Category: Americas

  • MIL-OSI USA: Hawley Chairs Missouri District Judge Nominations Hearing  

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo)

    Wednesday, June 04, 2025

    Today, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) chaired the Judiciary Committee nominations hearing featuring the four Missourians President Trump has tapped to serve as district judges for Missouri–his first tranche of judicial nominees. 
    The nominees are:
    Maria A. Lanahan, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri
    Cristian M. Stevens, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri
    Joshua M. Divine, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri
    Zachary M. Bluestone, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri
    These individuals would fill judicial positions that have been vacant throughout the Biden Administration. Since the beginning of the year, Senator Hawley has worked closely with the Trump White House to ensure that appointments to Missouri vacancies are prioritized.

    Meet the 4 outstanding Missourians Trump tapped as his FIRST judicial nominees: Josh Divine, Maria Lanahan, Zachary Bluestone & Cris Stevens
    We’ve waited four long years for these judges. We WILL get them confirmed. And they will be a great credit to Missouri pic.twitter.com/OuC5mqAT1g
    — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) June 4, 2025

    Senator Hawley also had a memorable exchange on Title IX protections with Whitney D. Hermandorfer, nominated to be United States Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit. Senator Hawley highlighted her record of defending legislation to safeguard women’s sports and opportunities from men who identify as women. 
    “I want to thank you for going to battle for our daughters, for going to battle for the women you played sports with, for standing up for this landmark legislation,”Senator Hawley said. 
    “When it comes to the litigation that you carried out on behalf of Tennessee … I think you did a great service, not just to Tennessee but for the nation,” Senator Hawley added. 
    Watch the full committee hearing here. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: SPC Jun 5, 2025 0100 UTC Day 1 Convective Outlook

    Source: US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

     For best viewing experience, please enable browser JavaScript support.

    Jun 5, 2025 0100 UTC Day 1 Convective Outlook

    Updated: Thu Jun 5 00:33:04 UTC 2025 (Print Version |   |  )

    Probabilistic to Categorical Outlook Conversion Table

     Forecast Discussion

    SPC AC 050033

    Day 1 Convective Outlook
    NWS Storm Prediction Center Norman OK
    0733 PM CDT Wed Jun 04 2025

    Valid 050100Z – 051200Z

    …THERE IS A SLIGHT RISK OF SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS ACROSS PORTIONS OF
    THE SOUTHERN HIGH PLAINS…

    …SUMMARY…
    Isolated severe thunderstorms are expected this evening across
    portions of the southern High Plains. Large hail and severe wind
    gusts are the primary concerns.

    …01z Update…

    Upper low that was located over the northern Baja Peninsula early
    this morning has deamplified and quickly sheared northeast as it
    tracks into western NM. Large-scale ascent ahead of this feature
    appears to be aiding several thunderstorm clusters along the Sangre
    de Cristo range, and more isolated activity now across the high
    Plains of northeast NM. ICECHIP sounding from TCC earlier this
    afternoon exhibited strong, deep-layer shear (50kt through 6km),
    with substantial veering in the lowest 1km. While buoyancy is not
    particularly strong on 00z sounding from AMA, wind profiles favor
    supercells and this activity should spread across northeast NM
    toward the southern TX Panhandle later this evening. Some longevity
    is expected as a LLJ is expected to increase across the High Plains
    after sunset. Hail and wind are the primary concerns.

    ..Darrow.. 06/05/2025

    CLICK TO GET WUUS01 PTSDY1 PRODUCT

    .html”>Latest Day 2 Outlook/Today’s Outlooks/Forecast Products/Home

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: News 06/4/2025 Blackburn Introduces Legislation to Protect Federal Law Enforcement Officers from Doxxing

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn)
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) introduced the Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act to make it illegal to dox federal law enforcement officials following the dangerous actions of Nashville Mayor Freddie O’Connell and his office to publicly release the names of law enforcement officers last week. This puts them at a higher risk of being targeted by criminal gangs, including MS-13 and Tren De Aragua.
    “Blue city mayors are doing everything they can to obstruct the Trump administration’s efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens,” said Senator Blackburn. “Just last week, Nashville Mayor O’Connell and his office doxxed federal law enforcement officers after the Trump administration worked with Tennessee Highway Patrol to arrest criminal illegal aliens. My Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act would make this illegal and hold blue city mayors accountable for obstructing enforcement of our immigration laws by putting law enforcement officers in harm’s way.”
    BACKGROUND
    Last year, an illegal alien from Mexico was charged with criminal homicide and evidence tampering after Nashville restaurant owner, Matt Carney, was tragically killed in a hit-and-run crash. Just a few months earlier, another illegal alien was charged with attempted kidnapping, sexual battery, public intoxication, and evading arrest after he followed a woman into the bathroom and groped her at the Nashville Sundae Club in the Gulch.
    Click here for a list of examples of the criminal illegal aliens who were arrested during a joint operation in Nashville by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Tennessee Highway Patrol, including convicted rapists, drug dealers, and individuals affiliated with MS-13. Senator Blackburn praised this operation in a recent column published by The Tennessean.
    Following this operation, Mayor O’Connell and his office doxxed federal law enforcement officers, putting them at risk of being targeted by criminal gangs. 
    Senator Blackburn has called on the U.S. Department of Justice to launch an investigation into the actions of Mayor O’Connell and his office for attempting to undermine President Trump and ICE’s work to get dangerous criminals out of Tennessee communities.
    THE PROTECTING LAW ENFORCEMENT FROM DOXXING ACT
    The Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act would make it illegal to publish the name of a federal law enforcement officer with the intent to obstruct a criminal investigation or immigration operation.
    Under this legislation, an individual found guilty of doxxing a federal law enforcement officer would face a fine and/or imprisonment of five years. 
    Click here for bill text.
    RELATED

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Facing Extreme Hurricane & Wildfire Seasons, Cantwell Slams Admin’s Erosion of Weather Forecasting: “NOAA Has Been Transparent That They Can’t Keep Up”

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
    06.04.25
    Facing Extreme Hurricane & Wildfire Seasons, Cantwell Slams Admin’s Erosion of Weather Forecasting: “NOAA Has Been Transparent That They Can’t Keep Up”
    Meteorologists from WA, OK and FL sound the alarm on laying off 100s of National Weather Service employees, creating unprecedented staffing shortages; Earlier today, Trump’s Commerce Secretary misled a Senate subcommittee that NOAA was “fully staffed” heading into hurricane & wildfire season
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, joined renowned meteorologists from across the country for a virtual presser to sound the alarm on cuts to the National Weather Service (NWS) as the United States heads into peak hurricane and wildfire season – and call on the Trump Administration to restore the agency to full capacity.
    “We have already seen these impacts from the Administration failing to heed these warnings. For at least a half a century, the National Weather Service has provided forecasts for 24 hours a day, seven days a week — until now. At least eight weather forecasting offices no longer have a meteorologist to cover overnight shifts. They are planning on eliminating the NOAA buoy program. You can’t map a hurricane if you don’t have the buoy information,” Sen. Cantwell said. “NOAA has been transparent that they can’t keep up. They have said that they can’t keep the lights on in a number of forecast offices. The Department of Commerce needs to be clear to the American people that the staffing shortages will impact our ability to compute that science [and] get those wildfire crews and emergency response where they need to go.”
    “We’re already a handful of days into the 2025 hurricane season. But the National Weather Service and NOAA are dealing with their own storm right now in the form of short staffing and budget cuts,” said Brian LaMarre, former Meteorologist in Charge in the Tampa Bay area. “There are eight [NWS offices] that are below a certain number of employees that work at that particular office, and that means that they can’t work 24/7 operations. That’s never before happened in my career.”
    “For the first time in 35 years, I have real concerns due to the staffing situation,” said Alan Gerard, a 35-year meteorologist with the NWS and the National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, OK. “And the very fact that some offices aren’t able to operate 24/7 and that the administration has authorized these hires during a hiring freeze, tells you that there’s recognition that there’s serious shortages.”
    “I find it frankly shameful that we even have to have this sort of discussion,” said Jeff Renner, retired meteorologist of 39 years at KING 5 in Seattle. “More people such as you and I now utilize weather apps such as I have on my telephone, yet there is a lack of fundamental appreciation that most of those forecasts, if not all of them, stem from National Weather Service forecasts.”
    Video of today’s virtual press conference is available HERE; a transcript is HERE.
    Over the past several months, the NWS lost over 560 employees due to layoffs and retirements spurred by the Trump Administration. On Monday, they announced they’d hire 126 – amounting to “a flimsy band-aid,” Sen. Cantwell said.
    This dangerous decision to leave critical jobs unfilled comes as the National Interagency Fire Center, a partnership which includes NWS, released its Fire Maps for the next four months predicting above normal significant fire potential across the West, in Hawaii, the coasts of North and South Carolina, and parts of Texas and Florida. The National Weather Service predicts an above-normal hurricane season, which began June 1.  Last year, according to the National Centers for Environmental Information, there were 27 weather disaster events that cost over $1 billion each and resulted in 568 deaths.
    Earlier this week, the acting head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) baffled his staff when he stated that he did not know that the United States had a hurricane season.
    And earlier today, U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick testified in a Senate hearing and claimed, falsely, that NOAA is “fully staffed” heading into the summer.
    Lutnick was plainly incorrect:
    National Hurricane Center in Miami has at least five vacancies.
    At least eight NWS weather forecasting offices no longer have enough meteorologists to cover overnight shifts.
    30 of the 122 weather forecast offices don’t currently have a meteorologist-in-charge, their most experienced weather expert. Some of these vacancies are in major metropolitan areas such as New York City, Cleveland, Houston, and hurricane-prone Tampa.
    Since mid-March, at least 10 weather forecast offices have suspended or limited their weather balloon launches needed for daily forecasts.
    NOAA is short more than 90 staffers whose job is maintaining Doppler radar and automated airport weather sensors operational across the nation.
    Last Thursday, Sen. Cantwell sent a letter demanding that the Trump Administration immediately exempt the NWS from its current federal hiring freeze so that citizens and communities will not be left to fend for themselves without adequate warnings as both hurricane season and wildfire season rapidly approach.
    Monday’s action by the administration lifted the hiring freeze on 126 positions across four roles – meteorologists, hydrologists, physical scientists, and electronic technicians. However, many other important roles remain subject to the freeze, including credentialed mariners needed to safety operate NOAA research vessels, weather scientists, and weather satellite technicians. NOAA vessels and satellites are crucial to maintaining forecast and weather infrastructure needed for meteorologists to issue quality and timely forecasts. These firings also impact our economy, with a number of commercial fishing surveys cancelled this year, including for Alaska pollock and salmon. Elimination of surveys will take catch from fishing families, which will result in job loss and increased cost for consumers who want access to high-quality American seafood at their local markets and restaurants.
    Multiple recent reports have documented the impacts of the hiring freeze. The Washington Post reports that “Some…forecasting teams are so critically understaffed that the agency is offering to pay moving expenses for any staff willing to transfer to those offices, according to notices recently sent to employees…” And the New York Times found that “The National Weather Service is preparing for the probability that fewer forecast updates will be fine-tuned by specialists, among other cutbacks, because of ‘severe shortages’ of meteorologists and other employees, according to an internal agency document.” These reports make clear that action must be taken immediately to avoid a catastrophic gap in capacity in the face of a future storm or wildfire.
    In February, Sen. Cantwell sent Lutnick a letter warning of the likelihood of this exact situation.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Unprecedented heat in the North Atlantic Ocean kickstarted Europe’s hellish 2023 summer. Now we know what caused it

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Matthew England, Scientia Professor and Deputy Director of the ARC Australian Centre for Excellence in Antarctic Science, UNSW Sydney

    Westend61/Getty Images

    In June 2023, a record-breaking marine heatwave swept across the North Atlantic Ocean, smashing previous temperature records.

    Soon after, deadly heatwaves broke out across large areas of Europe, and torrential rains and flash flooding devastated parts of Spain and Eastern Europe. That year Switzerland lost more than 4% of its total glacier volume, and severe bushfires broke out around the Mediterranean.

    It wasn’t just Europe that was impacted. The coral reefs of the Caribbean were bleaching under severe heat stress. And hurricanes, fuelled by ocean heat, intensified into disasters. For example, Hurricane Idalia hit Florida in August 2023 – causing 12 deaths and an estimated US$3.6 billion in damages.

    Today, in a paper published in Nature, we uncover what drove this unprecedented marine heatwave.

    A strange discovery

    In a strange twist to the global warming story, there is a region of the North Atlantic Ocean to the southeast of Greenland that has been cooling over the last 50 to 100 years.

    This so-called “cold blob” or “warming hole” has been linked to the weakening of what’s known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation – a system of ocean currents that conveys warm water from the equator towards the poles.

    During July 2023 we met as a team to analyse this cold blob – how deep it reaches and how robust it is as a measure of the strength of the Atlantic overturning circulation – when it became clear there was a strong reversal of the historical cooling trend. The cold blob had warmed to 2°C above average.

    But was that a sign the overturning circulation had been reinvigorated? Or was something else going on?

    A layered story

    It soon became clear the anomalous warm temperatures southeast of Greenland were part of an unprecedented marine heatwave that had developed across much of the North Atlantic Ocean. By July, basin-averaged warming in the North Atlantic reached 1.4°C above normal, almost double the previous record set in 2010.

    To uncover what was behind these record breaking temperatures, we combined estimates of the atmospheric conditions that prevailed during the heatwave, such as winds and cloud cover, with ocean observations and model simulations.

    We were especially interested in understanding what was happening in the mixed upper layer of water of the ocean, which is strongly affected by the atmosphere.

    Distinct from the deeper layer of cold water, the ocean’s surface mixed layer warms as it’s exposed to more sunlight during spring and summer. But the rate at which this warming happens depends on its thickness. If it’s thick, it will warm more gradually; if it’s thin, rapid warming can ensue.

    During summer the thickness of this surface mixed layer is largely set by winds. Winds churn up the surface ocean and the stronger they are the deeper the mixing penetrates, so strong winds create a think upper layer and weak winds generate a shallower layer.

    Sea surface temperature anomaly (°C) for the month of June 2023, relative to the 1991–2020 reference period.
    Copernicus Climate Change Service/ECMWF

    Thinning at the surface

    Our new research indicates that the primary driver of the marine heatwave was record-breaking weak winds across much of the basin. The winds were at their weakest measured levels during June and July, possibly linked to a developing El Niño in the east Pacific Ocean.

    This led to by far the shallowest upper layer on record. Data from the Argo Program – a global array of nearly 4,000 robotic floats that measure the temperature and salinity in the upper 2,000 metres of the ocean – showed in some areas this layer was only ten metres deep, compared to the usual 20 to 40 metres deep.

    This caused the sun to heat the thin surface layer far more rapidly than usual.

    In addition to these short term changes in 2023, previous research has shown long-term warming associated with anthropogenic climate change is reducing the ability of winds to mix the upper ocean, causing it to gradually thin.

    We also identified a possible secondary driver of more localised warming during the 2023 marine heatwave: above-average solar radiation hitting the ocean. This could be linked in part with the introduction of new international rules in 2020 to reduce sulfate emissions from ships.

    The aim of these rules was to reduce air pollution from ship’s exhaust systems. But sulfate aerosols also reflect solar radiation and can lead to cloud formation. The resultant clearer skies can then lead to more ocean warming.

    Early warning signs

    The extreme 2023 heatwave provides a preview of the future. Marine heatwaves are expected to worsen as Earth continues to warm due to greenhouse gas emissions, with devastating impacts on marine ecosystems such as coral reefs and fisheries. This also means more intense hurricanes – and more intense land-based heatwaves.

    Right now, although the “cold blob” to the southeast of Greenland has returned, parts of the North Atlantic remain significantly warmer than the average. There is a particularly warm patch of water off the coast of the United Kingdom, with temperatures up to 4°C above normal. And this is likely priming Europe for extreme land-based heatwaves this summer.

    Global ocean temperatures on June 2 2025. A patch of abnormally warm water is visible off the southern coast of the United Kingdom.
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

    To better understand, forecast and plan for the impacts of marine heatwaves, long-term ocean and atmospheric data and models, including those provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the United States, are crucial. In fact, without these data and models, our new study would not have been possible.

