Top World News

Apr 16, 2025 - World

Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) argued in a Washington Post opinion piece Wednesday, that it's every Americans' constitutional right to require the government to obtain a legal warrant based on probable cause before conducting a search on private records."That’s a key part of the Bill of Rights and an important protection against government abuse," Jordan wrote, adding that "short of imminent threats to national security, there is no good excuse for ignoring the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement."Jordan's piece comes in advance of an upcoming congressional debate that he called "one of the most important debates we will have this Congress." Jordan maintained, "It is vital that we begin working now to protect Americans’ constitutional rights."He wrote that up until now the federal government "has searched millions of Americans’ data...without ever obtaining a warrant," adding, "that’s not how it’s supposed to work in America."ALSO READ: 'Alarming': Small colleges bullied into silence as Trump poses 'existential threat'The House tried once before to add an amendment to the nation’s warrantless surveillance authority, Jordan wrote, but "came up just short" with the vote, so the warrant requirement was not adopted.But Congress will have a chance to reconsider when "the foreign surveillance authority, known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, expires again next year, on April 19, 2026," Jordan wrote. "Congress has a responsibility to fix this," Jordan wrote. "We can balance the need to protect Americans’ fundamental constitutional rights with the need to give our intelligence and law-enforcement agencies the tools to fight those who want to do us harm."Jordan wrote that last year, Congress pass the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act that included "some much-needed reforms" on searches."We took these important steps, and we have seen some improvement, but they did not go far enough. Until we pass a warrant requirement, the government’s powerful surveillance authorities will always be subject to abuse," Jordan argued."Our fidelity must always be to the Constitution," Jordan wrote. "We must continue to protect and enhance it" by passing an agreement on warrants before government searches take place.Jordan's comments came as President Donald Trump is criticized for multiple actions deemed by many to be in conflict with the Constitution.He has sought to consolidate executive power, questioned the independence of the judiciary, and made false claims about election integrity in an apparent effort to overturn democratic results. These actions have been viewed by many as assaults on the rule of law and the system of checks and balances.Read The Washington Post opinion piece here.

Apr 16, 2025 - World

Ed Martin, who is President Donald Trump's nominee to be the United States Attorney for Washington, D.C., was a regular guest on Russian state media programs for the span of eight years.According to a tally by the Washington Post, Martin appeared on Russian state outlets such as Russia Today and Sputnik more than 150 times from 2016 until 2024.What's more, Martin during his appearances would frequently parrot Kremlin talking points about international affairs."Hours before President Donald Trump announced U.S. missile strikes on Syria in response to a chemical attack that killed 90 civilians in April 2017, Ed Martin said on the Russian state television network RT America that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad might not be to blame," reports the Post. "In early 2022, Martin told an interviewer on the same arm of RT’s global network that 'there’s no evidence' of a Russian military buildup on Ukraine’s borders, criticizing U.S. officials as warmongering and ignoring Russia’s security concerns."ALSO READ: Elon Musk determined to sire a 'legion' of children 'before the apocalypse': leaked textsAnd even when he's not appearing on Russian state TV, the Post writes, Martin has heaped praise upon Russian President Vladimir Putin.In one article written in December last year, just before Trump nominated him as D.C. interim U.S. attorney, Martin criticized the “mediocre” American men who “despise figures like Vladimir Putin" because "he reminds them of their inadequacies.”

Apr 15, 2025 - World

The Justice Department clashed with U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis in a Tuesday hearing over what the U.S. government acknowledged was an accidental deportation of a Maryland father. Kilmar Ábrego García was shipped to a prison in El Salvador despite a judge ruling that García could not be deported there. The U.S. government has claimed that García is an MS-13 gang member, but one legal analyst wrote Tuesday there's reason to question this. According to Politico's Kyle Cheney, Xinis said that every day Ábrego García is in the Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, is "a day of further irreparable harm." "If not this court, then who, to engage in process. It’s process that is in the roots of our constitution, so we have to give process to both sides...There will be no tolerance for gamesmanship or grandstanding," the judge said.ALSO READ: 'Alarming': Small colleges bullied into silence as Trump poses 'existential threat'She also questioned the administration's definition of the word "facilitate," which comes from a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, in which the high court ordered the administration to "facilitate" García's return. The administration's definition flies in the face of the plain meaning of the word, the judge said, according to Cheney. "When a wrongfully removed individual [is outside US borders], it's not so cut-and-dried that all you have to do is remove obstacles domestically."CNN reported that the judge appeared willing to consider an expansion of the definition of "facilitate." The Justice Department asked for an appeal to stay that decision. The judge said, "The Supreme Court has spoken. My order is clear. It's direct. There is, in my view, nothing to appeal."See the clip below or at the link here. - YouTube youtu.be

Apr 15, 2025 - World

Former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams pumped the brakes on what he called a "preposterous" suggestion repeatedly made by President Donald Trump that Williams maintained was unconstitutional and had no chance of being enforced. At an Oval Office meeting Monday with El Salvador's president, Trump voiced his "willingness" to send American-born criminals to Salvadoran prisons, claiming, "I'm all for it." Trump has already struck a $6 million deal with the Central American nation to imprison alleged gang members and other undocumented migrants deported from the United States. Earlier this month, Trump said that if El Salvador would take American prisoners, "I would be honored to give them."ALSO READ: 'All hands on deck': Democrats unleash new strategy to derail Trump Williams said on CNN Tuesday, "There are issues on which reasonable minds can differ: Democrats, Republicans, different litigants. And there are some things that are truth or facts that cannot be denied. It is a fact that American law, the American Constitution, and American history, does not allow for the detention or incarceration of American citizens on foreign soil — period." Williams continued, "The idea that the president is 'just putting it out there' and just testing it as an idea is preposterous. It's nonsense. There is just no basis for that. And to be clear, rather than just this moral, lofty stuff I'm saying here, it's grounded in the Constitution, the Eighth Amendment. We've heard about it. Maybe people don't know what it is, but it prevents cruel and unusual punishment. We can't, as Americans, send people to be incarcerated in foreign prisons that we don't know the standards of, and so on. It's not about being 'touchy feely' to criminals and being soft — this is what the law says. It does not allow it. There's no basis for what the president said yesterday." CNN anchor Christi Paul suggested that the Trump administration may be seeing "just how far they can push...when it comes to the law." "And is it just a joke and just floating an idea?" Williams asked. "Well, it's an idea that's not based in reality, and I'm glad we can talk about it and make clear that, again, this isn't a question of Elliott's opinion. This is established, and any law professor analyst, attorney, worth ...their salt is in agreement on this issue. This is just not up for debate." Watch the clip below via CNN.

Apr 15, 2025 - World

Major setback for diplomatic efforts to end two years of civil war as Arab states refuse to sign joint communiqueA British-led attempt to establish a contact group to facilitate ceasefire talks in Sudan fell apart on Tuesday when Arab states refused to sign a joint communique after a conference in London.The daylong argument between Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates over the communique represents a big diplomatic setback for efforts to end two years of civil war in Sudan. Continue reading...