Category: housing

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Files Brief Challenging Trump Administration’s Unjustified and Unconstitutional Revocation of Student Visas

    Source: US State of California

    OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, as part of a coalition of 19 attorneys general, filed an amicus brief challenging the Trump Administration’s executive orders allowing for the ideologically-motivated revocation of visas for students and faculty who exercise their free speech and association rights. In the past month, the Trump Administration has revoked the visas, and in some cases arrested, detained, and sought to remove, hundreds of visa-holding and legal permanent resident students at higher education institutions for expressing opinions that the Trump Administration disagrees with. In other cases, students have been provided little to no justification for the termination grounds, much less the meaningful opportunity to challenge the sudden denial. In just California, nearly 100 students across the California State University system, University of California campuses, and Stanford University have had their visas revoked. 

    “Students across the country are being aggressively targeted without notice and for no clear reason beyond the President’s political agenda, creating a culture of fear and disrupting our institutions of higher education,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The unjustified and unconstitutional revocation of student visas for expressing their opinions sends a stunning message to campuses across the nation: fall in line or face deportation. I urge the court to put a swift stop to this policy before it can do any further damage.”

    The Trump Administration’s “Ideological Deportation Policy” is based on two Executive Orders (14161 and 14188).These orders direct federal agencies to vet foreign nationals seeking to enter the U.S. based on ideological grounds rather than on direct safety threats. These orders further direct federal agencies to investigate, detain, and deport noncitizen students and faculty who engage in political speech with which the Administration disagrees. Last month, the Trump Administration began using these orders as the basis to begin revoking hundreds of student visas. 

    During the 2023-2024 school year, states represented in the amicus brief hosted over 640,000 international students who supported more than 235,000 jobs and contributed approximately $27.5 billion annually to our economies through tuition, living expenses, and related spending. These noncitizen students not only make substantial economic contributions to the states; they also enrich academic discourse, strengthen our research capabilities, and enhance our global competitiveness. 

    In the brief, Attorney General Bonta and the multistate coalition argues that the Trump Administration’s Ideological Deportation Policy inflicts irreparable harms to the states, is contrary to the public interest, and violates the First Amendment’s protection of free speech, which the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed extends to noncitizen residents within the United States. The coalition respectfully urges the court to grant a preliminary injunction to stop deportations based on this policy while litigation continues. 

    Attorney General Bonta is committed to upholding the rights and protections of all of California’s residents, including the nearly 11 million immigrants who call California home. He has defended pathways for legal immigration for those fleeing dangerous conditions in their home counties, supported challenges to the early termination of the TPS designation for Venezuela and Haitians, and secured a preliminary injunction in his lawsuit challenging the President’s unlawful executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship.

    Attorney General Bonta has also vigorously defended President Trump’s assault on the rule of law. Last month, Attorney General Bonta, along with 20 other state attorneys general issued an open letter urging the legal community to stand together in defense of the rule of law in response to President Trump’s recent attacks. Attorney General Bonta also issued a separate statement on the need to speak up and push back when our democratic norms are violated, our legal system undermined, and our laws broken. 

    Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Washington, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont in filing the amicus brief. 

    A copy of the brief is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Missouri Gang Member Indicted for Murder in Aid of Racketeering and Other Crimes Including Three Murders

    Source: United States Attorneys General 2

    A federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Missouri returned an indictment on Wednesday charging Travis Santel Jones, 21, of St. Louis, Missouri, with one count of murder in aid of racketeering, RICO conspiracy, using a firearm during a crime of violence, and causing death with a firearm, all related to Jones’s alleged part in the Cochran Crips, a violent street gang based in St. Louis. Two victims were gunned down in the street and one victim was killed at his own home.

    “There is no place in our communities for groups that terrorize their neighbors,” said Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “This indictment alleges violent criminal acts and the tragic loss of three lives, all at the hands of a dangerous gang member. The Department of Justice’s Criminal Division will continue to pursue justice for these victims and for the people of St. Louis.”

    “The alleged activity here is exactly the type of case that the Violent Crime Initiative was designed to tackle — complex criminal conspiracies involving drugs and years of violence,” said U.S. Attorney Sayler A. Fleming for the Eastern District of Missouri. “There are severe federal consequences for anyone who is tempted to kill and maim to peddle poison.”

    “For years, FBI St. Louis has been investigating violent crimes and drug trafficking by Cochran Crips gang members. In 2020, our office surged resources to assist the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department after two innocent Saint Louis University students were gunned down simply because their vehicle was misidentified by the gang,” said Special Agent in Charge Ashley Johnson of the FBI St. Louis Field Office. “The FBI and our law enforcement partners will not stop until we bring all those involved in the murders to justice.”

    “Violence has no place in our community, and this indictment sends a clear message: we will always be a voice for victims, and we will not stop pursuing justice until there is accountability,” said St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department Chief Robert J. Tracy. “I am proud of the dedication by our investigators on this case, and we will continue to work with our federal law enforcement partners to keep our neighborhoods safe and take dangerous criminals off our streets.”

    According to court documents, Jones conspired with other Cochran Crips members to commit multiple acts of murder and multiple drug trafficking offenses. Specifically, it is alleged in July 2020, Jones and other members were driving the streets of St. Louis, armed with multiple firearms, looking for “get backs” (retaliation) against a rival gang. While searching for rival gang members, Jones and others allegedly killed two innocent people whom they mistakenly believed to be rivals. After allegedly shooting and killing the victims, Jones and other Cochran Crips allegedly sped away, fleeing the scene and endangering other motorists on the road. Just a day after the murders, it is alleged that Cochran Crips gang members glorified the murders in a rap song.

    In 2022, Jones allegedly murdered another Cochran Crips member when the gang believed that the victim had disrespected a fellow gang member. The gang members are alleged to have obtained a car, armed themselves with multiple firearms, drove to the victim’s home, and murdered him.

    If convicted of murder in aid of racketeering, Jones faces a mandatory minimum penalty of life in prison or the death penalty. All other charges carry a maximum penalty of life in prison.  

    The FBI and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department are investigating the case.

    Trial Attorneys Jared A. Hernandez and Matthew Mattis of the Criminal Division’s Violent Crime and Racketeering Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nino Przulj for the Eastern District of Missouri are prosecuting the case.

    This case is part of the Criminal Division’s Violent Crime Initiative in St. Louis conducted in partnership with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Missouri and local, state, and federal law enforcement. The joint effort addresses violent crime by employing, where appropriate, federal laws to prosecute gang members and their associates in St. Louis.

    This case is also part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) operation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found at www.justice.gov/OCDETF.

    An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congressman Moran Welcomes Pastor Michael Gossett to Capitol as Guest Chaplain

    Source: Congressman Nathaniel Moran (R-TX-01)

    Washington, D.C. ­– Congressman Nathaniel Moran (R-TX-01) released the following statement recognizing Dr. Michael Gossett, Senior Pastor of Green Acres Baptist Church in Tyler, Texas, for his dedicated service and recent role as Guest Chaplain for the U.S. House of Representatives:

    “It’s my honor to introduce Dr. Michael Gossett, Pastor of Green Acres Baptist Church in Tyler, Texas, to serve as the Guest Chaplain this week and offer a prayer.

    “Dr. Gossett and his wife lead the largest congregation of believers in East Texas. They also proudly shepherd a flock of four wonderful children at home. Pastor Michael, as he’s known, and Katie are passionate about their call to serve—to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ—and they are personable and approachable in their style, showing the same love and grace as our risen Lord and Savior.

    “Having been a firefighter for five years before entering full-time ministry, this Liberty University alum is tough-minded, disciplined, and steady in his leadership. He is authentic and genuine, and always faithful to preach the truth of the Word of God.

    “Because of that, he has been a strong and effective leader for Green Acres since he arrived in 2019. I’m proud to call him my friend and proud he’s dedicated his life to be salt and light in this lost and dark world.

    “To God be the glory for the great things He’s doing through the Gossetts and Green Acres Baptist Church in Tyler, Texas. Welcome, Pastor Gossett.”

    Watch Congressman Moran’s Full Remarks HERE

    Dr. Michael Gossett is the Senior Pastor of Green Acres Baptist Church in Tyler, Texas, where he has served since 2019. A graduate of Liberty University and former firefighter, he and his wife, Katie, have four children and are passionate about sharing the Gospel and serving the East Texas community.

    Watch Pastor Gossett’s Opening Prayer HERE

    Pastor Gossett’s Full Prayer as Delivered:

    ”Heavenly Father, we come to You today and acknowledge that You alone are the King of kings and Lord of lords. You alone are sovereign over the nations and the peoples of the Earth. Just as Psalm 24:1 says, “The Earth and everything in it, the world and its inhabitants, belong to the Lord.” You alone, Lord, have ordained each government official to serve, and we ask that You raise up leaders and call each representative to lead with justice, and wisdom, and humility.

    “We ask Your blessings on each member here and the families and people they represent. I pray that You would grant each Representative clarity of mind, integrity of heart, and a deep concern for truth and righteousness according to Your Word. I pray there would be no fear among them except a fear of the Lord. May they seek the good of the people and the flourishing of all, especially the most vulnerable. Please remind us today that our hope alone is in Your Son, Jesus Christ. We pray all this in the name of Jesus, our risen Lord and coming King. Amen.”

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congresswoman Tenney Leads Letter Praising President Trump’s Commitment to Countering Iran’s Nuclear Proliferation

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (NY-22)

    Washington, DC – Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (NY-24) today led eight of her colleagues in sending a letter to President Trump, commending his efforts to dismantle Iran’s nuclear weapons program. The letter also expresses support for the President’s National Security Presidential Memorandum 2 and the renewed Maximum Pressure Campaign against Iran.

    Additional signers of the letter include Representatives Derek Schmidt (KS-2), Barry Loudermilk (GA-11), Rudy Yakym (IN-2), Abraham Hamadeh (AZ-08), Burgess Owens (UT-4), Michael Baumgartner (WA-5), Mike Bost (IL-12), and Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1).

    This letter comes as the Trump administration prepares to engage in nuclear talks with Iran over the weekend of April 12, 2025. It reaffirms Congressional support for the President’s position that Iran can never be allowed to acquire or continue developing nuclear weapons.

    “In his first term, President Trump’s Maximum Pressure Campaign delivered successful results, crippling the Iranian regime and limiting its ability to spread terrorism and malign influence across the globe. By reinstating this strategy, the Trump administration is sending a strong message to Iran and the international community, reversing years of damage caused by the Biden administration’s weak policies that have emboldened the IRGC. Today, I am leading a letter to President Trump, applauding his administration’s strong efforts to disarm Iran and prevent it from developing nuclear-capable missiles or engaging in nuclear weapons-related research. President Trump is proving his administration is committed to striking back against Iran, sending a clear signal that the United States will not allow Iran’s proxies to operate with impunity,” said Congresswoman Tenney.

    “Congresswoman Tenney’s leadership on this issue could not come at a more decisive moment. As a result of President Trump’s wildly successful maximum pressure campaign, the United States has tremendous leverage over the regime in Iran. It is important that we deploy it strategically to ensure Iran’s complete and immediate denuclearization. No deal is far better than a bad deal that empowers this terrorist regime or leaves it with the means to ever reconstitute its nuclear program,” said Nick Stewart, Senior Director of Government Relations at FDD Action.

    Read the full text of the letter here  

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. LaLota Co-sponsors Legislation to Eliminate Tax Penalties for American Hostages, Including Suffolk County’s Kai Li

    Source: US Representative Nick LaLota (NY-01)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep Nick LaLota (Suffolk County, NY) released the following statement after signing on as co-sponsor of the Stop Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, bipartisan legislation that eliminates tax penalties for U.S. citizens wrongfully detained or held hostage abroad. The bill also extends this relief to their spouses during the period of detention and provides retroactive reimbursement to those who have already paid such penalties after their release. 

    This legislation directly benefits Americans such as Suffolk County resident and U.S. citizen Kai Lia, who was wrongfully detained by the Chinese Communist Party for eight years before his release in 2024, a cause for which LaLota consistently advocated after taking office in 2023. 

    “Our duty to fight for Americans unjustly detained abroad does not end when they return home. This bill takes a critical step in addressing an ongoing injustice they may face, specifically the unfair tax burdens imposed by our own nation. No American should be financially penalized for their inability to pay taxes while wrongfully imprisoned, nor should their family,” said LaLota. “A powerful example of why this legislation is needed is Kai Li, a Huntington resident who was unjustly detained by the Chinese Communist Party for over seven years and subjected to severe human rights abuses. After enduring unimaginable hardship, the last thing Kai and his family should face is unfairly imposed back taxes and fees. I was proud to advocate for Kai’s release, and this legislation demonstrates that I will continue fighting for him—and for every American who has suffered similar injustice—to ensure they receive our continued support.”

    To read a full text of the legislation, click HERE.

    Background:

    Kai Li of Huntington, New York, was unjustly imprisoned by the Chinese Communist Party from 2016 to 2024. In 2016, Kai Li visited Shanghai to mark the first anniversary of his mother’s death. When he arrived at the airport in Shanghai, CCP authorities immediately arrested him on “state security charges.” For months, Kai was held in secret detention without access to legal counsel. Then, almost two years later in July 2018, in a one-hour secret trial, Kai was convicted of espionage.