    Despite this, NOAA faces an uncertain future. A proposed budget for the 2026 fiscal year released by the White House last month could mean devastating funding cuts of more than US$1.5 billion – mostly targeting climate-based research and data collection.

    This would be a disaster for monitoring our oceans and climate system, right at a time when change is severe, unprecedented, and proving very costly.

    Matthew England receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Alex Sen Gupta receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Andrew Kiss receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Zhi Li receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    ref. Unprecedented heat in the North Atlantic Ocean kickstarted Europe’s hellish 2023 summer. Now we know what caused it – https://theconversation.com/unprecedented-heat-in-the-north-atlantic-ocean-kickstarted-europes-hellish-2023-summer-now-we-know-what-caused-it-258061

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Getting away with it … sort of. How a dictator and a fugitive Nazi advanced international human rights law

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Olivera Simic, Associate Professor in Law, Griffith University

    Pinochet and Rauff? They were alike. Each had two faces. One gentle, the other hard. They were joined.

    And they both got away with it … Sort of.

    Philippe Sands loves to tell stories. A master of historical non-fiction, he has become known for his unique blend of deeply personal, legal and historical narratives, which weave together incredible coincidences with moving stories of human courage in the face of mass atrocities and horror.

    Sands is a leading practitioner of international law, a professor at University College London, an author, a playwright, and the recipient of numerous literary awards. He is also someone whose family was murdered in the vortex of the Holocaust in Ukraine.

    With his previous two books, East West Street: On the Origins of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity (2016) and The Ratline: Love, Lies and Justice on the Trail of a Nazi Fugitive (2020), he demonstrated his unique skill in presenting complex legal cases to avid readers.

    His latest book, 38 Londres Street: On Impunity, Pinochet in England and a Nazi in Patagonia, rounds out the trilogy.

    If it weren’t based on facts, one might think it was a brilliantly crafted thriller.


    Review: 38 Londres Street: On Impunity, Pinochet in England and a Nazi in Patagonia – Philippe Sands (Weidenfeld & Nicolson)


    38 Londres Street weaves together several narratives, but at its heart is the story of the legal attempts to end impunity for two accused criminals. One is Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. The other is Walther Rauff, a former SS officer who fled to South America and allegedly worked with Pinochet’s Secret Intelligence Service.

    Sands brings these two men into a single narrative to highlight the legal struggle against impunity for mass atrocities, though he never loses sight of the victims and their human stories of suffering, courage and persistence.

    These were people whose lives were abruptly and violently taken. Sands includes many of their names and tragic fates in his book. He informs his readers that the Cementerio Sara Braun in Punta Arenas, Chile, has a memorial bearing the names of Pinochet’s many victims. He clearly wants these individuals never to be forgotten.

    Universal jurisdiction and the Pinochet precedent

    The building at 38 Londres Street in Santiago was once a site of pain. At this secret interrogation centre, one of many across Santiago and the rest of Chile, Pinochet’s agents imprisoned, tortured, executed and disappeared tens of thousands of people deemed leftists, socialists, communists or “other undesirables”.

    Pinochet came to power on September 11, 1973, overthrowing the democratically elected socialist government of President Salvador Allende in a military coup. He would rule Chile with an iron fist until 1990.

    Chile’s youth became the targets of his murderous regime. Sands notes that most victims were between 21 and 30 years old. The majority of them were workers; the rest mainly comprised academics, professionals and students. The atrocities were committed with impunity.

    Like all dictators, Pinochet believed himself untouchable. But in October 1998, while visiting the UK, he was arrested in London. Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón was seeking Pinochet’s extradition to Spain in order to try him for human rights abuses.

    Garzón was acting under the then-controversial legal principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows courts in one country to prosecute grave human rights violations committed outside its borders, regardless of the nationality of the accused.

    Never before had a former head of state of one country been arrested by, and in another, for committing international crimes.

    Sands would become involved in one of the most famous cases in international law since the Nuremberg trials more than 50 years earlier. Pinochet’s lawyers offered him an opportunity to participate in the case, arguing for the former dictator’s immunity as a former head of state. His wife threatened to divorce him if he accepted.

    He declined the offer. Instead, Sands represented Human Rights Watch when the Pinochet case was considered by the Law Lords.

    Pinochet had been indicted for crimes against humanity and genocide. At issue was the question of whether Pinochet, as a former head of state, had immunity before the English courts for acts committed in another country while he was in office. Should there be a legal protection for former dictators?

    The proceedings in London were novel and remarkable, writes Sands, because this was an open legal question when Pinochet was arrested. His arrest raised an unprecedented issue: was there an exception to the rule of immunity for a former head of state when a crime in international law was involved? And did the exception apply before a national court, rather than an international one?


    Many believed Pinochet’s immunity should be lifted and extradition proceedings should go ahead, so that he could answer for the deaths of Spanish nationals and others. If that did not happen, it was argued, the travesty of justice would signal that any dictator could get away with genocide. As Sands writes, immunity and impunity often go hand in hand.

    In this landmark case, Pinochet was stripped of the immunity from prosecution he had enjoyed as a former president. He was ordered to stand trial on charges of human rights abuses.

    For the next 16 months, he remained in the UK, awaiting extradition to Spain. But it never happened. The initial judgement on immunity was quashed, due to concerns about possible bias of one of the judges. The case returned to square one. New hearings took place.

    In January 2000, the UK eventually decided not to proceed with extradition, claiming that Pinochet was too ill to stand trial and that “it would not be fair”. He was allowed to return to Chile as a free man, thanks to medical doctors rather than lawyers.

    Political leaders in Europe generally welcomed the ruling. Margaret Thatcher, former British prime minister and Pinochet’s longstanding ally, was adamant that the lengthy legal wrangle had been a waste of public money. Seemingly agitated, she said in front of the cameras:

    Senator Pinochet was a staunch friend of Britain throughout the Falklands War. His reward from this government was to be held prisoner for 16 months. In the meantime, his health has been broken, his reputation tarnished, and vast funds of public money have been squandered on a political vendetta.

    Subsequent attempts to prosecute Pinochet in Chile were unsuccessful. He died in 2006 at the age of 91, without ever being tried for the human rights abuses that occurred while he was in power. Retributive justice, in the end, was not served. But Pinochet’s case opened the gates for efforts to bring other former and serving heads of state to justice.

    Today, the 38 Londres Street serves as a place of national memory where visitors can walk through its halls and learn about its dark past.

    The Nazi who invented the gas chambers

    Running parallel with Pinochet’s story is that of Nazi fugitive Walther Rauff.

    Rauff invented the mobile gas chambers that were precursors to the gas chambers in Nazi concentration camps. At the end of the second world war, he escaped to South America, settling in Chile. Germany made numerous attempts to have Rauff extradited to face charges, but the Chilean government refused these demands. He spent his days in the backwaters of Patagonia, running a king-crab cannery business.

    Sands travels to Patagonia and meets people who remember Rauff, whose identity seems to have been common knowledge among his neighbours and co-workers: “everyone knew rumours and stories of his past”; they knew about “the gas vans” and that he “once killed many people”. But no one seemed to be bothered. They describe Rauff as “cultivated and kind”. To many of Sands’ interlocutors, the stories about Rauff “were long ago and far away”.

    While dealing with the failed attempts for his extradition, Rauff put his energies into “harvesting crabs, making sure the tins were packed tight, [and] managing the workers”. He continued to do so, enjoying the company of his dog Bobby, when Pinochet became Chile’s new leader.

    Pinochet was an old friend. Sands records that the two men met in the 1950s in Quito, Ecuador, where Rauff was staying, having fled an Italian prison camp at the end of the war. The men shared a contempt for communism and an affinity for German culture. Pinochet encouraged Rauff to move to Chile.

    Rauff delighted in Pinochet’s murderous regime. Sands tell us that Pinochet used Rauff’s “expertise” to help with the murder and disappearance of thousands of people. But the controversy over whether Rauff worked for the Chilean military, becoming “chief advisor” to its intelligence services, or perhaps even its “head”, remains unresolved. Definitive and provable evidence about the assistance Rauff may have given to Pinochet was never obtained.

    Holding dictators to account

    One of the many coincidences Sands stumbles upon is that Rauff lived in Punta Arenas in southern Chile on a street called “Jugoslavija”, named after the country where I was born, which disintegrated in the 1990s in a brutal civil war marked by mass atrocities and genocide.

    Former Yugoslavian and Serbian president Slobodan Milošević would become the first-ever serving head of state to be charged with international crimes and extradited to an international court.

    Milošević was extradited to The Hague in 2001 after he was indicted for war crimes committed in Kosovo and Croatia, and for genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina following an order from the Serbian government. His trial is widely hailed as a landmark moment in the development of international criminal law, though he died in his cell before his trial ended, dying “innocent” like his counterparts Pinochet and Rauff.

    Slobodan Milošević in The Hague, July 2001.
    Robert Goddyn, via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    In 38 Londres Street, Sands brings to light the behind-the-scenes struggles to hold Pinochet and Rauff accountable. The book explores the intricacies and politics of international law. Despite its bitter ending, Pinochet’s case remains one of the most far reaching and important in the field of human rights. It caused other countries to reflect on their own legal immunities.

    As a researcher and academic, I found the book significant because it also offers insight into what it takes to conduct such expansive archival and qualitative research. Over several years, “in between work and life”, Sands travels to different corners of the globe and speaks to informants from all walks of life, including descendants of the perpetrators. He visits the sites of the events he recounts, most of them places marked by pain. He seeks to see and feel a past that still lingers.

    His method requires stamina, passion and unwavering diligence. His strong commitment to neutrality, decency and impartiality makes him stand out not only as a highly skilled writer, but a survivor who continues to unpack and share the legacy of the Holocaust. There is much to respect and learn from in Sands’ account, not least about the intricacies of writing a compelling story.

    Holding dictators to account is hard. Pinochet and Rauff deprived victims of the retributive justice they needed and deserved. Yet justice and reparations have many different meanings. They can be symbolic too, and still profoundly meaningful to victims. As one of the survivors of Pinochet’s regime replied to Sands when asked whether he believed his case was one of total impunity: “Not quite total […] Dawson [an island detention camp] has been recognised as a site of national memory, a protected monument, and that means something.”

    Pinochet and Rauff were never convicted, but they were not free. Pinochet spent years under house arrest, bitter and devastated, unable to walk the streets. Rauff lived in constant fear of being arrested and extradited. They were both haunted. This, after all, may have brought some satisfaction to the victims.

    Sands was once asked: “Do you believe in justice?” He replied: “Sort of.” Sands comes to understand that justice is “uneven in its delivery”. He has learned “to tamper expectations”. Maybe we all need to learn that skill from him too. Ultimately, justice remains a work-in-progress, just like the process of learning from a dark past.

    Olivera Simic does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Getting away with it … sort of. How a dictator and a fugitive Nazi advanced international human rights law – https://theconversation.com/getting-away-with-it-sort-of-how-a-dictator-and-a-fugitive-nazi-advanced-international-human-rights-law-257241

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley Oversight Unveils Disturbing Extent of FBI’s Anti-Catholic Bias

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today released Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) records revealing the Biden FBI’s anti-Catholic Richmond Memo was widely distributed to over 1,000 FBI employees across the country before it was publicly disclosed by a whistleblower in 2023.  
    Per the Grassley-obtained records, the Biden FBI’s targeting of Catholics based on biased sources was more widespread than previously known. In fact, Grassley found the FBI produced at least 13 additional documents and five attachments that used anti-Catholic terminology and relied on information from the radical far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). One FBI agent admitted over email, “[O]ur overreliance on the SPLC for hate designation [of traditional Catholics] is … problematic.”  
    A second FBI memo, released by Grassley, was drafted by the FBI Richmond field office for Bureau-wide distribution. The draft memo repeated the unfounded link between traditional Catholicism and violent extremism, but was never published due to backlash following the Richmond Memo’s public disclosure. The existence of this second memo contradicts former-FBI Director Christopher Wray’s testimony that the Richmond field office only produced “a single product.” 
    Grassley is urging FBI Director Kash Patel to continue producing records related to the Richmond Memo’s origins, as well as former-FBI Director Christopher Wray’s misleading and obstructive response to Grassley’s oversight of the memo. 
    “I’m determined to get to the bottom of the Richmond memo, and of the FBI’s contempt for oversight in the last administration,” Grassley wrote. “I look forward to continuing to work with you to restore the FBI to excellence and prove once again that justice can and must be fairly and evenly administered, blind to whether we are Democrats or Republicans, believers or nonbelievers.” 
    Find Grassley’s letter and the released FBI documents HERE. 
    Related: 
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley Recognizes C-SPAN’s Decades of Senate Coverage, Discusses Need for Public Access Across All Platforms

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley

    WASHINGTON – In a speech on the Senate floor, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) celebrated the 39th anniversary of C-SPAN 2’s first Senate broadcast on June 2, 1986. Earlier today, Grassley and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) introduced a bipartisan resolution to celebrate C-SPAN’s historic coverage and urge all television providers, including streaming services, to carry the network.

    [embedded content]

    VIDEO

    Today is the 39th year celebration of the United States Senate being covered by C-SPAN 2. 

    I’ve come to the floor countless times since my first term in the United States Senate. beginning in 1981. It’s a privilege to represent Iowans and my home state here in the greatest deliberative body in the world.

    For more than four decades, and counting, I’ve joined my colleagues here in this chamber to debate public policy, shed light on wrongdoing and celebrate historic milestones.

    I’ve cast votes on behalf of Iowans, giving my assent or dissent to nominations and legislation on matters both foreign [and] domestic, on issues from A to Z.

    For a period of time – spanning more than 27 years – I held the longest voting streak in Senate history. My 8,927 consecutive roll call votes ended in November of 2020, when I was quarantined for exposure to COVID-19.

    My good friend from Maine, Senator Susan Collins, now holds the baton, as she continues her unbroken voting streak since she was sworn into office in 1997.

    During the 116th Congress and now the 119th Congress, I’m honored to serve as Senate President pro tem. From this leadership position, I open the Senate daily, lead the Pledge of Allegiance and often take the opportunity to deliver brief remarks during what we call Morning Business.

    Since 1986, every minute of the people’s business conducted here in the Senate chamber has been made available live to the public, from memorable moments – including televising 16 Supreme Court nomination debates and three presidential impeachment trials – to subjects that are often very mundane.

    Thanks to C-SPAN 2, this public service allows our constituents to see the swearing-in of newly elected members, watch all-night sessions during vote-a-ramas and tune in to history being made.

    Speaking of the historic moments, it was 39 years ago today, [on] June 2, when C-SPAN 2 started its gavel-to-gavel coverage of the United States Senate. 

    That was seven years after C-SPAN started broadcasting live coverage of the U.S. House of Representatives in 1979. At that time, I was a member of the House and appreciated C-SPAN’s mission to foster civic engagement and let the sunshine in on the people’s business.

    So, today, I wish C-SPAN 2 a happy birthday and thank those who are dedicated to its mission to bring the people’s business to the people of our country. C-SPAN does not receive one penny of taxpayer dollars. It is funded primarily from satellite and cable providers.

    Senator Klobuchar of Minnesota and I have introduced a bipartisan resolution to recognize C-SPAN 2 and the public service it provides the American people through its live, nonpartisan coverage. Our resolution calls for television providers, including streaming services, to make C-SPAN public affairs programming available to all Americans in real time on all platforms. 

    For [the] tens of millions of Americans who have cut the cord and get their content from streaming services, they should not be cut off from the civic content made available by C-SPAN.

    C-SPAN gives our constituents a front row seat to the legislative branch, providing unfiltered access to debates and deliberations that impact their lives and their livelihoods.

    C-SPAN 2 has recorded more than 43,830 hours of Senate sessions that span the spectrum of political views, policy debates and personal testimony, including more than 169,000 speeches.

    It has documented more than 23,439 roll call votes, providing a live testimonial of Senate decision-making. Its coverage helps hold elected officials accountable to our constituents who are able to see every roll call vote, as it actually happens.

    And it just so happens, on C-SPAN 2’s inaugural day on June 2, 1986, I took my turn as presiding officer during the Senate session.

    I also delivered remarks to introduce a bill on human rights and free speech issues that involved protestors outside of the then-Soviet embassy here in Washington, D.C. Thanks to C-SPAN, Americans can watch history unfold before their very eyes.

