New judicial ethics code says judges may speak out against ‘illegitimate’ attacks

Kraig Pakulski 0 15 Article rating: No rating

By Tierney Sneed, CNN

(CNN) — Newly released ethics guidance for the federal judiciary makes clear that judges can speak out against “illegitimate forms of criticism and attacks.”

The guidance comes as judges have been targeted with smears by President Donald Trump and allies for their rulings against administration policies. Judges have spoken publicly about violence or threats of violence faced by them, their families and their staff, including the 2020 fatal shooting of the son of a federal judge.

Judicial ethics rules, the new opinion says, “affirm that judges may choose to engage in a wide range of civic engagement activities, including speaking and writing on core judiciary matters such as advocacy for the rule of law and judicial independence.”

“At the same time, judges should always exercise caution when expressing their personal views to preserve the integrity of the judiciary and to promote public confidence in the courts,” the new opinion says.

The ethics advisory cites the 2024 year-end report by Chief Justice John Roberts that emphasized judicial independence and said that violence, intimidation, disinformation and threats to defy court orders all qualify as “illegitimate” forms of judicial attack.

Roberts himself issued a noteworthy statement last year, amid calls by Trump and his allies for the impeachment of a federal judge for his ruling against a Trump immigration initiative, that said “impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”

More recently, the chief judge of the federal court in Minnesota wrote a pair of extraordinary letters to the appeals court that oversees him decrying how the Justice Department had handled a dispute over warrants it sought from his court for ICE protestors who disrupted a church service.

Gabe Roth, who leads the court reform group Fix the Court, praised the new ethics opinion in a statement.

“Though individuals are not called out by name, this is a strong rebuke of the Trump administration’s ‘war’ on the judiciary and comes one day after Attorney General Bondi denounced ‘liberal activist judges’ for taking part in ‘coordinated […] unlawful attack’ against President Trump’s ‘authority.’ Any judge who, in a measured manner, seeks to counter that nonsense would thus be ethically sound,” Roth said.

In court decisions, some judges have also pushed back at the administration’s hostility towards the judiciary. Fourth Circuit Judge Harvie Wilkinson – in a decision concerning Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the migrant the administration wrongly sent to an el Salvadorian prison – warned, “The respect that courts must accord the Executive must be reciprocated by the Executive’s respect for the courts.”

“Too often today this has not been the case, as calls for impeachment of judges for decisions the Executive disfavors and exhortations to disregard court orders sadly illustrate,” he wrote in the April opinion.

The new ethics language does not specifically point to the current environment. It instead leaned on past ethics commentary and said that “the Committee believes the Code and its previous advisory opinions leave room, in at least some circumstances, for the measured defense of judicial colleagues from illegitimate forms of criticism and attacks that risk undermining judicial independence or the rule of law, whether or not they rise to the level of persecution.”

The new opinion obliquely referenced the growing willingness of judges to speak to reporters without attribution, telling judges “that considerations of tone, context, and form should i

Local Student-Led Film Screens The Fight To Bring Back The California Grizzly Bear

Kraig Pakulski 0 26 Article rating: No rating

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. (KEYT) – Despite being an iconic California symbol, the grizzly bear has been practically extinct in the state for a century now. A new student-led film premiering at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival highlights the growing effort to recover the species.

The documentary film, The Bear Beneath, by director and UC Santa Barbara student Olivia Hille, producer Jorge Rodal Llano, and filmmaker Tatum Davis centers around the untold story of overhunting and habitat destruction that led to dwindling numbers in grizzly bears.

UCSB researcher Peter Alagona is featured in the film as an environmental expert, who continues the work and education to ramp up recovery efforts.

"He's the number one grizzly researcher – probably in the world, yeah. And he is brilliant, he's passionate, he's genuine, we put him on as the subject really for this documentary and I just feel like the story wrote itself because he's just so true to what he has to say and so intelligent," says Hille.

The documentary was shot and completed as part of the Carsey-Wolf Center’s GreenScreen environmental filmmaking program. From pitch to delivery, the project was completed in just 10 weeks, the length of one academic quarter at UCSB.

"I just feel like documentary-filmmaking is just the perfect way to capture a moment in time, and I think in this moment we able to bring awareness to this topic and also hopefully promote people actually taking action," says Davis.

The trio says they hope the film spreads to greater audiences, and inspires the community to do better.

"We want the grizzlies back! That's the very first thing," says Rodal. "We're going to have to keep working on films that are really important, that are talking about what's happened here so we don't commit the same mistakes in the future, environmentally."

The film premiered for the first time on Feb. 11th at the Film Festival. Another screening is scheduled for Friday afternoon at 2:40pm.

The Latest Breaking News, Weather Alerts, Sports and More Anytime On Our Mobile Apps. Keep Up With the Latest Articles by Signing Up for the News Channel 3-12 Newsletter.

The post Local Student-Led Film Screens The Fight To Bring Back The California Grizzly Bear appeared first on News Channel 3-12.