    In November 2024, the State Department announced Kai Li of Huntington would be coming home after being wrongfully detained by the Chinese government since 2016.

    Since coming into office, LaLota consistently advocated for the Li family, demanding his release from China and calling on the State Department to put pressure on China. In 2023, LaLota sent a letter to President Biden calling on him to meet with the Li family. Earlier in 2024, LaLota joined several other members in a letter to Secretary Blinken highlighting the human rights abuses committed by the Chinese government, including the treatment of Kai Li.

    In February 2024,  LaLota spoke on the House floor calling on the Biden Administration to bring Kai home. In March, LaLota invited Kai’s son, Harrison Li, to attend the State of the Union to bring more attention to Kai’s imprisonment. Shortly after, LaLota introduced a bill demanding the Chinese Communist Party immediately release Kai.

    In June 2024, LaLota successfully included an amendment to the FY25 State and Foreign Operations Appropriations bill that supported the Special Envoy for Hostage Affairs to strengthen efforts to bring American citizens wrongfully detained in China home. In August of 2024, LaLota sent a letter to National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan urging him to prioritize Kai Li’s release in Sullivan’s discussions with Chinese officials.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lee Introduces the Fairness for Stay-at-Home Parents Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Utah Mike Lee
    Legislation championed by Vice President Vance saves money for new moms and dads
    WASHINGTON – Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced the Fairness for Stay-at-Home Parents Act, which exempts new parents from paying back health insurance premiums to their employers, should they choose not to return to work after maternity or paternity leave. Under current law, employers can “claw back” premiums from new moms and dads if they stay at home following parental leave.
    The Fairness for Stay-at-Home Parents Act was previously introduced by JD Vance as Senator from Ohio, and is being lead in the House of Representatives by Rep. Riley Moore (R-WV)
    “Our legislation rectifies a problem with the Family and Medical Leave Act that unfairly impacts mothers who decide to stay home with their newborns after maternity leave,” said Senator Lee. “Each additional financial burden we can remove from growing American families is a victory, and this bill will make it easier for hundreds of thousands of new parents to care for their kids.” 
    “Being pro-life means being pro-family,” said Rep. Moore. “That means ensuring families aren’t penalized for deciding to have a parent stay home with their new baby. Our bill ensures families won’t face a huge bill for insurance premiums simply for choosing what’s best for their family.”
    “Family policy should give parents the choice to care for their young children. The Fairness for Stay-at-Home Parents Act does this, which is why I think it is a smart idea.”– Brad Wilcox, Senior Fellow at the Institute for Family Studies
    “This is a much needed update to the FMLA to protect women who decide to stay home with their newborns. Young moms should feel empowered to make the choices that work for them when caring for their babies, not get socked with surprise bills from their employers.”  -Ivana Greco, homeschooling mom of four and Senior Fellow at Capita.     
     
    You can read the bill text HERE.  
    You can read the one-pager HERE.
    You can read the Daily Wire’s exclusive coverage HERE.
     

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Salinas, Pingree, Tokuda, Wyden Lead Colleagues in Slamming Trump Administration for Censoring Agricultural Research Crucial to Rural Communities

    Source: US Representative Andrea Salinas (OR-06)

    Leaked Agricultural Research Service memo contains a sweeping list of banned words, including “climate,” “affordable housing,” and “safe drinking water.”

    Washington, DC — Today, U.S. Representatives Andrea Salinas (OR-06), Chellie Pingree (ME-01), and Jill Tokuda (HI-02), along with U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), warned the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) that Donald Trump’s politically motivated list of banned words — including “climate,” “affordable housing,” and “safe drinking water” — in research agreements being considered for federal funding would harm rural communities facing wildfires, drought, food insecurity, among other environmental agricultural challenges.

    In the letter to USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins, the lawmakers emphasized, “The exclusion of these terms from consideration for funding opportunities demonstrates an intentional effort to hinder, distort, and improperly steer federal scientific work in the name of political expediency, and the American people deserve far better than that.”

    The USDA has operated more than 600 research projects with a $1.7 billion budget. Banning terms like “runoff” or “soil pollution” from playing a role in funding these agricultural and environmental projects would stall opportunities to advance the agency’s core mission to carry out scientific work that bolsters lives, careers, and the overall wellbeing of communities across rural America. As Oregon’s climate changes, farmers are being exposed to emerging pest and disease threats, which could wipe out entire crops or even threaten human health. Climate change is a scientifically established threat to agricultural productivity, food security, and rural economies.

    The lawmakers continued: “The American people deserve transparency and integrity from federal research agencies, not political interference and outright censorship. The farmers and ranchers who rely on sound science to navigate environmental and economic challenges should not have their livelihoods undercut by unscientific, bureaucratic gatekeeping. Critical research proposals to reduce pollution, increase irrigation efficiency, or address emerging pest and disease threats should not be denied solely because they used a word that Donald Trump does not like.”

    In addition to Salinas, Wyden, Pingree, and Tokuda, the letter is cosigned in the House by Reps. Janelle Bynum (OR-05), Ed Case (HI-01), Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05), Angie Craig (MN-02), Jim Costa (CA-21), Shomari Figures (AL-02), Valerie Foushee (NC-04), Jared Huffman (CA-02) Jonathan Jackson (IL-01), Betty McCollum (MN-04), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC-AL), Jimmy Panetta (CA-19), Terri Sewell (AL-07), Shri Thanedar (MI-13), Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), and Maxine Waters (CA-43) and in the Senate by Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Tina Smith (D-MN).

    The members demand immediate answers clarifying the implications of this politically motivated censorship to the following questions no later than April 18, 2025:

    1. Has the USDA conducted any review to determine whether this policy violates federal transparency laws, scientific integrity policies, or anti-discrimination statutes? If so, please share the documentation. If not, please explain why a review has not been done.
    2. The USDA has confirmed the existence of the ARS memo that has been publicly reported. Please provide any other lists of key words that the USDA is using to evaluate federal agreements, contracts, grants, loans, and other programs.
    3. For each list provided under question 2, please explain the purpose of each list, including any relevant laws, regulations, Executive Orders, or memoranda that the USDA is seeking to comply with.
    4. What safeguards have you put in place to ensure that these restrictions do not lead to biased or politically motivated decision-making at the expense of merit, scientific integrity, and public welfare?
    5. Have these restrictions resulted in the rejection of agreements that would have directly benefited farmers, food supply security, or rural economies? If so, what processes does the USDA have in place to allow for the appeal of decisions and evaluations made based off key word lists for federal agreements, contracts, grants, loans, or other programs? Provide an itemized list of all agreements under all impacted programs that were rejected because they included one or more of these banned terms, as outlined in the directive, as well as a full justification for each rejection.
    6. In the case of the ARS banned word list, if an ongoing research agreement is focused on biofuels, for example, the ARS website lists 29 research projects containing the word biofuel. Will funding for these projects be revoked? Will ongoing research be halted? Will USDA require projects to rephrase their contracts? If a project cannot be rephrased without using a banned word, will the contract be terminated?
    7. What are the consequences for researchers or other agency employees who identify serious risks related to any of these banned terms, such as, for example, the expanded range of certain pests and diseases due to changing climate conditions, or nitrate contamination in the drinking water supply from fertilizer runoff?
      1. Will research proposals and agreements to address these critical issues – and others that include banned terms – be considered under this policy?
      2. If so, through what process are they getting around the banned terms list, and how is that decided? If not, how do you justify such negligence?
      3. Are career scientists, policy experts, and agency staff being pressured to remove or avoid these terms in their work? If not, explain how USDA plans to enforce these restrictions. If so, how does that not constitute political coercion?
    8. Does the USDA deny that climate change, pollution, and the accessibility of federal funding impact the safety and security of the American food supply? If so, provide your justification. If not, then why are these issues being censored?
    9. Will you release all internal communications regarding the creation, justification, and enforcement of this policy to ensure full transparency? If so, when? If not, why?

    To read the full letter, click here.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: 2025 Congressional Art Competition Winner

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Diana Harshbarger (R-TN)

    BLOUNTVILLE, TN — Today, Congresswoman Diana Harshbarger joined students, teachers, and community members in Blountville to announce the winners of the 2025 Congressional Art Competition, celebrating the exceptional talent of young artists across Tennessee’s First District. 

    Taking home first place was William McNeill of Providence Academy, whose stunning piece, “Great Dhalia,” captured the top honor and will be proudly displayed in the U.S. Capitol.

    Additional award recipients include:

    • Second Place: Laurel Pearson, Providence Academy
    • Third Place: Frances Stewart, University School
    • Honorable Mention: Annalise Burns, Providence Academy
    • Honorable Mention: Aleecia Rema Davis, Morristown East High
    • Art Teacher of the Year: Sharon Squibb, University School

    Congresswoman Harshbarger shared her admiration and appreciation for the students and educators who participated:

    “It always amazes me to see how much talent the young people of Tennessee’s First District have. It’s one of the reasons this is one of my favorite events of the year, and I’m thankful for the nearly one hundred students who submitted their art. I’m also extremely thankful to the teachers who helped make this competition possible through their guidance and leadership.”

    The Congressional Art Competition is held annually to showcase the artistic achievements of high school students from across the nation.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Closing remarks by UNFPA Executive Director Dr. Natalia Kanem at the 58th session of the Commission on Population and Development

    Source: United Nations Population Fund

    Madam Chair,
    Excellencies,
    Distinguished delegates, 
    Leaders of civil society,
    Dear colleagues, dear young people,

    Muy buenos días! Greetings of peace – always on our minds as we deliberate in this multilateral space – peace in the home, peace in our hearts, peace in the wider world.

    Last year’s 57th session of this Commission celebrated ICDP30. It drew record participation. This year again, this Commission garnered considerable engagement from Member States, civil society, from advocates for issues that affect older people and young advocates, too – all mobilized by the relevance of the theme: “Ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all at all ages”.

    In adopting the ICPD Programme of Action 31 years ago in Cairo, Member States set out a vision for the achievement of people-centred sustainable development, through investing in health, including sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights, promoting gender equality, and empowering adolescents and youth. 

    Deliberations of this Commission revealed that deeper investments in health, including sexual and reproductive health and rights, have driven progress in economic and social development, advanced social justice and supported individual well-being.

    As the Commission opened on World Health Day, there was good news on maternal mortality. Your efforts over the years to improve maternal health outcomes have contributed to a remarkable drop in deaths worldwide.

    The news, however, was less positive for Indigenous women, African women and women of African descent, and for women in humanitarian settings – far too many of whom continue to be left behind. Now, there is urgent need to go further to ensure that no woman dies needlessly from entirely preventable causes related to pregnancy and childbirth.

    As you highlighted, we as a global community need to do better to reduce inequalities in access to healthcare, including through financing and strengthened international cooperation and partnerships.

    We heard your hopes and priorities for furthering these investments to achieve universal health coverage and truly leave no one behind.

    You voiced commitment to improve health and well-being for populations at all ages; to end violence against women, including online; to ensure that child marriage and harmful practices no longer diminish the lives and experiences of women and girls and young people, in all their diversity.

    How unfortunate, then, that the Commission’s best efforts could not translate into an action-oriented outcome this year. Because let us be clear, millions of lives are on the line. Because this year like no other, women and girls expect UNFPA and the entire United Nations to rush to their rescue.

    And once again, it will be poor people who are cast aside, and as always sadly, it is women and girls with the most vulnerability and the least access to health services who will bear the greatest burden of ill health and preventable deaths.

    In recent months, the world appears to be in retreat, turning a face of indifference to human suffering at a time when humanitarian crises are pushing more and more people to the brink. As the principle of international solidarity comes under attack, more and more people are dying. They are being denied fundamental rights and choices, food, life-saving medicines and the basic necessities of life, caught up in catastrophes not of their own making, and for women and girls, there is a battle over their own bodies.

    Who is listening to the women and girls? Who will defend their fundamental rights? I can assure you that UNFPA is listening. We are responding based on the evidence, based on what women and girls tell us they need. We are committed to defending their fundamental freedoms, wherever they may be – in an urban centre or a rural area, in a refugee camp, fleeing violence or disaster, trapped by hunger and war. We will continue to do the necessary research, data analysis, the surveys and census advising to support countries who strongly desire to improve statistical data collection and usage to identify and address the needs of their people.

    As language is debated in these august halls, let us unfailingly uphold the fundamental values that must never be compromised.

    Principle 1 of the ICPD Programme of Action and Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirm that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

    And what better way to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the UN Charter than for “we the people” to “reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women”.

    Madam Chair,
    Distinguished delegates,

    This Commission is the guardian of the ICPD Programme of Action. Your work, historically, has bettered millions upon millions of lives around the world. Even as there are opposing positions, I hope that we can agree that much more unites us than divides us.

    Let us send a signal to those whom we serve that what is done here still matters.

    For UNFPA, we will do our utmost to assist Member States to move forward. Because this is no time to turn back. Human lives, human rights and human dignity are at stake. 

