MADISON, Wisconsin: President Donald Trump lost a federal lawsuit Saturday while his attorney was arguing his case before a skeptical Wisconsin Supreme Court in another lawsuit that liberal justices said “smacks of racism” and would disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters only in the state’s most diverse counties.
US District Judge Brett Ludwig, a Trump appointee, dismissed Trump’s federal lawsuit asking the court to order the Republican-controlled Legislature to name Trump the winner over Democrat Joe Biden. The judge said Trump’s arguments “fail as a matter of law and fact.”
The ruling came as Trump attorney Jim Troupis faced a barrage of questions about his claims from both liberal and conservative justices on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Troupis asked the court to toss more than 221,000 absentee ballots, including his own, saying they were cast fraudulently based on incorrect interpretations of the law by elections officials.
“What you want is for us to overturn this election so that your king can stay in power,” said liberal Justice Jill Karofsky. “That is so un-American.”
Trump also suffered a total defeat in a lower court in Wisconsin on Friday, with Reserve Judge Stephen Simanek ruling against every argument Trump made challenging ballots in the state’s two largest counties, saying the election was properly administered and that there was no wrongdoing as the president alleged.
“The bottom line here is that the court should do everything to ensure that the will of the voters prevail,” the judge said.
Conservative justices appeared to be sympathetic to some issues raised by Trump, but also questioned how they could fairly disqualify ballots only in the two counties where Trump sought a recount and not other counties where the same procedures were followed.
Biden attorney John Devaney said tossing any ballots in just those two counties would be a violation of the Constitution’s equal protection clause.
Trump is challenging ballots only in Milwaukee and Dane counties, the state’s most liberal counties with the largest non-white populations. He is not challenging any votes in more conservative counties where he won.
“This lawsuit, Mr. Troupis, smacks of racism,” Karofsky said. “I do not know how you can come before this court and possibly ask for a remedy that is unheard of in US history. ... It is not normal.”
Justice Rebecca Dallet, another liberal justice, questioned why Trump didn’t raise his same concerns about the absentee ballot process in the 2016 election that he won in Wisconsin. Troupis said Trump was not an aggrieved party that year.
Chief Justice Patience Roggensack, a conservative, voiced concerns with ballots that the city of Madison collected over two weekends at parks, saying that appeared to be the same as early voting, which had not started yet.
Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley also implied that the court must not allow for ballots to be counted if they were cast contrary to the law. But she questioned how the court could fairly disqualify more than 28,000 ballots cast by people who said they were indefinitely confined, given that some were.
The court in March said it was up to individual voters to determine whether they were “indefinitely confined,” a designation allowed voters to cast absentee ballots without showing a valid photo ID.
During Saturday’s arguments, other conservative justices raised concerns with allowing election officials to fill in missing information on envelopes that contain absentee ballots. And Troupis, who voted that way, said that he believes his vote was cast illegally and should be discounted.
Biden won Wisconsin by about 20,600 votes, a margin of 0.6% that withstood a Trump-requested recount in Milwaukee and Dane counties.
Biden’s attorney asked the court to rule before Monday, when Wisconsin’s 10 Electoral College votes are scheduled to be cast for Biden. Trump asked for a ruling before Jan. 6, the day Congress counts the Electoral College votes.
Trump and his allies have suffered dozens of defeats in Wisconsin and across the country in lawsuits that rely on unsubstantiated claims of widespread fraud and election abuse.
On Friday evening, the US Supreme Court rejected a Texas lawsuit that sought to invalidate Biden’s win by throwing out millions of votes in four battleground states, including Wisconsin.
Also Saturday, former Trump campaign attorney Sidney Powell asked the US Supreme Court to hear a federal case she lost in Wisconsin seeking to order the GOP-controlled Legislature to declare Trump the winner. Powell has lost similar cases in Georgia and Arizona.
