The Pentagon has told the White House to keep the military out of politics, after someone from the White House directed the Navy to keep the warship USS John S. McCain “out of sight” when President Donald Trump visited Japan.

“On Friday, May 31, Secretary Shanahan directed his Chief of Staff to speak with the White House Military Office and reaffirm his mandate that the Department of Defense will not be politicized,”  Shanahan’s spokesman Army Lt. Col. Joe Buccino said Sunday.

Eric Chewning, Shanahan’s chief of staff, told the defense secretary that he had reinforced this message to the White House, according to Buccino.

“There’s no room for politicizing the military,” Shanahan told reporters aboard a U.S. military aircraft en route to Seoul. “We take these things seriously, and my office and others will deal with it directly.”

The directive to hide the USS John S. McCain from Trump was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

An email seen by VOA showed discussions about the warship between the White House Military Office and an officer with the U.S. Navy’s 7th Fleet ahead of Trump’s trip.

“USS John McCain needs to be out of sight,” reads the email’s third bullet-pointed request.

“Please confirm #3 will be satisfied,” the email emphasized.

Shanahan confirmed Sunday that the White House Military Office gave the directive that the warship should be hidden from view “directly” to the Navy’s Seventh Fleet, which manages naval operations in the Western Pacific.

“The directive was not carried out,” Shanahan added.

According to Shanahan, officials have told him that a white tarp was placed over the ship’s stern on the days preceding the visit, but the tarp was for “hull preservation” and was removed prior to the president’s visit.

A paint barge was moved the day prior to Trump’s visit “to support ongoing maintenance,” but the barge “did not obscure the view of the ship during the visit,” said Shanahan.

Sailors with the USS John S. McCain and the USS Stethem were on a 96-hour Memorial Day weekend liberty unrelated to the visit and did not participate in the Trump event, he confirmed.

VOA had previously reported these details provided by a U.S. Navy official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Shanahan said he had called the late Senator John McCain’s wife “a couple days ago” after news of the incident broke, but declined to discuss the “private conversation.

On Thursday, Shanahan said he did not authorize and was not aware of the White House directive to hide the USS John S. McCain from Trump.

“I would never dishonor the memory of a great American patriot like Senator [John] McCain,” Shanahan told reporters traveling with him. “I’d never disrespect the young men and women who crew that ship.”

Trump tweeted Thursday that he was not informed about the controversy surrounding the USS John S. McCain during his visit to Japan.

The president later told reporters outside the White House that whoever was involved in the move was “well meaning” but that he was unaware of the decision to hide the warship.

“I don’t know what happened. I wasn’t involved. I would not have done that,” he said, adding, “I was not a big fan of John McCain in any way, shape or form.”

Trump frequently feuded with longtime Republican senator and 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who died last year.

The USS McCain was originally named for the senator’s father and grandfather, both Navy admirals, and now honors all three men.
…

The Pentagon has told the White House to keep the military out of politics, after someone from the White House directed the Navy to keep the warship USS John S. McCain “out of sight” when President Donald Trump visited Japan.

“On Friday, May 31, Secretary Shanahan directed his Chief of Staff to speak with the White House Military Office and reaffirm his mandate that the Department of Defense will not be politicized,”  Shanahan’s spokesman Army Lt. Col. Joe Buccino said Sunday.

Eric Chewning, Shanahan’s chief of staff, told the defense secretary that he had reinforced this message to the White House, according to Buccino.

“There’s no room for politicizing the military,” Shanahan told reporters aboard a U.S. military aircraft en route to Seoul. “We take these things seriously, and my office and others will deal with it directly.”

The directive to hide the USS John S. McCain from Trump was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

An email seen by VOA showed discussions about the warship between the White House Military Office and an officer with the U.S. Navy’s 7th Fleet ahead of Trump’s trip.

“USS John McCain needs to be out of sight,” reads the email’s third bullet-pointed request.

“Please confirm #3 will be satisfied,” the email emphasized.

Shanahan confirmed Sunday that the White House Military Office gave the directive that the warship should be hidden from view “directly” to the Navy’s Seventh Fleet, which manages naval operations in the Western Pacific.

“The directive was not carried out,” Shanahan added.

According to Shanahan, officials have told him that a white tarp was placed over the ship’s stern on the days preceding the visit, but the tarp was for “hull preservation” and was removed prior to the president’s visit.

A paint barge was moved the day prior to Trump’s visit “to support ongoing maintenance,” but the barge “did not obscure the view of the ship during the visit,” said Shanahan.

Sailors with the USS John S. McCain and the USS Stethem were on a 96-hour Memorial Day weekend liberty unrelated to the visit and did not participate in the Trump event, he confirmed.

VOA had previously reported these details provided by a U.S. Navy official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Shanahan said he had called the late Senator John McCain’s wife “a couple days ago” after news of the incident broke, but declined to discuss the “private conversation.

On Thursday, Shanahan said he did not authorize and was not aware of the White House directive to hide the USS John S. McCain from Trump.

“I would never dishonor the memory of a great American patriot like Senator [John] McCain,” Shanahan told reporters traveling with him. “I’d never disrespect the young men and women who crew that ship.”

Trump tweeted Thursday that he was not informed about the controversy surrounding the USS John S. McCain during his visit to Japan.

The president later told reporters outside the White House that whoever was involved in the move was “well meaning” but that he was unaware of the decision to hide the warship.

“I don’t know what happened. I wasn’t involved. I would not have done that,” he said, adding, “I was not a big fan of John McCain in any way, shape or form.”

Trump frequently feuded with longtime Republican senator and 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who died last year.

The USS McCain was originally named for the senator’s father and grandfather, both Navy admirals, and now honors all three men.
…

U.S. President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump will be on a state visit to the Britain June 3 to June 5.

What to know for the visit?

It’s not Trump’s first visit to Britain.

What’s so special this time?

Trump was in Britain in July 2018 on a working visit, which involved much less pomp and pageantry than a state visit. On a working visit, the visiting country and not the host country covers the bill.

A state visit is a formal visit by a head of state and is normally done at the invitation of the queen on the advice of her government. Queen Elizabeth II, as the current head of state, will act as Trump’s official host for the duration of the visit.

An invitation for a state visit was extended soon after Trump took office in 2017, but a number of concerns, including security have been hampering plans.

The White House said the upcoming trip would reaffirm the “steadfast and special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.”

Twelve U.S. presidents have visited Britain, though only two were there on state visits: George W. Bush in 2003 and Barack Obama in 2011.

What’s on the agenda?

In addition to a private lunch and a state banquet hosted by the queen, the president and the first lady also will attend cultural engagements with other members of the royal family.

They will participate in events to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion during World War II, including a visit to Portsmouth, a launch site for the offensive that led to the liberation of Europe. Other countries’ representatives are expected to attend.

Trump will hold a business round table at St. James’s Palace, and he’ll attend a bilateral meeting at 10 Downing Street, the residence and home of British Prime Minister Theresa May, who is resigning after failing to achieve an agreement on Britain’s departure from the European Union. May has said she will resign on June 7, two days after Trump is scheduled to leave.

Trump, who has supported Brexit since his 2016 presidential campaign, has criticized May’s handling of the issue. Responding to a reporter’s question on Thursday, Trump said he might meet with Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage — pro-Brexit politicians who are seeking to replace May. Trump said they both were his friends, “very good guys, very interesting people.”