    Let us hold fast to Principle 3 of the ICPD Programme of Action:

    “The right to development is a universal and inalienable right and an integral part of fundamental human rights, and the human person is the central subject of development.”

    In this regard, UNFPA notes with great appreciation your adoption of the decision on the special theme for the 60th  session of the CPD on “Population, poverty eradication and sustainable development”, and we look forward to supporting Member States, in collaboration with our partners at DESA.

    On behalf of all of us at UNFPA, I join in thanking our distinguished Chairperson, H.E. Ms. Catharina Jannigje Lasseur of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, for her vision, her astute leadership, and her proactive engagement over months of preparation, and we commend her colleague Ms. Iris De Leede.

    We appreciate the dedication and commitment of the CPD58 Bureau members from Burundi, Lebanon, Moldova, and Uruguay. 

    Special thanks to the co-facilitators, Norma Abi Karam of Lebanon and Jessica Orduz of Colombia, for their tireless efforts to promote evidence-based discussions on the draft resolution.

    May I recognize the UN DESA Population Division for their stewardship of the Commission, and the close partnership with UNFPA to support these efforts. 

    To my own UNFPA expert colleagues, thank you for your long hours and skilled contributions to this year’s session. 

    A final note of thanks to the distinguished representatives, delegates and observers of this 58th Commission for your hard work and active participation in the deliberations.

    I happily observed that this 58th session has been distinguished by meaningful participation by young people and by intergenerational dialogue to good effect. As commissioners, you have carried the aspirations for health of young people and older people, and you have carried our common aspiration for the healing of an increasingly ravaged planet.

    It is my hope that this Commission’s discussions will continue to shape national policies, influence international agreements, and galvanize partnerships that make a real difference in people’s lives. These deliberations provide an important substantial contribution to the upcoming 2025 High Level Political Forum and its review of SDG 3 on good health and SDG 5 on gender equality and towards the preparations for the Fourth Financing for Development Conference and the Second World Summit on Social Development.

    Excellencies, distinguished delegates,

    Quoting the gifted African poet Warsan Shire:

    i held an atlas in my lap
    ran my fingers across the whole world
    and whispered
    where does it hurt?

    it answered
    everywhere
    everywhere
    everywhere.

    In looking forward to constructive substantive reflections next year under the theme “population, technology and research in the context of sustainable development”, on behalf of UNFPA, allow me to reaffirm our commitment to partnering with the 59th CPD Chair and all of you to support the full implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action and support the continued success of the 2030 Agenda and the Pact of the Future.

    Remember that good health and healthy longevity begin with safe motherhood in the antenatal period. Let us continue to take forward our collective responsibility for a future in which everyone enjoys good health and well-being and everyone – at all ages – benefits from the fruits of sustainable development and lives in dignity and peace.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI: OceanFirst Financial Corp. Announces Redemption of all Outstanding 57,370 shares of 7.00% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock of OceanFirst Financial Corporation

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    RED BANK, N.J., April 11, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — OceanFirst Financial Corp. (NASDAQ: OCFC) (the “Company”), the holding company for OceanFirst Bank N.A. (the “Bank” or “OceanFirst”), announced today that it will redeem 57,370 shares of its 7.00% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A (the “Series A Preferred Stock”), constituting all of the outstanding shares of the Series A Preferred Stock, on May 15, 2025, the next dividend payment date for the Series A Preferred Stock (the “Redemption Date”). Payment of the cash redemption price equal to $1,000 per share of Series A Preferred Stock (the “Redemption Price”) (equivalent to $25 per Depositary Share) will be made on the Redemption Date. The Redemption Price does not include the previously declared dividend payment that is due on the Redemption Date and that will be paid immediately prior to the redemption of the Series A Preferred Stock on the Redemption Date to holders of record on the record date for such dividend payment. On the Redemption Date, simultaneous with the redemption of the Series A Preferred Stock, the depositary for the Series A Preferred Stock will redeem 2,294,800 depositary shares (the “Depositary Shares”), each representing a 1/40th interest in a share of the Series A Preferred Stock, for an amount per Depositary Share equal to 1/40th of the Redemption Price per share of Series A Preferred Stock.

    The Depositary Shares are held only in book-entry form through The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and shall be redeemed in accordance with the applicable procedures of DTC.

    On the Redemption Date, the Redemption Price will become due and payable. On and after the Redemption Date, dividends in respect of the Series A Preferred Stock represented by the Depositary Shares shall cease to accrue, the Series A Preferred Stock and the Depositary Shares shall no longer be deemed outstanding and all rights of the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock and holders of receipts evidencing the Depositary Shares shall cease and terminate, except only the right of the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock to receive the Redemption Price and the right of the holders of receipts evidencing the Depositary Shares to receive 1/40th of the Redemption Price, in each case, without interest.

    “We are pleased to announce our payoff of the Preferred Stock,” said Patrick Barrett, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. “Our strong capital and liquidity levels have positioned us well to pay off liabilities with higher funding costs. The redemption of our preferred stock is consistent with our balance sheet strategy of optimizing debt and capital.”

    About OceanFirst Financial Corporation

    OceanFirst Financial Corp.’s subsidiary, OceanFirst Bank N.A., founded in 1902, is a $13.3 billion regional bank providing financial services throughout New Jersey and in the major metropolitan areas between Massachusetts and Virginia. OceanFirst Bank delivers commercial and residential financing, treasury management, trust and asset management, and deposit services and is one of the largest and oldest community-based financial institutions headquartered in New Jersey. To learn more about OceanFirst, go to www.oceanfirst.com.

    Company Contact:
    Alfred Goon
    SVP Corporate Development and Investor Relations
    OceanFirst Financial Corp.
    Tel: 1.888.623.2633 ext. 27423
    Email: agoon@oceanfirst.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Kehoe Seeks Joint Damage Assessments in Preparation for Second Federal Disaster Declaration Request within Four Weeks

    Source: US State of Missouri

    APRIL 11, 2025

     — Today, Governor Mike Kehoe announced the state has requested the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) participate in joint preliminary damage assessments (PDAs) in 20 counties following the severe storms and flooding that began impacting Missouri on March 30. This request begins the process of obtaining a federal disaster for the second time in less than a month.

    “Missouri has again been battered by severe storms and significant flooding, causing widespread destruction and disrupting the lives of many families and businesses across the state,” Governor Kehoe said. “The State Emergency Management Agency (SEMA) and local emergency management officials have been working tirelessly to assess impacts, and we believe the extent of the damage clearly meets the threshold for FEMA to again participate in joint damage assessments.”

    Joint PDAs are being requested for the following counties: Bollinger, Butler, Cape Girardeau, Cooper, Carter, Dunklin, Howell, Iron, Mississippi, New Madrid, Oregon, Ozark, Reynolds, Ripley, Scott, Shannon, Stoddard, Vernon, Washington and Wayne. Additional counties may be added as more damage information is received from local officials.

    Joint PDA teams are made up of representatives from FEMA, SEMA, the U.S. Small Business Administration and local emergency management officials. Beginning Tuesday, April 15, six teams will survey and verify documented damage to determine if Individual Assistance can be requested through FEMA. Individual Assistance allows eligible residents to seek federal assistance for temporary housing, housing repairs, replacement of damaged belongings, vehicles, and other qualifying expenses.

    Damage assessments for roads, bridges and other public infrastructure are ongoing, likely resulting in a request for additional PDAs for Public Assistance next week.

    SEMA continues to coordinate with volunteer and faith-based partners to identify needs and assist impacted families and individuals over the coming days. Missourians with unmet needs are encouraged to contact United Way by dialing 2-1-1 or the American Red Cross at 1-800-733-2767.

    For additional resources and information about disaster recovery in Missouri, including general clean-up information, housing assistance, and mental health services, visit recovery.mo.gov.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Myanmar: Military strikes persist amid earthquake response efforts

    Source: United Nations MIL OSI

    Human Rights

    Military operations continue in Myanmar despite ceasefires declared after the recent earthquake that killed more than 3,600 people, the UN human rights office, OHCHR, said on Friday. 

    At a moment when the sole focus should be on ensuring humanitarian aid gets to disaster zones, the military is instead launching attacks,” spokesperson Ravini Shamdasani told journalists in Geneva.

    Since the 28 March disaster, military forces have reportedly carried out over 120 attacks, she said, and more than half occurred after a declared ceasefire was due to have gone into effect on 2 April.

    Devastated areas hit

    Most attacks involved aerial and artillery strikes, including in areas impacted by the quake. 

    Numerous strikes have been reported in populated areas, with many appearing to amount to indiscriminate attacks and to breach the principle of proportionality in international humanitarian law,” she added.

    Myanmar was already facing political, humanitarian, human rights and economic crisis before the earthquake struck.  

    The miliary seized power from the democratically elected government in February 2021 and has been engaged in a brutal civil war with opposition militias.

    Aid obstacles, amnesty appeal

    Ms. Shamdasani said UN human rights chief Volker Türk is calling on the military to remove any and all obstacles to aid delivery and to cease military operations. 

    She noted that areas at the epicentre of the quake in Sagaing, particularly those controlled by opponents of the military, have had to rely on local community responses for search and rescue, and to meet basic needs.

    “As the traditionally festive season of Thingyan and the start of a new year begins on Sunday in Myanmar, we call for common efforts to assist those in greatest need,” she added.

    In this regard, OHCHR called on the military to announce a full amnesty for detainees it has incarcerated since February 2021, including State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi and President U Win Myint.

    ‘Perfect storm’ for disease

    Meanwhile, the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) is worried that the earthquake has created “a perfect storm for the emergence of infectious disease outbreaks.”

    Eric Ribaira, UNICEF Myanmar’s chief of health said that even before the disaster, the country faced outbreaks of vaccine preventable and communicable diseases such as measles, malaria, dengue and cholera.

    The situation is so much more dangerous now for people, especially children, in these earthquake-affected areas,” he told UN News.

    Mr. Ribaira explained that earthquakes spark population displacement which can lead to overcrowded areas, such as temporary shelters, while water and sanitation systems are disrupted causing contaminated water supplies and poor hygiene conditions.

    Children may also get respiratory infections from dust and debris from collapsed buildings, he added.

    UNICEF is helping to provide clean drinking water and sanitation, as well as necessary supplies so that pregnant women can deliver safely. 

    So far, we have reached about 700 pregnant and lactating women with newborn and clean delivery kits. And we plan to reach much, much more in the coming days,” said Mr. Ribaira.

    UNICEF and aid partners have also deployed general medical kits to cover approximately 250,000 people for the next three months, but he stressed that more support is critical.

    “The needs are huge, and we must do everything we can to prevent these outbreaks and ensure that women can deliver their babies safely and the general population has urgent medical support when they need it,” he said.

    UN mobilizing aid

    This week, the UN and partners launched a $275 million appeal as an addendum to a humanitarian plan to reach some 1.1 people in Myanmar.

    The earthquake has pushed two million people into reliance on aid. They join nearly 20 million others who already required humanitarian assistance.

    UN agencies, partners and Member States have rapidly mobilized aid, including medical care, shelter, safe water, hygiene kits, and food.

    To further strengthen efforts on the ground, the UN Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) has allocated an additional $5 million for earthquake response, which follows an earlier disbursement of $5 million. 

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI: Hingham Savings Reports First Quarter 2025 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    HINGHAM, Mass., April 11, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — HINGHAM INSTITUTION FOR SAVINGS (NASDAQ: HIFS), Hingham, Massachusetts announced results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    Earnings

    Net income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 was $7,124,000 or $3.27 per share basic and $3.24 per share diluted, as compared to $6,868,000 or $3.17 per share basic and $3.13 per share diluted for the same period last year. The Bank’s annualized return on average equity for the first quarter of 2025 was 6.46%, and the annualized return on average assets was 0.64%, as compared to 6.63% and 0.63% for the same period last year. Net income per share (diluted) for the first quarter of 2025 increased by 3.5% compared to the same period in 2024.

    Core net income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, which represents net income excluding the after-tax net gain on equity securities, both realized and unrealized, was $6,125,000 or $2.81 per share basic and $2.78 per share diluted, as compared to $2,213,000 or $1.02 per share basic and $1.01 per share diluted for the same period last year. The Bank’s annualized core return on average equity for the first quarter of 2025 was 5.56% and the annualized core return on average assets was 0.55%, as compared to 2.14% and 0.20% for the same period last year. Core net income per share (diluted) for the first quarter of 2025 increased by 175.2% compared to the same period in 2024.

    See Page 9 for a Non-GAAP reconciliation between Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”) net income and core net income. In calculating core net income, the Bank did not make any adjustments other than those relating to the after-tax net gain on equity securities, both realized and unrealized. In the first quarter of 2024, both net income and core net income were positively impacted by lower income tax expense driven by excess tax benefit associated with the exercise of stock options and the revision of state income tax estimates.

    Balance Sheet

    Total assets increased to $4.523 billion at March 31, 2025, representing 5.9% annualized growth year-to-date and a 0.1% decline from March 31, 2024.

    Net loans increased to $3.924 billion at March 31, 2025, representing 5.2% annualized growth year-to-date and a 0.4% decline from March 31, 2024. Origination activity was concentrated in the Boston and Washington D.C. markets and remained focused on stabilized multifamily commercial real estate.