Trump loses Wisconsin case while arguing another one
https://arab.news/bawas
Trump loses Wisconsin case while arguing another one
- US District Judge Brett Ludwig, a Trump appointee, said Trump’s arguments “fail as a matter of law and fact”
- Trump and his allies have suffered dozens of defeats in Wisconsin and across the country in lawsuits
Sweden grants lowest ever number of residence permits to asylum seekers in 2024
The number of people in Sweden, who were born abroad has doubled in the past two decades to about a fifth of its 10.5-milion population
STOCKHOLM: Sweden granted the lowest number of residence permits to asylum seekers and their relatives on record in 2024, a boost for the right-wing government which pledged on Friday to keep bringing the number down further.
Sweden’s minority government and its backers, the far-right and anti-immigration Sweden Democrats, won the 2022 election on a promise to keep reducing immigration and gang crime, which they say are linked.
Since then it has introduced and proposed several measures to make Sweden less attractive to immigrants, such as making it harder to become a citizen and gain residence permits, less generous rules for bringing family members to Sweden and slashed the number of UNHCR quota immigrants accepted.
According to Swedish Migration Agency data 6,250 asylum seekers and their relatives were given residency permits in 2024, down 42 percent compared to when the government came into power and the lowest number since comparable records began in 1985.
“I think it will need to continue to decrease,” Migration Minister Johan Forssell told a news conference. “We now have a historically low asylum rate, but that should be put in relation to a number of years when it has been at very high levels.”
The number of people in Sweden, who were born abroad has doubled in the past two decades to about a fifth of its 10.5-milion population.
The country recorded a peak of just over 86,000 granted asylum related residency permits in 2016, the year after the migration crisis when 163,000 people sought asylum in Sweden, the highest number per capita in the EU.
Since then Sweden has reversed generous immigration policies, fueled by the rise of the Sweden Democrats, which first made it in to parliament in 2010 but in the last election won 20.5 percent of the vote to become the second-biggest party.
The policies have drawn harsh criticism from human rights groups, which say that the government is falsely making immigrants responsible for Sweden’s problems and risking eroding civil rights and protections.
The government is actively encouraging immigrants to return to their home countries and has earmarked 3 billion Swedish crowns ($269.18 million) for repatriation grants. Starting next year immigrants to Sweden can get 350,000 Swedish crowns to return, up from the current 10,000 crowns.
Special UK unit to track down soldiers over deaths of Afghan civilians
- Ministry of Defence team tasked with finding ex-personnel wanted in connection with alleged killings between 2010, 2013
- Afghan Inquiry established in 2022 following Times, BBC investigations
LONDON: The UK Ministry of Defence has instructed a special unit to find former elite soldiers wanted in connection with alleged killings of Afghan civilians, The Times reported on Friday.
The Afghan Inquiry Response Unit will locate people named by sources in relation to the alleged war crimes covered by the Afghan Inquiry.
It will use information including the addresses of people drawing military pensions to track down those wanted for questioning.
The AIRU, which was set up in 2023, includes military personnel, civil servants, former police detectives and a specialist Metropolitan Police counterterrorist officer.
The Afghan Inquiry is looking into claims that UK special forces members killed unarmed Afghans during night raids across a three-year period of operations, and attempted to hide evidence of wrongdoing.
The Afghan Inquiry was established in 2022 after investigations by The Times and the BBC uncovered claims that UK Special Air Force units killed numerous Afghan civilians between 2010 and 2013, including an incident where three boys aged 12, 14 and 16 were killed while drinking tea in their home.
The inquiry has the power to compel witness testimony under threat of imprisonment, but has had to contend with issues including former serving personnel not keeping contact with their regiments and some witnesses refusing to give evidence.
Former Veterans Minister Johnny Mercer was threatened with jail last year after he refused to give up the names of soldiers who had told him about alleged war crimes.
Saudi-based doctor receives highest award for overseas Indians
- Dr. Syed Anwar Khursheed among 27 awardees of this year’s Pravasi Bharatiya Samman
- He has served at King Faisal Hospital in Taif and as Royal Protocol physician in Riyadh
NEW DELHI: Dr. Syed Anwar Khursheed, one of the longest-serving Indian physicians in Saudi Arabia, received on Friday the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award, the highest honor conferred by India’s president on nationals based overseas.