    As an advocate for civic engagement and transparency, I applaud C-SPAN’s commitment to chronicling democracy in action here in the Congress.

    In fact, for more than 20 years, I’ve pushed to allow cameras into the federal courthouses, including the Supreme Court, to foster a better understanding of the federal judiciary and its role in our system of checks and balances and in resolving legal disputes.

    Keeping C-SPAN’s cameras rolling here in Congress keeps lawmakers accountable to our constituents by providing a valuable conduit for civic engagement and civic education. As James Madison wrote in 1822, after he had been President six years before, some 35 years after he helped write the Constitution:

    “A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a Farce or Tragedy; or perhaps both. Knowle[d]ge will for ever govern ignorance: and a people who mean to be their own Governours, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

    C-SPAN helps arm Americans with knowledge in real time in a refreshing, nonpartisan lens. In this era of civic discord and polarization, C-SPAN serves the public interest, not a partisan agenda. 

    I encourage my colleagues to support our bipartisan resolution that Sen. Klobuchar and I have introduced.

    And I’ll finish with another James Madison [quote], as he noted: an engaged and educated citizenry is necessary to advance the public good and secure the longevity of our republic.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Grassley Discusses AI Whistleblower Protection Act During “A Starting Point” Interview

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) joined “A Starting Point” to share details about his AI Whistleblower Protection Act.
    The legislation provides explicit whistleblower protections to those developing and deploying Artificial Intelligence (AI). Currently, some AI companies’ restrictive severance and nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) create a chilling effect on current and former employees looking to make whistleblower disclosures to the federal government, including Congress.
    Video and excerpts of Grassley’s remarks follow.

    VIDEO
    On the Importance of Whistleblowers:
    “A whistleblower can be anybody, most often in government that I deal with, but sometimes in the private sector. People that know something isn’t right, [that a] law might be violated. People might be stealing taxpayers’ money [or] taxes aren’t being paid, whatever the case might be. They think it’s not right. They may not even think of themselves as a whistleblower. I think of them as just patriotic Americans that want the government to do what the government’s supposed to do: obey the laws [and] spend the taxpayers’ money the way Congress intended.”
    On the Need for AI-Specific Whistleblower Protections:
    “I’ve had [AI] whistleblowers come to me and say that things aren’t right. They want to expose it … That’s why we need laws that would protect whistleblowers within the AI community, as we would any place in government or in the private sector …
    “My bill will explicitly protect communications of current and former AI employees making legally protected disclosure to Congress or a federal agency or to a supervisor. It seems as time goes on, AI is growing. My timely legislation will bring transparency and accountability to the artificial intelligence sector before it’s too late.”
    On Shady Non-Disclosure Agreements:
    “[These] non-disclosure statements that would say ‘you can’t talk about this,’ and it just prohibits and inhibits people that know something’s wrong coming to Congress to talk about it. It’s a violation of free speech, [and] it’s a way of covering up things that are wrong, that either people in government don’t want public, or private business wants to keep the information within the business.”
    On the Free Market System:
    “I believe in the free enterprise system. And of course, that causes me to support pro-business, pro-growth policies. I don’t see my whistleblower protection interest in any way violating that, because the government is legitimately a referee within the free enterprise system. So, all of this legislation isn’t about upending any non-disclosure agreements or ending companies’ rights to confidentiality. This is pretty simply stated as being something to ensure people who see wrongdoing can speak up without retribution before more harm is done to the public.
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley, Republican Colleagues Introduce Legislation to Bolster Violent Crime Laws

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley

    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today led 10 Republican colleagues in introducing legislation to strengthen violent crime statutes and help prevent future crime. The Combating Violent and Dangerous Crime Act would resolve conflicting court decisions by clarifying penalties for violent offenses like carjacking, robbery and kidnapping.

    “Under the Biden-Harris administration, our nation saw a massive spike in violent crime. As the Trump administration works to clean up the previous administration’s mess, Congress has a duty to resolve any legal ambiguities that may weaken our ability to hold criminals fully accountable,” Grassley said. “Our bill includes several modest, but meaningful, reforms to tamp down on future crime and ensure justice is served.”

    The Combating Violent and Dangerous Crime Act addresses ambiguity and conflicting applications of existing law by clarifying congressional intent. Among other provisions, the bill would:

    • Resolve conflicting circuit court decisions that have resulted in a higher burden to charge violent offenses;
    • Clarify that an attempt or conspiracy to commit an offence involving physical force meets the legal definition of a violent crime;
    • Increase the statutory maximum penalty for carjacking and remove a duplicative intent requirement needed to charge a carjacking offense;
    • Clarify that attempted bank robbery and conspiracy to commit bank robbery are punishable under the current bank robbery statute;
    • Outlaw the marketing of candy-flavored drugs to minors; and
    • Establish a new category of violent kidnapping offences, allowing for greater penalties for violent kidnapping.

    Grassley is joined by Sens. John Boozman (R-Ark.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Jim Risch (R-Idaho).

    Read the full bill text HERE. Read the section-by-section HERE.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: On Senate Floor, Grassley Pushes Back Against Baseless Democrat Obstruction of DOJ Nominees

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is calling out Senate Democrats for obstructing Department of Justice (DOJ) nominees and undermining the Senate’s advice and consent role. 
    Grassley today went to the Senate floor to request unanimous passage of Patrick Davis’ nomination to be Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ’s Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA). Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has announced a blanket hold on all DOJ political nominees, objected to Grassley’s request. 
    Citing his reasons for objecting, Schumer claimed to have received insufficient response from DOJ regarding the Qatari jetliner gifted to the United States. Davis, as head of the DOJ OLA, would be responsible for facilitating this and all other DOJ responses to Congress. By obstructing Davis’ swift confirmation, Schumer is hamstringing his own efforts to communicate with DOJ.  
    “Obstructing [Davis’] nomination serves absolutely no one,” Grassley said on the Senate floor. “Many senators – myself included – have outstanding requests to the Justice Department that we expect answers to. I understand that some senators may complain that they haven’t received a response to their own outstanding requests. I’ve made such complaints myself over the years, under both Republican and Democrat administrations. But I don’t believe that obstructing this particular qualified nominee, who can help get the responses we need, will address their concern.”
    Schumer additionally stated that, by seeking unanimous consent on Davis’ nomination, “Republicans want the Senate to quietly rubber stamp a political nominee for the DOJ… no hearing, no debate, no scrutiny.” The Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Davis’ nomination on March 26 and both debated and advanced his nomination on April 10.
    The Senate confirmed the last two heads of the DOJ OLA – Carlos Uriarte and Stephen Boyd – by voice vote. Grassley has repeatedly stressed holds should be used selectively and urged Democrats to work with Republicans to confirm nominees in a bipartisan manner. 
    Video and a transcript of Grassley’s remarks follow. 
    [embedded content]
    VIDEO
    I come to the floor today concerned that the Senate’s advice and consent role is being undermined. It’s being undermined by obstruction from Senate Democrats that threaten to keep the Justice Department from functioning as the American people expect and the American people deserve. 
    The Office of Legislative Affairs serves as the crucial bridge between the Justice Department and this Congress. This relationship is essential, not only for the legislative process but also for maintaining constitutional oversight and accountability. 
    The Office of Legislative Affairs ensures that we, as lawmakers, have the timely information needed to craft legislation, conduct oversight and fulfill our constitutional duties. When we seek answers—whether it’s on criminal justice, or immigration, or national security—it’s the Office of Legislative Affairs that takes our questions and returns the responses. This function can’t run on autopilot.
    Yet today, the Office of Legislative Affairs is hobbled. It lacks a Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General to lead that office. Why? Because Senate Democrats have decided to impede the confirmation of all Justice Department nominees without exception. That is not the constitutional role of advice and consent; that is obstruction.
    Every senator has the right to raise concerns about nominees—that’s our constitutional role, that’s our duty. And holds of specific nominees for specific reasons at times is very appropriate. It’s an appropriate tool for any senator to use. I have even used that tool, and I’ve also done it on nominees.  
    But the process demands fairness and common sense. We should weigh each nominee individually, not slam the brakes on an entire agency, especially one [responsible] for keeping Americans safe.
    So I’m here at the floor because of the nomination of Patrick Davis, [who has been] pending on the Senate calendar for now two months. This is regrettable, because he’s an exceptionally qualified nominee. And this senator should know, because he worked for this senator. 
    Mr. Davis brings a strong record of public service and a deep understanding of the legislative process, gained from his time working for me on the Senate Judiciary Committee. I’m confident he will lead the Office of Legislative Affairs with diligence, with fairness and with integrity. He should be confirmed today, and I’m here to ask my colleagues to do just that.
    Obstructing his nomination serves absolutely no one. Many senators—myself included—have outstanding requests to the Justice Department that we expect answers to. I understand that some senators may complain that they haven’t received a response to their own outstanding requests. I’ve made such complaints myself over the years, under both Republican and Democrat administrations. But I don’t believe that obstructing this particular qualified nominee, who can help get the responses we need, will address their concern.
    I also understand that some senators are unhappy with the current administration and are using [holds on] Justice Department nominees to make their displeasure known. 
    To these colleagues, I’ll simply say that the obstruction of qualified nominees to lead the Office of Legislative Affairs makes it harder for the Department of Justice to engage with Congress, and harder for Congress to do its job. This ultimately ends up hurting the American people.
    I’m asking this body to uphold a fair confirmation process so that the Justice Department can effectively engage with Congress. 
    Blocking the confirmation of Patrick Davis does not serve the Senate, it does not serve the interests of justice and it does not serve the American People.
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed Hammers Lutnick for Creating Waste, Inefficiency & Needless Bureaucratic Gridlock at Commerce

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WATCH: Sen. Reed warns Lutnick’s micromanagement and short-staffing of NOAA could leave states vulnerable to future disasters

    WASHINGTON, DC – In his partisan zeal to root out so-called waste, redundancy, and abuse, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is generating unprecedented bureaucratic waste and delays that are hampering the U.S. Department of Commerce’s mission, particularly at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).  Whistleblowers within the agency have come forward in the press to sound the alarm that Secretary Lutnick is causing bureaucratic gridlock and hindering the agency’s ability to assist local communities with preparations for extreme weather events.

    “Staff shortages and new layers of bureaucracy are suffocating NOAA and threatening its ability to accurately predict extreme weather events, ensure U.S. ports stay open and safeguard the nation’s commercial and recreational fisheries, say current and former agency officials,” according to E&E News by Politico.

    Things have gotten so bad at Commerce that even President Trump’s staunch ally U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has sounded the alarm.  Noting that NOAA has 5,700 contracts set to expire this year, Senator Cruz reported at a Congressional hearing last month that Secretary Lutnick typically reviews about two dozen contracts a week — at that pace, only 1,248 contracts would be reviewed in a year, and many of them require immediate attention and action.

    E&E News by Politico reported: “These contracts include everything from post-hurricane flood assessment to janitorial services,” Cruz said. He added that a data center at Texas A&M University was shut down for days, “depriving Texas emergency and water managers of critical drought forecasts that help them manage reservoirs and track storm surge data and hurricane forecasts in real time.”

    The report notes: “The coil around NOAA squeezes in two ways, they say. The first is personnel. More than 1,000 NOAA employees have left the agency since the start of the Trump administration, and the empty desks have led to staffing issues in key weather service offices — just as hurricane season approaches… The second issue is the slow pace of approval for outside contracts and grants… But fewer than 20 percent of outstanding grants have been approved, and more than 1,000 are in the queue with more added every day, according to a current NOAA official who was granted anonymity to speak without fear of reprisal.”

    Today, at a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies hearing, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) grilled Secretary Lutnick about the growing backlog of contracts that are still awaiting his sign off and how his inefficient and insufficient micromanagement tactics have slowed down the vital work of NOAA just as hurricane season is getting underway.

    “We’ve all been talking about bottlenecks, in fact, in the Department and elsewhere throughout the government. In fact, last month, Senator Cruz warned about the growing backlog of contracts awaiting approval at the Department of Commerce.  He warned that NOAA alone has 5,700 contracts set to expire this year. And it’s been reported in the press that you are insisting on personally reviewing every commerce contract over $100,000,” Reed asked.

    Secretary Lutnick admitted: “That is true.”

    Reed responded: “Well, that seems to be something that is not particularly efficient. And that results in the 5,700 contracts just in NOAA. So again, if you can’t find reliable support to do those reviews, I think you’re wasting your time, frankly.”

    To achieve costs savings and efficiently achieve its diverse missions, NOAA operations rely on a significant number of contractors.  While every Administration carefully reviews each contract to ensure it is an effective use of taxpayer dollars, what sets the Trump Administration apart is its own inefficiency and bureaucratic bottleneck that slows the reviews down to the point where the work in the contract either can’t be done or is approved at the last second and could raise costs in the long run.

    This is not a red state or blue state issue.  In addition to Senators Cruz and Reed, several other Senators – including Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Dan Sullivan (R-AK) — have raised concerns in recent months about missing or delayed funding, according to Politico.

    During the hearing, Reed pressed Lutnick about when the backlog of contract reviews would be completed and Lutnick, surprisingly, claimed there are no more NOAA contracts he needs to review:

    SEN. REED: Well, let’s go ahead and get those 5,700 contracts done. This weekend?

    SEC. LUTNICK: There are not, under any circumstances, any contracts in there. There are none.

    SEN. REED: How about this weekend?

    SEC. LUTNICK: None. 

    SEN. REED: Can you get it done this weekend? Work overtime with the gang and get it done?

    SEC. LUTNICK: There are no contracts waiting for me, and if there were, I’ll be there all night tonight, making sure they get turned out with my team, teaching my team how to do it.

    Noting that the Trump Administration has proposed drastic cuts to NOAA, slashing the agency’s annual budget from the current level of $6.1 billion down to $4.5 billion next year, and eliminating NOAA’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, Reed quoted longtime NOAA researcher Craig McLean, who served as NOAA’s top scientist during the first Trump Administration, and warned that the drastic cuts Secretary Lutnick is backing would “take us back to the 1950s in terms of our scientific footing and the American people” if enacted.

    Lutnick’s claim that the National Weather Service budget would remain unimpacted is undermined by steep cuts to other areas of NOAA, such as technology, research, and satellites that would grossly undercut the agency’s climate, weather, and ocean capabilities.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: New CBO Report Shows Trump’s Bill Would Slash Healthcare Coverage from 16 Million Americans & Raise Costs For Millions More

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WASHINGTON, DC – Today, after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a new analysis showing 16 million people will lose coverage from the Republican reconciliation plan, including their failure to extend premium tax credits that Americans use to buy affordable health insurance, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) issued the following statement:

    “The Republican-plan would rip health care away from working people in order to fund a bigger tax windfall for the ultra-wealthy.

    “Republicans continue to try to mislead the American people about their true intentions, but this CBO report makes it very clear that under the Republican plan, 16 million Americans will lose their health care and health costs will go up for millions more. 

    “The America people aren’t fooled by misleading Republican sales pitches and gravity-defying claims that you can somehow slash hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicaid and not reduce care or services for a single person.  They can see Republicans are trying to effectively dismantle the Affordable Care Act.  The CBO report is clear: Republicans are trying to rip people’s health care away through a variety of tactics, including increased bureaucratic red tape and higher out-of-pocket costs.

    “Republicans should halt this foolish, big ugly bill and start working with Democrats on a bipartisan, fiscally responsible package that includes targeted tax cuts for the middle-class, not just the wealthy few, and strengthens Medicaid instead of slashing hundreds of billions of health dollars.”

    The CBO was established in 1974 under the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act to give Congress independent, objective budgetary and economic analyses.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: The Government of Canada outlines 2025 measures to protect Southern Resident killer whales

    Source: Government of Canada News

    The Government of Canada recognizes that Southern Resident killer whales continue to face imminent threats to their survival and recovery, and that protecting these iconic marine mammals requires comprehensive and immediate action. The 2025 management measures focus on addressing the three primary threats to Southern Resident killer whales: acoustic and physical disturbance; prey availability and accessibility; and contaminants.