    Retail and commercial deposits increased to $2.066 billion at March 31, 2025, representing 13.8% annualized growth year-to-date and 9.2% growth from March 31, 2024. Non-interest-bearing deposits, included in retail and commercial deposits, were $427.3 million at March 31, 2025, representing 30.0% annualized growth year-to-date and 23.0% growth from March 31, 2024.

    Growth in non-interest bearing and money market balances in the first quarter of 2025 continues to reflect the Bank’s focus on developing and deepening deposit relationships with new and existing commercial and non-profit customers. The Bank continues to invest in its Specialized Deposit Group, actively recruiting for talented relationship managers in Boston, Washington, and San Francisco, particularly as respected competitors exit these markets or merge with larger regional banks.

    The stability of the Bank’s balance sheet, as well as full and unlimited deposit insurance through the Bank’s participation in the Massachusetts Depositors Insurance Fund, continues to appeal to customers in times of uncertainty.

    Wholesale funds, which includes Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) borrowings, brokered deposits, and Internet listing service deposits, were $1.978 billion at March 31, 2025 representing a 2.8% annualized decline year-to-date and a 9.5% decline from March 31, 2024, as the Bank replaced a large portion of these funds with retail and commercial deposits. In the first quarter of 2025, the Bank continued to manage its wholesale funding mix to optimize the cost of funds while taking advantage of the inverted yield curve at certain durations by adding lower rate longer term liabilities. Wholesale deposits, which include brokered and Internet listing service time deposits, were $507.1 million at March 31, 2025, representing 9.9% annualized growth year-to-date and 1.4% growth from March 31, 2024. Borrowings from the FHLB totaled $1.471 billion at March 31, 2025, representing a 6.9% annualized decline from December 31, 2024, and a 12.7% decline from March 31, 2024. As of March 31, 2025, the Bank maintained an additional $918.0 million in immediately available borrowing capacity at the FHLB of Boston and the Federal Reserve Bank, in addition to $361.6 million in cash and cash equivalents.

    Book value per share was $200.69 as of March 31, 2025, representing 5.4% annualized growth year-to-date and 5.6% growth from March 31, 2024. In addition to the increase in book value per share, the Bank declared $2.52 in dividends per share since March 31, 2024.

    On March 26, 2025, the Bank declared a regular cash dividend of $0.63 per share. This dividend will be paid on May 14, 2025 to stockholders of record as of May 5, 2025. This will be the Bank’s 125th consecutive quarterly dividend.

    The Bank has also generally declared special cash dividends in each of the last thirty years, typically in the fourth quarter, but did not declare a special dividend in 2024 and 2023. The Bank sets the level of the special dividend based on the Bank’s capital requirements and the prospective return on other capital allocation options, particularly the incremental return on capital from new loan originations. This may result in special dividends, if any, significantly above or below the regular quarterly dividend. Future regular and special dividends will be considered by the Board of Directors on a quarterly basis.

    Operational Performance Metrics

    The net interest margin for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 increased 26 basis points to 1.50%, as compared to 1.24% in the quarter ended December 31, 2024. This was the fourth consecutive quarter of continued expansion, which has continued to accelerate. This improvement was the result of a decline in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities, combined with an increase in the yield on interest-earning assets. The cost of interest-bearing liabilities fell 21 basis points in the first quarter of 2025, as the Bank continued to reduce retail and commercial deposit rates, and to take advantage of the inverted yield curve by adding lower rate FHLB advances and brokered deposits. The yield on interest-earning assets increased by six basis points in the first quarter of 2025, driven primarily by a higher yield on loans, as the Bank continued to originate loans at higher rates and reprice existing loans, partially offset by a lower yield on cash held at the Federal Reserve Bank.

    The net interest margin for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 increased 65 basis points to 1.50%, as compared to 0.85% for the same period last year. The Bank experienced a significant decline in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities when compared to the prior year. This was driven primarily by the repricing of the Bank’s funding sources, as the Bank began to reduce retail and commercial deposit rates in the second half of 2024, and to take advantage of the inverted yield curve by adding lower rate FHLB advances and brokered deposits. During this period, the yield on interest-earning assets increased, driven primarily by an increase in the yield on loans, partially offset by lower yield on cash held at the Federal Reserve Bank.

    Key credit and operational metrics remained strong in the first quarter of 2025. At March 31, 2025, non-performing assets totaled 0.04% of total assets, compared to 0.03% at December 31, 2024 and 0.04% at March 31, 2024. Non-performing loans as a percentage of the total loan portfolio totaled 0.05% at March 31, 2025, compared to 0.04% at both December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2024. The Bank did not record any charge-offs in the first three months of 2025 or 2024. Most of the non-performing assets and loans cited above were and are residential, owner-occupant loans.

    The Bank had only one small commercial real estate non-performing loan and no other commercial real estate delinquent loans as of March 31, 2025, and did not have any delinquent or non-performing commercial real estate loans as of December 31, 2024 or March 31, 2024. This commercial loan became current shortly after the close of the first quarter. The Bank did not own any foreclosed property at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024 or March 31, 2024.

    The efficiency ratio, as defined on page 5 below, decreased to 45.82% for the first quarter of 2025, as compared to 52.30% in the prior quarter and 77.24% for the same period last year. Operating expenses as a percentage of average assets increased to 0.68% for the first quarter of 2025, as compared to 0.66% for the prior quarter and 0.67% for the same period last year. This reflects, in part, seasonally higher expenses during the first quarter and continuing investments in deposit-gathering infrastructure. As the efficiency ratio can be significantly influenced by the level of net interest income, the Bank utilizes these paired figures together to assess its operational efficiency over time. During periods of significant net interest income volatility, the efficiency ratio in isolation may over or understate the underlying operational efficiency of the Bank. The Bank remains focused on reducing waste through an ongoing process of continuous improvement and standard work that supports operational leverage.

    Chairman Robert H. Gaughen Jr. stated, “Returns on equity and assets in the first quarter of 2025 remained significantly lower than our long-term performance, reflecting the lingering challenge from the increase in short-term interest rates and a historically long and deep inversion of the yield curve. These conditions have posed a significant – albeit ultimately temporary – challenge to our business model.

    This challenge began to fade last year and we are cautiously optimistic moving forward. Returns in our core business have started to improve, driven by acceleration in our net interest margin. Our operational leverage remains critical to generating satisfactory returns over time. Although our investment returns are likely to remain volatile over any individual period, they continue to contribute meaningfully to growth in book value per share over time.

    While the last two years have been extraordinarily challenging, the Bank’s business model has been built to compound shareholder capital over time. We remain focused on careful capital allocation, defensive underwriting and rigorous cost control – the building blocks for compounding shareholder capital through all stages of the economic cycle. These remain constant, regardless of the macroeconomic environment in which we operate.”

    The Bank’s quarterly financial results are summarized in this earnings release, but shareholders are encouraged to read the Bank’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q, which is generally available several weeks after the earnings release. The Bank expects to file Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) on or about May 7, 2025.

    Incorporated in 1834, Hingham Institution for Savings is one of America’s oldest banks. The Bank maintains offices in Boston, Nantucket, Washington, D.C., and San Francisco.

    The Bank’s shares of common stock are listed and traded on The NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol HIFS.

    Annual Meeting

    The Bank will hold its Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Meeting”) at 2:00PM EST on Wednesday, April 30, 2025 at the Hingham Historical Society (Old Derby Academy), located at 34 Main Street, Hingham, Massachusetts. We strongly encourage shareholders to attend in person, although they may also observe the Meeting by streaming video. Following the business meeting, the Bank will hold an informal meeting to discuss the results of the prior year and the operations of the Bank, as well as a question and answers session. We strongly encourage all shareholders to vote by proxy. Electronic voting will not be available. Registration for the meeting is available on the Bank’s website (click here). In addition to participating in the meeting itself, we also encourage shareholders to submit questions in writing in advance using the form on the Bank’s website.

     
    HINGHAM INSTITUTION FOR SAVINGS
    Selected Financial Ratios
     
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2024   2025
    (Unaudited)          
               
    Key Performance Ratios          
    Return on average assets (1) 0.63 %   0.64 %
    Return on average equity (1) 6.63     6.46  
    Core return on average assets (1) (5) 0.20     0.55  
    Core return on average equity (1) (5) 2.14     5.56  
    Interest rate spread (1) (2) 0.13     0.80  
    Net interest margin (1) (3) 0.85     1.50  
    Operating expenses to average assets (1) 0.67     0.68  
    Efficiency ratio (4) 77.24     45.82  
    Average equity to average assets 9.54     9.98  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest bearing liabilities 119.91     122.26  
               
      March 31,
    2024
      December 31, 2024   March 31,
    2025
    (Unaudited)                      
               
    Asset Quality Ratios          
    Allowance for credit losses/total loans   0.67 %   0.69 %   0.69 %
    Allowance for credit losses/non-performing loans   1,530.95     1,775.00     1,487.46  
                       
    Non-performing loans/total loans   0.04     0.04     0.05  
    Non-performing loans/total assets   0.04     0.03     0.04  
    Non-performing assets/total assets   0.04     0.03     0.04  
                       
    Share Related                  
    Book value per share $ 190.07     $ 198.03   $ 200.69  
    Market value per share $ 174.46     $ 254.14   $ 237.80  
    Shares outstanding at end of period   2,180,250       2,180,250     2,180,250  
    (1) Annualized.
    (2) Interest rate spread represents the difference between the yield on interest-earning assets and the cost of interest-bearing liabilities.
    (3) Net interest margin represents net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    (4) The efficiency ratio is a non-GAAP measure that represents total operating expenses, divided by the sum of net interest income and total other income, excluding the net gain on equity securities, both realized and unrealized.
    (5) Non-GAAP measurements that represent return on average assets and return on average equity, excluding the after-tax net gain on equity securities, both realized and unrealized.
     
    HINGHAM INSTITUTION FOR SAVINGS
    Consolidated Balance Sheets
     

    (In thousands, except share amounts)

    March 31, 2024   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2025
    (Unaudited)                  
    ASSETS  
                     
    Cash and due from banks $ 6,200   $ 4,183   $ 8,664
    Federal Reserve and other short-term investments   367,046     347,647     352,977
    Cash and cash equivalents   373,246     351,830     361,641
                     
    CRA investment   8,759     8,769     8,900
    Other marketable equity securities   78,497     104,575     109,335
    Securities, at fair value   87,256     113,344     118,235
    Securities held to maturity, at amortized cost   5,500     6,493     6,494
    Federal Home Loan Bank stock, at cost   69,484     61,022     61,322
    Loans, net of allowance for credit losses of $26,760
    at March 31, 2024, $26,980 at December 31, 2024
    and $27,280 at March 31, 2025
      3,938,252     3,873,662     3,924,108
    Bank-owned life insurance   13,723     13,980     14,064
    Premises and equipment, net   16,844     16,397     16,244
    Accrued interest receivable   8,783     8,774     9,006
    Other assets   16,263     12,269     12,314
    Total assets $ 4,529,351   $ 4,457,771   $ 4,523,428

    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

                     
    Interest-bearing deposits $ 2,045,524   $ 2,094,626   $ 2,146,091
    Non-interest-bearing deposits   347,397     397,469     427,287
    Total deposits   2,392,921     2,492,095     2,573,378
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances   1,684,675     1,497,000     1,471,000
    Mortgagors’ escrow accounts   13,570     16,699     15,820
    Accrued interest payable   14,040     8,244     11,266
    Deferred income tax liability, net   1,765     3,787     4,069
    Other liabilities   7,982     8,191     10,338
    Total liabilities   4,114,953     4,026,016     4,085,871
                     
    Stockholders’ equity:                
    Preferred stock, $1.00 par value,
    2,500,000 shares authorized, none issued
             
    Common stock, $1.00 par value, 5,000,000 shares
    authorized; 2,180,250 shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2024, December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2025
      2,180     2,180     2,180
    Additional paid-in capital   15,416     15,571     15,622
    Undivided profits   396,802     414,004     419,755
    Total stockholders’ equity   414,398     431,755     437,557
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 4,529,351   $ 4,457,771   $ 4,523,428
     
    HINGHAM INSTITUTION FOR SAVINGS
    Consolidated Statements of Income
     
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
    (In thousands, except per share amounts) 2024   2025
    (Unaudited)          
               
    Interest and dividend income:          
    Loans $ 43,120   $ 45,221
    Debt securities   45     95
    Equity securities   1,450     1,451
    Federal Reserve and other short-term investments   2,827     3,055
    Total interest and dividend income   47,442     49,822
               
    Interest expense:          
    Deposits   21,146     18,621
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances   17,212     15,165
    Total interest expense   38,358     33,786
    Net interest income   9,084     16,036
    Provision for credit losses   108     300
    Net interest income, after provision for credit losses   8,976     15,736
    Other income:          
    Customer service fees on deposits   137     135
    Increase in cash surrender value of bank-owned life insurance   81     84
    Gain on equity securities, net   5,971     1,281
    Miscellaneous   55     49
    Total other income   6,244     1,549
    Operating expenses:          
    Salaries and employee benefits   4,297     4,467
    Occupancy and equipment   431     439
    Data processing   755     724
    Deposit insurance   810     748
    Foreclosure and related   32     10
    Marketing   89     136
    Other general and administrative   813     946
    Total operating expenses   7,227     7,470
    Income before income taxes   7,993     9,815
    Income tax provision   1,125     2,691
    Net income $ 6,868   $ 7,124
               
