X issues statement on suspension of Reuters’ accounts, says govt gave one hour, no justification: ‘Non-compliance risked…’
X (formerly known as Twitter) on Tuesday said it had been asked by the Indian government to block more than 2,300 accounts, including the official handles of the international news agency Reuters. Read on to know more on this.
Delhi women to get FREE rides on DTC, cluster buses with Saheli Smart Card: Know how to apply
CM Rekha Gupta had earlier criticised the practice of issuing pink paper tickets to women, alleging that it was a major source of corruption under the previous administration.
How much tariff US is likely to impose on India? Donald Tariff says…
Though the deadline for signing the deal for tariff fixation ends on July 9, India and the US are yet to ink a trade deal. After holding many rounds of talks with the US commerce department mandarins, the Indian delegation returned last week, expressing hope to reach a consensus soon.
Centre responds after Elon Musk’s X claims it ordered blocking Reuters’ accounts
The Uninon government said that the moment Reuters and Reuters World were blocked on the X platform in India, it immediately wrote to ‘X’ to unblock them.
BIG update on fuel ban for end-of-life vehicles in Delhi-NCR, it will now come into force from…
The ‘no fuel’ scheme for EOL vehicles will also be implemented in Gurugram, Faridabad, Noida, Ghaziabad and Sonipat from this date.
This state govt’s scheme offers free bus service to women, transgenders, will be launched on…, know benefits, other details
The Delhi Government is set to roll out the ‘Saheli Smart Card’ for women and transgenders in Delhi. The scheme is expected to be rolled out by August 15. The card will be delivered by post, in case of loss, a duplicate can be issued.
Hills, rivers and rocky terrain: Why the Hill Country keeps flooding
When storms roll in, water rushes downhill fast, gaining speed and force as it moves — often with deadly results.
How the Supreme Court’s injunction ruling advances Trump’s birthright citizenship fight
President Donald Trump is aiming to terminate birthright citizenship in the United States – and the Supreme Court’s recent decision to curb universal injunctions has brought him one step closer to accomplishing that mission. While changing the way the government gives citizenship to babies born in the United States is still an uphill climb, the high court’s ruling raised the possibility that Trump’s new policy to end automatic citizenship could, at least temporarily, take effect in some parts of the country. Lawyer Carrie Severino, president of the conservative legal advocacy group JCN, said it was unclear at this stage of litigation how Trump’s policy would work logistically or to whom it would apply. The Supreme Court’s decision, issued June 27, barred Trump’s executive order from becoming active for 30 days. “Normally, if you give birth at the hospital, they just automatically issue everyone a Social Security number,” Severino told Fox News Digital. “Now the question isn’t open and shut like that.” SCOTUS RULES ON TRUMP’S BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP ORDER, TESTING LOWER COURT POWERS The Supreme Court’s decision arose from various Democratic-led states and immigration rights groups bringing several lawsuits across the country challenging Trump’s executive order, which the president signed shortly after he took office. The order dramatically changed the scope of birthright citizenship, which is outlined under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution and allows babies born to noncitizens in the United States to automatically receive U.S. citizenship in most cases. Courts uniformly rejected Trump’s policy and blocked it by issuing universal injunctions that applied to the whole country and not just certain pregnant noncitizens being represented in court. Seattle-based federal Judge John Coughenour, a Reagan appointee, chastised government attorneys during a February hearing over the matter. “It has become ever more apparent that to our president, the rule of law is but an impediment to his policy goals,” the judge said. “The rule of law is, according to him, something to navigate around or simply ignore, whether that be for political or personal gain.” Coughenour later said that if Trump wanted to change the “exceptional American grant of birthright citizenship,” then the president would need to work with Congress to amend the Constitution, rather than attempt to redefine the amendment through an executive order. