The post Santa Barbara International Film Festival Sets Dates For 2027 Edition appeared first on edhat.

The post Residential Resurfacing Project Underway in Goleta appeared first on edhat.

Por Uriel Blanco, CNN en Español

El presidente de Cuba, Miguel Díaz-Canel, habló este jueves del “momento sumamente desafiante” que vive la isla en medio del embargo económico y energético impuesto por Estados Unidos, y llamó a los cubanos a estar listos para “enfrentar serias amenazas”, entre ellas una “agresión militar”.

“El momento es sumamente desafiante y nos convoca otra vez, como en aquel 16 de abril de 1961, a estar listos para enfrentar serias amenazas, entre ellas la agresión militar. No la queremos, pero es nuestro deber prepararnos para evitarla y, si fuera inevitable, ganarla”, dijo Díaz-Canel en el evento del 65 aniversario de la declaración del carácter socialista de la Revolución cubana, que se dio durante la fallida invasión de Bahía de Cochinos por parte de exiliados cubanos apoyados por el Gobierno estadounidense.

El mandatario recalcó la difícil situación en Cuba, criticando las acciones económicas de larga data de EE.UU. contra la isla y las medidas recientes de la administración de Donald Trump que han trastocado la realidad del pueblo cubano en diversos aspectos.

“La cotidianidad cubana duele. Desde el vital descanso interrumpido primero por el apagón y luego por el retorno de la corriente después de largas horas, que ha movido el trabajo doméstico a las madrugadas; hasta la paralización de las industrias, el transporte, los servicios vitales y las producciones, porque se carece de combustible absolutamente para casi todo. La lista es muy larga y todo esto se derivó de una sola orden ejecutiva que nos declaró amenaza inusual y extraordinaria, exactamente lo que no somos”, declaró Díaz-Canel.

EE.UU. mantiene un embargo económico contra Cuba desde la década de 1960. A esta situación de carácter histórico, el Gobierno de Trump sumó un decreto (la orden ejecutiva a la que se refiere Díaz-Canel) en enero de este año para impedir el envío de petróleo a la isla con amenazas de aranceles adicionales a los países que le manden crudo. En dicho decreto, Trump justificó su bloqueo petrolero al argumentar que la isla “constituye una amenaza inusual y extraordinaria para la seguridad nacional y la política exterior de Estados Unidos”.

Antes del decreto, Venezuela era el principal proveedor de petróleo de Cuba. Sin embargo, eso llegó a su fin luego de que EE.UU. capturara al presidente derrocado Nicolás Maduro a través de una operación militar en Caracas el pasado 3 de enero. Otros paises proveedores de combustible como México dejaron de enviar crudo ante la amenaza arancelaria de Trump.

Desde entonces, la escasez de combustible ha impactado la vida diaria de los cubanos. Los apagones son cada vez más prolongados, frente a una infraestructura deteriorada por la falta de mantenimiento e inversiones. La falta de petróleo también ha paralizado los hospitales y afectado los servicios públicos y el transporte de alimentos, lo que ha dado paso a protestas en la isla, con ciudadanos golpeando ollas y cacerolas y encendiendo fogatas en medio de la oscuridad

A finales de marzo, el buque ruso Anatoly Kolodkin llegó a la isla con 100.000 toneladas de combustible, equivalentes a unos 700.000 barriles, con lo que se convirtió en el primer embarque de crudo que Cuba recibe en tres meses. Expertos consultados por CNN dijeron que la carga que

By John Fritze, CNN

(CNN) — The Supreme Court’s emergency docket has resurfaced as a flashpoint within the federal judiciary as justices openly snipe at one another over the handling of short-fuse appeals, especially those involving President Donald Trump’s policies.

The renewed debate over what critics call the “shadow docket” has been at the center of several recent instances of tension between the justices spilling out into public view – including an unusually harsh broadside Justice Sonia Sotomayor leveled at a conservative colleague.

Sotomayor, the court’s senior liberal, issued a rare public apology on Wednesday for suggesting earlier that Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s privileged upbringing influenced his approach to an emergency immigration case last year. A day before her mea culpa, a newly posted video revealed that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson had spent more than an hour lambasting the court’s conservative majority for its handling of quick turn cases.