    Cash dividends declared per common share $ 0.63   $ 0.63
               
    Weighted average shares outstanding:          
    Basic   2,169     2,180
    Diluted   2,192     2,201
               
    Earnings per share:          
    Basic $ 3.17   $ 3.27
    Diluted $ 3.13   $ 3.24
               
     
    HINGHAM INSTITUTION FOR SAVINGS
    Net Interest Income Analysis
     
      Three Months Ended
      March 31, 2024   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2025  
      Average Balance (9)  

    Interest

    Yield/
    Rate (10)
      Average Balance (9)  

    Interest

    Yield/ Rate (10)   Average Balance (9)  

    Interest

    Yield/
    Rate (10)
       
    (Dollars in thousands)  
    (Unaudited)                                                  
    Assets                                                  
    Loans (1) (2) $ 3,956,135   $ 43,120   4.36 %   $ 3,882,297   $ 44,787   4.58 $ 3,929,828   $ 45,221   4.67 %
    Securities (3) (4)   116,203     1,495   5.15       126,771     1,642   5.14     130,674     1,546   4.80  
    Short-term investments (5)   208,245     2,827   5.43       293,987     3,515   4.74     278,722     3,055   4.45  
    Total interest-earning assets   4,280,583     47,442   4.43       4,303,055     49,944   4.60     4,339,224     49,822   4.66  
    Other assets   64,034                 72,638               79,209            
    Total assets $ 4,344,617               $ 4,375,693             $ 4,418,433            
                                                       
    Liabilities and stockholders’ equity:     `                                            
    Interest-bearing deposits (6) $ 2,098,851     21,146     4.03 %   $ 2,136,101     20,518   3.81 $ 2,141,294     18,621   3.53 %
    Borrowed funds   1,471,027     17,212     4.68       1,421,152     15,985   4.46     1,407,844     15,165   4.37  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   3,569,878     38,358     4.30       3,557,253     36,503   4.07     3,549,138     33,786   3.86  
    Non-interest-bearing deposits   346,136                   374,461               413,877            
    Other liabilities   14,261                   14,072               14,464            
    Total liabilities   3,930,275                   3,945,786               3,977,479            
    Stockholders’ equity   414,342                 429,907               440,954            
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 4,344,617               $ 4,375,693             $ 4,418,433            
    Net interest income       $ 9,084               $ 13,441             $ 16,036      
                                                       
    Weighted average interest rate spread             0.13 %               .53             0.80 %
                                                       
    Net interest margin (7)             0.85 %               1.24             1.50 %
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing
    liabilities (8) 
      119.91 %             120.97 %           122.26 %          
    (1 ) Before allowance for credit losses.
    (2 ) Includes non-accrual loans.
    (3 ) Excludes the impact of the average net unrealized gain or loss on securities.
    (4 ) Includes Federal Home Loan Bank stock.
    (5 ) Includes cash held at the Federal Reserve Bank.
    (6 ) Includes mortgagors’ escrow accounts.
    (7 ) Net interest income divided by average total interest-earning assets.
    (8 ) Total interest-earning assets divided by total interest-bearing liabilities.
    (9 ) Average balances are calculated on a daily basis.
    (10 ) Annualized.

     HINGHAM INSTITUTION FOR SAVINGS
     Non-GAAP Reconciliation

     The Bank believes the presentation of the following non-GAAP financial measures provide useful supplemental information that is essential to an investor’s proper understanding of results of operations and financial condition of the Bank. Management uses these measures in its analysis of the Bank’s performance. These non-GAAP measures should not be viewed as substitutes for the financial measures determined in accordance with GAAP, nor are they necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures that may be presented by other banks.

     The table below presents the reconciliation between net income and core net income, a non-GAAP measurement that represents net income excluding the after-tax net gain on equity securities, both realized and unrealized.

      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
    (In thousands, unaudited) 2024     2025  
               
    Non-GAAP reconciliation:          
    Net Income $ 6,868     $ 7,124  
    Gain on equity securities, net   (5,971 )     (1,281 )
    Income tax expense (1)   1,316       282  
    Core Net Income $ 2,213     $ 6,125  
    (1)  The equity securities are held in a tax-advantaged subsidiary corporation. The income tax effect of the gain on equity securities, net, was calculated using the effective tax rate applicable to the subsidiary.

    The table below presents the calculation of the efficiency ratio, a non-U.S. GAAP performance measure that management uses to assess operational efficiency which represents total operating expenses, divided by the sum of net interest income and total other income, excluding net gain on equity securities, both realized and unrealized.

              Three Months Ended  
          March 31,       December 31,       March 31,  
    (In thousands, unaudited)     2024         2024         2025    
                             
    Non-U.S. GAAP efficiency ratio calculation:                        
    Operating expenses   $ 7,227       $ 7,174       $ 7,470    
                             
    Net interest income   $ 9,084       $ 13,441       $ 16,036    
    Other income     6,244         8,779         1,549    
    Gain on equity securities, net     (5,971 )       (8,503 )       (1,281 )  
    Total revenue   $ 9,357       $ 13,717       $ 16,304    
                             
    Efficiency ratio     77.24   %     52.30   %     45.82   %

    CONTACT: Patrick R. Gaughen, President and Chief Operating Officer (781) 783-1761

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Beam Global Reports Full Year 2024 Operating Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    SAN DIEGO, April 11, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Beam Global, (Nasdaq: BEEM), (the “Company”), a leading provider of innovative and sustainable infrastructure solutions for the electrification of transportation, smart cities, and energy security, today announced its operating results for the year ended December 31, 2024.

    2024 and Recent Company Highlights:

    Financial:

    • Revenues of $49.3 million, more than double any previous year’s revenue in the Company’s history excluding 2023
    • Five-year Revenue CAGR 68%
    • Revenues from non-government commercial entities increased by 229% from 2023 to 2024
    • Positive full year gross margins of 15% – an improvement of 13 percentage points over 2023
    • Adjusted non-GAAP gross margins, net of non-cash costs were 21%
    • Net cash used in Operations for 2024 was $2.2 million vs. 2023 at $13.3 million
    • Backlog of $5.6 million on December 31, 2024
    • Debt free and $100 million line of credit available and unused

    Operational:

    • Acquisition of Serbia-based Telcom – provides Beam with in-house production capabilities for power electronics
    • Received $7.4 million order from the U.S. Army for 88 off-grid EV ARCTM systems
    • Received $4.8 million order from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for EV ARCTM systems
    • Achieved CE (Conformité Européenne) certification on EV ARCTM
    • Achieved Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act Compliance for EV ARC™
    • Launched four new products BeamSpot™, BeamBike™, BeamPatrol™, BeamWell™
    • Received first orders for BeamSpot™ and BeamWell™
    • Closed and deployed first “Driving on Sunshine” sponsorship deal with Globos Osiguranje
    • Introduced the Beam Global Reseller Program – expanding outside sales resources
    • Delivered UK Ministry of Defence EV ARC™ systems to Cyprus
    • Entered Middle Eastern and African markets through reselling partnerships
    • Added new police and international airport fleet customers, further expanding our customer base in critical sectors
    • Enhanced Beam Global leadership team:
      • COO – Mark Myers, former Nuclear Navy Officer
      • VP of Sales – Andy Lovsted joined Beam Global in the U.S.
      • Director of Channel Partnerships – Igor Labovic joined Beam Global in Europe
    • Announced partnership with Benzina Zero, an innovative provider of electric mopeds, scooters, electric bicycles and micro-mobility solutions
    • Announced partnership with Zero Motorcycles, an innovative provider of electric motorcycles
    • Expanded global patent portfolio:
      • Awarded European Patent for Thermal Management Technology that Makes Lithium-ion Batteries Safer
      • Awarded U.S. Patent for Wireless / Inductive Electric Vehicle Charging Powered by Renewable Energy
      • Granted U.S. Patent for High-Volume Battery Assembly and Safety Technology

    “2024 was a year of tremendous expansion for Beam Global,” said Desmond Wheatley, CEO of Beam Global. “It was a year in which we introduced more new e-mobility and energy security products in the last quarter of the year than we have done in the last decade. It was also a year in which we expanded geographically into markets with billions of potential new customers for Beam. We completed another acquisition in Serbia, which will make our products less expensive, more effective, and harder to compete with. We won new patents as we continued to build our intellectual property portfolio. Using our technological differentiation, we won new customers with unique requirements that we believe only we can fulfill. With these strategic moves and others, we created a platform for growth, which is unlike anything that we’ve had in the Company’s history. We have made dramatic improvements to our gross profitability and set the Company on a clear path to being cash-flow positive. We have sufficient cash and other working capital resources to allow us to continue to execute on our plans and we remain debt free while still having access to our $100 million line of credit which remains untapped. We believe that the Company retains excellent opportunities for growth in 2025 as a result of our geographic and product portfolio expansions, and in spite of political and economic uncertainty in the United States.”

    2024 Financial Summary

    Revenues
    Beam Global’s revenues as of December 31, 2024, was $49.3 million compared to $67.4 million in 2023. Although there was a decrease year over year, this was a 124% increase over 2022 revenue of $22.0 million and twice any full year’s revenue in our history except 2023. Additionally, revenues derived from non-government commercial entities increased by 229% for the twelve months from 2023 to 2024 and were 38% of total revenues in 2024.   We believe that the decrease in revenue is a result of order timing, uncertainty in the U.S. government’s zero emission vehicle strategy related to the presidential election. These matters have mainly impacted our larger federal customers, and we do not believe that they signify any fundamental reduction in global demand for our products. We have continued to invest in our sales resources with new hires in both the U.S. and Europe and we have further expanded our selling resources without costs through adding external resources who are paid only when they make sales.     

    Gross Profit
    The Company reported a positive gross profit of $7.3 million, or 15% gross margin, for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to a gross profit of $1.2 million, or 2% gross margin in 2023. As a percentage of revenue, the full year margin improved by thirteen percentage points primarily because we have implemented cost improvements in late 2023 as a result of design changes to the EV ARCTM as well as operational improvements and positive margins generated from the acquisitions in Europe. The gross profit includes a non-cash negative impact of $2.4 million for depreciation and $0.7 million for amortization of intangible assets resulting from the AllCell acquisition. Without this non-cash expense, our gross profit for 2024 was $10.5 million, a 21% gross margin. The Company’s engineering teams have continued to implement design changes during 2024 which further reduce costs of the bill of materials and improve the product margins. We expect the Company’s revenue to grow in the future and our fixed overhead absorption to continue to improve.

    Operating Expenses
    Total operating expenses were $19.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to $17.5 million in the prior year.   The operating expenses in 2024 includes an increase of $3.8 million due to having a full year of operating expenses for the Serbian acquisitions and a non-cash positive impact of $0.4 million, without these, adjusted operating expenses increase for the year ended December 31, 2024 would be $1.6 million compared to the same period in 2023. The increase is mostly attributable to salaries and benefits of $0.7 million related to new hires in 2024, $0.4 million related to outside services, partially related to acquisitions, and $0.4 million related to marketing expenses.

    Loss from Operations
    Loss from operations was $11.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared to $16.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. Backing out the non-cash items that included $3.7 million for depreciation and amortization, $3.3 million for stock-based compensation and $0.4 million for allowance for credit losses, offset by $4.7 million for change in fair value of contingent consideration liabilities pertaining to the true-up of the earnout payment for the Amiga acquisition, the non-cash loss from operations was $8.9 million for 2024, compared to loss from operations of $11.8 million for 2023. The Non-GAAP loss from operations decreased 24% year over year due to increased gross profit of 13 percentage points in 2024 and management of operating expenses.

    Cash
    On December 31, 2024, we had cash of $4.6 million, compared to cash of $10.4 million at December 31, 2023. The cash decrease between December 31, 2023 and 2024 included cash payments for our acquisitions of $3.2 million.  Net cash used for operating activities was $2.2 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2024 compared to $13.3 million for the same period in 2023.

    We have historically met our cash needs through a combination of debt and equity financing and more recently through increasing gross profit contributions. Our cash requirements are generally for operating activities and acquisitions.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    To supplement our condensed consolidated financial statements, which are prepared in accordance with GAAP, we present Non-GAAP Loss from Operations which is non-GAAP financial measures, in this press release. We use Non-GAAP Loss from Operations in conjunction with GAAP measures as part of our overall assessment of our performance to evaluate the effectiveness of our business strategies and to communicate with our board of directors concerning our financial performance. We believe Non-GAAP Loss from Operations is also helpful to investors, analysts and other interested parties because it can assist in providing a more consistent and comparable overview of our operations across our historical financial periods. Non-GAAP Loss from Operations has limitations as an analytical tool. Therefore, you should not consider it in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of our results as reported under GAAP. Because of these limitations, you should consider Non-GAAP Loss from Operations alongside other financial performance measures, including net loss attributable to other GAAP measures. In evaluating Non-GAAP Loss from Operations you should be aware that in the future we may incur expenses that are the same as, or similar to, some of the adjustments reflected in this press release. Our presentation of Non-GAAP Loss from Operations should not be construed to imply that our future results will be unaffected by the types of items excluded from the calculations of Non-GAAP Loss from Operations. Non-GAAP Loss from Operations is not presented in accordance with GAAP and the use of these terms vary from others in our industry. Reconciliation of this non-GAAP measure has been provided in the financial statement tables included within this press release, and investors are encouraged to review this reconciliation.

