WASHINGTON: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi staged a record-breaking, eight-hour speech Wednesday in hopes of pressuring Republicans to allow a vote on protecting “Dreamer” immigrants — and to demonstrate to increasingly angry progressives and Democratic activists that she has done all she could.
Wearing four-inch heels and forgoing any breaks, Pelosi, 77, spent much of the rare talkathon reading personal letters from the young immigrants whose temporary protection from deportation is set to expire next month. The California Democrat quoted from the Bible and Pope Francis, as Democrats took turns sitting behind her in support. The Office of the House Historian said it was the longest continuous speech in the chamber on record.
“You see, these people are being deported,” Pelosi said around hour six. “We can do something today to at least make whole the children.”
Her remarks seemed partly aimed at the liberal wing of Pelosi’s own party, who seethed as Senate Democrats cut a budget deal with Republicans that could quickly steal the momentum behind the effort to resolve the Dreamers’ plight.
The wide-ranging budget accord says nothing about renewing the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, called DACA, which temporarily shields Dreamers — hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the country as children and living here illegally — from deportation. President Donald Trump has moved to annul DACA.
Pelosi said she’d oppose the budget deal unless GOP leaders agreed to hold a House vote on helping the Dreamers. But top Democrats said they weren’t corralling rank-and-file lawmakers to oppose the budget pact, leading some of the party’s immigration advocates to question the forcefulness of her opposition.
“I’m going to take everything she says at face value,” said Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Illinois “And then hopefully tomorrow she will validate that trust by stopping us from voting for it. If she doesn’t, then it was a nice speech.”
Pelosi’s performance had no immediate impact on Republican leaders, who have not scheduled a vote on the issue. AshLee Strong, spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, said Ryan “has already repeatedly stated we intend to do a DACA and immigration reform bill — one that the president supports.”
While Pelosi spoke, immigration activists rallied in Washington and threatened retribution against the congressional Democrats who abandoned the strategy of demanding that a budget accord be paired with an immigration deal. The fresh threats exposed deepening divisions within a Democratic Party struggling to address a liberal priority in Republican-controlled Washington.
“I’m not a loyal Democrat,” Linda Sarsour, a political activist who co-chaired the 2017 Women’s March, declared during a fiery rally near Capitol Hill. “We will be joining primaries this year and we will primary Democrats who did not have the spine or the courage to stand up for our undocumented family.”
The activists who filled a Washington church Wednesday, like liberal leaders nationwide, called out Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for failing to attach immigration legislation to a must-pass bill like the budget deal.
“What are they thinking? They’re giving up their leverage,” said a frustrated Angel Padilla, policy director for the liberal group Indivisible.
Pelosi started speaking around 10 a.m. and yielded the floor at 6:11 p.m. By the end, there was a quiver in her voice, a stumble over some words and a case of sniffles.
At one point she interrupted herself to read a note from the House historian alerting her that she had delivered the chamber’s longest continuous speech, besting Rep. Champ Clark’s five-hour, 15-minute stem-winder about tariff reform in 1909. In the Senate, where unthinkably long orations are more common, South Carolina Sen. Strom Thurmond spoke against the Civil Rights Act of 1957 for a record 24 hours and 18 minutes.
When Pelosi finished, around 50 Democrats responded with a standing ovation, high-fives, hugs and kisses. The Republican side of the chamber was virtually empty.
“We achieved the recognition of what the Dreamers mean to America,” she told reporters afterward. “They are a reflection of all the immigrants that have come before.”
The federal government will shutter non-essential operations Thursday at midnight unless Congress passes a spending plan.
Pelosi stages 8-hour speech to push for vote for ‘Dreamers’
Pelosi stages 8-hour speech to push for vote for ‘Dreamers’
Indian vets to be re-deployed as security guards in Kashmir, says Delhi
- Around 70 people were killed in violence last week in worst India-Pakistan fighting in decades
- Around 4,000 veterans have been “identified” as non-combatant volunteers, says Indian government
Srinagar, India: Military veterans will be redeployed as security guards in Indian-administered Kashmir, New Delhi said on Saturday, a week after it reached a ceasefire with Pakistan to end their most serious conflict in decades.