Bipartisan opposition over inflammatory comments likely to sink Trump State Dept. nominee

Kraig Pakulski 0 17 Article rating: No rating

By Jennifer Hansler, Christian Sierra, CNN

(CNN) — Jeremy Carl, the Trump administration’s pick for a top State Department position, is unlikely to get the job after a bipartisan group of senators grilled him over his history of racist, sexist and reported antisemitic comments and posts.

Republican Sen. John Curtis of Utah said in a statement following the heated Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing Thursday that he would not support Carl’s nomination for assistant secretary of state for international organizations.

“After reviewing his record and participating in today’s hearing, I do not believe that Jeremy Carl is the right person to represent our nation’s best interests in international forums, and I find his anti-Israel views and insensitive remarks about the Jewish people unbecoming of the position for which he has been nominated,” Curtis said.

The Republican’s opposition is likely to sink Carl’s nomination – if all Democrats on the committee also vote no, he will not have the votes to advance. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has also opposed his nomination.

A White House official told CNN on Thursday evening that Carl is still the nominee.

CNN’s KFile uncovered in September 2025 that Carl deleted thousands of social media posts, many demonstrating a history of inflammatory commentary – including incendiary posts about race, claims that “peaceful coexistence” with Democrats is impossible, and even a call for a political opponent to face the death penalty.

Carl also repeatedly wrote about the “Great Replacement,” a conspiracy theory that posits there is a plot to intentionally bring non-White immigrants into Western countries to “replace” White populations.

In his hearing Thursday, Carl was pressed on those past comments and others, including a 2024 podcast appearance in which he reportedly said, “Jews have often loved to play the victim,” and that “the Holocaust dominates so much of modern Jewish history,” according to Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democrat.

Shaheen, the ranking member of the committee, said that since his nomination, Carl had “tweeted more than 850 times, appeared on five podcasts and repeated this language.”

“This is a pattern,” she said.

“It’s hard to understand how we can trust you if you can’t even restrain yourself during the period in which you’ve been nominated,” she told him.

Carl argued that he understands “the importance of restraint and conduct.”

“I unfortunately have to balance that with my current job which involves advocacy. I can’t, as I’ve explained, just totally put away my day job,” he said. Carl is a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank. He served as a former deputy assistant secretary at the Interior Department during President Donald Trump’s first term.

In an exchange with Democratic Sen. Cory Booker, Carl said he regretted some of his past comments about Jewish people.

“I made some comments in interviews about minimizing the effect of the Holocaust that were absolutely wrong. And I’m not going to sit here and defend them here,” he said.

However, pressed on whether he regretted comments he has made about other races, Carl said he was “echoing” Trump that “unity rather than diversity is a strength.”

Sen. Chris Murphy said that Carl’s nomination was “heartbreaking,” calling him “wildly unqualified” for the position. The Connecticut Democrat spent several minutes questioning Carl on views about “anti-White discrimination” and “the erasure of White culture.”

Carl struggled to answer Murphy’s questions on what constitutes “White culture,” but alluded to “mass immigration” erasing “common American culture” and saying that it “weakens us.”

Cu

Un cierre parcial del Gobierno está a punto de afectar al Departamento de Seguridad Nacional. Esto es lo que significa

Kraig Pakulski 0 17 Article rating: No rating

Por Tami Luhby, CNN

El Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS, por sus siglas en inglés) podría verse afectado por un cierre parcial del Gobierno si el Congreso no financia la agencia antes del final del viernes. Sin embargo, casi todos los trabajadores del DHS seguirían en sus puestos, aunque muchos no recibirían pago hasta que termine la interrupción, y es probable que el público apenas note cambios.

El DHS es la última agencia federal que aún no cuenta con financiamiento para el resto del año fiscal 2026, que se extiende hasta el 30 de septiembre. Desde que terminó el cierre más largo de la historia a mediados de noviembre, los legisladores han aprobado una serie de proyectos de gasto para el resto del Gobierno.

El paquete más reciente, aprobado a finales de enero, solo financiaba al DHS por dos semanas para dar al Congreso más tiempo para negociar reformas en las operaciones de control migratorio de la agencia, una exigencia de los demócratas del Senado después de que agentes federales de inmigración abatieran a tiros a dos ciudadanos estadounidenses en Minneapolis en enero.

La Casa Blanca presentó una oferta la noche del miércoles, que los demócratas están evaluando. Pero no está claro si podrán alcanzar un acuerdo antes de que expire el financiamiento del DHS.

El líder de la mayoría en el Senado, John Thune, dijo este miércoles que sería necesario otro proyecto de financiamiento a corto plazo, conocido como resolución continua, para mantener operativas las partes críticas del DHS. El líder de la minoría en el Senado, Chuck Schumer, no ha indicado cómo procederán los demócratas.

El presidente Donald Trump no es ajeno a los cierres del Gobierno. También presidió uno durante su primer mandato, que duró 35 días y fue el más largo registrado hasta el estancamiento de 43 días del año pasado.

