World News
Republicans threaten colleges, foreign students over response to Israel-Hamas war on October 25, 2023 at 10:00 am
Republicans furious over colleges’ response to Hamas’s recent attacks on Israel are threatening universities’ funding and the visas of foreign students, though legal experts are divided on if such moves would stand up in court.
“Under the Trump administration, we will revoke the student visas of radical anti-American and antisemitic foreigners at our colleges and universities and we will send them straight back home,” former President Trump said in Iowa.
Several of his GOP primary challengers are calling for similar actions.
While First Amendment experts balk at the idea, there are split opinions on how the issue would fall legally in the courts.
“I think both of these ideas are nonsense and completely antithetical to the spirit of the First Amendment,” said Jared Carter, an assistant professor of law at Vermont Law and Graduate School.
The issue arose after multiple universities across the country had student groups who released statements that praised Hamas or blamed Israel for the initial Oct. 7 terror attack.
The biggest controversy came out of Harvard, where more than 30 student groups initially signed a statement after the Hamas attack that said they “hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.”
That led to fresh calls from Republican presidential candidates such as Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Sen. Tim Scott (S.C.) to stop funding to these schools and kick out of the country foreign students who participated in such statements or protests.
Scott said in an interview on “The Sean Hannity Show” that student protesters in support of Hamas who are on here on visas “should be sent back to their country.”
And DeSantis said over the weekend, “When I’m president, if foreign students are out there celebrating terrorism, I will cancel their visas and send them home.”
While the president could try to issue an executive order to enact this sort of policy, experts are divided on if such a move would survive court challenges.
Republicans such as Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Tom Cotton (Ark.) have also recently made moves advocating for foreigners who support Hamas to lose their visas.
Supporters of the expulsions say individuals who aren’t American citizens don’t have the same free speech rights. Others, while not agreeing with that position, acknowledge the courts have taken the position that there are differences in First Amendment rights between the groups.
“In my view, unfortunately, that’s correct. The courts have been much more permissive in allowing the federal government to manage immigration both allowing people in and deport based on political viewpoints. They’ve just been more permissive under the First Amendment,” Carter said.
“There’s a series of U.S. Supreme Court cases that basically say that in making determinations about whether or not somebody should be admitted or have a visa in the United States that the government can consider their political viewpoints, which obviously, for residents and U.S. citizens, that would be completely inconsistent with the First Amendment,” Carter said. “So I think that the president has more flexibility when it comes to immigration.”
But Kevin Goldberg, a First Amendment specialist at Freedom Forum, says it is clear-cut that both groups in the country have the same free speech rights.
“Once you’re in the country, you receive the protection of the First Amendment, whether you’re a citizen or not,” Goldberg said.
The vagueness in the proposals from the presidential candidates on what a college student would have to say to be punished “raises serious First Amendment concerns,” he added.
Much of the protests among students have been calling for a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas or denouncing actions taken by Israel after the country declared war on Hamas. Others have participated in protests such as one in New York City, which lawmakers on both sides of the aisle denounced for antisemitism.
The GOP 2024 hopefuls are also looking at defunding colleges that have allowed these protests to happen or did not release statements quickly enough condemning Hamas.
Scott introduced legislation in the Senate last week to ban federal student aid to schools that allow antisemitic events to occur.
“Any university or college that peddles blatant antisemitism, especially after Hamas’ brutal attack on Israeli civilians, women and children, has no place molding the minds of future generations, never mind receiving millions of taxpayer funds to do so,” Scott said.
Legal experts, however, believe the courts would clearly rule against efforts by Congress or a president to cut funding to schools based on their students’ viewpoints.
“I think if a president tried to withhold funding from colleges, universities simply because they had an organization on campus that supported Palestinians, I think the likelihood of that being constitutional is very low,” Carter said. “And, furthermore, particularly state universities, the Supreme Court has said that the First Amendment applies to actions by state universities, so if a state university said they were going to fund student groups and they decided not to fund the student group because it’s supported Palestinians, then I think the school would be susceptible to being sued for violating the students’ First Amendment rights.”