Around 70 people were killed in the violence, which was sparked by an attack on tourists by gunmen in Indian-administered Kashmir last month that New Delhi accused Islamabad of backing — a charge it denies.
The government of Jammu and Kashmir approved a “proposal for mobilizing Ex-Servicemen (ESM) to safeguard vital infrastructure across the Union Territory,” according to a government press release.
Around 4,000 veterans have been “identified” as non-combatant volunteers, out of which 435 have licensed personal weapons, it said.
This will help by “significantly enhancing the capacity to respond effectively to localized security situations,” the government added.
Veterans will work in “static guard” roles, focusing on “presence-based deterrence and local coordination.”
India already has an estimated half a million soldiers permanently deployed in the contested region that has been at the heart of several wars between the nuclear-armed neighbors, who administer separate portions of the divided territory.
Rebels in India’s Jammu and Kashmir have waged an insurgency since 1989, seeking independence or a merger with Pakistan.
Fighting had decreased since 2019, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government revoked the territory’s partial autonomy and imposed direct control from New Delhi.
But last year, thousands of additional troops, including special forces, were deployed across the territory’s mountainous south following a series of deadly rebel attacks that had left more than 50 soldiers dead in three years.
A similar veteran volunteer program took place with 2,500 veterans during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the government.
Trump claims the US is the only country with birthright citizenship. It’s not
- As enshrined in the US Constitution, citizenship is granted to anyone born in the US, regardless of the parents’ immigration status
- Most countries with unconditional birthright citizenship are concentrated in the Americas. The rest are in Africa and Asia
As the Supreme Court prepared to hear arguments Thursday on whether to allow President Donald Trump’s restrictions on birthright citizenship to take effect, he falsely claimed on Truth Social that the United States is the only country that offers such a right.
Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 20, the first day of his second term, that would deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are living in the US illegally or temporarily. It has been put on nationwide holds by lower court orders.
The administration is now appealing, on an emergency basis, the authority of individual judges to issue these rulings, known as nationwide, or universal, injunctions. The constitutionality of the executive order itself is not yet before the court.
Here’s a closer look at the facts.
Trump, discussing birthright citizenship in a Truth Social post: “The United States of America is the only Country in the World that does this, for what reason, nobody knows.”
The facts: This is not true. About 30 countries, including the US, offer unconditional birthright citizenship, according to the CIA World Factbook and the Library of Congress. Birthright citizenship was enshrined in the Constitution after the Civil War to ensure that formerly enslaved people would be citizens.
“The statement is pretty obviously wrong,” said Ilya Somin, a professor of law at George Mason University who is an expert on constitutional law and migration rights. “Many countries have birthright citizenship, though in some of them the rules are different from those in the US.”
Birthright citizenship is a principle known as jus soli or “right of the soil.” It bases citizenship on a person being born within a country’s territory. In contrast, the principle of jus sanguinis or “right of blood” determines citizenship based on the citizenship of one’s parents or other ancestors.
Citizenship is granted to anyone born in the US, regardless of the parents’ immigration status. Only children of diplomats, who have allegiance to another government, and of enemies present in the US during hostile occupation do not qualify. Those born to parents of sovereign Native American tribes were also excluded until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.
Most countries with unconditional birthright citizenship, among them Canada and Mexico, are concentrated in the Americas. The rest are in Africa and Asia. Some countries offer citizenship to those born in their territory to noncitizen parents only under certain conditions, such as the legal status of their parents or the age of the person applying for citizenship based on place of birth.
These are: Antigua & Barbados, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, El Salvador, The Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Lesotho, Mauritius, Mexico, Nepal, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts & Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Uruguay, Venezuela.