In an interview Friday with British tabloid The Sun, Trump said Boris Johnson would be an “excellent” choice for the Conservative Party leadership. “I think Boris would do a very good job,” he said, adding that his endorsement “could help anybody.”

After his three-day visit to Britain, Trump will fly to Shannon, Ireland, for a bilateral with Prime Minister Leo Varadkar. Trump said he will stay overnight in Doonbeg, the luxury golf resort in County Clare that he bought in 2014.

On June 6, Trump will head to France where he will observe the D-Day anniversary in Normandy, alongside French President Emmanuel Macron.

Who else is coming and who are they meeting?

Other than the president and the first lady, the White House has confirmed the president’s adult children also will be on the trip.

They will meet members of the royal family, including Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla Parker Bowles; Prince William and his wife, Kate Middleton; and Prince Harry. The Trumps will not be meeting Prince Harry’s wife, Meghan Markle, nor their new baby, Archie. Markle, who is American, is still on maternity leave.

Additionally, Trump will attend a reception at the U.S. Embassy to meet staff and their families.

Where are they staying?

State visitors usually stay with Queen Elizabeth at either Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle. President George W. Bush and President Obama both stayed at Buckingham Palace. A spokesperson for the royal household said the Trumps will not be staying with the queen, however, due to renovation work that is being carried out at the royal residence.

Buckingham Palace is currently undergoing a 10-year, $477 million renovation, including major electrical and plumbing work.

Will there be protests?

During Trump’s visit last July, more than 100,000 people protested on the streets of London, according to police. This year, protest organizers say they expect similar numbers.

The main protest, “Together Against Trump,” will take place in London on Tuesday, June 4. Smaller protests are planned elsewhere in Britain.

The protests are organized in general opposition to Trump’s views and policies on issues such as immigration and climate change. The campaign group Stop Trump said, “We will make it clear to the British government that it’s not OK to normalize Trump’s agenda and fear it has sparked.”

The “Trump Baby” — a 6-meter balloon by artist Matt Bonner depicting the president as an infant in a diaper holding a cellphone — is expected to appear, as it did during Trump’s 2018 visit to Britain and during his visits to France and Argentina.
…

U.S. President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump will be on a state visit to the Britain June 3 to June 5.

What to know for the visit?

It’s not Trump’s first visit to Britain.

What’s so special this time?

Trump was in Britain in July 2018 on a working visit, which involved much less pomp and pageantry than a state visit. On a working visit, the visiting country and not the host country covers the bill.

A state visit is a formal visit by a head of state and is normally done at the invitation of the queen on the advice of her government. Queen Elizabeth II, as the current head of state, will act as Trump’s official host for the duration of the visit.

An invitation for a state visit was extended soon after Trump took office in 2017, but a number of concerns, including security have been hampering plans.

The White House said the upcoming trip would reaffirm the “steadfast and special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.”

Twelve U.S. presidents have visited Britain, though only two were there on state visits: George W. Bush in 2003 and Barack Obama in 2011.

What’s on the agenda?

In addition to a private lunch and a state banquet hosted by the queen, the president and the first lady also will attend cultural engagements with other members of the royal family.

They will participate in events to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion during World War II, including a visit to Portsmouth, a launch site for the offensive that led to the liberation of Europe. Other countries’ representatives are expected to attend.

Trump will hold a business round table at St. James’s Palace, and he’ll attend a bilateral meeting at 10 Downing Street, the residence and home of British Prime Minister Theresa May, who is resigning after failing to achieve an agreement on Britain’s departure from the European Union. May has said she will resign on June 7, two days after Trump is scheduled to leave.

Trump, who has supported Brexit since his 2016 presidential campaign, has criticized May’s handling of the issue. Responding to a reporter’s question on Thursday, Trump said he might meet with Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage — pro-Brexit politicians who are seeking to replace May. Trump said they both were his friends, “very good guys, very interesting people.”

In an interview Friday with British tabloid The Sun, Trump said Boris Johnson would be an “excellent” choice for the Conservative Party leadership. “I think Boris would do a very good job,” he said, adding that his endorsement “could help anybody.”

After his three-day visit to Britain, Trump will fly to Shannon, Ireland, for a bilateral with Prime Minister Leo Varadkar. Trump said he will stay overnight in Doonbeg, the luxury golf resort in County Clare that he bought in 2014.

On June 6, Trump will head to France where he will observe the D-Day anniversary in Normandy, alongside French President Emmanuel Macron.

Who else is coming and who are they meeting?

Other than the president and the first lady, the White House has confirmed the president’s adult children also will be on the trip.

They will meet members of the royal family, including Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla Parker Bowles; Prince William and his wife, Kate Middleton; and Prince Harry. The Trumps will not be meeting Prince Harry’s wife, Meghan Markle, nor their new baby, Archie. Markle, who is American, is still on maternity leave.

Additionally, Trump will attend a reception at the U.S. Embassy to meet staff and their families.

Where are they staying?

State visitors usually stay with Queen Elizabeth at either Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle. President George W. Bush and President Obama both stayed at Buckingham Palace. A spokesperson for the royal household said the Trumps will not be staying with the queen, however, due to renovation work that is being carried out at the royal residence.

Buckingham Palace is currently undergoing a 10-year, $477 million renovation, including major electrical and plumbing work.

Will there be protests?

During Trump’s visit last July, more than 100,000 people protested on the streets of London, according to police. This year, protest organizers say they expect similar numbers.

The main protest, “Together Against Trump,” will take place in London on Tuesday, June 4. Smaller protests are planned elsewhere in Britain.

The protests are organized in general opposition to Trump’s views and policies on issues such as immigration and climate change. The campaign group Stop Trump said, “We will make it clear to the British government that it’s not OK to normalize Trump’s agenda and fear it has sparked.”

The “Trump Baby” — a 6-meter balloon by artist Matt Bonner depicting the president as an infant in a diaper holding a cellphone — is expected to appear, as it did during Trump’s 2018 visit to Britain and during his visits to France and Argentina.
…

The vast majority of U.S. state voting legislation introduced this year was intended to expand voting access rather than impose restrictions.

Lawmakers in 45 states have been debating at least 647 bills that would expand voting access, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law. That’s compared with lawmakers in 28 states that have considered at least 82 bills to restrict access.

Voting-related topics under consideration in legislatures this year:

Early voting

Most states and the District of Columbia allow registered voters to cast ballots in person before Election Day. This year, lawmakers in New York and Delaware approved early voting in those states. An effort to allow voters in Connecticut to decide whether that state should have early voting did not receive enough support from legislators to make the ballot next year.

Bills that would allow early voting or put the question before voters also were introduced in Maine, Minnesota, Missouri and Virginia.

No-excuse absentee voting

While absentee ballots are available in every state, 19 states require a voter to provide a reason for requesting one. This year, bills that would allow some form of no-excuse absentee voting or put the question before voters were introduced in Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire and New York.

​Same-day and Election Day registration

A growing number of states allow people to register and vote on the same day. In most cases, this applies to the early voting period as well as Election Day. Proof of residency and identification are required. States check whether a voter has already cast a ballot and have criminal penalties to deter fraud. 

This year, bills that would allow for same-day voter registration or to put the question before voters were introduced in Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico and New York.