    1. Acoustic and physical disturbances from vessels

    Approach distance

    Vessels must stay at least 400 metres away and must not impede the path of all killer whales year-round in Southern British Columbia coastal waters between Campbell River to just north of Ucluelet. Commercial whale-watching and ecotourism companies who receive an authorization from the Minister of Transport and Internal Trade will be able to view non-Southern Resident killer whales (such as transient (Biggs) killer whales) from 200 metres, given their expertise in identifying different types of killer whales.

    If a vessel finds itself within 400 metres of a killer whale, they are asked to turn off fish finders and echo sounders and put the engine in neutral when safe to do so to allow animals to pass.

    If a vessel is within 1,000 metres of a killer whale, they are asked to reduce speed to less than seven knots when safe to do so to lessen engine noise and vessel wake.

    To address imminent threats to Southern Resident killer whale survival and the Government of Canada’s commitment to develop longer-term actions for the recovery of Southern Resident killer whales, Fisheries and Oceans Canada proposes to increase the approach distance to 1,000 metres for Southern Resident killer whales through amendments to the Marine Mammal Regulations under the Fisheries Act. The process for amending the Marine Mammal Regulations remains ongoing. The exact scope and implementation of any regulatory measures will be informed by future consultations with directly affected First Nations, Wildlife Management Boards, stakeholders, and other affected parties upon publication of the draft regulation in the Canada Gazette, Part 1. The consultations are intended to seek feedback on the scope of these measures and identify and mitigate, to the extent possible, potential impacts.

    Speed restricted zones

    The 2025 measures continue the mandatory speed restricted zones near Swiftsure Bank, co-developed with the Pacheedaht First Nation.

    • From June 1 until November 30, 2025, all vessels must slow down to a maximum of 10 knots over ground in two speed restricted zones near Swiftsure Bank. The first area is in the Protected Fisheries Management Area 121-1 and the second speed restricted zone is located near the mouth of the Nitinat River from Carmanah Point to Longitude 125 degrees west.
    • Exemptions are in place for the following:
      • vessels in distress or providing assistance to a vessel or person in distress
      • vessels avoiding immediate or unforeseen danger
      • government or law enforcement on official business
      • permitted research if the research requires higher speed; and
      • a sailing vessel proceeding under sail and not being propelled by machinery
    • While the mandatory speed restricted zones and the voluntary slowdowns coordinated by the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority’s Enhancing Cetacean and Habitat Observation (ECHO) Program both cover known foraging areas at or near Swiftsure Bank, they are separate measures from each other and take place in different locations. The ECHO Program slowdown at Swiftsure Bank is a voluntary ship slowdown which takes effect across 23 nautical miles in both the outbound and inbound lanes at Swiftsure Bank.

    Vessel restricted zones (Formerly Interim sanctuary zones)

    Formerly known as Interim Sanctuary Zones, Vessel Restricted Zones create spaces of refuge for the whales. The location of these zones is based on scientific and Indigenous knowledge of historically important foraging areas for Southern Resident killer whales.

    • From June 1 until November 30, 2025, no vessel traffic or fishing activity is allowed in vessel restricted zones off the southwest coast of South Pender Island and the southeast end of Saturna Island. Exceptions will be allowed for emergency situations and vessels engaged in Indigenous food, social, and ceremonial fisheries.
    • To ensure the safety of those operating human-powered vessels, a 20-metre corridor next to shore will allow kayakers and other paddlers to transit through these zones. If a killer whale is in the sanctuary at the time, paddlers must remain 400 metres away from the whales.

    Voluntary speed reduction zone

    In 2025, Transport Canada is continuing with a voluntary speed reduction zone in Tumbo Channel, in effect once again from June 1 to November 30, 2025. When travelling through this area, it is recommended that vessels reduce their speed to 10 knots, when safe to do so.

    2. Prey availability

    Chinook, chum and coho salmon are an essential part of the Southern Resident killer whale diet. Last year’s process developed and consulted on salmon fisheries management measures for both 2024 and 2025, which were announced on June 3, 2024.

    To address the limited availability of prey, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is continuing a combination of fishing restrictions in key foraging areas within their critical habitat, along with voluntary measures coastwide. These measures will reduce disturbance and competition for salmon between fish harvesters and killer whales. Opportunities will be available for non-salmon related recreational and commercial fisheries, for Indigenous food, social and ceremonial harvest as well as Treaty-defined fishing access.

    For 2025, the following measures will help protect the whales’ access to salmon and minimize disturbance in key foraging areas:

    • Area-based closures in Southern Resident killer whale key foraging areas for recreational and commercial salmon fisheries:
      • around the Strait of Juan de Fuca (portions of Subareas 20-4 and 20-5) in effect from August 1 until October 31
      • Swiftsure Bank (portions of Subareas 20-1, 21-0, 121-1 and 121-2) in effect from July 15 until October 31
      • around the mouth of the Fraser River (a portion of Subarea 29-3) from August 1 to September 30
    • The Southern Gulf Islands area-based closures (Subarea 18-9 and portions of 18-2, 18-4 and 18-5) will be in effect as early as May 1, based on confirmed presence of Southern Resident killer whales. These closures will be in place until November 30, 2025.
    • All fishers are encouraged to temporarily cease fishing activities (e.g., do not haul in gear where appropriate) when killer whales are within 1,000 metres. This voluntary measure is in place year-round throughout Canadian Pacific waters.

    To address the ongoing imminent threats to Southern Resident killer whale survival and recovery, proposed adjustments to the Southern Resident killer whale commercial and recreational salmon fishing closures are being considered and consulted on for 2025 and or 2026 under the Fisheries Act to address the threat of reduced prey availability. The exact scope and implementation of any regulatory measures will be informed by consultations with directly affected First Nations, Wildlife Management Boards, industry stakeholders, and other affected parties. The consultations are intended to seek feedback on the scope of these measures and identify and mitigate, to the extent possible, potential impacts.

     

    Enhancing Cetacean Habitat and Observation Program (ECHO)

    For the ninth year in a row, the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority-led Enhancing Cetacean and Habitat Observation (ECHO) Program will coordinate large-scale threat reduction measures to support the recovery of endangered southern resident killer whales. These measures will include a ship slowdown in Haro Strait, Boundary Pass and Swiftsure Bank, and a route alteration in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Full details of the ECHO Program’s voluntary measures, including dates, target slowdown speeds and location coordinates, are available on the ECHO Program’s website (www.portvancouver.com/echo).

    3. Contaminants

    Considering the persistence of many contaminants in the environment, the Government of Canada and its partners continue to progress on long-term actions to support Southern Resident killer whale recovery in the following areas:

    The Government of Canada has also developed and updated the online Pollutants Affecting Whales and their Prey Inventory Tool, which maps estimates of pollutant releases within the habitats of Southern Resident killer whales and their primary prey, Chinook salmon. This tool will help model the impacts of additional mitigation measures and controls.

    To better understand the threat of contaminants and to provide input into government action, the Government of Canada leads a technical working group focused on contaminants in the environment. This group is comprised of key partners from all orders of government, academia and non-governmental organizations and:

    • has identified priority contaminants of concern;
    • has provided recommendations for the long-term actions to support Southern Resident killer whale recovery; and
    • conducts important monitoring and research, to identify contaminant exposures to Southern Resident killer whales, their habitat and their prey.

    In addition, the group continues to recommend and develop environmental quality guidelines for the protection of Southern Resident killer whales and their prey and compares them with monitoring data to identify areas of potential risk for further action.

    Compliance with management measures depends on public awareness. The Government of Canada continues to collaborate with educational organizations, environmental groups, Indigenous partners, and government bodies to raise awareness of the Southern Resident killer whale protection measures through public education and outreach efforts. For further information, please see Whales and contaminants – Canada.ca and how Canada is reducing the threat of contaminants to Southern Resident Killer Whales – Canada.ca.

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: The Governments of Canada and Manitoba match Red Cross donations to help those impacted by wildfires

    Source: Government of Canada News (2)

    June 4, 2025 – Ottawa, Ontario

    Today, the Governments of Canada and Manitoba announced that they will both match every dollar donated to the Canadian Red Cross 2025 Manitoba Wildfires Appeal to support wildfire disaster relief and recovery efforts across Manitoba.

    Donation matching will be open for 30 days, retroactive to when each appeal first opened on May 28.

    Through this initiative, the provincial government will match donations up to $15 million.

    The funds raised will be used to assist those impacted in Manitoba with immediate relief, including financial assistance, support to evacuees and the communities hosting them, as a result of the wildfires in Manitoba.

    Thousands of Manitobans have been displaced as wildfires continue to threaten communities across the province. In response, the Canadian Red Cross is working closely with Indigenous leadership and all levels of government to provide emergency accommodations, personal services, and critical information to people who have been forced from their homes.

    The Governments of Canada and Manitoba are committed to continue doing everything they can to support all those affected.

    Canadians wishing to make a financial donation to help those impacted by wildfires in Manitoba or Saskatchewan can do so online at www.redcross.ca or by calling 1-800-418-1111.

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Government of Canada announces 2025 measures to protect Southern Resident killer whales

    Source: Government of Canada News (2)

    June 4, 2025            British Columbia, Canada                            

    The government is acting to protect Canada’s nature, biodiversity and water. Southern Resident killer whales are iconic to Canada’s Pacific coast and hold deep cultural significance for Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities in British Columbia.  

    That’s why today, the Minister of Transport and Internal Trade, the Honourable Chrystia Freeland, the Minister of Fisheries, the Honourable Joanne Thompson, and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada, the Honourable Julie Dabrusin, announced measures to protect Southern Resident killer whales on the west coast.

    These measures will primarily address acoustic and physical disturbance to Southern Resident killer whales from recreational, fishing, and whale watching vessels.

    The 2025 vessel and fishery measures include: 

    • Two mandatory speed restricted zones near Swiftsure Bank, effective June 1 to November 30, 2025.
    • Two vessel restricted zones off Pender and Saturna Islands, effective June 1 to November 30, 2025.
    • The continued requirement for vessels to stay at least 400 metres away from all killer whales, and a prohibition from impeding the path of all killer whales in Southern British Columbia coastal waters between Campbell River and Ucluelet, including Barkley and Howe Sound. This is now in effect until May 31, 2026.
    • A voluntary speed reduction zone in Tumbo Channel, off the North side of Saturna Island, effective June 1 to November 30, 2025.
    • An agreement with authorized local whale watching and ecotourism industry partners to abstain from offering or promoting tours viewing Southern Resident killer whales.
    • Fishery closures for commercial and recreational salmon fisheries in key Southern Resident killer whale foraging areas.  
    • Continued actions to reduce contaminants in the environment affecting whales and their prey, including developing tools to track pollutants and their sources and monitoring contaminants in air, freshwater, sediments, and wastewater.

    Fisheries and Oceans Canada proposes to increase the approach distance to 1,000 metres for Southern Resident killer whales through amendments to the Marine Mammal Regulations under the Fisheries Act.

    The federal government will continue its ongoing efforts and long-term actions alongside all partners, including First Nations, stakeholders, and the marine and tourism industries to support the protection and recovery of the Southern Resident killer whale population.

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Hickenlooper Statement on New Budget Estimate for Republicans’ Plan to Gut Medicaid, Increase National Debt

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Colorado John Hickenlooper

    Republicans’ House-passed bill would strip health insurance from 16 million Americans, raise national debt by $2.4 trillion according to CBO 

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper released the following statement on the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) latest estimate for how the cuts to Medicaid and other crucial services included in the House-passed Republican budget will kick millions of Americans off their health insurance and increase the national debt.

    “Kicking even more kids and their families off their health insurance to pay for big tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy? That’s exactly what another CBO report shows the Republicans’ extreme plan does.

    “Even the President’s friends are saying this is a horrible bill.”

    This latest CBO estimate reflects the last-minute Republican changes to their budget that in total would result in 16 million Americans losing health insurance and increase our national debt by $2.4 trillion.   

    Nearly 80 million Americans are enrolled in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) nationally. Medicaid covers the care for over 60% of all nursing home residents.

    The Republican budget proposal calls for extreme Medicaid cuts of more than $700 billion, which would take away people’s health benefits; make it harder for them to see their health care providers; and prevent seniors from getting nursing home care.

    The Senate now must consider the House-passed budget. Hickenlooper has already voted against the Republican budget resolution on the Senate floor twice and offered amendments to prevent cuts to Medicaid. He will vote against the proposal again when it comes to the Senate.

    CBO is a nonpartisan entity that offers impartial analysis on the costs and impacts of proposed legislation to Congress.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Video: President Donald J. Trump Signs Travel Restrictions Executive Order

    Source: United States of America – The White House (video statements)

    “We cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen… That is why today I am signing a new executive order placing travel restrictions on countries including Yemen, Somalia, Haiti, Libya, and numerous others.” –President Trump