The first sentence of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, often referred to as the Citizenship Clause, guarantees birthright citizenship. It states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
This clause effectively overturned the notorious Dred Scott decision of 1857, in which the Supreme Court held that Black people, no matter whether or not they were enslaved, were not citizens. It was ratified, along with the rest of the 14th Amendment, in 1868 after it was passed by the Senate in 1866. The Civil War ended in 1865.
Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship conflicts with a Supreme Court decision from 1898 that held that the Citizenship Clause made citizens of all children born on US soil with narrow exceptions that are not at issue in the case currently before the court.
The justices are also considering appeals from the Trump administration on several other issues, many related to immigration.
Poland votes in tight election as Europe watches
- Warsaw's pro-EU mayor Rafal Trzaskowski face off with nationalist historian Karol Nawrocki
- Winner to succeed Andrzej Duda., who can't run again after serving two consecutive 5-year terms
WARSAW: Poles vote on Sunday in a tight presidential election that will be decisive for the future of the country’s centrist government as well as for abortion and LGBTQ rights.
Pro-EU Warsaw mayor Rafal Trzaskowski is expected to get 30 percent, ahead of nationalist historian Karol Nawrocki’s 25 percent, according to opinion polls.
That would put both through to the runoff on June 1 at a particularly fraught moment for Europe as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine drags on, far-right populists continue to rise and ties with Washington come under strain.
Polls open at 7:00 am (0500 GMT) and close at 9:00 p.m. when exit polls are to be released. There are 13 candidates in total and definitive results are expected only on Monday.
Ever since former EU leader Donald Tusk’s coalition came to power in 2023, key government initiatives have been blocked by the veto of nationalist President Andrzej Duda.
Some Poles are hoping that logjam is about to end.
“I hope that these elections will complete the change,” said Hubert Michalowski, a self-employed 50-year-old.
Michalowski told AFP he was opposed to any rightward turn for Poland and instead wanted his country to “stay in the center and reverse this trend in Europe as well.”
The electoral campaign in the European Union and NATO member has largely revolved around foreign policy, showcasing a clash of philosophies over Poland’s engagement with the EU and the United States.
But social issues have also played a major part.
Trzaskowski, 53, has promised to support abortion and LGBTQ rights — a prospect that has raised the hopes of Malgorzata Mikoszewska, 41, a tourism agency employee.
“Above all, I hope for the liberalization of the law on abortion and sexual minorities,” she said.
The Law and Justice party (PiS), which backs Nawrocki, was frequently at odds with Poland’s Western allies and EU institutions in Brussels over rule-of-law concerns. It lost power in 2023.
Nawrocki, 42, admires Donald Trump and said the US president told him “You will win” when they met at the White House earlier this month.
The key to the election could be whether supporters of Slawomir Mentzen, a far-right candidate polling in third position with around 12 percent, cast their ballots for Nawrocki in the second round.
Mentzen is a Euroskeptic libertarian staunchly against abortion and migrants. He has accused the country’s one million Ukrainian refugees of taking advantage of Poland.
Echoing some of Mentzen’s rhetoric, self-employed 25-year-old Radoslaw Wiecek said he did not want Poland to be “totally subject to the EU.”
Wiecek said he wanted “a fresh wind” to end the dominance of the two main political groups — Law and Justice and the Civic Coalition (KO) which backs Trzaskowski.
For Anna Urbanska, a 74-year-old pensioner, the key electoral issue is immigration.
“I don’t want these immigrants to be allowed in here, in Poland. I want us to be able to live more peacefully,” she said.The governing coalition is hopeful a victory by Trzaskowski would enable it to fulfil its hitherto undelivered campaign pledges.
Tusk’s administration has been stymied from easing Poland’s stringent abortion laws and introducing other changes by the head of state’s veto power, to the disappointment of some voters.
Poland’s president is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, steers foreign policy and can introduce and veto legislation.
“With Nawrocki as president, the government would be paralyzed, and that could eventually lead to the fall of the ruling coalition,” said political scientist Anna Materska-Sosnowska.
His victory could mean “the return of the populists with renewed force” at the next general election, she told AFP.