Automatic voter registration

Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have started or have plans to implement a system in which residents are automatically registered to vote when they have contact with the state, typically at the state’s motor vehicle agency, unless they decline.

This year, bills that would implement automatic voter registration were introduced in Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska and New Hampshire.

Registration assistance

Republicans in some states have expressed concerns about the actions of third-party voter registration groups, specifically pointing to the burden on local election officials when the groups submit forms that are incomplete or contain false information.

In Tennessee, this prompted a law signed recently by Republican Gov. Bill Lee that allows for fines for 100 or more incomplete registration forms in a year. A similar measure was introduced in Arizona.

​Voter identification

Seven states have what has been described as “strict” photo identification requirements, meaning a voter must show a photo ID prior to casting a ballot. In those states, people who do not have an acceptable form of photo ID are directed to cast a provisional ballot that will be counted only if the voter visits the appropriate election office to present an ID within a certain number of days.

Ten other states have “non-strict” photo identification requirements. Depending on the state, some voters may have the option to sign an affidavit, or poll workers can vouch for their identity. In other cases, voters are directed to cast a provisional ballot, and then election officials determine eligibility without further action required of the voter.

Efforts to implement photo ID requirements in Montana and Wyoming failed this year.

Sources: National Conference of State Legislatures and the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU’s School of Law
…

The vast majority of U.S. state voting legislation introduced this year was intended to expand voting access rather than impose restrictions.

Lawmakers in 45 states have been debating at least 647 bills that would expand voting access, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law. That’s compared with lawmakers in 28 states that have considered at least 82 bills to restrict access.

Voting-related topics under consideration in legislatures this year:

Early voting

Most states and the District of Columbia allow registered voters to cast ballots in person before Election Day. This year, lawmakers in New York and Delaware approved early voting in those states. An effort to allow voters in Connecticut to decide whether that state should have early voting did not receive enough support from legislators to make the ballot next year.

Bills that would allow early voting or put the question before voters also were introduced in Maine, Minnesota, Missouri and Virginia.

No-excuse absentee voting

While absentee ballots are available in every state, 19 states require a voter to provide a reason for requesting one. This year, bills that would allow some form of no-excuse absentee voting or put the question before voters were introduced in Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire and New York.

​Same-day and Election Day registration

A growing number of states allow people to register and vote on the same day. In most cases, this applies to the early voting period as well as Election Day. Proof of residency and identification are required. States check whether a voter has already cast a ballot and have criminal penalties to deter fraud. 

This year, bills that would allow for same-day voter registration or to put the question before voters were introduced in Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico and New York.

Automatic voter registration

Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have started or have plans to implement a system in which residents are automatically registered to vote when they have contact with the state, typically at the state’s motor vehicle agency, unless they decline.

This year, bills that would implement automatic voter registration were introduced in Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska and New Hampshire.

Registration assistance

Republicans in some states have expressed concerns about the actions of third-party voter registration groups, specifically pointing to the burden on local election officials when the groups submit forms that are incomplete or contain false information.

In Tennessee, this prompted a law signed recently by Republican Gov. Bill Lee that allows for fines for 100 or more incomplete registration forms in a year. A similar measure was introduced in Arizona.

​Voter identification

Seven states have what has been described as “strict” photo identification requirements, meaning a voter must show a photo ID prior to casting a ballot. In those states, people who do not have an acceptable form of photo ID are directed to cast a provisional ballot that will be counted only if the voter visits the appropriate election office to present an ID within a certain number of days.

Ten other states have “non-strict” photo identification requirements. Depending on the state, some voters may have the option to sign an affidavit, or poll workers can vouch for their identity. In other cases, voters are directed to cast a provisional ballot, and then election officials determine eligibility without further action required of the voter.

Efforts to implement photo ID requirements in Montana and Wyoming failed this year.

Sources: National Conference of State Legislatures and the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU’s School of Law
…

Democratic presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand has unveiled a comprehensive plan to protect the rights of LGBTQ people to mark the start of Pride Month.

If elected, the New York senator says she’d direct the Justice Department to consider gender identity and sexual orientation a protected class. She would also ban discrimination against transgender members of the military and federally recognize a third gender in identification documents, denoted by an “X” on ID cards.

In a platform announced Saturday, Gillibrand said she’d prohibit gay conversion therapy nationwide and direct public schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms matching their identity.

Her proposal would further require health insurance plans to cover hormone therapy for transgender patients, and it would recognize U.S. asylum claims for LGBTQ people fleeing persecution in their home countries.

 
…

VOA Mandarin service’s Libo Lui contributed to this report

SINGAPORE – Since the first week acting U.S. Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan took the reins at the Pentagon, he’s said his top concern is “China, China, China.”

On Saturday, Shanahan told an audience at the annual Shangri-La defense forum that the U.S. would not ignore Chinese behavior, which he says has threatened prosperity in the region.

“It’s not about conflict. It’s not about building walls. This is about security,” Shanahan said.

China is infamous for its theft of other nations’ military and civilian technology, and the U.S. secretary said he took issue with Beijing’s cyber attacks and state-sponsored stealing of intellectual property.

Experts say China has used this theft to narrow the gap between some critical American and Chinese military abilities.

“The kind of advantage that we had against China and the western Pacific during the Cold War is gone for good,” Michael O’Hanlon, a senior defense expert with the Brookings Institution, told VOA.

China also has continued to project more military power beyond its borders, most notably by constructing artificial islands in the South China Sea and placing heavy weapons on them to support territorial claims not recognized under international law.

Speaking to reporters Friday, Shanahan called the moves “excessive,” saying that while the Chinese “argue that it’s defensive, it looks like it’s a bit overkill.”

Recently, the U.S. has pushed for more international patrols in the South China Sea, including one last month with Japan, India and the Philippines.

Bradley Bowman, of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said working with allies to combat Chinese aggression in the region will bolster the U.S. position of protecting international waterways key to global trade.

“I think we need to characterize this conflict for what it is. It’s not a conflict between China and the US. It’s a conflict with China and the world,” he said.

Speaking to VOA at the conference, Rep. Adam Smith, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said China has to some extent “overplayed their hand.”

“They are seen as a bully in the region by a lot of people. They encroached on people’s territory in a variety of disputes…and in doing that, those countries have turned to the U.S.,” Smith said.

 In his speech Saturday, Shanahan stressed that the U.S. doesn’t want any nation in the region to have to choose positive relations with one partner over another, but, he said, the world deserved a fair playing field.

U.S. allies at the conference expressed anxiety over rising tensions between the two powers, and as one leader pointed out, many believe that if China and the U.S. won’t work together, they risk upending the global system.

 
…

On a trip to Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Britain, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is seeking common ground with European allies, despite fundamental differences over the United States’ withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and doing business with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei. VOA’s Diplomatic Correspondent Cindy Saine has more from Washington, as talks between Pompeo and German Chancellor Angela Merkel wrapped Friday.
…

President Donald Trump says he’s imposing tariffs on all goods from Mexico until the country stops the flow of undocumented migrants from Central America who cross its territory and enter the United States. Trump tweeted Friday that Mexico “can easily fix this problem. Time for them to finally do what must be done!” Here’s a look at what Mexico has done so far: 

The problem 

In the first three months of 2019, as many as 300,000 migrants — mostly from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador — crossed through Mexico to reach the United States. Many were families with children, who cannot be detained for long in the United States.