    Conference Call April 11, 2025 at 4:30 p.m. ET

    Management will host a conference call on Friday, April 11, 2025 at 4:30 p.m. ET to review financial results and provide an update on corporate developments. Following management’s formal remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session.

    Participants can register for the conference through the following link:   

    https://dpregister.com/sreg/10198405/fed880d536

    PARTICIPANT CALL IN (TOLL FREE): 1-844-739-3880

    PARTICIPANT INTERNATIONAL CALL IN: 1-412-317-5716

    Please ask to join the Beam Global call.

    A webcast archive will be available on our website (www.BeamForAll.com) following the call.

    About Beam Global
    Beam Global is a clean technology innovator which develops and manufactures sustainable infrastructure products and technologies. We operate at the nexus of clean energy and transportation with a focus on sustainable energy infrastructure, rapidly deployed and scalable EV charging solutions, safe energy storage and vital energy security. With operations in the U.S. and Europe, Beam Global develops, patents, designs, engineers and manufactures unique and advanced clean technology solutions that power transportation, provide secure sources of electricity, save time and money and protect the environment. Beam Global is headquartered in San Diego, CA with facilities in Chicago, IL and Belgrade and Kraljevo, Serbia. Beam Global is listed on Nasdaq under the symbol BEEM. For more information visit BeamForAll.comLinkedInYouTube, Instagram and X (formerly Twitter).

    Forward-Looking Statements
    This Beam Global Press Release may contain forward-looking statements. All statements in this Press Release other than statements of historical facts are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by terms or phrases such as “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “target,” “plan,” “intend,” “seek,” “goal,” “will,” “should,” “may,” or other words and similar expressions that convey the uncertainty of future events or results. These statements relate to future events or future results of operations. These statements are only predictions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may cause Beam Global’s actual results to be materially different from these forward-looking statements. Except to the extent required by law, Beam Global expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

    Media Contact
    Andy Lovsted
    +1-858-335-8465
    Press@BeamForAll.com

    Investor Relations
    Luke Higgins
    +1-858-799-4583
    IR@BeamForAll.com

           
    Beam Global      
    Consolidated Balance Sheets      
    (In thousands)      
                     
          December 31,       December 31,  
          2024       2023  
                     
    Assets                
    Current assets                
    Cash   $ 4,572     $ 10,393  
    Accounts receivable, net of allowance for credit losses of $259 and $448     8,027       15,943  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets     2,243       2,453  
    Inventory, net     12,284       11,933  
    Total current assets     27,126       40,722  
                     
    Property and equipment, net     13,704       16,513  
    Operating lease right of use assets     1,893       1,026  
    Goodwill     10,580       10,270  
    Intangible assets, net     8,037       9,050  
    Deposits     119       62  
    Total assets   $ 61,459     $ 77,643  
                     
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                
    Current liabilities                
    Accounts payable   $ 8,959     $ 9,732  
    Accrued expenses     2,462       2,737  
    Sales tax payable     195       209  
    Deferred revenue, current     847       828  
    Note payable, current     63       40  
    Deferred consideration           2,713  
    Contingent consideration, current     93        
    Operating lease liabilities, current     696       615  
    Total current liabilities     13,315       16,874  
    Commitments and contingencies (F-14)                
    Deferred revenue, noncurrent     800       402  
    Note payable, noncurrent     199       160  
    Contingent consideration, noncurrent     216       4,725  
    Other liabilities, noncurrent     3,380       3,787  
    Deferred tax liabilities, noncurrent     1,290       1,698  
    Operating lease liabilities, noncurrent     971       455  
    Total liabilities     20,171       28,101  
                     
    Commitments and contingencies (Note 9)                
                     
    Stockholders’ equity                
    Preferred stock, $0.001 par value, 10,000,000 authorized, none outstanding as of December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023.            
    Common stock, $0.001 par value, 350,000,000 shares authorized, 14,835,630 and 14,398,243 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.     15       14  
    Additional paid-in-capital     147,072       142,265  
    Accumulated deficit     (104,643 )     (93,361 )
    Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (AOCI)     (1,156 )     624  
                     
    Total stockholders’ equity     41,288       49,542  
                     
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 61,459     $ 77,643  
                     
    Beam Global
    Consolidated Statements of Operations
    ( In thousands, except per share amounts)
                   
      Year Ended
      December 31,
        2024       2023  
                   
    Revenues $ 49,336     $ 67,353  
                   
    Cost of revenues   42,040       66,149  
                   
    Gross profit   7,296       1,204  
                   
                   
    Operating expenses   18,953       17,465  
                   
    Loss from operations   (11,657 )     (16,261 )
                   
    Other income (expense)              
    Interest income   205       261  
    Other income (expense)   110       (36 )
    Interest expense   (34 )     (12 )
    Other income   281       213  
                   
    Loss before income tax expense   (11,376 )     (16,048 )
                   
    Income tax (benefit) expense   (94 )     12  
                   
    Net Loss $ (11,282 )   $ (16,060 )
                   
    Net foreign currency translation adjustments   (1,781 )     624  
    Total Comprehensive Loss $ (13,063 )   $ (15,436 )
                   
    Net Income (loss) per share – basic/diluted $ (0.77 )   $ (1.30 )
                   
    Weighted average shares outstanding – basic/diluted   14,621       12,345  
                   
    Beam Global
    Reconciliation of Loss from Operations to Non-GAAP Loss from Operations
    (Unaudited, In thousands)
                        
           Year Ended
           December 31,
             2024       2023  
                        
    GAAP Total Revenue     $ 49,336     $ 67,353  
                        
    GAAP Total COGS   42,040       66,149  
    Adjusted to exclude the following:                 
    Depreciation and amortization      3,155       970  
    Non-GAAP Total COGS    $ 38,885     $ 65,179  
                        
    Non-GAAP Gross Profit    $ 10,451     $ 2,174  
    Gross Margin %       21 %     3 %
                        
    GAAP Total Operating Expenses      18,953       17,465  
                   
    Adjusted to exclude the following:                 
    Depreciation and amortization      558       581  
    Non-cash compensation      3,322       2,675  
    Allowance for credit losses      392       0  
    Fair value of contingent consideration (1)     (4,675 )     260  
    Non-GAAP Total adjustments    $ (403 )   $ 3,516  
                   
    Non-GAAP Total Operating Expenses   $ 19,356     $ 13,949  
                        
    GAAP Loss from Operations    $ (11,657 )   $ (16,261 )
    Non-GAAP total adjustments      2,752       4,486  
    Non-GAAP Loss from Operations    $ (8,905 )   $ (11,775 )
                        

    (1)   Fair value of contingent consideration is non-cash. The Earnout Consideration is paid in the Company’s stock. See the financial statement notes included in prior quarterly and annual filings.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Goods Council addresses trade concerns and future work, elects new Chair

    Source: WTO

    Headline: Goods Council addresses trade concerns and future work, elects new Chair

    Trade concerns
    The CTG reviewed 35 specific trade concerns (STCs), four of which were raised at the Council for the first time. The new trade concerns were (in alphabetical order):
    European Union – Proposal for a Regulation on Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases (F-gas), Amending Directive
    India – Measures That May Have Unintended Results Equivalent to Quantitative Restrictions
    Philippines – Export Restrictions on Minerals in Their Raw Form
    United States – Reciprocal Tariffs and Other Tariff Measures
    On the first item, the United States and Japan raised concerns regarding the development and implementation of the EU regulation in question.
    On the second item, Thailand expressed concern regarding delays in the issuance of standard marks and import licenses in India for certain products, including wood-based boards and viscosity fibres.
    On the third item, Japan and the United Kingdom raised concerns regarding a bill in the Senate of the Philippines which they said would impose export restrictions on raw minerals.
    On the fourth item, China raised concerns regarding the recent tariff measures announced by the United States. China said that the tariffs ran counter to WTO rules and undermined the multilateral trading system, and it called upon all WTO members to stand together in safeguarding the rules-based system. Twenty members took the floor to comment. Many expressed concerns about the negative economic impact of the tariffs and their compatibility with WTO rules. Many also stressed the importance of resolving trade disputes through dialogue and cooperation within the WTO framework.
    The United States delivered a separate statement on its tariff duties announcements of 2 and 9 April under “other business”. It said that, on 2 April, US President Donald Trump had declared a national emergency under domestic law due to the extraordinary threat to US national and economic security arising from conditions reflected in large and persistent annual US goods trade deficits. The United States said it was not altering or abrogating its WTO tariff bindings or commitments, but rather was taking action it considered necessary for the protection of its essential security interests, and was maintaining the measure pursuant to the essential security exception in the WTO Agreement.
    China replied that it regretted that the US measures had introduced uncertainty into the global economy; there were no winners in the trade war, China said, adding that it was essential to resolve this issue within a cooperative framework. No other member took the floor.
    Trade concerns previously raised in the CTG have covered a wide range of measures relating to trade in goods across the WTO membership, including non-tariff barriers, environmental policies, import taxes, import/export restrictions, national security, halal certification, subsidy schemes, export controls, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures, discriminatory domestic taxes, administrative procedures, and trade-disruptive and -restrictive measures.
    They have also encompassed a wide range of sectors, including agriculture, semi-conductors and semi-conductor-manufacturing equipment, and food products, as well as specific products, such as critical minerals, electric vehicles, electric batteries, liquors, air conditioners, apples and pears, cheese, pulses, cosmetics and tyres.
    The full agenda of the meeting is available here.
    Appointment of officers to the subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods
    Regarding the election of chairs for the CTG’s 14 subsidiary bodies, the outgoing CTG Chair, Ambassador Clare Kelly of New Zealand, reported on the process and informed members that consultations would continue with a view to finding consensus. Once this was reached, the new Chair would reconvene the meeting to address this agenda item only.
    Future work of the Goods Council
    The Chair reported on the 25 February informal dedicated session on managing trade concern discussions, at which members further discussed ideas and proposals that had been put forward by delegations, as well as on the second informal session on digital tools used in the CTG and its subsidiary bodies, which was held on 7 April.
    The CTG then considered a draft Decision on the recording of the resolution of trade concerns. The Decision would allow for the recording of positive resolutions, based on the existing practices of the Committees on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) and Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). Discussions will continue.
    Secretariat report on status of notifications
    The WTO Secretariat presented a new report on the status of regular/periodic and one-time only notifications in the goods area by members to the CTG. Transparency is a fundamental WTO principle, requiring members to notify various elements of their trade-related measures and policies to the WTO.
    The report reveals an overall submission rate of 77.2 per cent for covered notification requirements, with a higher compliance rate of 82.3 per cent for one-time notifications, and a lower rate of 68.9 per cent for regular/periodic notifications. Detailed submission rates for least-developed country (LDC) members were also provided.
    Several members took the floor to thank the Secretariat for the report and the analysis contained therein.
    Other issues
    The United States raised what it considered to be systemic concerns that the WTO Secretariat was not properly informing and consulting with members prior to undertaking certain activities that are relevant to members’ work in the CTG and its subsidiary bodies. The United States called for a collaborative effort among members to create formal guidance and ensure that the Secretariat remained member-driven, including seeking approval, where appropriate, before engaging in such activities.
    Nineteen members took the floor to comment. In the exchanges, many members reflected the value that they placed on the technical work of the Secretariat, with a shared concern for improving its transparency and communication with WTO members, while balancing the need for efficient Secretariat operations. Several members expressed concerns about any requirement that the Secretariat obtain member approval before undertaking knowledge activities.
    Replying on behalf of the WTO Secretariat, Deputy Director-General Angela Ellard highlighted the launch of a comprehensive transparency portal for members and ongoing efforts to keep them informed about Secretariat activities and to seek their views. The Secretariat remains committed to serving all members impartially and transparently, while continuously improving its services, based on member feedback, DDG Ellard added.
    Election of the Chair
    At the conclusion of the meeting, members elected Mr. Gustavo Nerio Lunazzi of Argentina as Chair of the Goods Council for the upcoming work year.
    The outgoing Chair, Ambassador Clare Kelly of New Zealand, noted that the Goods Council meeting had, as usual, taken place in room W of the WTO, the same room in which General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) negotiators forged the multilateral trading system that members know today, and in which the first important GATT meetings took place. Whenever delegates walk into this room, she said, they should remember that they are walking through history, and have a responsibility not only to preserve, but also to enhance and adapt the legacy of our predecessors to new challenges.

    Share

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: In a world of trade tensions, what do tariffs really do?

