further, Elliott Management wrote in a letter seen by the Financial Times.

The letter from the $70 billion hedge fund puts it at odds with Washington's embrace of crypto, warning of potential consequences to market stability and the dominance of the US dollar.

According to the letter, the current market landscape is unlike any other. Investors are "acting like a crowd of sports bettors," with widespread speculation evident in the AI investing frenzy and elevated stock valuations.

Crypto is at the heart of this risk-on surge, Elliott wrote, with speculators encouraged by the industry's deepening relationship with the White House. Since Donald Trump's inauguration, the president has installed industry-friendly regulatory heads and signed an executive order promoting digital assets.

Trump's campaign promises go even further, and investors are gearing up for more policies to come this year. Bitcoin has rallied 38% since Election Day, while some altcoins have soared much higher.


Despite the surge in value, these assets have "no substance," Elliott said. The hedge fund is bracing for the sector's "inevitable collapse," which "could wreak havoc in ways we cannot yet anticipate."

The letter also highlighted the greenback's dominance as a global reserve currency, and questioned the idea that Washington should turn toward alternative reserve assets. After all, other countries are already working to diversify away from the dollar.

This effectively amounts to a rejection of the national bitcoin reserve, a policy recommendation that would direct the government to buy and hold the flagship token as a hedge against inflation.

Elliott Management did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.

The fund's founder, Paul Singer, has been critical of crypto for years. In 2018, he called the assets "one of the most brilliant scams in history."

The firm's outlook contrasts starkly with Wall Street's rising enthusiasm for digital assets. While some, such as billionaire investor David Einhorn, also regard the crypto rally with skepticism, institutional demand for digital assets has been gaining more and more traction.

According to Standard Chartered, this should help push bitcoin toward $200,000 by the end of the year. Other altcoins are also projected to gain, especially if Trump policies unleash a meme coin bull run.

How Does Pete Hegseth Feel About Bitcoin? His Financial Filings Reveal The Answer

AJ Fabino
Sun, February 2, 2025 

BENZINGA


New Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth brings cryptocurrency holdings to the Pentagon’s top post, with financial disclosures showing he owns between $5,000 and $15,000 in Bitcoin amid his broader support for digital assets.

“Look at [Donald] Trump, making bitcoin great again,” Hegseth said during a Fox News segment in November after Bitcoin initially surged past $80,000. “All it took was signaling to that market that they weren’t going to be overregulated. Trump embraced them.”

The Senate confirmed Hegseth as defense secretary Friday in a 50-50 vote, with Vice President JD Vance breaking the tie. The narrow victory came despite concerns about his qualifications and personal conduct, marking only the second time a vice president has cast a deciding vote for a Cabinet nominee.

Built on the trusted network of Fortune 500 companies, this blockchain company partners with Salesforce to uproot lengthy and expensive B2B transactions, and you can invest with just $100.

Financial records released Jan. 13 show Hegseth earned over $5 million in the past two years, mostly from his Fox News hosting role and speaking engagements. Beyond his Bitcoin holdings, the documents reveal he collected $4.6 million from Fox News and up to $1 million from a Baltimore rental property.

The Army veteran and former Fox & Friends Weekend host has openly backed cryptocurrency, praising its independence from government control.

During Coinbase Global's (NASDAQ:COIN) 2021 IPO, he called it the “tip of the iceberg” for digital currency adoption.

Trending: Nancy Pelosi Invested $5 Million In An AI Company Last Year — Here's How You Can Invest In Multiple Pre-IPO AI Startups With Just $1,000

“Crypto has arrived. Bitcoin is not a person, it’s not a company, it’s not a place. It’s tougher to stop than you would think,” Hegseth said at the time, according to cryptocurrency publication The Block.

Hegseth takes control of the Pentagon as Bitcoin trades around $100,000, potentially reacting to shifting political winds. His dual role as both a Bitcoin investor and America’s new defense chief arrives as digital assets face less scrutiny from the federal government.

The position puts him among the highest-ranking U.S. officials to publicly hold cryptocurrency, though his Bitcoin stake represents a small portion of his multimillion-dollar portfolio.

According to Juniper Research, the total value of B2B cross-border payments stored on the blockchain is projected to exceed $4.4 trillion — Join the first company to bring blockchain payments to Salesforce early with just $100.


© 2025 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.