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_1F7PxVT40

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI USA: Restricting The Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    class=”has-text-align-center”>BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A PROCLAMATION
    During my first Administration, I restricted the entry of foreign nationals into the United States, which successfully prevented national security threats from reaching our borders and which the Supreme Court upheld.  In Executive Order 14161 of January 20, 2025 (Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats), I stated that it is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes. 
    I also stated that the United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those aliens approved for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests.  More importantly, the United States must identify such aliens before their admission or entry into the United States.  The United States must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists or other threats to our national security.
    I directed the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, to identify countries throughout the world for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full or partial suspension on the admission of nationals from those countries pursuant to section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f).  After completing that process, the Secretary of State determined that a number of countries remain deficient with regards to screening and vetting.  Many of these countries have also taken advantage of the United States in their exploitation of our visa system and their historic failure to accept back their removable nationals. 
    As President, I must act to protect the national security and national interest of the United States and its people.  I remain committed to engaging with those countries willing to cooperate to improve information-sharing and identity-management procedures, and to address both terrorism-related and public-safety risks.  Nationals of some countries also pose significant risks of overstaying their visas in the United States, which increases burdens on immigration and law enforcement components of the United States, and often exacerbates other risks related to national security and public safety.
    Some of the countries with inadequacies face significant challenges to reform efforts.  Others have made important improvements to their protocols and procedures, and I commend them for these efforts.  But until countries with identified inadequacies address them, members of my Cabinet have recommended certain conditional restrictions and limitations.  I have considered and largely accepted those recommendations and impose the limitations set forth below on the entry into the United States by the classes of foreign nationals identified in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation.
    NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, hereby find that, absent the measures set forth in this proclamation, the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of persons described in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions.  I therefore hereby proclaim the following:
    Section 1.  Policy and Purpose.  (a)  It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks and other national security or public-safety threats.  Screening and vetting protocols and procedures associated with visa adjudications and other immigration processes play a critical role in implementing that policy.  These protocols enhance our ability to detect foreign nationals who may commit, aid, or support acts of terrorism, or otherwise pose a safety threat, and they aid our efforts to prevent such individuals from entering the United States.
    (b)  Information-sharing and identity-management protocols and practices of foreign governments are important for the effectiveness of the screening and vetting protocols and procedures of the United States.  Governments manage the identity and travel documents of their nationals and residents. They also control the circumstances under which they provide information about their nationals to other governments, including information about known or suspected terrorists and criminal-history information.  It is, therefore, the policy of the United States to take all necessary and appropriate steps to encourage foreign governments to improve their information-sharing and identity-management protocols and practices and to regularly share their identity and threat information with the immigration screening and vetting systems of the United States.
    (c)  Section 2(b) of Executive Order 14161 directed the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, within 60 days of the date of that order, to jointly submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, a report identifying countries throughout the world for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full or partial suspension on the entry or admission of nationals from those countries pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)).
    (d)  On April 9, 2025, the Secretary of State, with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, presented the report described in subsection (c) of this section, recommending that entry restrictions and limitations be placed on foreign nationals of several countries.  The report identified countries for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full suspension of admissions and countries that warrant a partial suspension of admission.
    (e)  In evaluating the recommendations from the Secretary of State and in determining what restrictions to impose for each country, I consulted with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, appropriate Assistants to the President, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  I considered foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism goals.  And I further considered various factors, including each country’s screening and vetting capabilities, information sharing policies, and country-specific risk factors — including whether each country has a significant terrorist presence within its territory, its visa-overstay rate, and its cooperation with accepting back its removable nationals. 
    I also considered the different risks posed by aliens admitted on immigrant visas and those admitted on nonimmigrant visas.  Persons admitted on immigrant visas become lawful permanent residents of the United States.  Such persons may present national security or public-safety concerns that may be distinct from those admitted as nonimmigrants.  The United States affords lawful permanent residents more enduring rights than it does to nonimmigrants.  Lawful permanent residents are more difficult to remove than nonimmigrants, even after national security concerns arise, which increases the costs and aggravates the dangers of errors associated with admitting such individuals.  And although immigrants are generally subject to more extensive vetting than nonimmigrants, such vetting is far less reliable when the country from which someone seeks to emigrate maintains inadequate identity-management or information-sharing policies or otherwise poses risks to the national security of the United States.
    I reviewed these factors and assessed these goals, with a particular focus on crafting country-specific restrictions.  This approach was designed to encourage cooperation with the subject countries in recognition of each country’s unique circumstances.  The restrictions and limitations imposed by this proclamation are, in my judgment, necessary to prevent the entry or admission of foreign nationals about whom the United States Government lacks sufficient information to assess the risks they pose to the United States.  The restrictions and limitations imposed by this proclamation are necessary to garner cooperation from foreign governments, enforce our immigration laws, and advance other important foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism objectives.
    (f)  After reviewing the report described in subsection (d) of this section, and after accounting for the foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism objectives of the United States, I have determined to fully restrict and limit the entry of nationals of the following 12 countries:  Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.  These restrictions distinguish between, but apply to both, the entry of immigrants and nonimmigrants.
    (g)  I have determined to partially restrict and limit the entry of nationals of the following 7 countries:  Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.  These restrictions distinguish between, but apply to both, the entry of immigrants and nonimmigrants. 
    (h)  Sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation describe some of the identity-management or information-sharing inadequacies that led me to impose restrictions.  These inadequacies are sufficient to justify my finding that unrestricted entry of nationals from the named countries would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  Publicly disclosing additional details on which I relied in making these determinations, however, would cause serious damage to the national security of the United States, and many such details are classified.
    Sec. 2.  Full Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Identified Concern.  The entry into the United States of nationals of the following countries is hereby suspended and limited, as follows, subject to the categorical exceptions and case-by-case waivers described in section 5 of this proclamation:
    (a)  Afghanistan
    (i)   The Taliban, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) group, controls Afghanistan.  Afghanistan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Fiscal Year 2023 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Entry/Exit Overstay Report (“Overstay Report”), Afghanistan had a business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visa overstay rate of 9.70 percent and a student (F), vocational (M), and exchange visitor (J) visa overstay rate of 29.30 percent.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Afghanistan as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (b)  Burma
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Burma had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 27.07 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 42.17 percent.  Additionally, Burma has historically not cooperated with the United States to accept back their removable nationals.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Burma as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (c)  Chad
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Chad had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 49.54 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.64 percent.  According to the Fiscal Year 2022 Overstay Report, Chad had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 37.12 percent.  The high visa overstay rate for 2022 and 2023 is unacceptable and indicates a blatant disregard for United States immigration laws.  
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Chad as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (d)  Republic of the Congo
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, the Republic of the Congo had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 29.63 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.14 percent.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of the Republic of the Congo as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (e)  Equatorial Guinea
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Equatorial Guinea had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 21.98 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 70.18 percent.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Equatorial Guinea as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (f)  Eritrea
    (i)   The United States questions the competence of the central authority for issuance of passports or civil documents in Eritrea.  Criminal records are not available to the United States for Eritrean nationals.  Eritrea has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Eritrea had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 20.09 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.43 percent.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Eritrea as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (g)  Haiti
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Haiti had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 31.38 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 25.05 percent.  Additionally, hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the United States during the Biden Administration.  This influx harms American communities by creating acute risks of increased overstay rates, establishment of criminal networks, and other national security threats.  As is widely known, Haiti lacks a central authority with sufficient availability and dissemination of law enforcement information necessary to ensure its nationals do not undermine the national security of the United States. 
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Haiti as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (h)  Iran
    (i)   Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism.  Iran regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks, is the source of significant terrorism around the world, and has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Iran as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby suspended.
    (i)  Libya
    (i)   There is no competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents in Libya.  The historical terrorist presence within Libya’s territory amplifies the risks posed by the entry into the United States of its nationals.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Libya as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (j)  Somalia
    (i)   Somalia lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Somalia stands apart from other countries in the degree to which its government lacks command and control of its territory, which greatly limits the effectiveness of its national capabilities in a variety of respects.  A persistent terrorist threat also emanates from Somalia’s territory.  The United States Government has identified Somalia as a terrorist safe haven.  Terrorists use regions of Somalia as safe havens from which they plan, facilitate, and conduct their operations.  Somalia also remains a destination for individuals attempting to join terrorist groups that threaten the national security of the United States.  The Government of Somalia struggles to provide governance needed to limit terrorists’ freedom of movement.  Additionally, Somalia has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Somalia as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (k)  Sudan
    (i)   Sudan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Overstay Report, Sudan had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 26.30 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 28.40 percent. 
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Sudan as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (l)  Yemen
    (i)   Yemen lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  The government does not have physical control over its own territory.  Since January 20, 2025, Yemen has been the site of active United States military operations.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Yemen as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    Sec. 3.  Partial Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Identified Concern.
    (a)  Burundi
    (i)    According to the Overstay Report, Burundi had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 17.52 percent. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Burundi as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Burundi to the extent permitted by law.
    (b)  Cuba
    (i)    Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism.  The Government of Cuba does not cooperate or share sufficient law enforcement information with the United States.  Cuba has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Cuba had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 7.69 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 18.75 percent.
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Cuba as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Cuba to the extent permitted by law.
    (c)  Laos
    (i)    According to the Overstay Report, Laos had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 34.77 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 6.49 percent.  Laos has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Laos as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Laos to the extent permitted by law.
    (d)  Sierra Leone
    (i)    According to the Overstay Report, Sierra Leone had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.43 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.83 percent.  Sierra Leone has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Sierra Leone as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Sierra Leone to the extent permitted by law.
    (e)  Togo
    (i)    According to the Overstay Report, Togo had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 19.03 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.05 percent. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Togo as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Togo to the extent permitted by law.
    (f)  Turkmenistan
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Turkmenistan had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 21.74 percent. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Turkmenistan as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Turkmenistan to the extent permitted by law.
    (g)  Venezuela
    (i)    Venezuela lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Venezuela has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Venezuela had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 9.83 percent.
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Venezuela as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B‑1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Venezuela to the extent permitted by law.
    Sec. 4.  Scope and Implementation of Suspensions and Limitations.  (a)  Scope.  Subject to the exceptions set forth in subsection (b) of this section and any exceptions made pursuant to subsections (c) and (d) of this section, the suspensions of and limitations on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation shall apply only to foreign nationals of the designated countries who:
    (i)   are outside the United States on the applicable effective date of this proclamation; and
    (ii)  do not have a valid visa on the applicable effective date of this proclamation.
    (b)  Exceptions.  The suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation shall not apply to:
    (i)     any lawful permanent resident of the United States;
    (ii)    any dual national of a country designated under sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation when the individual is traveling on a passport issued by a country not so designated;
    (iii)   any foreign national traveling with a valid nonimmigrant visa in the following classifications:  A-1, A-2, C-2, C-3, G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO-1, NATO‑2, NATO-3, NATO-4, NATO-5, or NATO-6;
    (iv)    any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State;
    (v)     immediate family immigrant visas (IR-1/CR-1, IR-2/CR-2, IR-5) with clear and convincing evidence of identity and family relationship (e.g., DNA);
    (vi)    adoptions (IR-3, IR-4, IH-3, IH-4);
    (vii)   Afghan Special Immigrant Visas;
    (viii)  Special Immigrant Visas for United States Government employees; and
    (ix)    immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran.
    (c)  Exceptions to the suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation may be made for certain individuals for whom the Attorney General finds, in her discretion, that the travel by the individual would advance a critical United States national interest involving the Department of Justice, including when individuals must be present to participate in criminal proceedings as witnesses.  These exceptions shall be made only by the Attorney General, or her designee, in coordination with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security.
    (d)  Exceptions to the suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation may be made case-by-case for individuals for whom the Secretary of State finds, in his discretion, that the travel by the individual would serve a United States national interest.  These exceptions shall be made by only the Secretary of State or his designee, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security or her designee.
    Sec. 5.  Adjustments to and Removal of Suspensions and Limitations.  (a)  The Secretary of State shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director for National Intelligence, devise a process to assess whether any suspensions and limitations imposed by sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation should be continued, terminated, modified, or supplemented.  Within 90 days of the date of this proclamation, and every 180 days thereafter, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, describing his assessment and recommending whether any suspensions and limitations imposed by sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation should be continued, terminated, modified, or supplemented.
    (b)  The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately engage each of the countries identified in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation on measures that must be taken to comply with United States screening, vetting, immigration, and security requirements.
    (c)  Additionally, and in light of recent events, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall provide me an update to the review of the practices and procedures of Egypt to confirm the adequacy of its current screening and vetting capabilities.
    Sec. 6.  Enforcement.  (a)  The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with appropriate domestic and international partners, including countries and organizations, to ensure efficient, effective, and appropriate implementation of this proclamation.
    (b)  In implementing this proclamation, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations.
    (c)  No immigrant or nonimmigrant visa issued before the applicable effective date of this proclamation shall be revoked pursuant to this proclamation.
    (d)  This proclamation shall not apply to an individual who has been granted asylum by the United States, to a refugee who has already been admitted to the United States, or to an individual granted withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment of Punishment (CAT).  Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to limit the ability of an individual to seek asylum, refugee status, withholding of removal, or protection under the CAT, consistent with the laws of the United States.
    Sec. 7.  Severability.  It is the policy of the United States to enforce this proclamation to the maximum extent possible to advance the national security, foreign policy, and counterterrorism interests of the United States.  Accordingly:
    (a)  if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any provision of this proclamation to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this proclamation and the application of its other provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby; and
    (b)  if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any provision of this proclamation to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid because of the lack of certain procedural requirements, the relevant executive branch officials shall implement those procedural requirements to conform with existing law and with any applicable court orders.
    Sec. 8.  Effective Date.  This proclamation is effective at 12:01 am eastern daylight time on June 9, 2025.
    Sec. 9.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
    (b)  This proclamation shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
    (c)  This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable by law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty‑five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-ninth.
                                 DONALD J. TRUMP

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Gillibrand, Markey Slam Republican Plan To Rescind Over $1 Billion In Federal Funding For The Corporation For Public Broadcasting

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New York Kirsten Gillibrand

    Today, U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Ed Markey led a group of 29 senators in slamming a Republican attempt to rescind $1.07 billion in already-allocated funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which funds local public broadcasting stations across the country.  The $1.07 billion represents 100% of CPB’s funding through September 2027. This move follows President Trump’s executive order directing cuts to federal funding for PBS and NPR.  

    Following the White House’s request to rescind $1.07 billion in federal funding for CPB, we write to express our strong opposition to any rescission of funding for public broadcasting and prohibitions of direct and indirect funding to the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio,” wrote the senators. “This funding is essential to the functioning of the public media system and the communities they serve, and any cuts in funding would have detrimental effects on local stations, which rely on this funding to provide critical services to millions of Americans across the country. Public broadcasting is an essential service that should be protected, not decimated. For this reason, we request that you prioritize maintaining and continuing funding for CPB.”

    The Corporation for Public Broadcasting supports over 1,500 local public television and radio stations that provide free, high-quality programming to millions of households across America. It provides young children who don’t get the chance to attend preschool with educational content that helps them learn to read; airs highly trusted nightly news programming; and shares critical public safety information during emergencies. Local public television stations also provide extensive coverage of local government and elections and host candidate debates, helping Americans stay connected with their elected leaders. Because public television and radio relies heavily on federal funding to operate, particularly in rural communities, losing this funding would force many of these stations to reduce much of their programming or, in some cases, close their doors.

    In addition to Senators Gillibrand and Markey, the letter was also signed by Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Gary Peters (D-MI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).  

    The full text of the letter is available here or below:  

    Dear Majority Leader Thune,

    Federal investment in the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) supports over 1,500 local and regional public television and radio stations that provide free, high-quality programming to millions of households across the country. Following the White House’s request to rescind $1.07 billion in federal funding for CPB, we write to express our strong opposition to any rescission of funding for public broadcasting and prohibitions of direct and indirect funding to the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio, as outlined in the Executive Order titled, “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media” released on May 1, 2025. This funding is essential to the functioning of the public media system and the communities they serve, and any cuts in funding would have detrimental effects on local stations, which rely on this funding to provide critical services to millions of Americans across the country.

    Our public broadcasting system is a unique American institution that is deeply embedded in our communities and a critical source of lifesaving public safety services, accurate information, and educational programming. The vast majority of the federal funding CPB receives is allocated to local radio and television stations across the country. These cuts will have an immediate and significant impact for stations in rural communities that heavily rely on CPB funding to provide critical services and could likely result in the elimination of programming or outright closure of stations in areas already faced with limited connectivity.

    According to Northwestern University, 55 million people in the United States have no or only one source of local news, and rural counties are far more likely to lose their local news outlets. This number could increase if the two-year advance appropriation for public media is not upheld, resulting in the drastic reduction or complete elimination of free, high-quality local programming. This is especially concerning given the importance of public broadcasting during public emergencies, such as natural disasters, transportation accidents, national security threats, or public safety matters. CPB funds are essential to ensuring that the broadcast infrastructure remains robust and operational in disaster situations, especially scenarios in which local public broadcasters serve as the only source of information for those who need a lifeline. Any cuts in funding will have drastic consequences for communities in need.

    And there is much more to their public safety services in addition to the critical local information they broadcast. Public television’s interconnection technology, which connects local public television stations to PBS, is also one of the backbone pathways for the delivery of our nation’s Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) services – enabling cell phone subscribers to receive geotargeted emergency text alerts no matter where they are in the country. A cut to public broadcasting funding would put this lifesaving service and its nationwide footprint at risk.

    Public television has also pioneered cutting edge technology that helps first responders communicate with each other over the broadcast spectrum without the need for mobile service or broadband. This datacasting technology and public television’s public safety partnerships is already helping with early earthquake warning and has been proven effective in a wide range of scenarios where broadband or cellular service are limited, including rural search and rescue, overwater communications, large event crowd control and more. But this is only possible if stations serving rural and remote areas with limited broadband are healthy and continue operating as they are today.

    On the education front, public television’s early childhood education services ensure that every family has access to high-quality, non-commercial educational content regardless of their ability to pay for such services. This is essential for over 50 percent of three and four-year old children who do not attend formal preschool.

    If funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is eliminated or rescinded, the impact would be devastating. Millions of people across the country whose stations rely on CPB funding for a significant percentage of their budget would be at risk of losing access to public television’s services. These are services that nobody else in the media world is providing, but it’s exactly the work for which public broadcasting was created, and they are delivering to our communities every day.  

    Public broadcasting is an essential service that should be protected, not decimated. For this reason, we request that you prioritize maintaining and continuing funding for CPB.

    We appreciate your consideration of this request and thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Crapo, Mullin, Kelly, Cramer Introduce Legislation to Strengthen Broadband Connectivity in Rural America

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Idaho Mike Crapo

    Washington, D.C.–U.S. Senators Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma), Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) and Kevin Cramer (R-North Dakota) introduced the Lowering Broadband Costs for Consumers Act of 2025 to direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to require proper contributions to the Universal Service Fund (USF) from edge providers and broadband providers.  Requiring edge providers to cover associated costs for rural fiber networks will reduce the financial burden on consumers and rural providers while strengthening broadband connectivity throughout rural America.

    “Idahoans rely heavily upon broadband technology,” said Crapo.  “Addressing the ‘digital divide’ in broadband deployment between rural and urban or suburban areas will ensure communities, regardless of size, can access the necessary connection for modern life.”

    Currently, more than 100,000 households in Idaho lack access to broadband internet, according to the U.S. Census.  On Idaho’s tribal lands, more than 83 percent of residents cannot connect to high-speed internet.

    “Fair contributions to the USF from edge providers are long overdue,” said Mullin.  “Video streaming services account for 75 percent of all traffic on rural broadband networks.  However, unrecovered costs from streaming companies are often shifted and borne by small rural broadband providers.  Available, affordable internet will close the digital divide and increase telehealth, educational and employment opportunities for those who previously went without.  Rural Oklahomans deserve the same connectivity as those living in urban areas.”

