Headline

US Judges ‘Usurping’ Trump’s Authority – White House

Published

6 months ago

March 19, 2025

Editor

The White House on Wednesday accused judges of “usurping” executive power after a series of rulings against Donald Trump’s administration, including one that blocked the deportation of Venezuelan migrants and drew the president’s ire.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt alleged there had been a “concerted effort by the far left” to pick judges who were “clearly acting as partisan activists” to deal with cases involving the Republican’s administration.

“Not only are they usurping the will of the president and the chief executive of our country, but they are undermining the will of the American public,” Leavitt said at a daily briefing.

Leavitt in particular lashed out at District Judge James Boasberg, who ordered the suspension over the weekend of the deportation flights, carried out under an obscure wartime law.

Trump’s administration says it invoked the more than 200-year-old legislation to deport Venezuelan gang members as part of its mass deportation program of undocumented migrants.

“It’s very, very clear that this is an activist judge who is trying to usurp the president’s authority,” Leavitt said, branding the judge also as a “Democrat activist.”

Trump personally called for the judge’s impeachment on Tuesday, saying Boasberg was a “Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama.”

His comments drew a rare public rebuke from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said in a statement on Tuesday.

Trump renewed his attacks on Boasberg on his Truth Social network on Wednesday, although he did not repeat his call for impeachment.

“If a President doesn’t have the right to throw murderers, and other criminals, out of our Country because a Radical Left Lunatic Judge wants to assume the role of President, then our Country is in very big trouble and destined to fail!” he said.

Judges have dealt Trump a number of setbacks in recent days as his administration pursues its wholesale overhaul of the federal government.

A judge on Tuesday ordered an immediate halt to the shutdown of the main US aid agency by tech tycoon Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

On the same day, another judge suspended the Trump administration’s ban on transgender people serving in the military, citing the principle of equality.

South African billionaire Musk railed against what he called a “judicial coup” in a series of posts on his social network X.

Trump, the first convicted felon to serve in the White House, has a history of attacking the judges who presided over his civil and criminal cases.

But Trump’s administration now appears bent on a showdown with the judiciary as he asserts extraordinary levels of executive power.

AFP

Headline

Antitrust Trial: US Asks Court To Break Up Google’s Ad Business

Published

2 hours ago

September 22, 2025

Editor

Google faces a fresh federal court test on Monday as US government lawyers ask a judge to order the breakup of the search engine giant’s ad technology business.

The lawsuit is Google’s second such test this year, following a similar government demand to split up its empire that was shot down by a judge earlier this month.

Monday’s case focuses specifically on Google’s ad tech “stack” — the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.

In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.

Monday’s trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.

According to filings, the US government will argue that Google should spin off its ad publisher and exchange operations. The DOJ will also ask that after the divestitures are complete, Google be banned from operating an ad exchange for 10 years.

Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court’s findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.

“We’ve said from the start that DOJ’s case misunderstands how digital advertising works and ignores how the landscape has dramatically evolved, with increasing competition and new entrants,” said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs.

In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU’s antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.

Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.

This remedy phase of the US trial follows a first trial that found Google operated an illegal monopoly. It is expected to last about a week, with the court set to meet again for closing arguments a few weeks later.

The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.

That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.

Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.

The US government had pushed for Chrome’s divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.

Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.

Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.

These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world’s largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.

AFP

Headline

Google Faces Court Battle Over Breakup Of Ad Tech Business

Published

3 hours ago

September 22, 2025

Editor

Google faces a fresh federal court test on Monday as US government lawyers ask a judge to order the breakup of the search engine giant’s ad technology business.

The lawsuit is Google’s second such test this year after the California-based tech juggernaut saw a similar government demand to split up its empire shot down by a judge earlier this month.

Monday’s case focuses specifically on Google’s ad tech “stack” — the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.

In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.
Monday’s trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.

Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court’s findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.

In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU’s antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.
Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.

The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.

That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.
Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.

The US government had pushed for Chrome’s divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.
Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.

Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.

These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world’s largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.

Headline

Peru Anti-government Protesters Clash With Police

Published

1 day ago

September 21, 2025

Editor

Hundreds of anti-government protesters clashed with police in the Peruvian capital Lima on Saturday, throwing stones and sticks as officers fired tear gas on the demonstrators, AFP journalists reported.

The protest, organized by a youth collective called “Generation Z”, is part of growing social unrest in Peru against organized crime, corruption in public office, and a recent pension reform.

“Today, there is less democracy than before. It’s getting worse… because of fear, because of extortion,” said 54-year-old protester Gladys, who declined to give her last name.

Around 500 people gathered in the city center, under heavy police presence.

“Congress has no credibility, it doesn’t even have the approval of the people… It is wreaking havoc in this country,” said protester Celene Amasifuen.

The clashes broke out as demonstrators tried to approach executive and congressional buildings in Lima.

The radio station Exitosa said that its reporter and a cameraman were hit by pellets, commonly fired by law enforcement.

Police said at least three officers were wounded.

Approval ratings for President Dina Boluarte, whose term ends next year, have plummeted amid rising extortion and organized crime cases.

Several opinion polls show the government and conservative-majority Congress are seen by many as corrupt institutions.

This week, the legislature passed a law requiring young adults to join a private pension fund, despite many facing a precarious working environment.