    Source: World Trade Organization

    Trade policy tensions are escalating fast. In recent months, several large economies have announced or implemented sweeping new tariffs, reviving a policy tool that many thought to have been largely relegated to the past. These developments have sparked a flurry of political commentary – but behind the headlines, there exists a body of economic research that helps to make sense of what tariffs actually do.

    At their core, tariffs are simple: they raise the domestic price of imported goods. But their effects ripple through the economy in complex ways – altering prices, wages, exchange rates and trade patterns. As governments revisit this powerful lever, understanding the economic mechanisms at play has never been more important.

    At the most basic level, a tariff is a tax on imported products. It drives a wedge between the world price and the domestic price. For instance, if a 10 per cent tariff is imposed on a product with a world price of US$ 100, the domestic price becomes US$ 110. The difference – US$ 10 – is collected as tariff revenue, which the government can use to finance its expenditures.

    Tariffs can also affect the world price of a product, particularly when they are imposed by a large economy. The logic is that higher domestic prices reduce domestic demand, which in turn lowers world demand, and thus world prices. In our example, the world price might fall to $95 after the tariff is imposed, resulting in a domestic price of $104.50. In this case, part of the tariff is effectively paid by foreign producers.

    This cost-shifting creates incentives for large economies to unilaterally impose tariffs. However, this so-called optimal tariff argument overlooks the possibility of retaliation. If country A imposes tariffs on country B, country B has an incentive to respond in kind. The end result is a trade war that leaves both sides worse off.

    This logic underpins the leading theory of trade negotiations. If all economies attempt to benefit at each other’s expense, everyone ends up worse off – and this creates incentives for cooperative trade policymaking. The economics literature on trade policy has shown that the core WTO principles of reciprocity and non-discrimination are effective tools for escaping the logic of mutually harmful tariffs (Bagwell and Staiger, 2002).

    The extent to which tariffs pass through to consumer prices is ultimately an empirical question. Evidence from the initial wave of US tariffs on China suggests full pass-through to US consumers (Amiti et al. 2019; Fajgelbaum et al. 2019). However, these studies focus on short-term effects and use methodologies that cannot fully account for broader macroeconomic adjustments. Standard quantitative trade models typically predict at least some cost-shifting to foreign producers.

    A broader question is how tariffs affect inflation. When a country imposes a tariff, it causes a one-off increase in the domestic price level, but this does not necessarily translate into sustained inflation. One channel through which a tariff could lead to persistent inflation is a wage–price spiral, which is similar to what can happen with other supply shocks.

    Tariffs do not just affect imports – they also affect exports. One direct channel is through higher prices for intermediate goods, which undermine the competitiveness of exporting firms; but broader general equilibrium effects are also important. Tariffs allow import-competing sectors to expand, which draws resources – such as labour, capital and land – away from other sectors, including exporting sectors.

    This process operates through changes in the real exchange rate, which measures domestic prices relative to foreign prices, adjusted for the nominal exchange rate. As import-competing sectors expand, they demand more workers, which pushes up wages across the economy. Higher wages raise production costs for exporting firms, making them less competitive in international markets. The result is an appreciation of the real exchange rate, which makes exports relatively more expensive abroad.

    A related question is what happens to the nominal exchange rate. One channel is direct: tariffs reduce import demand, and hence the demand for foreign currency, leading to an appreciation of the domestic currency. Another channel is indirect: tariffs may lead markets to anticipate tighter monetary policy to counter inflation, which can also cause the domestic currency to appreciate. For trade effects, what ultimately matters is the change in the real exchange rate; whether this occurs through adjustments in wages, domestic prices, or the nominal exchange rate is of secondary importance.

    There is, thus, a trade-off between the inflationary and competitiveness effects of tariffs. If the exchange rate appreciates strongly, domestic prices rise little, but competitiveness suffers significantly. If it appreciates only slightly, domestic prices rise more, but competitiveness is less affected. Either way, tariffs impose economic costs.

    A topical question is whether tariffs affect trade imbalances. The answer depends on whether one considers aggregate, bilateral or sectoral imbalances. Aggregate trade imbalances reflect the gap between national saving and national investment – a basic accounting identity. The logic is analogous to household finance: if a household (country) saves, it must earn (export) more than it spends (imports).

    To improve the aggregate trade balance, tariffs would need to increase national saving or reduce investment, which is a possibility. For instance, households might delay consumption if they expect tariffs to be temporary, thereby raising saving. Alternatively, tariffs could reduce investment by increasing the cost of capital goods, or by creating policy uncertainty, leading firms to postpone spending.

    However, most economists expect tariffs to have only limited effects on aggregate imbalances. Macroeconomic fundamentals – such as fiscal policy or the household savings rate – play a more dominant role. This view is supported by empirical studies that have found little impact of tariffs on aggregate trade balances so far (Furceri et al. 2022).

    Tariffs can, however, affect bilateral trade balances by altering relative prices. It is entirely possible for country A to run a deficit with country B, B with C, and C with A – without any of them having an aggregate trade imbalance.

    Tariffs can also affect sectoral trade balances. For example, higher tariffs on goods imports tend to improve the goods trade balance by discouraging imports through higher domestic prices, while worsening the services trade balance by reducing services exports through an appreciation of the real exchange rate.

    As tariffs return to the trade policy agenda, it is worth recalling what economics has long understood: tariffs are not just a tool for raising revenue or protecting domestic industries – they are a policy lever with wide-ranging, and often unintended, consequences. Their appeal in the short term can obscure longer-term costs to inflation, competitiveness and international cooperation. In a world of growing trade tensions, a clear-eyed view of those trade-offs is more important than ever.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Tanzania: Stop repression of opposition leaders and immediately release Tundu Liss

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Responding to news that treason charges were brought against Tundu Lissu, leader of Tanzania’s main opposition Party for Democracy and Progress (Chadema) on 10 April, following his arrest on 9 April, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, Tigere Chagutah said:

    “The Tanzanian authorities must immediately and unconditionally release Tundu Lissu whose arbitrary arrest and detention comes amid a growing crackdown on opposition leaders ahead of the October 2025 general elections.

    “The authorities’ campaign of repression saw four government critics forcibly disappeared, and one unlawfully killed in 2024. The police have also prevented opposition members from holding meetings and other political gatherings, subjecting them to mass arrest, arbitrary detention and unlawful use of force.

    “Instead of using these heavy-handed tactics to silence critics, authorities in Tanzania should focus on upholding fundamental human rights in the country, including the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.”

    Tundu Lissu

    Tundu Lissu was arrested on 9 April 2025 after holding a political rally in Mbinga town, southwest of Tanzania. He was then transferred to Dar es Salaam, more than 1,000 kilometres away by road during the night. Police used excessive force, including by firing teargas and shooting in the air to disperse his supporters who gathered around during the arrest.

    On 10 April, police charged him with the non-bailable offence of treason, in relation to social media posts he made on 3 April calling for Tanzanians to boycott the forthcoming elections, citing the possibility of rigging.

    The state also charged him with three offences in relation to the “publication of false information” using the country’s cybercrime laws. On 3 April 2025, Tundu Lissu, in a You Tube post also stated that Tanzanian police participated in alleged electoral malpractices that he claimed were ordered by the president following the November 2024 local elections. He further stated that judges in the country are not independent and subject to pressure of the ruling party.

    Dioniz Kipanya, a Chadema party official, disappeared on 26 July 2024 when he left home following a telephone conversation with an unidentified person. Deusdedith Soka and Jacob Godwin Mlay, both Chadema youth activists, and Frank Mbise, a motorcycle taxi driver, were abducted by a group of men suspected to be police officers on 18 August 2024.

    The body of Ali Mohamed Kibao, a senior Chadema member, was found on 8 September 2024. Suspected security agents had abducted him from a bus on 6 September 2024 while he was travelling home to Tanga from Dar es Salaam. According to a post-mortem his body had been soaked in acid and bore signs of a beating.

    Tundu Lissu will be arraigned in Kisitu Magistrates Court of Dar es Salaam on 24 April 2025.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Tanzania: Stop repression of opposition leaders and immediately release Tundu Lissu

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Responding to news that treason charges were brought against Tundu Lissu, leader of Tanzania’s main opposition Party for Democracy and Progress (Chadema) on 10 April, following his arrest on 9 April, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, Tigere Chagutah said:

    “The Tanzanian authorities must immediately and unconditionally release Tundu Lissu whose arbitrary arrest and detention comes amid a growing crackdown on opposition leaders ahead of the October 2025 general elections.

    “The authorities’ campaign of repression saw four government critics forcibly disappeared, and one unlawfully killed in 2024. The police have also prevented opposition members from holding meetings and other political gatherings, subjecting them to mass arrest, arbitrary detention and unlawful use of force.

    The Tanzanian authorities must immediately and unconditionally release Tundu Lissu whose arbitrary arrest and detention comes amid a growing crackdown on opposition leaders ahead of the October 2025 general elections.

    Tigere Chagutah, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa

    “Instead of using these heavy-handed tactics to silence critics, authorities in Tanzania should focus on upholding fundamental human rights in the country, including the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.”

    Background

    Tundu Lissu was arrested on 9 April 2025 after holding a political rally in Mbinga town, southwest of Tanzania. He was then transferred to Dar es Salaam, more than 1,000 kilometres away by road during the night. Police used excessive force, including by firing teargas and shooting in the air to disperse his supporters who gathered around during the arrest.

    On 10 April 2025, police charged him with the non-bailable offence of treason, in relation to social media posts he made on 3 April 2025 calling for Tanzanians to boycott the forthcoming elections, citing the possibility of rigging.

    The state also charged him with three offences in relation to the “publication of false information” using the country’s cybercrime laws. On 3 April 2025, Tundu Lissu, in a You Tube post also stated that Tanzanian police participated in alleged electoral malpractices that he claimed were ordered by the president following the November 2024 local elections. He further stated that judges in the country are not independent and subject to pressure of the ruling party.

    Dioniz Kipanya, a Chadema party official, disappeared on 26 July 2024 when he left home following a telephone conversation with an unidentified person. Deusdedith Soka and Jacob Godwin Mlay, both Chadema youth activists, and Frank Mbise, a motorcycle taxi driver, were abducted by a group of men suspected to be police officers on 18 August 2024.

    The body of Ali Mohamed Kibao, a senior Chadema member, was found on 8 September 2024. Suspected security agents had abducted him from a bus on 6 September 2024 while he was travelling home to Tanga from Dar es Salaam. According to a post-mortem his body had been soaked in acid and bore signs of a beating.

    Tundu Lissu will be arraigned in Kisitu Magistrates Court of Dar es Salaam on 24 April 2025.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICE removes former Mexican governor convicted of money laundering in the US

    Source: US Immigration and Customs Enforcement

    SAN DIEGO — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement removed Tomas Jesus Yarrington Ruvalcaba, 68, a citizen of Mexico wanted by Mexican authorities, April 9.

    Enforcement and Removal Operations Harlingen and San Diego deportation officers, in coordination with ERO Mexico City, removed Yarrington, a former governor of Tamaulipas, Mexico, and former presidential candidate in Mexico, at the San Ysidro Port of Entry. Yarrington was turned over to Mexican authorities without incident. He is wanted in Mexico for organized crime and transactions with illegally obtained resources.

    ICE ERO Mexico City and Security Alliance for Fugitive Enforcement Initiative were instrumental with providing essential documentation regarding Yarrington’s history during his immigrations proceedings that resulted in his removal to Mexico.

    On March 25, 2021, Yarrington pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering in the United States District Court, Southern District of Texas and was sentenced to serve 108 months imprisonment.

    ICE Homeland Security Investigations Brownsville special agents investigated the case with assistance from the Drug Enforcement Administration, Internal Revenue Service’s Criminal Investigation, the FBI, and the Texas Attorney General’s Office. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas handled the prosecution.

    According to court documents, Yarrington accepted bribes from individuals and private companies in Mexico to do business with the state of Tamaulipas while he served as governor. Yarrington was in that position from 1999 to 2005. He was also an Institutional Revolutionary Party candidate for the president of Mexico in 2005. Yarrington used the bribery money he received while governor to purchase properties in the U.S. He had nominee buyers buy property in the U.S. to hide his ownership of the properties and the illegal bribery money used to purchase them. Yarrington laundered his illegally obtained bribe money in the United States by purchasing beachfront condominiums, large estates, commercial developments, airplanes and luxury vehicles.

    In April 2017, authorities captured Yarrington in Italy while he was traveling under an assumed name and false passport. He was taken into custody on a provisional arrest warrant based on the indictment returned in May 2013. Although Yarrington contested extradition, Italian authorities eventually authorized his extradition to the U.S. He arrived in April 2018. The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs secured the extradition from Italy to the United States.

    ICE ERO officers took custody of Yarrington from the Department of Justice’s Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal Correctional Institution Thomson in Thomson, Illinois, July 3, 2024, and transferred him to ICE custody where he continued his immigration proceedings.

    On Feb. 27, an immigration judge with the DOJ Executive Office for Immigration Review ordered Yarrington removed. He waived his right to appeal.