The stakes are high for Europe.
Under Tusk, Poland has grown more important on the continent, reinforcing its position as a key voice on NATO’s eastern flank against Russian aggression.
Materska-Sosnowska said the ballot was fundamental for “attempts to stop the anti-democratic, populist trend running through Europe.”
Vatican could be a venue for Russia-Ukraine talks, Rubio says, after pope renews an offer to help
- In a speech to eastern rite Catholics on May 8, Pope Leo XIV begged Russia and Ukraine to meet and negotiate
- The Vatican has a tradition of diplomatic neutrality and had long offered its services, and venues, to try to help facilitate talks
ROME: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Saturday that the Vatican could be a venue for Russia-Ukraine peace talks, taking up the Holy See’s longstanding offer after Pope Leo XIV vowed to personally make “every effort” to help end the war.
Speaking to reporters in Rome before meeting with Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, the Vatican point man on Ukraine, Rubio said that he would be discussing potential ways the Vatican could help, “the status of the talks, the updates after yesterday (Friday) and the path forward.”
Asked if the Vatican could be a peace broker, Rubio replied: “I wouldn’t call it broker, but it’s certainly — I think it’s a place that both sides would be comfortable going.”
“So we’ll talk about all of that and obviously always grateful to the Vatican for their willingness to play this constructive and positive role,” said Rubio, who also met Saturday with the Vatican secretary of state and foreign minister.
The Vatican has a tradition of diplomatic neutrality and had long offered its services, and venues, to try to help facilitate talks, but found itself sidelined during the all-out war, which began on Feb. 24, 2022.
Pope Francis, who occasionally angered both Kyiv and Moscow with his off-the-cuff comments, had entrusted Zuppi with a mandate to try to find paths of peace. But the mandate seemed to narrow to help facilitate the return of Ukrainian children taken by Russia, and the Holy See also was able to mediate some prisoner exchanges.
During their meeting at the US Embassy in Rome, Rubio thanked Zuppi for the Vatican’s humanitarian role, citing in particular prisoner swaps and the return of Ukrainian children. Rubio “emphasized the importance of continued collaboration under the new leadership of Pope Leo XIV,” US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said.
Leo, who was elected history’s first American pope on May 8, took up Francis’ call for peace in Ukraine in his first Sunday noon blessing as pope. He appealed for all sides to do whatever possible to reach “an authentic, just and lasting peace.”
Leo, who as a bishop in Peru had called Russia’s war an “imperialist invasion,” vowed this week personally to “make every effort so that this peace may prevail.”
In a speech to eastern rite Catholics, including the Greek Catholic Church of Ukraine, Leo begged warring sides to meet and negotiate.
“The Holy See is always ready to help bring enemies together, face to face, to talk to one another, so that peoples everywhere may once more find hope and recover the dignity they deserve, the dignity of peace,” he said.
The Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, repeated the Vatican’s offer to serve as a venue for direct talks, saying the failure of negotiations in Istanbul to reach a ceasefire this week was “tragic.”
“We had hoped it could start a process, slow but positive, toward a peaceful solution to the conflict,” Parolin said on the sidelines of a conference. “But instead we’re back to the beginning.”
Asked concretely what such an offer would entail, Parolin said that the Vatican could serve as a venue for a direct meeting between the two sides.
“One would aim to arrive at this, that at least they talk. We’ll see what happens. It’s an offer of a place,” he said.
“We have always said, repeated to the two sides that we are available to you, with all the discretion needed,” Parolin said.
The Vatican scored what was perhaps its greatest diplomatic achievement of the Francis pontificate when it facilitated the talks between the United States and Cuba in 2014 that resulted in the resumption of diplomatic relations.
The Holy See has also often hosted far less secret diplomatic initiatives, such as when it brought together the rival leaders of South Sudan in 2019. The encounter was made famous by the image of Francis bending down to kiss their feet to beg them to make peace.