​How did Mexico’s new president look at immigration?

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador took office on Dec. 1, intending to reduce migration by addressing its root causes: joblessness, poverty and violence in such countries as Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. He proposed creating a plan to develop the economies of Central America and southern Mexico, while creating humanitarian and work visas so that Central American migrants could stay in Mexico instead of heading to the U.S.

Did that cause a spike in migration?

The biggest drivers of the migrant exodus were in place before Lopez Obrador took office, and the first massive caravan of migrants formed last year, months before he took office. The caravans came about after tens of thousands of poor Central Americans decided they were a safer option than paying smugglers. New immigration routes for Cubans, Haitians and people from Africa also had opened up through Central America. Lopez Obrador’s offers of visas may have made it easier or safer to cross Mexico, but probably didn’t play a key role in most people’s decision to leave their home countries. 

What changed in Mexico?

A first huge caravan of migrants crossed Mexico headed for the U.S. border in November, before Lopez Obrador took office. The arrival of over 10,000 migrants taxed border facilities and angered Mexicans living in border cities. In January, another caravan crossed Mexico. By the time the third formed in April, it was clear that Mexico could no longer maintain an open-door policy.

In April, the United States began slowing border crossings by reassigning border inspection personnel to deal with the influx of migrants already inside the United States. That started hurting Mexico’s economy, especially as time-sensitive shipments were held up at the border. Separately, migrants began forcing their way across the border with Guatemala, overwhelming border forces and sometimes refusing to register once they arrived. 

​Did U.S. pressure affect Mexican policy?

The border crossing slowdown in April and repeated threats by Trump to close the border or impose tariffs have played a role in changing Mexico’s policies. But Mexicans’ attitudes are also shifting. Increasingly, many Mexicans see large-scale movement of migrants across their country as a threat to their own safety and economy.

Has Mexico helped the U.S. at all?

Mexico is only bound to take in its own citizens when the U.S. expels people at border crossings, and has traditionally refused to take in people from other countries. But starting in late January, Mexico has allowed the United States to return over 6,748 Central Americans to Mexican border cities as they wait to hear about their U.S. asylum claims. The Remain in Mexico policy, as it is known, is meant to reduce the attractiveness of U.S. asylum requests that in the past had allowed claimants to remain in the United States for years as their cases wound their way through the courts.

Has Mexico done more to limit migration?

Mexico staged one of its first large-scale raids on a migrant caravan in April, detaining 371 people on a highway in the southern state of Chiapas. At the same time, Mexico announced that it would no longer grant humanitarian visas at the border with Guatemala after 15,000 people applied in the course of a few weeks. Instead, Mexico encouraged potential migrants to apply for such visas at Mexican consulates in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.

Humanitarian visas are still being issued for migrants already in Mexico, but at a very slow pace. Work visas are now limited to only a few southern border states in Mexico where wages are low and few migrants want to stay. When migrants began to hop freight trains toward the U.S. border, as they did in past decades, Mexico started police raids on the train. When Lopez Obrador took office, detentions of migrants were relatively low, with 5,884 migrants deported in January. By the end of May, the figure had risen to 15,654.

​Why don’t migrants ask for asylum in Mexico?

Some do. There have been over 18,000 requests for asylum filed in Mexico in the first four months of 2019, several times the levels of a few years ago. But many migrants say they either don’t feel safe in Mexico, or they want to join relatives already in the United States. Many want to earn more money than is possible in Mexico.

Has Mexico yielded to U.S. immigration pressure in the past?

During a previous surge in unaccompanied minors at the U.S. border in 2014, Mexico’s president at the time, Enrique Pena Nieto, tightened security at Mexico’s porous southern border, including immigration checkpoints and raids on freight trains used by the migrants. 
…

The Trump administration is creating a new position aimed at overhauling America’s immigration system amid an accelerating surge of Central American migrants and asylum-seekers arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border.  

The person most likely to hold the job: former Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, a conservative lawmaker known for hawkish immigration views.

Why a ‘czar’? 

“Usually, when the president creates a czar, it’s because he feels that there’s not enough interagency coordination going on. And it is true that in the area of dealing with people at the southwest border, while the Department of Homeland Security has the lead, there are other important actors at the border,” said Elaine Kamarck, senior fellow at Washington-based think tank Brookings Institution. 

Previous “czars” appointed by the White House over the years have focused on coordinating policy across different agencies to combat illegal recreational drugs or domestic violence.  

Kamarck, an expert on the U.S. government, sees Cuccinelli’s role as helping the administration try to get past the legal challenges that have blocked some of its immigration policies.    

“As a [former] attorney general, he will be more sensitive to the legal problems,” she said.   

Though the White House has not explained what Cuccinelli would oversee, a senior White House official told VOA, “He is expected to take a senior position at DHS where he will work on issues involving immigration.” 

Cuccinelli is an outspoken immigration hardliner. Political observers interviewed by VOA said his views largely align with President Donald Trump’s outlook.  

Cuccinelli has supported denying citizenship to American-born children of parents living in the U.S. illegally. As attorney general he allowed American workers to file lawsuits when an employer knowingly hired someone living in the country illegally. He also restricted who qualifies for in-state tuition at public universities to citizens or legal residents. 

Administration role 

The Washington Post reported Trump would prefer to appoint Cuccinelli to the position of director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the agency that administers the country’s legal immigration system. 

The current USCIS director, L. Francis Cissna, communicated to his staff he is expected to leave the post on June 1. 

Kevin Appleby, senior director of international migration policy for the Center for Migration Studies and an outspoken critic of the administration’s hardline policies, said there is “real concern” about having Cuccinelli as USCIS director. 

“He thinks we have too many immigrants as it is,” Appleby said. As USCIS director, where he would have authority over who gets legal permanent resident status and who gets citizenship, he could “do a lot of damage to people who have followed the law.”  

Trump also supports drastically reducing the number of immigrants coming to the United States, telling his supporters at a rally in May, “The country is full. We don’t want people coming up here.” 

Appleby said Cuccinelli could try to further restrict immigration by extending the processing time it takes for immigrants to become citizens, effectively making it much more difficult for those who are waiting in legal limbo.  

“He could turn back immigrants, refugees, who may legally have a right to come to the country,” Appleby said.

The Trump administration has argued that many people who come to the United States and declare themselves refugees do not in fact qualify for such status.  

Virginia attorney general

As Virginia attorney general in 2010 under former Republican Gov. Robert McDonnell, Cuccinelli issued an opinion stating that Virginia law enforcement officials had the authority to question individuals about their immigration status during a stop or arrest. 

The American Civil Liberties Union at the time sent a letter to Virginia police chiefs and sheriffs urging them not to follow the opinion from Cuccinelli because it was “legally faulty and would lead to adverse public safety consequences.” 

“Because most police officers have not been trained to enforce immigration law, allowing them to question individuals about immigration status is an invitation for racial profiling and potential equal protection violations,” the letter said.

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2012 and a settlement with plaintiffs in 2016 have since erased most of a law in Arizona that gave police similar authority.  

Kamarck said given Cuccinelli’s history as a “very tough and very conservative attorney general of the state of Virginia,” he might be able to help the president carry out his more restrictive immigration policies, despite the court challenges.  