Dr. Khursheed was born in Gulbarga city in the southwestern state of Karnataka and has spent most of his professional life — more than 40 years — in the Kingdom.
He has served for three decades at King Faisal Hospital in Taif and nearly a decade as a Royal Protocol physician in Riyadh, was involved in the COVID-19 response, and has overseen critical care operations and medical assistance to Hajj pilgrims.
He has also contributed to education, founding the International Indian School in Taif, and provided guidance on the establishment of other schools for the Indian community in Saudi Arabia.
Dr. Khursheed usually travels to India twice a year to see his relatives and hometown, but this time the visit is different, coming with a recognition that he did not expect.
“My heart rate is higher this time,” he told Arab News, as he arrived in India to take part in the ceremony in Bhubaneswar, Odisha.
“I really felt excited, thrilled when the award was announced. I was not in the race for the award. I am aware of the honor associated with the award, the prestige it has ... I will be joining an elite club of the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman awardees and meet top-level personalities from around the globe. It’s a lifetime achievement.”
Established in 2003, the annual award celebrates the exceptional contributions of overseas Indians in various fields, including medicine, community service, education, business and public affairs.
Dr. Khursheed is among 27 recipients of this year’s Pravasi Bharatiya Samman, and the only one based in Saudi Arabia. He received the award from President Droupadi Murmu.
“Dr. Syed Anwar Khursheed is a distinguished physician with 45 years of experience in public health care and is one of the longest-serving physicians in the government sector. Having spent three decades at the King Faisal Hospital, he was a part of the Medical Protocol Department of the Royal Saudi Family for eight years. He also oversaw critical care operations in the Hajj program at Minah and Arafat,” Suhel Ajaz Khan, India’s ambassador to the Kingdom, told Arab News.
“The Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award to Dr. Syed Anwar Khursheed is a matter of great pride for the Indian diaspora in Saudi Arabia, since it is the highest honor conferred on overseas Indians by the Hon’ble President of India. The award has recognized Dr. Khursheed’s outstanding achievements in the field of medical science and health care, and his long-standing contribution to the welfare of the Indian community in Saudi Arabia.”
More than 2.65 million Indians live and work in Saudi Arabia. They constitute the second-largest Indian community in the Middle East after the UAE.
Among the previous recipients of the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award from Saudi Arabia are Dr. Majid Kazi, personal physician to King Fahd bin Abdulaziz, who was honored with Pravasi Bharatiya Samman in 2006, and Rafiuddin Fazulbhoy, social worker and the founder of Indian International School in Jeddah, who received it in 2008.
In 2011, the award was conferred to renowned pediatrician Dr. M.S. Karimuddin, and in 2014 to Shihab Kottukad, a social worker engaged in assisting the poorest Indian laborers in the Kingdom.
Educationist Zeenat Jafri, who started the first Indian school in Riyadh, was awarded Pravasi Bharatiya Samman in 2017. In 2021, the recognition was granted to Dr. Siddeek Ahmed, investor and philanthropist based in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province.
Kremlin says Putin ready for talks with Trump
- Incoming US president has said he can bring a swift end to the nearly three-year conflict between Russia and Ukraine
- Washington has delivered tens of billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine since Russia launched its military offensive
MSOCOW: The Kremlin said Friday that President Vladimir Putin was open to talks with Donald Trump, after the incoming US president said a meeting between the pair was being set up.
Trump, who will be inaugurated on January 20, has said he can bring a swift end to the nearly three-year conflict between Russia and Ukraine, without presenting a concrete plan.
“The president has repeatedly stated his openness to contact with international leaders, including the US president, including Donald Trump,” Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
Trump on Thursday said a meeting with Putin was being arranged.
“He wants to meet, and we’re setting it up,” Trump said at a meeting with Republican governors at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida.