    “In an interconnected world, high-speed internet access is part of our daily lives–from scheduling a doctor’s appointment to keeping in touch with family,” said Kelly.  “This bipartisan bill will have big corporations contribute to the expansion of affordable high-speed internet in areas that desperately need it.” 

    The Lowering Broadband Costs for Consumers Act would:

    • Direct the FCC to reform the USF by expanding the base so that edge providers and broadband providers contribute on an equitable and nondiscriminatory basis to preserve and advance universal service.
    • Limit assessments of edge providers to only those with more than three percent of the estimated quantity of broadband data transmitted in the United States and more than $5 billion in annual revenue. 
    • Direct the FCC to adopt a new mechanism under the current USF high-cost program to provide specific, predictable and sufficient support for expenses incurred by broadband providers that are not otherwise recovered.
    • Limit the FCC’s authority over edge providers and broadband providers only to requiring contributions to the USF.

    Full text of the Lowering Broadband Costs for Consumers Act of 2025 can be found here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Coons, Whitehouse, colleagues demand answers from Justice Dept. on decision to shutter specialized unit for cracking down on global drug crime

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and several of their colleagues sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi questioning the Department of Justice’s plan to end the successful Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) program. 

    “As the Department’s website notes, OCDETF ‘is the centerpiece of the Attorney General’s strategy to combat transnational-organized crime and to reduce the availability of illicit narcotics in the nation.’ OCDETF oversees coordination of thousands of federal, state, and local law enforcement officials to implement a national strategy to dismantle transnational drug cartels, the financial networks that support them, and the flow of drugs from these cartels into the United States,” wrote the senators.

    The OCDETF program is the largest anti-crime task force in the country. In just the past two months, OCDETF resources have been used to secure prison sentences for two individuals operating a clandestine fentanyl lab in South Carolina and to take down three prolific Chinese money launderers who have pled guilty to laundering tens of millions of dollars in drug proceeds. Many OCDETF investigations target the cartels’ financial networks, an often-overlooked component of the U.S. strategy to combat drug-trafficking organizations. In Fiscal Year 2023, OCDETF investigations resulted in forfeitures and seizures totaling more than $423 million. 

    Reporting from Bloomberg revealed that the Trump administration plans to eliminate the OCDETF program, including its support for specialized investigators and prosecutors. Such a decision would kneecap America’s ability to dismantle cartels trafficking illicit fentanyl.

    “We seek to fully understand the Department’s plans to cease OCDETF operations. We also seek to ensure that the federal government continues to have a coordinated strategy for working with state and local stakeholders to investigate and hold accountable transnational criminal organizations operating in, or financing the operations of organizations that operate in, the United States,” added the senators.

    The senators requested answers to the following questions by June 13, 2025:

    1. How many cases has OCDETF led, or supported with funds, intelligence, or other resources, that disrupted fentanyl traffickers’ production, distribution, financing, or money laundering networks?
    2. Does the Department intend to cease or significantly reduce OCDETF operations?  If so, please specify how. 
    3. If the Department intends to cease or significantly reduce OCDETF operations:
      1. Why is the department choosing to cease or significantly reduce OCDETF operations?
      2. How will the department ensure that ongoing OCDETF investigations and prosecutions continue uninterrupted?
      3. According to GAO, “OCDETF cases must have a financial component” to facilitate the targeting of financial networks underpinning drug trafficking organizations. How will the Department ensure that OCDETF-enabled inter-agency coordination on investigations into the financial networks of fentanyl traffickers and transnational criminal organizations continues uninterrupted?
      4. How will the department ensure that federal, state, and local law enforcement relying on OCDETF’s Fusion Center intelligence products are not hampered by a cessation or reduction of OCDETF operations? 
      5. Does the department intend to designate another entity to coordinate investigations and prosecutions of transnational criminal organizations, unrelated to low-level offenders?  If so, which entity?

    In addition to Senators Coons and Whitehouse, the letter is signed by U.S. Senators Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

    The text of the letter is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Polis Signs New Law Supporting Home Ownership for Colorado Educators

    Source: US State of Colorado

    DENVER – Today, Governor Polis signed SB25-167 – Invest State Funds to Benefit Communities, sponsored by Senators Judy Amabile and Lisa Frizell, and Representatives Shannon Bird and Meghan Lukens. This law helps expand access to housing for teachers, increasing homeownership and supporting Colorado schools by providing down-payment assistance and expanding housing opportunities that educators can afford. 

    “We are taking big steps to reduce housing costs and breaking down barriers to home ownership for people across the state. This new law is another step in the right direction, and I’m proud to sign it today, helping more educators get housing they can afford , allowing teachers to live in the communities they choose, and supporting Colorado children in the classroom. I thank the sponsors for their work to tackle housing costs,” said Governor Polis. 

    Governor Polis also signed: 

    • SB25-122 – Extending Organ & Tissue Donation Fund, sponsored by President James Coleman and Senator Cleave Simpson, and Representatives Jennifer Bacon and Regina English
    • HB25-1013 – Department of Corrections Visitation Rights, sponsored by Representatives Regina English and Jennifer Bacon, and President James Coleman and Senator Tony Exum 

    Governor Polis signed the following bills into law administratively: 

    • SB25-017 – Measures to Support Early Childhood Health, sponsored by Senators Lisa Cutter and Iman Jodeh, and Representatives Junie Joseph and Yara Zokaie. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-036 – State Patrol Bonding Exception, sponsored by Senators Marc Catlin and Marc Snyder, and Representatives Sheila Lieder and Ty Winter. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-070 – Online Marketplaces & Third-Party Sellers, sponsored by Senators Larry Liston and Dylan Roberts, and Representatives Ryan Armagost and William Lindstedt. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-075 – License to Sell Vehicles Criminal Offense, sponsored by Senator Julie Gonzales, and Representatives Cecelia Espenoza and Jennifer Bacon. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-126 – Uniform Antitrust Pre-Merger Notification Act, sponsored by Senator Marc Snyder, and Representative Cecelia Espenoza
    • SB25-162 – Railroad Safety Requirements, sponsored by Senators Lisa Cutter and Marc Snyder, and Representatives Javier Mabrey and Elizabeth Velasco. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-163 – Battery Stewardship Programs, sponsored by Senators Lisa Cutter and Matt Ball, and Representatives Kyle Brown and Rebekah Stewart. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-173 – Revenue Classification Taxpayers Bill of Rights, sponsored by Senator Mike Weissman, and Representatives Lorena Garcia and Yara Zokaie
    • SB25-257 – Modify General Fund Transfers to State Highway Fund, sponsored by Senators Jeff Bridges and Barbara Kirkmeyer, and Representatives Shannon Bird and Rick Taggart. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-258 – Temporarily Reduce Road Safety Surcharge, sponsored by Senators Jeff Bridges and Barbara Kirkmeyer, and Representatives Shannon Bird and Emily Sirota. This bill is bipartisan.
      • “This bill is an important part of our work to save Coloradans money. By cutting vehicle registration fees, we are helping Coloradans keep more of their hard-earned money. This is just one piece of our efforts,” said Governor Jared Polis.
    • SB25-261 – Property Tax Deferral Program Administration, sponsored by Senators Judy Amabile and Barbara Kirkmeyer, and Representatives Shannon Bird and Emily Sirota. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-286 – Petroleum Products Fees & Penalties, sponsored by Senators Nick Hinrichsen and Marc Snyder, and Representative Shannon Bird. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-299 – Consumer Protection Residential Energy Systems, sponsored by Senator Katie Wallace, and Representatives Kyle Brown and Matt Soper. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-300 – Revisor’s Bill, sponsored by Senators John Carson and Mike Weissman, and Representatives Stephanie Luck and Sean Camacho. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-305 – Water Quality Permitting Efficiency, sponsored by Senators Barbara Kirkmeyer and Jeff Bridges, and Representatives Shannon Bird and Rick Taggart. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-306 – Performance Audits of Certain State Agencies, sponsored by Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez and Senator Barbara Kirkmeyer, and Representatives William Lindstedt and Rick Taggart. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-316 – Auraria Higher Education Center Appropriations, sponsored by Senators Judy Amabile and Jeff Bridges, and Representatives Rick Taggart and Emily Sirota. This bill is bipartisan.
    • SB25-319 – Modification Higher Education Expenses Income Tax Incentive, sponsored by Senators Jeff Bridges and Judy Amabile, and Representatives Shannon Bird and Rick Taggart. This bill is bipartisan.
    • HB25-1043 – Owner Equity Protection in Homeowners’ Association Foreclosure Sales, sponsored by Representatives Naquetta Ricks and Jennifer Bacon, and Senator Tony Exum. This bill is bipartisan.
    • HB25-1056 – Local Government Permitting Wireless Telecommunications Facilities, sponsored by Representatives Meghan Lukens and Jennifer Bacon, and Senators Dylan Roberts and Nick Hinrichsen. This bill is bipartisan.
      • “This bill will help increase connectivity for Coloradans across the state by breaking down barriers. I appreciate the sponsors for their work on this new law and look forward to seeing increased service across Colorado,” said Governor Jared Polis.
    • HB25-1061 – Community Schoolyards Grant Program, sponsored by Representatives Rick Taggart and Jennifer Bacon, and Senators Judy Amabile and Barbara Kirkmeyer. This is a bipartisan bill.
    • HB25-1082 – Qualified Individuals Death Certificates, sponsored by Representatives Ron Weinberg and Kyle Brown, and Senators Rod Pelton and Dafna Michaelson Jenet. This is a bipartisan bill.
    • HB25-1108 – Prohibitions in Rental Agreements Due to Death, sponsored by Representatives Ron Weinberg and Javier Mabrey, and Senators Barbara Kirkmeyer and Jeff Bridges. This is a bipartisan bill.
    • HB25-1161 – Labeling Gas-Fueled Stoves, sponsored by Representative Alex Valdez, and Senators Cathy Kipp and Katie Wallace. This bill is bipartisan.
    • HB25-1223 – Capital Needs of Rural and Frontier Hospitals, sponsored by Representatives Dusty Johnson and Meghan Lukens, and Senators Rod Pelton and Dylan Roberts. This is a bipartisan bill.
    • HB25-1224 – Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act Modifications, sponsored by Representatives Brianna Titone and Matt Soper, and Senator Marc Snyder. This is a bipartisan bill.
    • HB25-1234 – Utility Consumer Protection, sponsored by Representatives Naquetta Ricks and Junie Joseph, and Senators Faith Winter and Katie Wallace
    • HB25-1307 – Updating Technical References in Education Law, sponsored by Representatives Stephanie Luck and Michael Carter, and Senators Matt Ball and Janice Rich. This is a bipartisan bill.
    • HB25-1324 – Clarify Property Tax Objection & Protest Deadlines, sponsored by Representatives Cecelia Espenoza and Stephanie Luck, and Senators Matt Ball and Marc Catlin. This is a bipartisan bill.
    • HB25-1327 – Modify Statewide Ballot Measure Processes, sponsored by Representatives Emily Sirota and Meg Froelich, and Senator Cathy Kipp
    • HB25-1300 – Workers’ Compensation Benefits Proof of Entitlement, sponsored by Representative Jenny Willford and Senator Cathy Kipp
    • HB25-1317 – Correct Error in Self-Pay Estimate Statute, sponsored by Representatives Brandi Bradley and Michael Carter, and Senator Tony Exum.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Hochul Speaks at Axios AI + NY Summit

    Source: US State of New York

    arlier today, Governor Kathy Hochul participated in Axios AI+ NY Summit fireside chat with Ina Fried.

    VIDEO: The event is available to stream on YouTube here and TV quality video is available here (h.264, mp4).

    AUDIO: The Governor’s remarks are available in audio form here.

    PHOTOS: The Governor’s Flickr page will post photos of the event here.

    A rush transcript of the Governor’s remarks is available below:

    Ina Fried, Axios: Next up, we are joined by a governor who’s putting AI front and center of her tech policy agenda. Please welcome New York Governor Kathy Hochul. Thanks so much. First off, I think we’re both big sports fans, although I think yours are more concentrated in Buffalo than my teams.

    Governor Hochul: I love all my New York teams. All the ones that play in New York in particular.

    Ina Fried, Axios: We have a very lively crowd.

    Governor Hochul: We can annex the Meadowlands and bring them back home for anybody’s paying attention. I think I’m going to run on that.

    Ina Fried, Axios: We just have to annex the Meadowlands.

    Governor Hochul: Trump can take Canada. I should at least be able to get the Meadowlands right.

    Ina Fried, Axios: You focused a lot on bringing high tech jobs to New York, not just AI but CHIPS. I think there was another announcement today, Global Foundries is going to increase its investment by another $3 billion. Talk about those efforts, but also in the context of what’s coming with AI. I mean, if the predictions are right, we had the Anthropic founder, Dario Amodei, saying, this could be half of jobs over a few years. Is it enough to just have incentives to bring high tech jobs here? If generative AI eliminates this many jobs, is even retraining feasible? Like what do we really need?

    Governor Hochul: No, it’s all in the realm of possibility. I want New York to be the home of innovation. We always have that. All the great inventions, all the technological revolutions that proceed. IBM is home here. Micron will soon find its way here, and that’s 50,000 jobs in upstate New York. I’m from Buffalo, as you may have figured out from the first question. That’s a lot. That’s for an economy that you see based on manufacturing and building. And my dad and grandpa were steelworkers and now my dad left a steel plant and started a tech company back in the sixties.

    So I’m hardwired to be part of an economy that’s devoted to risk. The people are willing to go out there and do something that’s quite unprecedented, but also the returns are very high. So I want New York to be that place that people look to as they already are. I mean, we have over 2,000 AI startups right now, but your question is, will these new jobs of manufacturing semiconductors, for example, and others, will that replace the jobs that can be lost?

    It does not have to be that way. AI can increase productivity dramatically. So why can’t we harness that to be the most productive nation on the planet — that we can have more output and use human capital in the ways that have not been harnessed before? Because people are too busy working on an assembly line in the past. Let’s take that talent and refocus it on innovation.

    We have a workforce, for example, of over 188,000. I have a plan to train 100,000 New York State employees. Train them in the uses of AI, how it can supplement us, how we can be more responsive to the public. I’m not looking to eliminate their jobs. I want them to have a better — have people have a better customer experience when they come into a DMV or other offices.

    So I see great potential here, and I leaned hard into this. We will talk about Empire AI I presume, but this is something that’s so natural. I’m very competitive. I’m proud that New York City is now the number one destination for new tech jobs. I mean, that’s us. I won’t name any other cities or what coast they’re on.

    Ina Fried, Axios: Before I came here, I left a few AI companies in San Francisco to come here.

    Governor Hochul: Anybody not a New Yorker here? I’m just pointing it out. This is the smartest people on the planet. They’re here and they’re saying they’re New Yorkers. So, just an observation.

    Ina Fried, Axios: Obviously as a sports fan, it’s hard to beat home field advantage. So jobs is obviously one big piece of this, but another is making sure that society is ready to adapt and use it safely. I want to broaden out, but one place to start — we had a conversation with Aura, which is a startup that’s working on, how do we make this safe for kids and families? And obviously that’s something you’ve also been focused on.

    How do you see the role of AI in education? You’ve had some bills around phone use, around deep fakes among students. How do we make sure that kids are learning the technology they need to be learning, but also protected from chatbots that might increase addiction and that sort of thing. What else do we need?

    Governor Hochul: No. New York State is nation-leading when it comes to protecting our children — and I can go into the details because we enacted these last year against a lot of opposition.

    But I said to the big tech companies that were saying, “Well, we were able to kill this in some other states. We plan on killing it in New York.” I said, “Why don’t you get out of the courtroom and come into my conference room and we’ll talk about this.” There is a path forward, but I know all of you have kids.

    And I’m sure you want someone to be looking out for them. Well, I’m New York State’s first Mom Governor, and I look out for all the kids. So that’s where I approach this from is what we can do to protect our children, but not unnecessarily constrained what AI is all about and the potential.

    So we did this, but I’ll tell you what’s most concerning is what Washington did — their House Republicans just did a few days ago — and if this gets through the Senate, it says that no state or municipality can regulate any form of artificial intelligence for the next decade.