Esto es lo que se sabe sobre un cierre parcial que afecte al DHS:

Las muertes por disparos de Alex Pretti y Renee Nicole Good a manos de agentes de inmigración del DHS durante protestas en Minneapolis el mes pasado generaron una amplia indignación pública y llevaron a los demócratas del Senado a exigir reformas a cambio de su apoyo a un paquete para financiar otros departamentos federales.

Los demócratas han dicho que quieren restringir las patrullas itinerantes, endurecer los criterios para órdenes de registro y arresto, reforzar las políticas sobre el uso de la fuerza y exigir que los agentes del Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) usen cámaras corporales y se quiten las máscaras. Los republicanos se han opuesto a casi todos esos cambios y algunos han presionado para que los demócratas hagan concesiones, como tomar medidas más firmes contra las llamadas ciudades santuario.

Es posible que los demócratas no tengan mucho poder para restringir realmente las actividades de ICE y de la Oficina de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza de EE.UU. (CBP, por sus siglas en inglés) en caso de un cierre. Incluso durante una interrupción, ICE seguiría operando sus funciones principales, según han sostenido varios asesores del Congreso.

En general, más del 90 % de los 272.000 empleados del DHS continuarían trabajando durante la interrupción, de acuerdo con el plan de cierre de la agencia publicado en septiembre, que cubre los primeros cinco días de un estancamiento. Más del 93 % de los trabajadores de ICE y CBP permanecerían en sus puestos.

Solo unos 44.500 empleados seguirían recibiendo pago mediante otras asignaciones presupuestarias, según el plan. No obstante, la secretaria

Tensión en el Senado: funcionarios del DHS bajo fuego tras el fin del operativo en Minneapolis

Kraig Pakulski 0 15 Article rating: No rating

Por Michael Williams

Mientras el “zar de la frontera” de la Casa Blanca, Tom Homan, confirmaba este jueves el cese de las operaciones de refuerzo migratorio en el estado, la presión se trasladó a las autoridades locales. En una jornada marcada por la tensión, funcionarios estatales respondieron duras preguntas ante el Senado sobre las causas y decisiones que desencadenaron esta represión.

Esos funcionarios, el fiscal general de Minnesota, Keith Ellison, y el comisionado de correccionales del estado, Paul Schnell, a su vez criticaron al Gobierno de Trump por la forma en que se ha comportado en su estado.

El testimonio se tornó en discusiones a gritos entre Ellison y dos senadores republicanos que lo acusaron de contribuir a la violencia en Minnesota y sugirieron que debería ir a la cárcel por su papel en el escándalo de fraude de gran escala.

Más tarde, altos funcionarios de inmigración del Gobierno de Trump enfrentaron otra ronda de preguntas sobre las muertes del mes pasado de Alex Pretti y Renee Good y las tácticas de los agentes de inmigración que trabajan en sus agencias.

Aquí algunos puntos destacados de un día intenso en Washington y Minneapolis mientras se acerca la fecha límite de financiamiento para el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional.

Homan, quien fue designado por el Gobierno para estar a cargo de las operaciones en Minneapolis después de que Pretti muriera el mes pasado, dijo durante una conferencia de prensa el jueves que el aumento en Minneapolis que comenzó a principios de diciembre pronto finalizaría.

“He propuesto, y el presidente Trump ha estado de acuerdo, que esta operación de aumento concluya”, dijo Homan.

En su punto máximo, alrededor de 3.000 agentes federales fueron desplegados como parte de la Operación Metro Surge en lo que fue la mayor operación de cumplimiento de inmigración en la historia del país. El aumento generó semanas de protestas, enfrentamientos tensos entre manifestantes y agentes, los las muertes de Pretti y Good por parte de agentes, e intentos por parte del Gobierno de retratar a ambos como terroristas que querían causar daño a las fuerzas del orden.

Homan dijo el jueves que permanecería una cantidad limitada de agentes.

El anuncio fue bien recibido por funcionarios demócratas, incluyendo al gobernador Tim Walz, el alcalde de Minneapolis Jacob Frey y legisladores tanto en el Congreso como en la legislatura estatal.

Walz dijo que el incremento causó graves daños económicos al estado y señaló que buscaría un reembolso.

“El gobierno federal necesita pagar por lo que rompieron aquí”, dijo Walz el jueves por la mañana. “No puedes romper las cosas y luego simplemente irte sin hacer algo al respecto”.

Y mientras Homan hablaba en Minneapolis, altos funcionarios de Minnesota que testificaban en Washington dijeron que el daño ya estaba hecho.

Testificando ante la Comisión de Seguridad Nacional y Asuntos Gubernamentales del Senado, Ellison dijo que el aumento “causó un daño real a nuestro estado”.

El fiscal general demócrata pidió a los miembros de la comisión que ejercieran sus poderes de supervisión para obligar a varias reformas dentro de las fuerzas del orden federales, incluyendo exigir que ICE proporcione documentación completa de los arrestos y detenciones realizados por sus agentes, permitir el acceso de supervisión a sus instalaciones de detención, y requerir que las investigaciones estatales y federales sobre las muertes de Good y Pretti se

RSS
First31723173317431753177317931803181Last