“And so I just think that it’s absurd to think that a president can come in and tell schools they will pull funding from schools that simply are complying with their constitutional obligations,” he added.
Republicans furious over colleges’ response to Hamas’s recent attacks on Israel are threatening universities’ funding and the visas of foreign students, though legal experts are divided on if such moves would stand up in court. “Under the Trump administration, we will revoke the student visas of radical anti-American and antisemitic foreigners at our colleges and…
Business
GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT RETURNS FOR ITS 5TH EDITION AT THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT – HOUSE OF LORDS, PALACE OF WESTMINSTER
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Theme: “People, Planet, and Profit in the Age of AI and Innovation”
London, United Kingdom — The Global Sustainability Summit (GSS) is officially back for its landmark 5th Edition, continuing its legacy as one of the leading international platforms driving sustainable development, climate action, ethical investment, innovation, and global collaboration.
Convened annually at the prestigious British Parliament, House of Lords, Palace of Westminster, by Ambassador Canon Chinenem Otto, the Summit has, over the last four years, successfully fostered international dialogue and partnerships that have contributed to the advancement of global sustainability goals, the establishment of sustainability-focused ministries, departments and policy structures across national and subnational governments, and the attraction of major investors into sustainable development projects, corporations and emerging economies.
This year’s summit, themed “People, Planet, and Profit in the Age of AI and Innovation,” will explore how emerging technologies, responsible leadership, sustainable finance, innovation, and global partnerships can shape a more inclusive, resilient and environmentally conscious future.
The 5th Edition promises to be the most impactful yet, bringing together world leaders, policymakers, diplomats, investors, academics, innovators, climate experts and youth leaders from across the globe to discuss actionable solutions toward achieving a sustainable and equitable future.
Among the distinguished speakers, delegates and honorees already lined up for the Summit are:
• His Excellency Mallam AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq — Executive Governor of Kwara State, Nigeria and Chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum
• His Excellency Senator Prince Bassey Otu — Executive Governor of Cross River State, Nigeria
• Ambassador Patricia Espinosa Cantellano — Former Executive Secretary of UN Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Former Foreign Minister of Mexico
• Lord Marvin Rees, Baron Rees of Easton OBE — Member of the House of Lords, United Kingdom
• Hon. Neema K. Lugangira — Secretary-General of Women Political Leaders (WPL), Brussels and Former Member of Parliament
• Her Excellency Dr. Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah — President of the Republic of Namibia
• His Excellency Nangolo Mbumba — Former President of Namibia
• Former President of Tanzania
• Her Excellency Ambassador Professor Olufolake AbdulRazaq — First Lady of Kwara State, Nigeria and Chairperson of Nigeria Governors’ Spouses Forum
• Your Excellency Dr. Dikko Umar Radda, PhD, CON — Executive Governor of Katsina State and Chairman of the Northwest Governors Forum, Nigeria
• Hon. Sam Shafiishuna Nujoma — Governor of Khomas Region, Namibia
• H.E. Mr. Veiccoh Nghiwete — High Commissioner of the Republic of Namibia to the United Kingdom
• Her Excellency Ms. Macenje “Che Che” Mazoka — High Commissioner of Zambia to the United Kingdom
• Ms. Danielle Newman — Partner Lead, ICT, World Economic Forum
• Leanne Elliott Young — Co-founder, Institute of Digital Fashion & CommuneEast
• Ms. Chloe Russell — Producer & Presenter, Art, Science and Nature
• Professor Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger — University of Cambridge & University of Waterloo
• Dr. Alexandra R. Harrington — IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law (WCEL)
• Professor Payam Akhavan — Massey College, University of Toronto
• Mr. Mallai C. E. Sathya — President, Dravida Vetri Kazhagam and International Movement for Tamil Culture Asia
The Summit will feature high-level panel discussions, strategic investment conversations, sustainability awards, policy dialogues, innovation showcases, youth engagement sessions and international networking opportunities focused on climate resilience, ethical financing, food-water-energy sustainability, circular economy, artificial intelligence, diplomacy and sustainable development.