Trump administration officials “really have had a hard time implementing the things that they say [they would do.] So I suspect Cuccinelli … has enough government experience and enough legal experience to be a help to them if, in fact, the president will listen to him,” Kamarck said.  

Cuccinelli’s position in the Trump administration is expected to be announced soon. 
…

VOA News Center Associate Producer Jesusemen Oni contributed reporting from Washington. 

WASHINGTON — Mexico’s foreign minister says he has starting negotiating with U.S. officials after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to impose tariffs on Mexican products related to the migrant surge at the border.

Marcelo Ebrard said on Twitter Friday that he had spoken to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by phone and said face-to-face talks between the two would take place Wednesday in Washington.

“The summit to resolve the U.S. dispute with our country will be on Wednesday in Washington,” Ebrard said. “We will be firm and defend the dignity of Mexico.”

Earlier Friday, Mexico’s president responded to the U.S. tariff threats with caution urging “dialogue” over “coercive measures.”

“I want to reiterate that we are not going to fall into any provocation; but we are going to be prudent, and we are going to respect the authorities of the United States and President Donald Trump,” said Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador.

His statement Friday morning followed a two-page letter to Trump made public late Thursday, similar in tone, responding to Trump’s announcement on Twitter earlier in the day that the United States would begin imposing an escalating tax on imports from Mexico.

“On June 10th, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP,” Trump tweeted. Until “the illegal immigration problem is remedied” tariffs will continue to rise monthly, going as high as 25% by October 1.

U.S. border agents have apprehended an increasing number of people, largely from Central America, who crossed the southern U.S. border without authorization in recent months.

In contrast to previous spikes in arrivals, recent groups have included a large number of children, prompting U.S. officials to scramble to support families and children traveling without parents, some of whom are seeking asylum.

In an indication of the pressing demands at the border, U.S. Customs and Border Protection solicited bids for the purchase of tens of thousands of baby diapers, wipes and bottles this past week, according to documents reviewed by VOA on a government contracting website.

Mexico has the “absolute ability and authority to do a lot more than they’re doing,” White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters Friday.

Reaction from Mexico

Lopez Obrador posted a letter to Twitter after Trump’s announcement that said, “Social problems are not resolved with taxes or coercive measures.”

Trump’s announcement of the new tariffs came on the same day Mexico began the formal process of ratifying the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (US MCA) on trade.

Mexico’s deputy foreign minister for North America, Jesus Seade, says such tariffs would be disastrous, expressing more alarm than the Mexican president.

“If this threat is carried out, it would be extremely serious,” he told reporters. “If this is put in place, we must respond vigorously.”

For one trade expert, who previously served as Mexico’s ambassador to China, a top trading partner for that country and the U.S., the timing of Trump’s tariff statement raises questions about the future of the US MCA.

“By mixing two things — immigration and now just lately drug flow with trade — I think it confuses the issue,” said Jorge Guajardo, a senior director at the Washington-based international trade consulting firm McLarty Associates.

The trade deal “was a triumph for all three countries, and now of course, that all comes into doubt,” Guajardo added.

Marking progress

Some Republican members of Congress but no Democrats were consulted about White House plan, according to acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.

Asked in a hastily arranged conference call with reporters about benchmarks Mexico would need to achieve to have the tariffs lifted, Mulvaney said there needs to be significant and substantial reductions in arrivals from Central America crossing into the United States.

“We’re going to take this and look at it on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis,” Mulvaney said. “We are interested in seeing the Mexican government act tonight, tomorrow.”

Trump has repeatedly accused Mexico of not doing enough to stop Central American migrants from traveling through the country on their way to the United States.

The U.S. system, however, is not infallible. While the country has increased its apprehension rate at the border in recent years, U.S. border agents stop an estimated 65% to 80% of people crossing into the country without authorization, according to a 2018 DHS report. 
…

A Republican redistricting expert advocated for adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census to give an electoral edge to white people and Republicans, opponents of the move alleged in a court filing Thursday.

The filing in Manhattan federal court said a trove of newly discovered documents revealed that Thomas Hofeller, a longtime Republican gerrymandering guru, played a key role in pushing the Trump administration to include a citizenship question on the census for the first time since 1950.

GOP strategist

Lawyers for opponents of adding the question said the files, found on Hofeller’s computer drives after he died last year, also showed that he contributed vital language to a Justice Department letter used to justify the question on the grounds that it was needed to protect minority voting rights.

In reality, the lawyers argued, the documents show the census change is part of a wider Republican effort to restrict the political power of Democrats and Latino communities.

“The new evidence reveals that Dr. Thomas Hofeller, the longtime Republican redistricting specialist, played a significant role in orchestrating the addition of the citizenship question to the 2020 Decennial Census in order to create a structural electoral advantage for, in his own words, ‘Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites,’ and that defendants obscured his role through affirmative misrepresentations,” the filing said.

The change, announced in spring 2018, seems poised for approval by the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard arguments in April and is likely to rule by July. It’s not yet clear if the Hofeller documents might affect the pending case, though the American Civil Liberties Union apprised the high court of the latest developments Thursday in a letter signed by Dale Ho, director of the group’s voting rights project and a lawyer who argued against adding the question before the top court.

States, cities and rights groups had sued in New York and elsewhere, arguing that the question would suppress the count of immigrants and strengthen congressional representation and funding for areas where mostly Republicans reside. States with large numbers of immigrants tend to vote Democratic.

Lawyers for President Donald Trump’s administration say the commerce secretary has wide discretion to design the census questionnaire.

On Thursday, lawyers for groups including the ACLU said that the files show that a Justice Department official and a transition official for President Donald Trump testified falsely by hiding Hofeller’s role in asking for the question. They asked U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman to issue sanctions or consider finding individuals in contempt.

Ho, of the ACLU, said documents found after Hofeller’s death last year revealed the administration’s “goal was to dilute the voting power of minority communities. That’s literally the diametric opposite of what the administration has been saying all along.”

Furman gave the Justice Department until Monday to respond. An official with the department declined to comment on the record.

Furman set a hearing in the case for June 5.

Daughter turns over documents

The Hofeller documents cited by lawyers were discovered when his estranged daughter found four external computer hard drives and 18 thumb drives in her father’s Raleigh, North Carolina, home after his death last summer.

The New York Times reported that she contacted Common Cause, which had recently sued in state court to challenge North Carolina’s legislative districts, which had been drawn by Hofeller.

Furman, the federal judge, ruled in January that the question could not be included on the census, saying fewer people would respond to the census and that the process used to add it was faulty. Federal judges in California and Maryland reached similar conclusions in separate lawsuits.

Besides the citizenship question, the Supreme Court also is expected to decide within weeks, in cases from North Carolina and Maryland, whether to set limits for the first time on drawing districts for partisan advantage.
…

A Republican redistricting expert advocated for adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census to give an electoral edge to white people and Republicans, opponents of the move alleged in a court filing Thursday.

The filing in Manhattan federal court said a trove of newly discovered documents revealed that Thomas Hofeller, a longtime Republican gerrymandering guru, played a key role in pushing the Trump administration to include a citizenship question on the census for the first time since 1950.

GOP strategist

Lawyers for opponents of adding the question said the files, found on Hofeller’s computer drives after he died last year, also showed that he contributed vital language to a Justice Department letter used to justify the question on the grounds that it was needed to protect minority voting rights.