“President Putin wants to meet, he’s said that even publicly, and we have to get that war over with, that’s a bloody mess,” he said.
The Kremlin welcomed Trump’s “readiness to solve problems through dialogue,” Peskov said Friday, adding Moscow had no prerequisites for staging the meeting.
“No conditions are required. What is required is mutual desire and political will to solve problems through dialogue,” he told reporters in a daily briefing.
Trump’s hopes for a swift end to the conflict have stoked concern in Kyiv that Ukraine could be forced to accept a peace deal on terms favorable to Moscow.
Washington has delivered tens of billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale military offensive in February 2022.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said that without such support his country would have lost the conflict.
He is pushing Trump to back his “peace-through-strength” proposal, seeking NATO protections and concrete Western security guarantees as part of any settlement to end the fighting.
Ukraine’s foreign ministry dismissed Trump’s comments on any forthcoming meeting with Putin.
“Trump has talked about plans for such a meeting before, so we see nothing new in this,” said spokesman Georgiy Tykhy.
“Our position is very simple: we all in Ukraine want to end the war fairly for Ukraine, and we see that President Trump is also determined to end the war,” he said, according to the Interfax Ukraine news agency.
Tykhy said Ukraine was preparing for high-level discussions between Kyiv and Washington “immediately” after the inauguration, including between Trump and Zelensky.
The Supreme Court is considering a possible TikTok ban. Here’s what to know about the case
- Three appeals court judges have sided with the government and upheld the law, which bans TikTok unless it’s sold
- The justices largely hold the app’s fate in their hands as they hear the case Friday
WASHINGTON: The law that could ban TikTok is coming before the Supreme Court on Friday, with the justices largely holding the app’s fate in their hands.
The popular social media platform says the law violates the First Amendment and should be struck down.
TikTok’s parent company is based in China, and the US government says that means it is a potential national security threat. Chinese authorities could force it to hand over sensitive data on the huge number of Americans who use it or could influence the spread of information on the platform, they say.
An appeals court has upheld the law, which bans TikTok unless it’s sold.
The law is set to take effect Jan. 19, the day before a new term begins for President-elect Donald Trump, who has 14.7 million followers on the platform. The Republican says he wants to “save TikTok.”
Here are some key things to know about the case:
Is TikTok banned?
Not now, but the short-form video-sharing app could be shut down in less than two weeks if the Supreme Court upholds the law.
Congress passed the measure with bipartisan support, and President Joe Biden, a Democrat, signed it into law in April.
TikTok’s lawyers challenged the law in court, joined by users and content creators who say a ban would upend their livelihoods. TikTok says the national security concerns are based on inaccurate and hypothetical information.
But a unanimous appeals court panel made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents has upheld the law.
When will the Supreme Court decide?
The justices will issue a decision after arguments Friday, a lightning-fast movement by court standards.
The conservative-majority court could drop clues about how it’s leaning during oral arguments.
TikTok lawyers have urged the justices to step in before the law takes effect, saying even a monthlong shutdown would cause the app to lose about one-third of its daily American users and significant advertising revenue.
The court could quickly block the law from going into effect before issuing a final ruling, if at least five of the nine justices think it is unconstitutional.
What has Trump said about it?
The law is to take effect Jan. 19, the day before Trump takes over as president.
He took the unusual step of filing court documents asking the Supreme Court to put the law on hold so that he could negotiate a deal for the sale of TikTok after he takes office. His position marked the latest example of him inserting himself into national issues before he takes office. It also was a change from his last presidential term, when he wanted to ban it.
Parent company ByteDance has previously said it has no plans to sell. Trump met with TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, last month.
Who else is weighing in?
Free-speech advocacy groups like the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have urged the court to block the law, saying the government hasn’t shown credible evidence of harm and a ban would cause “extraordinary disruption” in Americans’ lives.
On the other side, Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican former Senate leader, and a group of 22 states have filed briefs in support, arguing that the law protects free speech by safeguarding Americans’ data and preventing the possible manipulation of information on the platform by Chinese authorities.