Speaking ahead of the Summit, Convener Ambassador Canon Chinenem Otto noted:
“As the world rapidly evolves through artificial intelligence and technological innovation, we must ensure that sustainability remains people-centered, environmentally responsible and economically inclusive. The Global Sustainability Summit continues to serve as a bridge connecting governments, institutions, innovators and investors to accelerate practical sustainability solutions globally. Our fifth edition is not only a celebration of progress made over the years, but also a renewed call for global collaboration and actionable impact toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and Net Zero ambitions.”
The Global Sustainability Summit continues to position itself as a catalyst for transformative partnerships and sustainable global progress, reinforcing the urgent need for collective action toward a more resilient and sustainable future.
More announcements regarding additional speakers, partners and summit activities will be unveiled in the coming weeks.
President Donald Trump says the United States might one day get rid of federal income tax because of money the government collects from tariffs on imported goods. Tariffs are extra taxes the U.S. puts on products that come from other countries.
What Trump Is Saying
Trump has said that tariff money could become so large that it might allow the government to cut income taxes “almost completely.” He has also talked about possibly phasing out income tax over the next few years if tariff money keeps going up.
How Taxes Work Now
Right now, the federal government gets much more money from income taxes than from tariffs. Income taxes bring in trillions of dollars each year, while tariffs bring in only a small part of that total. Because of this gap, experts say tariffs would need to grow by many times to replace income tax money.
Questions From Experts
Many economists and tax experts doubt that tariffs alone could pay for the whole federal budget. They warn that very high tariffs could make many imported goods more expensive for shoppers in the United States. This could hit lower- and middle‑income families hardest, because they spend a big share of their money on everyday items.
What Congress Must Do
The president can change some tariffs, but only Congress can change or end the federal income tax. That means any real plan to remove income tax would need new laws passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate. So far, there is no detailed law or full budget plan on this idea.
What It Means Right Now
For now, Trump’s comments are a proposal, not a change in the law. People and businesses still have to pay federal income tax under the current rules. The debate over using tariffs instead of income taxes is likely to continue among lawmakers, experts, and voters.
Former President Donald Trump has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to declassify all government files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier whose death in 2019 continues to fuel controversy and speculation.
The order, signed Wednesday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, instructs the FBI, Department of Justice, and intelligence agencies to release documents detailing Epstein’s network, finances, and alleged connections to high-profile figures. Trump described the move as “a step toward transparency and public trust,” promising that no names would be shielded from scrutiny.
“This information belongs to the American people,” Trump said in a televised statement. “For too long, powerful interests have tried to bury the truth. That ends now.”
U.S. intelligence officials confirmed that preparations for the release are already underway. According to sources familiar with the process, the first batch of documents is expected to be made public within the next 30 days, with additional releases scheduled over several months.
Reactions poured in across the political spectrum. Supporters praised the decision as a bold act of accountability, while critics alleged it was politically motivated, timed to draw attention during a volatile election season. Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, emphasized caution, warning that some records could expose private victims or ongoing legal matters.
The Epstein case, which implicated figures in politics, business, and entertainment, remains one of the most talked-about scandals of the past decade. Epstein’s connections to influential individuals—including politicians, royals, and executives—have long sparked speculation about the extent of his operations and who may have been involved.
Former federal prosecutor Lauren Fields said the release could mark a turning point in public discourse surrounding government transparency. “Regardless of political stance, this declassification has the potential to reshape how Americans view power and accountability,” Fields noted.
Officials say redactions may still occur to protect sensitive intelligence or personal information, but the intent is a near-complete disclosure. For years, critics of the government’s handling of Epstein’s case have accused agencies of concealing evidence or shielding elites from exposure. Trump’s order promises to change that narrative.
As anticipation builds, journalists, legal analysts, and online commentators are preparing for what could be one of the most consequential information releases in recent history.
Why Some Songs End Up in Movies—While Others Never Do
They Told Him a Black Man Can’t Learn. He Sued Them and Won.