In reality, the lawyers argued, the documents show the census change is part of a wider Republican effort to restrict the political power of Democrats and Latino communities.

“The new evidence reveals that Dr. Thomas Hofeller, the longtime Republican redistricting specialist, played a significant role in orchestrating the addition of the citizenship question to the 2020 Decennial Census in order to create a structural electoral advantage for, in his own words, ‘Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites,’ and that defendants obscured his role through affirmative misrepresentations,” the filing said.

The change, announced in spring 2018, seems poised for approval by the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard arguments in April and is likely to rule by July. It’s not yet clear if the Hofeller documents might affect the pending case, though the American Civil Liberties Union apprised the high court of the latest developments Thursday in a letter signed by Dale Ho, director of the group’s voting rights project and a lawyer who argued against adding the question before the top court.

States, cities and rights groups had sued in New York and elsewhere, arguing that the question would suppress the count of immigrants and strengthen congressional representation and funding for areas where mostly Republicans reside. States with large numbers of immigrants tend to vote Democratic.

Lawyers for President Donald Trump’s administration say the commerce secretary has wide discretion to design the census questionnaire.

On Thursday, lawyers for groups including the ACLU said that the files show that a Justice Department official and a transition official for President Donald Trump testified falsely by hiding Hofeller’s role in asking for the question. They asked U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman to issue sanctions or consider finding individuals in contempt.

Ho, of the ACLU, said documents found after Hofeller’s death last year revealed the administration’s “goal was to dilute the voting power of minority communities. That’s literally the diametric opposite of what the administration has been saying all along.”

Furman gave the Justice Department until Monday to respond. An official with the department declined to comment on the record.

Furman set a hearing in the case for June 5.

Daughter turns over documents

The Hofeller documents cited by lawyers were discovered when his estranged daughter found four external computer hard drives and 18 thumb drives in her father’s Raleigh, North Carolina, home after his death last summer.

The New York Times reported that she contacted Common Cause, which had recently sued in state court to challenge North Carolina’s legislative districts, which had been drawn by Hofeller.

Furman, the federal judge, ruled in January that the question could not be included on the census, saying fewer people would respond to the census and that the process used to add it was faulty. Federal judges in California and Maryland reached similar conclusions in separate lawsuits.

Besides the citizenship question, the Supreme Court also is expected to decide within weeks, in cases from North Carolina and Maryland, whether to set limits for the first time on drawing districts for partisan advantage.
…

A group of detained asylum-seekers sued the U.S. government Thursday claiming immigration officials in five Southern states are systematically denying them parole.

In the second lawsuit of its kind filed against the Trump administration, legal advocacy groups representing 12 plaintiffs are seeking class action status on behalf of hundreds of asylum seekers being held in detention centers in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee. In addition to Central American migrants, the plaintiffs include a member of a Cameroonian opposition party and Cuban and Venezuelan political dissidents.

Migrants who arrive at U.S. ports of entry and ask for refuge in the United States are not eligible for bond hearings in front of a judge, but they can be released from detention on parole for humanitarian reasons under a 2009 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policy.

Denying parole

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center, claims that in recent months there has been an “unwritten policy and practice of categorically denying parole to asylum-seekers” that violates the government’s “own directive and guidelines.”

According to ICE data cited in the complaint, the New Orleans Field Office, which oversees the five states, granted parole in 76% of cases in 2016, but just 22% in 2017. In 2018, parole was granted in just two of the 130 cases in which ICE made a determination, or less than 2%, the complaint said.

The Justice Department declined to comment. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

​Administration centerpiece

President Donald Trump, who has made immigration a centerpiece of his administration, has said migrants are abusing the asylum system by making fraudulent claims to stay in the country for months or years as their cases work their way through a backlogged immigration court system.

He has pledged to end a practice of what he calls “catch and release” by detaining more asylum-seekers during their court proceedings.

U.S. officials say the system is overwhelmed by thousands of migrants, mostly from Central America, claiming fear of returning to their home countries. Families are often released to live in the United States because of limits placed on how long children can be held in detention, but adults can be locked up indefinitely during their court cases unless ICE decides to release them.

ICE expanded its detention capacity this year by 2,500 beds in three facilities in Louisiana, where many of the plaintiffs are being held.

First lawsuit in March 2018

One plaintiff in the lawsuit is a transgender woman who said she fled police repression in Cuba, sought asylum in El Paso, Texas, in January and has been detained since. During months in ICE custody, the suit alleges, she said she was periodically held in isolation and has yet to receive an interview to be considered for release.

A separate lawsuit filed in March 2018 made similar claims about ICE field offices in Detroit, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, El Paso, Texas, and Newark, New Jersey. Last July, a federal judge ordered ICE to follow its own policy and grant parole to asylum seekers who are not a flight risk or a danger to the community in those jurisdictions.
…

A group of detained asylum-seekers sued the U.S. government Thursday claiming immigration officials in five Southern states are systematically denying them parole.

In the second lawsuit of its kind filed against the Trump administration, legal advocacy groups representing 12 plaintiffs are seeking class action status on behalf of hundreds of asylum seekers being held in detention centers in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee. In addition to Central American migrants, the plaintiffs include a member of a Cameroonian opposition party and Cuban and Venezuelan political dissidents.

Migrants who arrive at U.S. ports of entry and ask for refuge in the United States are not eligible for bond hearings in front of a judge, but they can be released from detention on parole for humanitarian reasons under a 2009 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policy.

Denying parole

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center, claims that in recent months there has been an “unwritten policy and practice of categorically denying parole to asylum-seekers” that violates the government’s “own directive and guidelines.”

According to ICE data cited in the complaint, the New Orleans Field Office, which oversees the five states, granted parole in 76% of cases in 2016, but just 22% in 2017. In 2018, parole was granted in just two of the 130 cases in which ICE made a determination, or less than 2%, the complaint said.

The Justice Department declined to comment. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

​Administration centerpiece

President Donald Trump, who has made immigration a centerpiece of his administration, has said migrants are abusing the asylum system by making fraudulent claims to stay in the country for months or years as their cases work their way through a backlogged immigration court system.

He has pledged to end a practice of what he calls “catch and release” by detaining more asylum-seekers during their court proceedings.

U.S. officials say the system is overwhelmed by thousands of migrants, mostly from Central America, claiming fear of returning to their home countries. Families are often released to live in the United States because of limits placed on how long children can be held in detention, but adults can be locked up indefinitely during their court cases unless ICE decides to release them.

ICE expanded its detention capacity this year by 2,500 beds in three facilities in Louisiana, where many of the plaintiffs are being held.

First lawsuit in March 2018

One plaintiff in the lawsuit is a transgender woman who said she fled police repression in Cuba, sought asylum in El Paso, Texas, in January and has been detained since. During months in ICE custody, the suit alleges, she said she was periodically held in isolation and has yet to receive an interview to be considered for release.

A separate lawsuit filed in March 2018 made similar claims about ICE field offices in Detroit, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, El Paso, Texas, and Newark, New Jersey. Last July, a federal judge ordered ICE to follow its own policy and grant parole to asylum seekers who are not a flight risk or a danger to the community in those jurisdictions.
…

The United States is giving Mexico 10 days to stop illegal migrants from heading north to the U.S. border, or the country will be slapped with tariffs on all of its products.