“Back then, the justices humbly waited,” Jackson, the court’s junior liberal, told Yale Law School as she drew a comparison between the modern court and how she said the justices dealt with emergency matters when she was a clerk two decades ago. “Things are different now.”

The court, Jackson said, has failed to grasp how its “scratch paper musings” caused “real-world harms.”

It can take months, and even years, to decide if a president’s policy is legal. On the shadow docket, the court decides if that policy remains in effect, or not, while that process plays out. Because of the speed at which the court must move, it rarely holds oral arguments or receives the same level of briefing to make that decision.

Lower courts have wrestled for months with whether the Supreme Court’s emergency orders – sometimes referred to as “interim orders” – carry the weight of precedent beyond the case at hand. That can prove especially tricky when the Supreme Court offers little explanation of its reasoning, or the facts of a subsequent case are slightly different.

The revived criticism of the process has landed as the Supreme Court is heading into its most intense period, with justices working behind the scenes to draft opinions in the most significant merits cases ahead of summer recess. In coming weeks, the court will decide major merits appeals on Trump’s power to fire federal officials, his effort to end birthright citizenship for millions of people and Republican efforts to alter this year’s midterm election.

At the same time, the emergency docket itself has lightened considerably this year as challenges to many of Trump’s most controversial early domestic policies have either run their course or already reached the high court.

By Betsy Klein, Kaanita Iyer, CNN

(CNN) — President Donald Trump’s proposed triumphal arch project received overwhelmingly negative feedback from preservationist groups and members of the public as plans for the massive structure were presented on Thursday to a key committee for the first time.

But the Commission of Fine Arts still appears poised to approve the project and took a preliminary vote to move ahead with the process. The independent federal agency, which has been stacked with Trump loyalists, advises the president and Congress on design plans for monuments, memorials, coins and federal buildings.

Trump has been deeply involved in the project to build an arch as he takes significant steps to impose his style and taste on the nation’s capital during his second term. He has already added his name to the Kennedy Center and the US Institute of Peace and is overseeing a major ballroom addition to the White House complex.

“This is personal for the president,” Commission of Fine Arts Chairman Rodney Mims Cook, Jr., said at the meeting.

In a sign of its importance to the president, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum unveiled renderings for the 250-foot arch, which would be 165-feet tall and 165-feet wide, with a 25-foot pedestal and a massive 60-foot gilt bronze Lady Liberty sculpture on top, boasting that it would “strengthen the city’s symbolic architectural vocabulary.”

The president has said he wants it to be the biggest arch in the world, modeled after Paris’ Arc de Triomphe — but larger. It would be the equivalent of a 16- to 20-story building, taller than the White House, the Lincoln Memorial and the US Capitol building. The project is already facing a legal challenge from a Vietnam War veterans’ group related to its scale and obstruction of the view of the Arlington National Cemetery.

After the arch presentation from Burgum and lead designer Nicholas Charbonneau, the commission heard broad concerns about the project’s scale, design and placement. It has been pictured in the proposal to sit on a traffic circle between the Arlington National Cemetery’s entrance and the Lincoln Memorial.

“We had just under 1,000 commenters. It’s saying that 100% of the comments were against the project,” Commission Secretary Thomas Luebke said.

Luebke read one letter from an unnamed individual that warned the project “would be profoundly out of scale with its surroundings” and “appears to disregard established norms that prioritize harmony with existing structures, preservation of sight lines and respect for the symbolic hierarchy of the capitals and landmarks.” The arch, the individual added, would set a “troubling precedent.”

Zachary Burt, community outreach and grants manager for the DC Preservation League, shared “serious concerns and strong opposition” to the project, particularly the arch’s proposed placement. The arch would sit atop a traffic circle on Columbia Island, a man-made strip of land between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington House, which was once home to Confederate leader Robert E. Lee and is now a centerpiece of Arlington National Cemetery.

The “visual connection” between those historic places, Burt said, “is not just a simple view. It … symbolizes the sacrifices our nation has made in pursuit of its highest ideal. The proposal for a 250-foot-tall triumphal arch threatens the solemn vista.”

After several people spoke against the project, H. Edward Phillips III, an attorney from Tennessee, defended the plan. He shared that his family members served in the military and said he did not see the arch as “offensive.”

Commissioners largely e