    So that means my ban on sexual exploitation of young girls on social media and using AI and the fact that there are these AI undressing sites. In the first half of 2024, there were 16 sites that had 200 million views. I mean, this is what’s going on to our kids, our girls sitting in high schools, and we have to stop that.

    And so I have a whole list of reforms — I encourage every other state to undertake it because right now I am not holding my breath that Washington will have the courage to stand up and do what’s right, which really should be a nationwide policy to protect our children. We’ll keep at it. And I’m concerned. We’ll see the Trump administration in court, once again, because — and this is a real growth industry for lawyers, right? I’m getting sued, I’m suing them, and I’m a lawyer too, I’d probably make more money on the other side, but I like what I do.

    Ina Fried, Axios: So what I hear from the tech companies all the time is, “Oh, we’re fine with regulation, we just don’t want a patchwork of regulation. We don’t want different regulations in 50 states.” Are they being genuine when they say that or do they just not want regulation?

    Governor Hochul: Well, then here’s what we’ll do. We’ll let you work with New York State as we did. We’ll be the gold standard. I was just with a room full of crypto leaders yesterday. I said, “You want to do virtual currency in New York because we’ll have the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. We always do things to make sure it’s protecting our citizens, our consumers, our viewers, and we’ll always have the highest standards. So come join us, and then you can create it here with us and other states can replicate it. So I’m happy to do that.

    As a former member of Congress — really happy I’m not there right now — I know that this is really Washington’s responsibility, because it’s hard for companies to have a different policy they have to adhere to in 50 different states. That is not ideal.

    Ina Fried, Axios: So if we don’t want 50 regulations and Congress seemingly is not gonna do anything, could you work with other states?

    Governor Hochul: Oh yeah. Yeah.

    Ina Fried, Axios: Is there efforts already in that regard there?

    Governor Hochul: Yeah, there’s a democratic governor’s organization that is more forward thinking in this space, and we do work together, we share ideas. But our legislation is just one-year-old now, and I’m sure they want to see the — our law is one-year-old, the regulations are following, so there’s a little bit of work to do. But that’s exactly what we do, we share best practices.

    Ina Fried, Axios: So as we’ve alluded to, there’s a bunch of individual policies in place in New York, laws that have passed around things like kids’ privacy, deepfake porn. One thing New York doesn’t have is a real comprehensive statewide privacy law, similar to Washington and some other states. Does New York need a privacy bill?

    Governor Hochul: We’re looking at that as well. What we focused on primarily were kids right off the bat, and even with respect to social media algorithms, we are the first state in the nation to ban social media companies from bombarding our kids with algorithms throughout the day, and really many times taking them to a dark place. I mean, if a young person is contemplating suicide and they put in “suicide” and it comes back with — not resources and support and uplifting messages to make them think differently, it tells them how to commit suicide. So when we have triggering words like that that show up, we have our police alerted to that and others who are alerted to this.

    So this is what we’re focusing on, how to send out the warning signals of what can be done. But privacy is very important to us as well. We’ll get to that, I just need to take care of the kids first.

    Ina Fried, Axios: And on that front, you mentioned social media. That’s obviously been a huge concern for a long time is the impact that’s having on our kids. It seems like the next thing down the road is AI companions, where they’re not talking to a real person, but they’re talking to an AI companion. What should that relationship — should kids not be talking to AI companions at all?

    Governor Hochul: We have in our law, and I don’t know that other states have done this, that there has to be some warning or indication over and over that this is not a real person. This is not a real person. We have that in our laws now. We did that already just to give that young person just a reality check.

    And I can’t stop the whole phenomenon from happening, but the stories that have been coming out, not just the 14-year-old in Florida who committed suicide, but the New York Times did quite a story about all the different relationships. And adults can make their own decisions, kids are very impressionable, and those are the ones that we have to take the extra measure to protect.

    And we should not get any opposition from these companies at all. I mean, tell them it’s bad for your image to be standing up against a mom and protecting kids. I mean, just don’t even go there. It’s just not worth the fight.

    Ina Fried, Axios: So every now and then, folks who have been coming to this conference for a while know, I very occasionally give out a magic wand and allow someone to— if you could wave this magic wand and have the ideal regulation in place, what would it look like? So I’m going to let you borrow — you can’t keep it — borrow my magic wand.

    If you could wave your wand and have some ideal legislation in place around how AI can be embraced safely, what would be part of that package?

    Governor Hochul: Part of that would be that there’s a lot of education of people. People do not understand this gap between virtual reality and reality, and I’m afraid that’s something that a lot of kids are falling into.

    So, I would want to make sure that all your personal information is protected. What we did last year was our Child Protection Act — you cannot sell data collected on kids, anyone under 18; you cannot amass this data based on their preferences, where they’re going — you can no longer send algorithms to them; you can no longer sell that to other people. I think that’s something adults are entitled to as well. Those are some of the privacy protections. You can’t be capturing all this personal data and monetizing it. So that’s an area I think we should be focused more on and get some cooperation from the companies.

    Ina Fried, Axios: I know you leave a bunch of the court battles to your very active Attorney General — I get emails from her on a practically daily basis of what she’s challenging the White House on. What are the things that have happened in the first few months of the Trump administration that have you personally most concerned? What are the fights that you want more people to take up?

    Governor Hochul: You do not have enough time.

    Ina Fried, Axios: We got three minutes.

    Governor Hochul: God. I mean, my latest fight was to save offshore wind. They literally, on April 16, pulled the plug on a 10 year, $5 billion project from a company called Equinor from Norway, which will be powering 500,000 homes in Brooklyn with renewable energy. That is a big win for our climate, our renewable energy efforts, and to meet our climate goals. On April 16, the Secretary of Interior gave them a stop work order. The project was going to be stopped a few weeks ago. They’re losing $50 million a week.

    I went down to the White House; I had long conversations; I had more phone calls; and I’m proud to say we saved not just renewable energy, but 1,500 clean energy jobs in the process. So, that’s the most recent. They’re attacking congestion pricing every single month on the 21st — I get, basically, a hostage letter that if you don’t turn off the cameras, we’re going to kidnap you or whatever it is and I usually take it, and do a social media of it, and throw it away — here we go.

    So we’re fighting on that, but also on other areas about my rights to — we just had a win in court on that, where they’re threatening to withhold federal dollars. Anytime they don’t like something you do, whether it’s the State of Maine — my friend Janet Mills was subjected to this; we were together in the White House when she got harassed — they threatened withholding federal dollars. We just got a temporary restraining order from them threatening to withhold our federal dollars when it came. So that’s — I can’t keep it all straight.

    We litigated birthright citizenship. We’re going to have a lot of complicated challenges with the immigration issue. I have to testify before the House Oversight Committee on that very issue next week — really looking forward to that. You see who’s on that committee? Check it out. And, by the way, it’s someone who said, “I didn’t even read the bill. No, it’s a thousand pages.” Use ChatGPT to figure it out — right?

    They’re claiming they did not know that there was a 10 year ban on any social media. I mean, I’m sorry, any AI.

    Ina Fried, Axios: AI.

    Governor Hochul: “Oh, I didn’t know.” You voted for it. Just ask GPT. Anything I should worry about in here?

    Ina Fried, Axios: All right. I would love to keep the —

    Governor Hochul: Just some humble advice for them.

    I would love to keep the conversation going. Unfortunately, I know you have somewhere to go and we’re almost out of time. I have a quick question that I think only you can answer. So, I love buffalo sauce, but I don’t really like the bones.

    Ina Fried, Axios: Do boneless wings count?

    Governor Hocul: There’s chicken fingers.

    Ina Fried, Axios: That’s what my 12-year-old likes.

    Governor Hocul: Okay, chicken fingers are close enough, no one will mock you out, but the damning thing — if you ever eat chicken wings with ranch dressing, you’ll be barred from the entire region. Just don’t go. Just —

    Ina Fried, Axios: All right.

    Governor Hocul: Take it from me, everybody. That’s your pro-tip today. All right, so you heard it here: the Meadowlands is now part of New York, boneless wings are okay, but don’t you dare put them in ranch.

    Ina Fried, Axios: Thank you so much, Governor Hochul.

    Governor Hocul: Thank you.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reviewing Certain Presidential Actions

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    MEMORANDUM FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERALTHE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
    SUBJECT:       Reviewing Certain Presidential Actions
    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby directed:
    Section 1.  Background.  The President of the United States, as the unitary head of the executive branch, holds tremendous power and responsibility through his signature:  words on paper can become the law of the land, individuals are appointed to some of the highest offices in Government, national policies can be created or eliminated, and prisoners can go free.  In sum, the Nation is governed through Presidential signatures.
    In recent months, it has become increasingly apparent that former President Biden’s aides abused the power of Presidential signatures through the use of an autopen to conceal Biden’s cognitive decline and assert Article II authority.  This conspiracy marks one of the most dangerous and concerning scandals in American history.  The American public was purposefully shielded from discovering who wielded the executive power, all while Biden’s signature was deployed across thousands of documents to effect radical policy shifts.  
    For years, President Biden suffered from serious cognitive decline.  The Department of Justice, for example, concluded that, despite clear evidence that Biden had broken the law, he should not stand trial owing to his incompetent mental state.  Biden’s cognitive issues and apparent mental decline during his Presidency were even “worse” in private, and those closest to him “tried to hide it” from the public.  To do so, Biden’s advisors during his years in office severely restricted his news conferences and media appearances, and they scripted his conversations with lawmakers, government officials, and donors, all to cover up his inability to discharge his duties. 
    Notwithstanding these well-documented issues, the White House issued over 1,200 Presidential documents, appointed 235 judges to the Federal bench, and issued more pardons and commutations than any administration in United States history.  For instance, just 2 days before Christmas in 2024, the White House announced that Biden commuted the sentences of 37 of the 40 most vile and monstrous criminals on Federal death row, including several child killers and mass murderers.
    Although the authority to take these executive actions, along with many others, is constitutionally committed to the President, there are serious doubts as to the decision making process and even the degree of Biden’s awareness of these actions being taken in his name. 
    The vast majority of Biden’s executive actions were signed using a mechanical signature pen, often called an autopen, as opposed to Biden’s own hand.  This was especially true of actions taken during the second half of his Presidency, when his cognitive decline had apparently become even more clear to those working most closely with him.
    Given clear indications that President Biden lacked the capacity to exercise his Presidential authority, if his advisors secretly used the mechanical signature pen to conceal this incapacity, while taking radical executive actions all in his name, that would constitute an unconstitutional wielding of the power of the Presidency, a circumstance that would have implications for the legality and validity of numerous executive actions undertaken in Biden’s name.
    Sec. 2.  Investigation.  (a)  The Counsel to the President, in consultation with the Attorney General and the head of any other relevant executive department or agency (agency), shall investigate, to the extent permitted by law, whether certain individuals conspired to deceive the public about Biden’s mental state and unconstitutionally exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the President.  This investigation shall address:
    (i)    any activity, coordinated or otherwise, to purposefully shield the public from information regarding Biden’s mental and physical health;
    (ii)   any agreements between Biden’s aides to cooperatively and falsely deem recorded videos of the President’s cognitive inability as fake;
    (iii)  any agreements between Biden’s aides to require false, public statements elevating the President’s capabilities; and
    (iv)   the purpose of these activities, including to assert the authorities of the President.
    (b)  The Counsel to the President shall also investigate, in consultation with the Attorney General and the head of any other relevant agency, the circumstances surrounding Biden’s supposed execution of numerous executive actions during his final years in office. This investigation shall address:
    (i)   the policy documents for which the autopen was used, including clemency grants, Executive Orders, Presidential memoranda, or other Presidential policy decisions; and
    (ii)  who directed that the President’s signature be affixed.
    Sec. 3.  General Provisions.  This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
                                 DONALD J. TRUMP

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Restricts the Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    COMBATING TERRORISM THROUGH COMMON SENSE SECURITY STANDARDS: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Proclamation to protect the nation from foreign terrorist and other national security and public safety threats from entry into the United States.
    Pursuant to President Trump’s Executive Order 14161, issued on January 20, 2025, titled “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,” national security agencies engaged in a robust assessment of the risk that countries posed to the United States, including regarding terrorism and national security.
    In Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court upheld the President’s authority to use section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to protect the United States through entry restrictions.
    The Proclamation fully restricts and limits the entry of nationals from 12 countries found to be deficient with regards to screening and vetting and determined to pose a very high risk to the United States: Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.
    The Proclamation partially restricts and limits the entry of nationals from 7 countries who also pose a high level of risk to the United States: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.
    The Proclamation includes exceptions for lawful permanent residents, existing visa holders, certain visa categories, and individuals whose entry serves U.S. national interests.
    SECURING OUR BORDERS AND INTERESTS: The restrictions and limitations imposed by the Proclamation are necessary to garner cooperation from foreign governments, enforce our immigration laws, and advance other important foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism objectives.
    It is the President’s sacred duty to take action to ensure that those seeking to enter our country will not harm the American people.
    After evaluating a report submitted by the Secretary of State, in coordination with other cabinet officials, President Trump has determined that the entry of nationals from certain countries must be restricted or limited to protect U.S. national security and public safety interests.
    The restrictions are country-specific in order to encourage cooperation with the subject countries in recognition of each country’s unique circumstances.
    Some of the named countries have inadequate screening and vetting processes, hindering America’s ability to identify potential security threats before entry.
    Certain countries exhibit high visa overstay rates, demonstrating a disregard for U.S. immigration laws and increasing burdens on enforcement systems.
    Other countries lack cooperation in sharing identity and threat information, undermining effective U.S. immigration vetting.
    Some countries have a significant terrorist presence or state-sponsored terrorism, posing direct risks to U.S. national security.
    Several countries have historically failed to accept back their removable nationals, complicating U.S. efforts to manage immigration and public safety.
    MAKING AMERICA SAFE AGAIN: President Trump is keeping his promise to restore the travel ban and secure our borders.
    President Trump: “We will restore the travel ban, some people call it the Trump travel ban, and keep the radical Islamic terrorists out of our country that was upheld by the Supreme Court.”
    In his first term, President Trump successfully implemented a travel ban that restricted entry from several countries with inadequate vetting processes or significant security risks.
    The Supreme Court upheld the travel ban, ruling that it “is squarely within the scope of Presidential authority” and noting that it is “expressly premised on legitimate purposes.”
    This Proclamation builds on President Trump’s first-term travel ban, incorporating an updated assessment of current global screening, vetting, and security risks.
    JUSTIFICATION FOR FULL SUSPENSION BY COUNTRY
    Afghanistan
    The Taliban, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) group, controls Afghanistan.  Afghanistan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Fiscal Year 2023 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Entry/Exit Overstay Report (“Overstay Report”), Afghanistan had a business/tourist (B1/B2) visa overstay rate of 9.70 percent and a student (F), vocational (M), and exchange visitor (J) visa overstay rate of 29.30 percent.
    Burma
    According to the Overstay Report, Burma had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 27.07 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 42.17 percent.  Additionally, Burma has historically not cooperated with the United States to accept back their removable nationals.
    Chad
    According to the Overstay Report, Chad had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 49.54 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.64 percent.  According to the Fiscal Year 2022 Overstay Report, Chad had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 37.12 percent.  The high visa overstay rate for 2022 and 2023 is unacceptable and indicates a blatant disregard for U.S. immigration laws.  
    Republic of the Congo
    According to the Overstay Report, the Republic of the Congo had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 29.63 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.14 percent.
    Equatorial Guinea
    According to the Overstay Report, Equatorial Guinea had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 21.98 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 70.18 percent.
    Eritrea
    The United States questions the competence of the central authority for issuance of passports or civil documents in Eritrea. Criminal records are not available to the United States for Eritrean nationals.  Eritrea has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Eritrea had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 20.09 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.43 percent.
    Haiti
    According to the Overstay Report, Haiti had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 31.38 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 25.05 percent.  Additionally, hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the United States during the Biden Administration.  This influx harms American communities by creating acute risks of increased overstay rates, establishment of criminal networks, and other national security threats. As is widely known, Haiti lacks a central authority with sufficient availability and dissemination of law enforcement information necessary to ensure its nationals do not undermine the national security of the United States. 
    Iran
    Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism.  Iran regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks, is the source of significant terrorism around the world, and has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    Libya
    There is no competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents in Libya.  The historical terrorist presence within Libya’s territory amplifies the risks posed by the entry into the United States of its nationals.
    Somalia
    Somalia lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Somalia stands apart from other countries in the degree to which its government lacks command and control of its territory, which greatly limits the effectiveness of its national capabilities in a variety of respects.  A persistent terrorist threat also emanates from Somalia’s territory.  The United States Government has identified Somalia as a terrorist safe haven.  Terrorists use regions of Somalia as safe havens from which they plan, facilitate, and conduct their operations.  Somalia also remains a destination for individuals attempting to join terrorist groups that threaten the national security of the United States.  The Government of Somalia struggles to provide governance needed to limit terrorists’ freedom of movement.  Additionally, Somalia has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.
    Sudan
    Sudan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Overstay Report, Sudan had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 26.30 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 28.40 percent. 
    Yemen
    Yemen lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  The government does not have physical control over its own territory.  Since January 20, 2025, Yemen has been the site of active U.S. military operations.
    JUSTIFICATION FOR PARTIAL SUSPENSION BY COUNTRY (Immigrants and Nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J Visas)
    Burundi
    According to the Overstay Report, Burundi had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 17.52 percent. 
    Cuba
    Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism.  The Government of Cuba does not cooperate or share sufficient law enforcement information with the United States.  Cuba has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Cuba had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 7.69 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 18.75 percent.
    Laos
    According to the Overstay Report, Laos had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 34.77 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 6.49 percent.  Laos has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    Sierra Leone
    According to the Overstay Report, Sierra Leone had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 15.43 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.83 percent.  Sierra Leone has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    Togo
    According to the Overstay Report, Togo had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 19.03 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.05 percent. 
    Turkmenistan
    According to the Overstay Report, Turkmenistan had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 21.74 percent. 
    Venezuela
    Venezuela lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Venezuela has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Venezuela had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 9.83 percent.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Directs Review of Certain Presidential Actions