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s order, courts and plaintiffs are moving quickly to adapt and, in some cases, find workarounds before the 30-day deadline arrives. Within hours of the high court’s decision, plaintiffs who brought a birthright citizenship lawsuit in Maryland asked a judge to change the lawsuit to a class action proceeding that covers all babies who will be born after Trump’s executive order takes effect. The request was one of what is quickly becoming a manifold of court requests that are testing the Supreme Court’s injunction decision and potentially undercutting it. The Supreme Court’s decision left intact the ability for judges, if they see fit, to use class action lawsuits or statewide lawsuits to hand down sweeping orders blocking Trump’s policies from applying to wide swaths of people. SUPREME COURT TAKES ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP: LIBERALS BALK AT TRUMP ARGUMENT TO END NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS “The bottom line is that the Trump administration has the right to carry this order out nationwide, except where a court has stayed it as to parties actually involved in a lawsuit challenging it,” Severino said. American Immigration Council’s Michelle Lapointe wrote online there was a “real possibility” that if the judges overseeing the current lawsuits do not find a way in the next few weeks to issue broad injunctions blocking birthright citizenship, then some states might see the policy take effect. “That raises the risk of babies born in certain parts of the United States… being fully stripped of their rights as U.S. citizens, perhaps even rendering them stateless,” Lapointe wrote. “The human cost of such an action is unconscionable.” Regardless of what happens in the coming weeks and months, the underlying merits of Trump’s birthright citizenship policy are on track to end up at the Supreme Court. The justices were able to avoid touching the substance of Trump’s argument by merely considering the constitutionality of universal injunctions during this last go-round, but the next time a birthright citizenship lawsuit comes before them, they are likely to have to weigh in on whether Trump’s policy is constitutional. 100 DAYS OF INJUNCTIONS, TRIALS AND ‘TEFLON DON’: TRUMP SECOND TERM MEETS ITS BIGGEST TESTS IN COURT Severino said she believed the six Republican-appointed justices would rely heavily on “history and tradition” and “what the words were understood to mean in 1868 when the 14th Amendment was passed.” “It’s a challenging issue, in part because our immigration system looks so dramatically different now than it did at the time of the 14th Amendment, because the sort of immigration we’re looking at was not really on their radar, nor was the type of entitlement state that we are living in,” Severino said. Michael Moreland, Villanova University law school professor, told Fox News Digital there has long been an academic debate about the language in the amendment. It states that babies born in the United States and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are citizens. The dispute, Moreland said, has centered on “how broadly or narrowly” to interpret that clause. The Trump administration has said that as part of its immigration crackdown, it wants to curtail abuse of the 14th Amendment, which can include foreigners traveling to the United States strictly to give birth with no intention of legally settling in the country. The amendment also incentivizes migrants to enter the country illegally to give birth and rewards pregnant women already living illegally in the country by imparting citizenship to their children, the administration has said. Judges, thus far, have found that Trump’s policy is at odds with more than 150 years of precedent. The government has long given citizenship to any child born in the United States with few exceptions, such as babies born to foreign diplomats or foreign military members.
Resurfaced Mamdani photo sparks social media firestorm, outrage from key voting bloc: ‘Shameful’
A resurfaced photo of New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani flipping off a statue of Christopher Columbus is sparking backlash online and with some members of the Italian-American community. “Take it down,” Mamdani posted in June 2020, along with a photo showing what is presumably his gloved hand raising the middle finger toward a statue of the famed Italian explorer in Astoria, New York. Some in the Italian community took offense to the post, according to a New York Post report, including Columbus Heritage Coalition President Angelo Vivolo. “We will defend Columbus Day and Columbus statues,” Vivolo said. NY TIMES GRAPPLES WITH LIBERAL OUTRAGE OVER ITS MAMDANI COLLEGE APPLICATION REPORT “He is being disrespectful to the Italian American community.” Vivolo added. “If you offend one community, you offend all communities.” Joseph Scelsa, the founder and president of the Italian American Museum, suggested it is unwise for Mamdani to alienate Italians, who the New York Post reported make up 8% of the population of New York City. “To eliminate such a large population of people would be a travesty,” Scelsa said. “It’s not inclusive. It’s exclusionary. Who’s to say who is a hero and who is not a hero? Columbus is our hero.” SOME WEALTHY NEW YORK ELITES SURPRISINGLY BACK NYC SOCIALIST CANDIDATE WHO WANTS TO TAX THEM MORE The backlash to the post could also be found coming from conservatives on social media. “Not gonna happen,” actor Joe Piscopo posted on X. “This guy needs to be stopped,” YouTuber Joey Salads posted on X. “The most defining characteristic of the left is ingratitude,” journalist