The announcement was made in a tweet by U.S. President Donald Trump Thursday evening.

“On June 10th, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP,” Trump tweeted. Until “the illegal immigration problem is remedied” tariffs will continue to rise monthly, going as high as 25% by Oct. 1.

“Mexico’s passive cooperation in allowing this mass incursion constitutes an emergency and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States,” Trump said in a subsequent statement. “Mexico has very strong immigration laws and could easily halt the illegal flow of migrants, including by returning them to their home countries.”

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador responded with a tweet of his own. In a letter he posted on Twitter he said “social problems are not resolved with taxes or coercive measures.”

Trump’s announcement of the new tariffs came on the same day Mexico began the formal process to ratify the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade.

Lopez Obrador said he was sending his foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard to Washington to try to negotiate a solution.

Mexico’s deputy foreign minister for North America, Jesus Seade, says such tariffs would be disastrous.

“If this threat is carried out, it would be extremely serious,” he told reporters. “If this is put in place, we must respond vigorously.”

Some Republican members of Congress but no Democrats were consulted about the plan, according to acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.

Asked in a hastily arranged conference call with reporters about benchmarks Mexico would need to achieve to have the tariffs lifted, Mulvaney said there needs to be significant and substantial reductions in illegal migrants from Central America crossing into the United States.

“We’re going to take this and look at it on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis,” Mulvaney said. “We are interested in seeing the Mexican government act tonight, tomorrow.”

The acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Kevin McAleenan, told reporters on the call there is “an organized smuggling effort” involving commercial bus lines controlled by criminal organizations “to move 100,000 people to our country every four weeks.”

Trump has repeatedly accused Mexico of not doing enough to stop Central American migrants from traveling through the country on their way to the United States.
…

The United States is giving Mexico 10 days to stop illegal migrants from heading north to the U.S. border, or the country will be slapped with tariffs on all of its products.

The announcement was made in a tweet by U.S. President Donald Trump Thursday evening.

“On June 10th, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP,” Trump tweeted. Until “the illegal immigration problem is remedied” tariffs will continue to rise monthly, going as high as 25% by Oct. 1.

“Mexico’s passive cooperation in allowing this mass incursion constitutes an emergency and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States,” Trump said in a subsequent statement. “Mexico has very strong immigration laws and could easily halt the illegal flow of migrants, including by returning them to their home countries.”

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador responded with a tweet of his own. In a letter he posted on Twitter he said “social problems are not resolved with taxes or coercive measures.”

Trump’s announcement of the new tariffs came on the same day Mexico began the formal process to ratify the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade.

Lopez Obrador said he was sending his foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard to Washington to try to negotiate a solution.

Mexico’s deputy foreign minister for North America, Jesus Seade, says such tariffs would be disastrous.

“If this threat is carried out, it would be extremely serious,” he told reporters. “If this is put in place, we must respond vigorously.”

Some Republican members of Congress but no Democrats were consulted about the plan, according to acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.

Asked in a hastily arranged conference call with reporters about benchmarks Mexico would need to achieve to have the tariffs lifted, Mulvaney said there needs to be significant and substantial reductions in illegal migrants from Central America crossing into the United States.

“We’re going to take this and look at it on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis,” Mulvaney said. “We are interested in seeing the Mexican government act tonight, tomorrow.”

The acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Kevin McAleenan, told reporters on the call there is “an organized smuggling effort” involving commercial bus lines controlled by criminal organizations “to move 100,000 people to our country every four weeks.”

Trump has repeatedly accused Mexico of not doing enough to stop Central American migrants from traveling through the country on their way to the United States.
…

Acting U.S. Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan said Thursday he did not authorize and was not even aware of a White House directive to have the U.S. Navy warship USS John S. McCain “out of sight” when President Donald Trump visited Japan.

“I would never dishonor the memory of a great American patriot like Senator (John) McCain,” Shanahan told reporters traveling with him aboard a U.S. military aircraft en route to Singapore. “I’d never disrespect the young men and women who crew that ship.”

During a visit to Indonesia earlier, Shanahan told reporters “What I read this morning was the first I heard about it.” He said he is asking his chief of staff to look into the matter.

An email seen by VOA shows discussions about the USS John S. McCain between the White House Military Office and an officer with the U.S. Navy’s 7th Fleet ahead of Trump’s trip.

“USS John McCain needs to be out of sight,” reads the email’s third bullet-pointed request.

“Please confirm #3 will be satisfied,” the email emphasized.

​Trump says he was not informed

Trump tweeted Thursday that he was not informed about the controversy surrounding the USS John S. McCain during his visit to Japan.

​

Shanahan’s spokesman, Army Lt. Col Joe Buccino, said the acting secretary of defense also “was not aware of the directive to move the USS John S. McCain, nor was he aware of the concern precipitating the directive.”

“In terms of ship movements, the only ships I’ve moved is the USS Abraham Lincoln,” Shanahan added during a press event at the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Indonesia. He was referring to his early deployment to the Middle East of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group, which was sent to deter potential threats from Iran.

The Wall Street Journal first reported the directive to hide the USS John S McCain from Trump.

Long feud continues

Trump frequently feuded with longtime Republican senator and 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who died last year.

The USS McCain was originally named for the senator’s father and grandfather, both Navy admirals, and now honors all three men.

Meghan McCain, Sen. McCain’s daughter, called Trump a “child” who is “deeply threatened by the greatness” of her father. “Nine months since he passed, Trump won’t let him RIP. So I have to stand up for him,” she tweeted.

Media outlets report that a tarp was used to obscure the ship’s name ahead of Trump’s stop. When senior Navy officials figured out what was happening, they directed Navy personnel to remove the tarp, which was not present Saturday before Trump’s visit.

“The name of the USS John S. McCain was not obscured during the POTUS visit to Yokosuka on Memorial Day. The Navy is proud of that ship, its crew, its namesake and its heritage,” Navy Chief Information Officer Rear Adm. Charlie Brown tweeted Thursday.

Asked whether he would open an investigation, Shanahan said he needed to find out more about the incident first.
…

Acting U.S. Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan said Thursday he did not authorize and was not even aware of a White House directive to have the U.S. Navy warship USS John S. McCain “out of sight” when President Donald Trump visited Japan.

“I would never dishonor the memory of a great American patriot like Senator (John) McCain,” Shanahan told reporters traveling with him aboard a U.S. military aircraft en route to Singapore. “I’d never disrespect the young men and women who crew that ship.”

During a visit to Indonesia earlier, Shanahan told reporters “What I read this morning was the first I heard about it.” He said he is asking his chief of staff to look into the matter.

An email seen by VOA shows discussions about the USS John S. McCain between the White House Military Office and an officer with the U.S. Navy’s 7th Fleet ahead of Trump’s trip.

“USS John McCain needs to be out of sight,” reads the email’s third bullet-pointed request.

“Please confirm #3 will be satisfied,” the email emphasized.

​Trump says he was not informed

Trump tweeted Thursday that he was not informed about the controversy surrounding the USS John S. McCain during his visit to Japan.

​

Shanahan’s spokesman, Army Lt. Col Joe Buccino, said the acting secretary of defense also “was not aware of the directive to move the USS John S. McCain, nor was he aware of the concern precipitating the directive.”