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    INVESTIGATING EXECUTIVE ACTIONS UNDER BIDEN’S PRESIDENCY: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing an investigation into who ran the United States while President Biden was in office.
    The Memorandum directs an investigation into whether certain individuals conspired to deceive the public about Biden’s mental state and unconstitutionally exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the President.
    The Memorandum also mandates an investigation into the circumstances surrounding Biden’s purported execution of the numerous executive actions during his final years in office, examining policy documents signed with an autopen, who authorized its use, and the validity of the resulting Presidential policy decisions.
    QUESTIONING WHO WIELDED THE EXECUTIVE POWER DURING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: The combined nature of Biden’s documented cognitive decline and the repeated use of an autopen raises serious concerns about the legitimacy of his actions.
    Reports indicate that, for years, Biden suffered from serious cognitive decline.
    For example, although the Department of Justice found that Biden had violated the law by willfully retaining and disclosing classified materials, it ultimately concluded that Biden was unfit to stand trial given his incompetent mental state.

    Biden’s cognitive issues and apparent mental decline were reportedly even “worse” in private, with those closest to him attempting to conceal it from the public.
    Biden’s advisors severely restricted his news conferences and media appearances, scripting his conversations with lawmakers, government officials, and donors.

    Despite Biden’s cognitive deficiencies, the White House issued over 1,200 Presidential documents, appointed 235 judges to the Federal bench, and issued more pardons and commutations than any Administration in U.S. history.
    Just two days before Christmas in 2024, Biden commuted the sentences of 37 of the 40 most vile and monstrous criminals on Federal death row, including several child killers and mass murderers.

    The authority to take these executive actions is constitutionally reserved for the President, yet the Biden White House used an autopen to execute the vast majority of Biden’s executive actions, particularly during the second half of his Presidency.
    RESTORING PRESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTABILITY: President Trump believes Americans deserve answers as to whether President Biden signed these documents, and if not, who signed them, and under what circumstances.
    President Trump: “And you know what, they ought to find out who was using that autopen. Because whoever that person was, he or she was like the President of the United States … I think a President should sign it, not use an autopen. And we’re going to find out whether or not he knew what the hell he was doing. … So I think it’s something that we should really look at because that’s so important.”
    President Trump: “The real question – who ran the autopen, OK? Who ran the autopen? Because the things that were signed were signed illegally, in my opinion.”
    Since returning to office, President Trump has held numerous open-press signing events where the American public can witness President Trump’s signature and knowledge regarding the matters in question with their own eyes.
    Even the legacy media admits that President Trump is on track to becoming the most-accessible President in modern history.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Restricts Foreign Student Visas at Harvard University

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    RESTRICTING FOREIGN STUDENT VISAS AT HARVARD: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Proclamation to safeguard national security by suspending the entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University. 
    The Proclamation suspends the entry into the United States of any new Harvard student as a nonimmigrant under F, M, or J visas.
    It directs the Secretary of State to consider revoking existing F, M, or J visas for current Harvard students who meet the Proclamation’s criteria.
    The Proclamation does not apply to aliens attending other U.S. universities through the Student Exchange Visa Program (SEVP) and exempts aliens whose entry is deemed in the national interest.
    HARVARD HAS A DEMONSTRATED HISTORY OF CONCERNING FOREIGN TIES AND RADICALISM:
    The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has long warned that foreign adversaries take advantage of easy access to American higher education to steal information, exploit research and development, and spread false information.
    The University has seen a drastic rise in crime in recent years, while failing to discipline at least some categories of conduct violations on campus.
    Harvard has failed to provide sufficient information to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) about foreign students’ known illegal or dangerous activities, reporting deficient data on only three students.
    Harvard is either not fully reporting its disciplinary records for foreign students or is not seriously policing its foreign students.
    Harvard has also developed extensive entanglements with foreign adversaries, receiving more than $150 million from China alone. In exchange, Harvard has, among other things, hosted Chinese Communist Party paramilitary members and partnered with China-based individuals on research that could advance China’s military modernization.
    The Chinese Communist Party has sent thousands of mid-career and senior bureaucrats to study at U.S. institutions, with Harvard University considered the top “party school” outside the country. Xi Jinping’s own daughter attended Harvard as an undergraduate in the early 2010s.

    Harvard has failed to adequately address violent anti-Semitic incidents on campus, with many of these agitators found to be foreign students.
    Harvard has persisted in prioritizing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in its admissions, denying hardworking Americans equal opportunities by favoring certain groups, despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling against its race-based practices.
    These concerns have compelled the Federal government to conclude that Harvard University is no longer a trustworthy steward of international student and exchange visitor programs.
    HOLDING HARVARD ACCOUNTABLE: President Trump wants our institutions to have foreign students, but believes that the foreign students should be people that can love our country.  
    President Trump: “The students? Well, we want to have great students here. We just don’t want students that are causing trouble. We want to have students. I want to have foreign students.”
    President Trump: “We have people who want to go to Harvard and other schools, they can’t get in because we have foreign students there. But I want to make sure that the foreign students are people that can love our country.”
    President Trump: “We are still waiting for the Foreign Student Lists from Harvard so that we can determine, after a ridiculous expenditure of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, how many radicalized lunatics, troublemakers all, should not be let back into our Country. Harvard is very slow in the presentation of these documents, and probably for good reason!”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Enhancing National Security by Addressing Risks at Harvard University

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    class=”has-text-align-center”>BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A PROCLAMATION
    Admission into the United States to attend, conduct research, or teach at our Nation’s institutions of higher education is a privilege granted by our Government, not a guarantee.  That privilege is necessarily tied to the host institution’s compliance and commitment to following Federal law.  Harvard University has failed in this respect, among many others.
    The Student Exchange Visa Program (SEVP) depends fundamentally on academic institutions’ good faith, transparency, and full adherence to the relevant regulatory frameworks.  This is for crucial national-security reasons.  The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has long warned that foreign adversaries and competitors take advantage of easy access to American higher education to, among other things, steal technical information and products, exploit expensive research and development to advance their own ambitions, and spread false information for political or other reasons.  Our adversaries, including the People’s Republic of China, try to take advantage of American higher education by exploiting the student visa program for improper purposes and by using visiting students to collect information at elite universities in the United States.
    Protecting our national security requires host institutions of foreign students to provide sufficient information, when asked, to enable the Federal Government to identify and address misconduct by those foreign students.  In my judgment, it presents an unacceptable risk to our Nation’s security for an academic institution to refuse to provide sufficient information, when asked, about known instances of misconduct and criminality committed by its foreign students.  This principle is one reason why SEVP regulations require foreign students to obey Federal and State criminal laws and require universities to keep records about foreign students’ studies in the United States — including records relating to criminal activity by foreign students and resulting disciplinary proceedings — and furnish them to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on request.
    Crime rates at Harvard University — including violent crime rates — have drastically risen in recent years.  Harvard has failed to discipline at least some categories of conduct violations on campus.  Given these facts, it is imperative, in my judgment, that the Federal Government be able to assess and, if necessary, address misconduct and crimes committed by foreign students at Harvard.
    Despite the risks described above, Harvard University has refused the recent requests of the DHS for information about foreign students’ “known illegal activity,” “known dangerous and violent activity,” “known threats to other students or university personnel,” “known deprivation of rights of other classmates or university personnel,” and whether those activities “occurred on campus,” and other related data.  Harvard provided data on misconduct by only three students, and the data it provided was so deficient that the DHS could not evaluate whether it should take further actions.  Harvard’s actions show that it either is not fully reporting its disciplinary records for foreign students or is not seriously policing its foreign students.  In my judgment, these actions and failures directly undermine the Federal Government’s ability to ensure that foreign nationals admitted on student or exchange visitor visas remain in compliance with Federal law.
    These concerns have compelled the Federal Government to conclude that Harvard University is no longer a trustworthy steward of international student and exchange visitor programs.  When a university refuses to uphold its legal obligations, including its recordkeeping and reporting obligations, the consequences ripple far beyond the campus.  They jeopardize the integrity of the entire United States student and exchange visitor visa system, compromise national security, and embolden other institutions to similarly disregard the rule of law.
    Harvard University has also developed extensive entanglements with foreign countries, including our adversaries.  According to The Harvard Crimson, Harvard has received more than $150 million in total contributions from foreign governments over the last 5 years, and over $1 billion from foreign sources.  Over the last 10 years, Harvard has received more than $150 million from China alone.  In exchange, Harvard has, among other things, “repeatedly hosted and trained members of a Chinese Communist Party paramilitary organization,” according to a probe by the House of Representatives Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party.  Harvard researchers have also partnered with China-based individuals on research that could advance China’s military modernization, according to the same probe.
    Finally, Harvard University continues to flout the civil rights of its students and faculty, triggering multiple Federal investigations.  Harvard’s discrimination against disfavored races in admissions was so blatant that the Supreme Court decision ending the practice nationwide bears Harvard’s name.  Yet even after that Supreme Court decision, Harvard and its affiliated organizations on campus continue to deny hardworking Americans equal opportunities.  Instead of those Americans, Harvard admits students from non-egalitarian nations, including nations that seek the destruction of the United States and its allies, or the extermination of entire peoples.  It is not in the interest of the United States to further compound Harvard’s discrimination against non-preferred races, national origins, shared ancestries, or religions by further reducing opportunities for American students through excessive foreign student enrollment.
    Considering these facts, I have determined that it is necessary to restrict the entry of foreign nationals who seek to enter the United States solely or principally to participate in a course of study at Harvard University or in an exchange visitor program hosted by Harvard University.  Such restrictions are authorized under sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), which authorize the President to suspend entry of any class of aliens whose entry would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  I have determined that the entry of the class of foreign nationals described above is detrimental to the interests of the United States because, in my judgment, Harvard’s conduct has rendered it an unsuitable destination for foreign students and researchers.  Until such time as the university shares the information that the Federal Government requires to safeguard national security and the American public, it is in the national interest to deny foreign nationals access to Harvard under the auspices of educational exchange.
    NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, hereby find that, absent the measures set forth in this proclamation, the entry into the United States of persons described in section 1 of this proclamation would, except as provided for in section 2 of this proclamation, be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions.  I hereby proclaim as follows:
    Section 1.  Suspension of Entry.  The entry of any alien into the United States as a nonimmigrant to pursue a course of study at Harvard University under section 101(a)(15)(F) or section 101(a)(15)(M) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F) or 1101(a)(15)(M), or to participate in an exchange visitor program hosted by Harvard University under section 101(a)(15)(J) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J), is suspended and limited, subject to section 2 of this proclamation.  That suspension and limitation shall expire, absent extension, 6 months after the date of this proclamation.
    Sec. 2.  Scope and Implementation of Suspension and Limitation on Entry.  (a)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall apply to aliens who enter or attempt to enter the United States to begin attending Harvard University through the SEVP after the date of this proclamation.
    (b)  The Secretary of State shall consider, in the Secretary’s discretion, whether foreign nationals who currently attend Harvard University and are in the United States pursuant to F, M, or J visas and who otherwise meet the criteria described in section 1 of this proclamation should have their visas revoked pursuant to section 221(i) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1201(i).
    (c)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall not apply to any alien who enters the United States to attend other universities through the SEVP.
    (d)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall not apply to any alien whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees.
    (e)  No later than 90 days after the date of this proclamation, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall jointly submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, a recommendation on whether an extension or renewal of the suspension and limitation on entry in section 1 of this proclamation is in the interests of the United States.
    Sec. 3.  Operational Action to Implement this Order.  The Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate to take all necessary and appropriate action to implement this proclamation.  The Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall also consider using their respective authorities under the INA to impose limitations on Harvard University’s ability to participate in the SEVP and the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System.  Any such actions should include an exception for any alien whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees.
    Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
    (b)  This proclamation shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
    (c)  This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-ninth.
                                 DONALD J. TRUMP

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: House Passes Pettersen’s Bill to Expand Access to Treatment, Combat Opioid Epidemic

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Brittany Pettersen (Colorado 7th District)

    Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed Congresswoman Brittany Pettersen’s bill – the Support for Patients and Communities Act – to reauthorize funding for critical prevention, treatment, and recovery substance use disorder (SUD) programs. 

    Pettersen’s own mother struggled with a decades-long battle with addiction after being overprescribed opioids. Inspired by her mom’s struggle, Rep. Pettersen has fought to expand access to treatment to help people like her mother receive the care they need, including passing a bill that directed Colorado to apply for a Section 1115 Waiverto cover residential and inpatient treatment for individuals struggling with addiction. In the first year alone, this waiver increased access to substance use disorder treatment by 60% and 48,000 Coloradans were able to get the care they needed. Colorado also saw a 35% decline in fentanyl-related deaths in this past year. 

    “At a time when the Trump administration is dismantling the agency that oversees treatment and recovery services and is taking away health care from people struggling with addiction, protecting these programs is more important than ever,” said Pettersen. “In my fight to save my mom’s life, I saw how broken our system is, and I’ve been working every day to fix it. Colorado has led the way by expanding treatment and making resources like Narcan widely available. We have to protect that progress and keep fighting to make sure people like my mom have the tools they need to rebuild their lives and live in recovery.” 

    Republicans struck down Pettersen’s amendment to protect Section 1115 Waivers which are currently on the chopping block in Republicans’ budget proposal. Pettersen’s amendment would have allowed states to use downstream savings to calculate budget neutrality for Section 1115 Waivers, or Medicaid Demonstration Programs. Substance use disorder patients who receive the care they need can save states thousands of dollars in the long-term. 

    “While I’m pleased to see this legislation move forward, I’m deeply disappointed that Republicans rejected my amendments to protect Section 1115 Waivers,” said Pettersen. “The disastrous Republican budget would completely decimate the progress we’ve made in combatting the opioid crisis in Colorado and leave people to die without access to the treatment they need to survive.” 

    Specifically, the Support for Patients and Communities Act will:

    • Expand access to naloxone for first-responders and community members; 
    • Provide substance use disorder (SUD) treatment for pregnant and postpartum women;
    • Address SUD workforce shortages by expanding loan repayment programs and fellowship opportunities for healthcare providers; 
    • Increase access to peer-led recovery support services; 
    • Fund Comprehensive Opioid Recovery Centers; and 
    • Promote the prevention of overdoses through prescription drug monitoring programs. 

    The legislation is endorsed by over 160 vital substance use disorder treatment and recovery organizations, including Faces and Voices of Recovery, the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), the National Association for Behavioral Healthcare, and Mental Health Colorado.

    MIL OSI USA News