Megan Basham posted on X. “He disrespects the critical role Italians and Catholics played in the founding of our nation,” former Trump official Ezra A. Cohen posted on X. “Shameful.” “What a disgusting socialist,” Florida GOP Chair Evan Power posted on X. “so u can be a nepo baby anchor baby who’s never had a job in your life and potentially become mayor of America’s largest city simply on the force of hating white people hard enough,” Foundation for Freedom Online executive director Mike Benz posted on X. “This communist clown needs to be sent back,” Federalist CEO Sean Davis posted on X. Fox News Digital reached out to Mamdani’s campaign but did not receive a response about the post, which is still visible on his X account as of Tuesday morning. Mamdani, a self-described democratic socialist, rocked the political landscape last month when he was victorious in New York City’s Democratic mayoral primary despite running on a platform filled with left-wing priorities and a track record that includes previous calls to defund the police. Mamdani, who was born in Uganda to parents from India, has become a target for moderate Democrats and Republicans over his socialist views and recently faced controversy after it was reported he identified as Asian and African American while applying to college. Mamdani is set to face off against several candidates in the general election this November, including current Mayor Eric Adams, who is running as an independent, Republican Curtis Sliwa, and former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
‘Bait and switch’: Schumer warns of bitter funding fight over GOP cuts plan
Senate Republicans are set to consider a multibillion-dollar package of cuts from the White House, but the top Senate Democrat warned that doing so could have consequences for a later government funding showdown. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., warned on Tuesday that the Senate GOP’s plan to move forward with a $9.4 billion rescissions package would have “grave implications” on Congress, particularly the forthcoming government funding fight in September. “Republicans’ passage of this purely partisan proposal would be an affront to the bipartisan appropriations process,” Schumer wrote in a letter to fellow Senate Democrats. 2 LONE REPUBLICANS VOTE AGAINST TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ AS IT HEADS TO PRESIDENT’S DESK “That’s why a number of Senate Republicans know it is absurd for them to expect Democrats to act as business as usual and engage in a bipartisan appropriations process to fund the government, while they concurrently plot to pass a purely partisan rescissions bill to defund those same programs negotiated on a bipartisan basis behind the scenes,” he continued. The rescissions package, proposed by the Impoundment Control Act, allows the White House to request that Congress roll back congressionally appropriated funding. Such proposed cuts must be approved by both chambers within 45 days. TAX CUTS, WORK REQUIREMENTS AND ASYLUM FEES: HERE’S WHAT’S INSIDE THE SENATE’S VERSION OF TRUMP’S BILL This package in particular, which narrowly squeaked through the House by a two-vote margin last month, would claw back $8.3 billion in funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and over $1 billion in cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the government-backed funding arm for NPR and PBS. The package, informed heavily by the cuts proposed by President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency, formerly helmed by tech billionaire Elon Musk, would only need to pass a simple majority in the upper chamber to pass. Musk and DOGE made USAID a primary target of their hunt for waste, fraud and abuse within the federal government, dismantling much of the long-standing organization ahead of the rescission request. The impending deadline to fund the government in September will either require the passage of a dozen appropriations bills – something Congress has not done in years – or the need to work with Democrats to crest the 60-vote threshold in the Senate. GOP LAWMAKERS REBUKE ELON MUSK’S PRIMARY THREATS, SAY TRUMP’S LEGISLATION ‘SOMETHING WE’VE GOT TO DO’ And the rescissions package is not wildly popular among Republicans. Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, R-Maine, said during a hearing on the package late last month that she was concerned about proposed cuts to the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and the CPB, and warned that cuts to the AIDS and HIV prevention program would be “extraordinarily ill-advised and shortsighted.” Schumer is no stranger to trying to leverage government funding fights to his advantage. Earlier this year, he withheld support for the House GOP-authored government funding extension before ultimately agreeing to the deal. That same scenario could play out once more come September. “This is beyond a bait-and-switch – it is a bait-and-poison-to-kill,” Schumer said. “Senate Republicans must reject this partisan path and instead work with Democrats on a bipartisan appropriations process.”