“In terms of ship movements, the only ships I’ve moved is the USS Abraham Lincoln,” Shanahan added during a press event at the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Indonesia. He was referring to his early deployment to the Middle East of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group, which was sent to deter potential threats from Iran.

The Wall Street Journal first reported the directive to hide the USS John S McCain from Trump.

Long feud continues

Trump frequently feuded with longtime Republican senator and 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who died last year.

The USS McCain was originally named for the senator’s father and grandfather, both Navy admirals, and now honors all three men.

Meghan McCain, Sen. McCain’s daughter, called Trump a “child” who is “deeply threatened by the greatness” of her father. “Nine months since he passed, Trump won’t let him RIP. So I have to stand up for him,” she tweeted.

Media outlets report that a tarp was used to obscure the ship’s name ahead of Trump’s stop. When senior Navy officials figured out what was happening, they directed Navy personnel to remove the tarp, which was not present Saturday before Trump’s visit.

“The name of the USS John S. McCain was not obscured during the POTUS visit to Yokosuka on Memorial Day. The Navy is proud of that ship, its crew, its namesake and its heritage,” Navy Chief Information Officer Rear Adm. Charlie Brown tweeted Thursday.

Asked whether he would open an investigation, Shanahan said he needed to find out more about the incident first.
…

Special counsel Robert Mueller Wednesday declined to clear President Donald Trump of obstructing justice, though the president responded by declaring himself innocent and the “case is closed.” In his first public comments on the Russia probe, Mueller said because of a long-standing Department of Justice policy, the president cannot be charged with a federal crime while in office, and he indicated it is up to Congress to take further action. White House correspondent Patsy Widakuswara has more.
…

Special counsel Robert Mueller Wednesday declined to clear President Donald Trump of obstructing justice, though the president responded by declaring himself innocent and the “case is closed.” In his first public comments on the Russia probe, Mueller said because of a long-standing Department of Justice policy, the president cannot be charged with a federal crime while in office, and he indicated it is up to Congress to take further action. White House correspondent Patsy Widakuswara has more.
…

Louisiana lawmakers on Wednesday passed a strict new abortion ban that would prohibit the procedure before some women even know they are pregnant, joining a half-dozen conservative states with similar measures. 

In a 79-23 vote, the Louisiana House gave final passage to a bill barring abortion once there’s a detectable fetal heartbeat, as early as the sixth week of pregnancy. Gov. John Bel Edwards, the Deep South’s only Democratic governor, supports the ban and intends to sign it into law despite opposition from national party leaders who say such laws are attacks on women.  

“I know there are many who feel just as strongly as I do on abortion and disagree with me — and I respect their opinions,” Edwards said in a statement after the ban’s passage. “As I prepare to sign this bill, I call on the overwhelming bipartisan majority of legislators who voted for it to join me in continuing to build a better Louisiana that cares for the least among us and provides more opportunity for everyone.” 

Lawmakers in conservative states across the nation are striking at the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationally. Abortion opponents are pushing new restrictions on the procedure in hopes that a case will make its way to the high court, where two new conservative justices appointed by President Donald Trump could help overturn Roe. 

Heartbeat bills

Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi and Ohio have enacted similar so-called heartbeat bills, while Missouri lawmakers approved an eight-week ban on abortion. Alabama went even further, outlawing virtually all abortions, even in cases of rape or incest. None of the bans has taken effect, and all are expected to face legal challenges.

Louisiana’s prohibition would take hold only if neighboring Mississippi’s law is upheld by a federal appeals court. A federal judge temporarily blocked that Mississippi law Friday.

Abortion rights activists said Louisiana’s bill would effectively eliminate abortion as an option before many women realize they are pregnant, calling the proposal unconstitutional.

The legislation includes an exception from the abortion ban to prevent the pregnant woman’s death or “a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function” — or if the pregnancy is deemed “medically futile.” 

But it does not include an exception for a pregnancy caused by rape or incest. 

A doctor who violates the prohibition under the bill could face a prison sentence of up to two years, along with the revocation of his or her medical license. 

Although similar abortion bans have drawn sharp criticism from Democrats nationwide, Louisiana’s proposal won wide bipartisan support and was sponsored by a Democrat from the northwest corner of the state, Sen. John Milkovich.

Up for re-election

Support from Edwards, running for re-election this fall against two Republicans, is expected to help shore up his position with some voters in his conservative home state, even if it puts him at odds with national Democratic Party leaders and donors.

The ban is one of several bills that Louisiana lawmakers are advancing to add new restrictions on abortion, including a proposal to ask voters to rewrite the state constitution to ensure it offers no protections for the procedure. Another bill would limit where medication-induced abortions can be performed to the state’s three licensed abortion clinics.
…

Louisiana lawmakers on Wednesday passed a strict new abortion ban that would prohibit the procedure before some women even know they are pregnant, joining a half-dozen conservative states with similar measures. 

In a 79-23 vote, the Louisiana House gave final passage to a bill barring abortion once there’s a detectable fetal heartbeat, as early as the sixth week of pregnancy. Gov. John Bel Edwards, the Deep South’s only Democratic governor, supports the ban and intends to sign it into law despite opposition from national party leaders who say such laws are attacks on women.  

“I know there are many who feel just as strongly as I do on abortion and disagree with me — and I respect their opinions,” Edwards said in a statement after the ban’s passage. “As I prepare to sign this bill, I call on the overwhelming bipartisan majority of legislators who voted for it to join me in continuing to build a better Louisiana that cares for the least among us and provides more opportunity for everyone.” 

Lawmakers in conservative states across the nation are striking at the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationally. Abortion opponents are pushing new restrictions on the procedure in hopes that a case will make its way to the high court, where two new conservative justices appointed by President Donald Trump could help overturn Roe. 

Heartbeat bills

Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi and Ohio have enacted similar so-called heartbeat bills, while Missouri lawmakers approved an eight-week ban on abortion. Alabama went even further, outlawing virtually all abortions, even in cases of rape or incest. None of the bans has taken effect, and all are expected to face legal challenges.

Louisiana’s prohibition would take hold only if neighboring Mississippi’s law is upheld by a federal appeals court. A federal judge temporarily blocked that Mississippi law Friday.

Abortion rights activists said Louisiana’s bill would effectively eliminate abortion as an option before many women realize they are pregnant, calling the proposal unconstitutional.

The legislation includes an exception from the abortion ban to prevent the pregnant woman’s death or “a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function” — or if the pregnancy is deemed “medically futile.” 

But it does not include an exception for a pregnancy caused by rape or incest. 

A doctor who violates the prohibition under the bill could face a prison sentence of up to two years, along with the revocation of his or her medical license. 

Although similar abortion bans have drawn sharp criticism from Democrats nationwide, Louisiana’s proposal won wide bipartisan support and was sponsored by a Democrat from the northwest corner of the state, Sen. John Milkovich.

Up for re-election

Support from Edwards, running for re-election this fall against two Republicans, is expected to help shore up his position with some voters in his conservative home state, even if it puts him at odds with national Democratic Party leaders and donors.

The ban is one of several bills that Louisiana lawmakers are advancing to add new restrictions on abortion, including a proposal to ask voters to rewrite the state constitution to ensure it offers no protections for the procedure. Another bill would limit where medication-induced abortions can be performed to the state’s three licensed abortion clinics.
…