Perhaps the Holy See’s most critical diplomatic initiative came during the peak of the Cuban missile crisis when, in the fall of 1962, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev ordered a secret deployment of nuclear missiles in Cuba that were soon detected by US spy planes.
As the Kennedy administration considered its response, with the threat of nuclear war looming, Pope John XXIII pleaded for peace in a public radio address, in a speech to Vatican ambassadors and also wrote privately to Kennedy and Khruschev, appealing to their love of their people to stand down.
Many historians have credited John XXIII’s appeals with helping both sides step back from the brink of nuclear war.
Trump warns Walmart: Don’t raise prices due to my tariffs but do eat the costs from those taxes
- "I’ll be watching," Trump warned, adding that Walmart "made billions of dollars last year, far more than expected"
- Walmart warned on Thursday that everything from bananas to children’s car seats could increase in price
WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump on Saturday ripped into Walmart, saying on social media that the retail giant should eat the additional costs created by his tariffs.
As Trump has jacked up import taxes, he has tried to assure a skeptical public that foreign producers would pay for those taxes and that retailers and automakers would absorb the additional expenses. Most economic analyzes are deeply skeptical of those claims and have warned that the trade penalties would worsen inflation. Walmart warned on Thursday that everything from bananas to children’s car seats could increase in price.
Trump, in his Truth Social post, lashed out at the retailer, which employs 1.6 million people in the United States. He said the company, based in Bentonville, Arkansas, should sacrifice its profits for the sake of his economic agenda that he says will eventually lead to more domestic jobs in manufacturing.
“Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain,” Trump posted. “Walmart made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS last year, far more than expected. Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, “EAT THE TARIFFS,” and not charge valued customers ANYTHING. I’ll be watching, and so will your customers!!!”
The posting by the Republican president reflected the increasingly awkward series of choices that many major American companies face as a result of his tariffs, from deteriorating sales to the possibility of incurring Trump’s wrath. Trump has similarly warned domestic automakers to not raise their prices, even though outside analyzes say his tariffs would raise production costs.
So far, those tariffs have darkened the mood of an otherwise resilient US economy. The preliminary reading of the University of Michigan survey of consumer sentiment on Friday slipped to its second lowest measure on record, with roughly 75 percent of respondents “spontaneously” mentioning tariffs as they largely expected inflation to accelerate.
In April, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon was among the retail executives who met with Trump at the White House to discuss tariffs. But the Trump administration went forward despite warnings and has attacked other companies such as Amazon and Apple that are struggling with the disruptions to their supply chains.
Walmart chief financial officer John David Rainey said he thinks $350 car seats made in China will soon cost an additional $100, a 29 percent price increase.
“We’re wired to keep prices low, but there’s a limit to what we can bear, or any retailer for that matter,” he told The Associated Press on Thursday after the company reported strong first-quarter sales.
The administration recently ratcheted down its 145 percent tariffs on China to 30 percent for a 90-day period. Trump has placed tariffs as high as 25 percent on Mexico and Canada due to illegal immigration and drug trafficking, harming the relationship with America’s two largest trading partners.
There is a universal baseline tariff of 10 percent on most countries as Trump promises to reach trade deals in the coming weeks after having shocked the financial markets in early April by charging higher import taxes based on trade deficits with other countries. Trump insists he intends to preserve the tariffs as a revenue source and that a framework agreement with the United Kingdom would largely keep the 10 percent tariff rate in place.
Trump has also placed import taxes on autos, steel and aluminum and plans to do so on pharmaceutical drugs, among other products.
The tariffs and Trump’s own reversals on how much he should charge have generated uncertainty across the US economy, such that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has held the central bank’s benchmark rates steady until there is more clarity. Powell has warned that tariffs can both hurt growth and raise prices.
On Saturday, Trump repeated his calls for Powell to cut the benchmark rates. That could cause inflation to accelerate, but the president has maintained that inflationary pressures have largely disappeared from the economy.
“Too Late Powell, a man legendary for being Too Late, will probably blow it again — But who knows???” Trump posted on Truth Social.
