“The flights suggest the Trump administration may be growing more brazen in its defiance of judicial restraint. The U.S. Constitution established the judiciary as a co-equal and independent branch of government.
Trump has sought to push the boundaries of executive power since taking office in January, cutting spending authorized by Congress, dismantling agencies and firing tens of thousands of federal workers.”
…
“On Monday, Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, said the flights were already in international airspace when the judge’s orders came and that more flights would continue.
“Once you’re outside the border, you know, it is what it is. But they’re in international waters, already on the way south, close to landing. You know what? … We did what we had to do,” he told Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” program.
Asked what was next, Homan said: “Another flight, another flight every day.”
“We’re not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think,” he added.”
“Trump’s administration axed temporary protections for Venezuelan immigrants in the early days of his second term. In less than a month, hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans nationally stand to lose temporary protected status, opening them up to deportation — leaving South Florida Republican Reps. Maria Elvira Salazar, Mario Diaz-Balart and Carlos Gimenez scrambling to try to convince Trump to change his mind.”
“because executive branch officials interpret and enforce thickets of laws and administrative rules under which we try to live, guidance from the boss is powerful. Interpreted one way, a rule regulating unfinished gun parts leaves people free to pursue their hobbies; interpreted another, and those owning the parts are suddenly felons. The president can push interpretations either way.”
“The country’s air force has recommended buying the jets, but the outgoing defense minister said “the predictability of our allies” must be taken into account when making procurement decisions.”
“The Senate minority leader, both privately to his caucus Thursday and in a floor speech shortly after, said he would vote to advance a GOP-written stopgap to fund the government through September. He said Republicans’ spending bill is “very bad.” But he argued the “potential for a shutdown has consequences for America that are much, much worse” and would empower President Donald Trump and Elon Musk to further gut federal agencies.”
“Putin, meanwhile, has had the measure of his Washington opponents — and on Thursday, he demonstrated he understands Trump’s psychology. Praise the man while deflecting him; pat him on the head — something Ukraine’s passionate President Volodymyr Zelenskyy almost fatally forgot to do in his Oval Office meeting last month, prompting a hasty ejection from the White House.
There was no firm Russian nyet to stoke the U.S. leader’s anger, rather a teacher’s applause for Trump’s idea and effort.
The temporary truce was “correct” and “we support it,” the Russian leader said, but, alas, there were many sticking points. Ukrainian units had nearly been encircled in a salient in Russia’s Kursk region and could be forced to “surrender or die,” he explained. Why should they just be let go? “If we stop hostilities for 30 days, what does that mean? That everyone who is there will go out without a fight?”
During the pause in hostilities, will Ukraine be able to mobilize fresh troops and receive weapons from the West? “How will supervision be organized? These are all serious questions.” He then added: “I think we need to talk to our American colleagues … Maybe have a phone call with President Trump and discuss this with him.”
It was all drawn from the playbook that he and his lugubrious Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov have used time and again: Obfuscate, delay, muddle, throw in some whataboutism, be sorrowfully unctuous, but make sure to dangle a carrot.”
…
““Trump is much more concerned about this deal than about Ukraine,” Bondarev said. “That gives Putin leverage.””
“In the states’ case, filed in Baltimore’s federal court, the attorneys general argued that the administration had violated a 6-day notice requirement for so-called reductions in force – or RIFS – as well as other procedural steps for such mass terminations. The administration countered that no such notice was required for the layoffs, done quickly in early days of the administration, because federal law allows the government to terminate probationary employees under certain circumstances without any heads up.
Bredar on Thursday rejected the administration’s arguments that the terminations fit into a category not requiring notice because the employees were fired because of their substandard performance.
“Here, the terminated probationary employees were plainly not terminated for cause,” Bredar wrote in a 56-page opinion. “The sheer number of employees that were terminated in a matter of days belies any argument that these terminations were due to the employees’ individual unsatisfactory performance or conduct.””
…
“The upshot of Bredar’s ruling, as he acknowledged at a hearing Tuesday, is that the administration would be allowed to lay off the employees en masse if it went through the proper RIF procedures, including the advance notice. His ruling also noted the administration is free to fire individualized employees without following the RIF rules if they are being fired for cause, “on the basis of good-faith individualized determinations.””
…
“The Trump administration has been targeting probationary workers because they have fewer job protections and can be dismissed more easily. Federal probationary employees have typically been in their positions for one year, but some jobs have two-year probationary periods. The employees may be new to the federal workforce, but they also could have been recently promoted or shifted to a different agency.”