    Members of the public can report crime and suspicious activity by calling 866-347-2423 or completing the online tip form.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Former Bureau of Prisons Officer Sentenced for Violating Inmate’s Civil Rights

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    RALEIGH, N.C. – A former lieutenant at the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) was sentenced today to two years of probation for conspiring to violate the civil rights of inmates at Butner Correctional Institute.  On December 23, 2024, Daniel Mitchell, 42, pled guilty to the charge.

    According to court documents and other information presented in court, Mitchell was a lieutenant supervising the special housing unit (SHU) at the Federal Correctional Institute Butner Medium II.  Victim K.G. was an inmate housed in the SHU under Mitchell’s supervision.  On the morning of December 8, 2021, a female officer reported to Mitchell that inmate K.G. exposed himself to her and engaged in a sexual act within her view. The BOP disciplinary policy for such behavior is a formal write-up of the misconduct.  Instead, Mitchell directed another officer to take inmate K.G. to a holding cell and teach him a lesson by “tuning him up.” There, the inmate was physically assaulted by the officer.  In later interviews, Mitchell and the officer both admitted to meeting in Mitchell’s office where they agreed that the officer would assault K.G. as punishment. 

    Daniel P. Bubar, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina made the announcement after sentencing by U.S. District Judge Terrence W. Boyle. The DOJ Office of the Inspector General investigated the case.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Jake D. Pugh and Civil Rights Division Trial Attorney Eric Peffley prosecuted the case.

    Related court documents and information can be found on the website of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina or on PACER by searching for Case No. 5:24-cr-0332-BO.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Ocean County Man Admits To Fraudulently Obtaining Over $250,000 In Social Security Disability Benefits

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    TRENTON, N.J. – An Ocean County, New Jersey man admitted he defrauded the Social Security Administration for nearly eight years in order to improperly obtain over $250,000.00 in Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits, U.S. Attorney Alina Habba announced.

    Krzysztof Niedzielski, 49, of Toms River, New Jersey, pleaded guilty yesterday before U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi in Trenton federal court to an Information charging him with theft of public money and making false statements to the Social Security Administration.

    According to documents filed in this case and statements made in court:

    From at least as early as 2012 through at least as recently as 2020, Niedzielski obtained approximately $270,933.10 in Social Security disability benefits for himself, his wife, and his dependent children on the basis that he was disabled and could not work. During this period, Niedzielski managed and performed physical labor for a home improvement contracting company where he obtained a substantial income. However, during this time, Niedzielski failed to notify the Social Security Administration of his employment and income. Niedzielski knowingly and intentionally concealed this work from the Social Security Administration to prevent any reduction in disability benefits.

    The charge of theft of public money carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison and the charge of making false statement to the Social Security Administration carries a maximum sentence of 5 years in prison. Each charge also carries a fine of up to $250,000. Sentencing is scheduled for August 5, 2025.

    U.S. Attorney Habba credited special agents of the Social Security Administration – Office of the Inspector General, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Amy Connelly, with the investigation leading to the guilty plea.

    The government is represented by Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Keith Abrams of the Narcotics/OCDETF Unit in Newark.

                                                               ###

    Defense counsel: Nicholas Moschella, Esq.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: U.S. Attorney’s Office Adds 295 New Immigration Cases in One Week

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    SAN ANTONIO – Acting United States Attorney Margaret Leachman for the Western District of Texas announced today, that federal prosecutors in the district filed 295 immigration and immigration-related criminal cases from April 4 through April 10.

    Among the new cases, Mexican national Jorge Alberto Garcia-Drue was encountered at the Frio County Jail in Pearsall after he was arrested for allegedly refusing to provide accurate identification. Immigration and Customs Enforcement/Enforcement Removal Operations agents determined that Garcia-Drue was an alien illegally present within the United States and that he had been previously removed from the country. A review of his criminal history revealed that he had also been convicted on Dec. 10, 2014 of harboring illegal aliens and aiding and abetting. For that conviction, Garcia-Drue was sentenced to 21 months in federal prison.

    In El Paso, agents responded to an address on April 3. A criminal complaint alleges that one of the agents recognized an alarming amount of smoke inside the residence. Responding to the smoke, agents entered the home and noticed that two cell phones were burning inside a toilet. At the same time, an agent noticed a broken skylight in the bathroom was broken and believed someone had escaped through the roof. Two individuals were then located and apprehended on the roof of the house. The individuals were identified as Victor Adolfo Gonzalez-Serrano and Alberto Antonio Barrera-Soria. Back inside the residence, the criminal complaint indicates that agents located air mattresses, bags full of trash, and wet clothing and shoes. 17 additional people were located inside the residence. The home had been used as a stash house, allegedly managed by Gonzalez-Serrano and Barrera-Soria, who both stated they were being paid to harbor and care for the illegal aliens. Barrera-Soria has been deported two times—most recently on July 23, 2024. He, along with Gonzalez-Serrano and a third defendant, Diego Axel Barrera-Granados, who alleged that he had been smuggled into the U.S. to transport illegal aliens, are Mexican nationals in the United States illegally and have been charged with bringing in and harboring aliens.

    On April 7, Border Patrol agents apprehended an individual east of the Paso Del Norte Port of Entry. A criminal complaint alleges that, during processing, the individual was receiving multiple phone calls and texts, causing suspicion that an alien smuggling scheme was ongoing. The apprehended individual allegedly consented for agents to use his cell phone and, when a USBP agent answered an incoming call, the agent posed as an illegal alien to coordinate a pickup. This led agents to Luis David Castro, who arrived at an agreed upon location and believed he was going to pick up an illegal alien for smuggling. He’s charged with one count of bringing in and harboring aliens. Castro is a felon convicted in 2016 for aggravated robbery with 2023 conviction for burglary of a building. 

    Guatemalan national Julio Pop-Tiul was arrested in El Paso on April 7 for illegal re-entry, having been previously removed from the U.S. on May 13, 2024. A criminal complaint alleges that Pop-Tiul is a twice-convicted felon and admitted affiliation with the 18th Street Gang. He was convicted in Los Angeles, California in 2019 for assault with a deadly weapon and in 2021 for taking a vehicle without consent.

    In Del Rio, Mexican national Jose Alfredo Almendarez-Alvarez was arrested by USBP agents for being an alien illegally present in the U.S. Almendarez-Alvarez was deported in October 2024 through Laredo. A convicted felon, he was sentenced in Huntsville in 2023 to two years’ confinement for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

    Other arrests this past week in the Del Rio sector include Mexican nationals Jose Eufracio-Plata, Isaias Gomez-Cruz, and Antonio Manuel Vazquez-Rodriguez. Eufracio-Plata was just deported March 7 for the third time and has four felony convictions, including two for illegal re-entry and two related to marijuana possession. Gomez-Cruz was apprehended April 3 near Carrizo Springs. Gomez-Cruz was most recently deported for the fifth time on March 3 following a conviction for illegal re-entry on Feb. 26. His criminal record includes two DWI convictions and a conviction for reckless driving. Vazquez-Rodriguez was deported March 14 through Laredo and was convicted in September 2024 for evading arrest. He was also convicted for the same offense in March 2023. Lastly, Mexican national Eduardo Gaspar-Santos was arrested April 2 after being previously deported Dec. 6, 2024. Gaspar-Santos was convicted in November 2024 in Lewisville for assault causing bodily injury.

    These cases were referred or supported by federal law enforcement partners, including Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ICE ERO), U.S. Border Patrol, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), with additional assistance from state and local law enforcement partners.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Texas comprises 68 counties located in the central and western areas of Texas, encompasses nearly 93,000 square miles and an estimated population of 7.6 million people. The district includes three of the five largest cities in Texas—San Antonio, Austin and El Paso—and shares 660 miles of common border with the Republic of Mexico.

    These cases are part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).

    Indictments and criminal complaints are merely allegations and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Video: The Big Picture: Week of April 7

    Source: United States of America – Department of State (video statements)

    Spokesperson Tammy Bruce: For this week’s Big Takeaway, I discuss how the State Department is working hard every day to keep America, and Americans, safe. From designating foreign terrorist organizations to imposing sanctions, we’re taking action to protect and secure our nation for your families, friends, and future.

    ———-
    Under the leadership of the President and Secretary of State, the U.S. Department of State leads America’s foreign policy through diplomacy, advocacy, and assistance by advancing the interests of the American people, their safety and economic prosperity. On behalf of the American people we promote and demonstrate democratic values and advance a free, peaceful, and prosperous world.

    The Secretary of State, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, is the President’s chief foreign affairs adviser. The Secretary carries out the President’s foreign policies through the State Department, which includes the Foreign Service, Civil Service and U.S. Agency for International Development.

    Get updates from the U.S. Department of State at www.state.gov and on social media!
    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/statedept
    X: https://x.com/StateDept
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/statedept
    Flickr: https://flickr.com/photos/statephotos/

    Subscribe to the State Department Blog: https://www.state.gov/blogs
    Watch on-demand State Department videos: https://video.state.gov/
    Subscribe to The Week at State e-newsletter: http://ow.ly/diiN30ro7Cw

    State Department website: https://www.state.gov/
    Careers website: https://careers.state.gov/
    White House website: https://www.whitehouse.gov/
    Terms of Use: https://state.gov/tou

    #StateDepartment #DepartmentofState #Diplomacy

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoi1oDhbT60

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI USA: Murphy: Trump Is Dismantling Our Democracy. We Must Come Together And Act Before It’s Too Late.

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Connecticut – Chris Murphy
    [embedded content]
    WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to sound the alarm about Trump’s coordinated effort to dismantle the pillars of American democracy. Murphy warned attacks on journalists, universities, lawyers, and the business community are eroding the institutions that hold leaders accountable—paving the way for a fake democracy where elections still happen, but only one side ever wins.
    “Most of the time, there is not a singular moment when the executive dramatically seizes power,” Murphy said. “There’s not normally a brazen attempt to burn down the Parliament building. No, instead democracies die when gradually, often quietly and methodically over time, the structures that hold the executive accountable–for corruption, for thievery, for wrongdoing–are dismantled. Dismantled so that citizens can no longer hold the executive accountable. Dismantled so that the political opposition never has enough room to maneuver meaningfully. There are still elections. The executive doesn’t try to stuff the ballot box. Occasionally, at lower levels, the opposition still wins. But what happens is that those structures of accountability are either so degraded or so completely co-opted by the regime that the truth is just buried and the political opposition loses the basic tools that it needs to win.”
    Murphy warned authoritarian regimes begin by targeting the press—and that Trump is following the same playbook: “From Hungary to Belarus to Venezuela – countries that have elections but elections where one party just keeps on winning –  these are places journalists are subject to [a] non-stop harassment campaign from the regime, such that people just stop doing journalism, or journalists stop telling the full truth. Last month, for instance, the Turkish President Erdogan locked up 11 journalists simply for covering the protests against Erdogan’s jailing of the top opposition leaders. Now Trump has not started jailing journalists, but the pace of harassment in the first 60 days of his second term is alarming. He’s denied access to government buildings, including the White House, to journalists who don’t use pre-approved language from the White House. He is preferencing credentials to partisan journalists who simply parrot his party line. His FCC has begun to deliberately harass media companies that are owned by political opponents of the President.”
    Murphy underscored the chilling similarities between autocratic regimes’ attacks on universities and Trump’s own crackdown on higher education: “Universities, over the long history of democracy, have been the place where protest – especially youth protest – begins. They are a thorn in the side of leadership. The famous Tiananmen Square protests in China were, of course, started by university students. So it’s no surprise that if you want to crush democracy, you need to crush the independence of universities. That’s why Trump’s decision to target universities that permit criticism of President Trump is so bone-chilling. He pretends like he’s standing up to anti-Semitism on campuses, but what he’s really trying to do is make clear that protest against his policies on campuses will result in federal funding being cut off. Columbia University was forced to agree to a stunning list of free speech concessions in order to gain assurances from President Trump that their federal funding would continue. They had to agree to allow campus police to arrest protestors. They had to essentially agree to receivership – federal receivership – over an academic department that houses professors who are critical of Trump and his policies. Effectively, the President of the United States got to pick the person who will oversee the Columbia department on the Middle East, South Asian and African Studies as well as the Center for Palestine Studies. That is extraordinary. That’s not what happens in a healthy democracy–the leader of the country micromanaging academic departments at major universities to assure that academic work aligns with the regime.”
    Murphy also highlighted the striking parallels between Trump’s campaign against law firms and autocrats who silence legal opposition: “Maybe there’s not a lot of love for lawyers in this country, but lawyers are the ones that bring the lawsuits to stop the thievery and illegality. Lawyers are compelled, by their oath, to stand up for the Constitution. Putin arrested Nalvalny’s lawyers right on the eve of Navalny’s trial. In Venezuela, Maduro routinely harasses and detains lawyers – human rights lawyers – because he knows those are the ones that will hold him accountable. In Tunisia, the regime stormed the offices of the Bar Administration to intimidate the legal profession into silence. Here in America, Trump is engaged in a shameless campaign of extortion against any major law firm that has taken a position against Trump or Trump’s interests. What he is doing is extraordinary, and it is mind blowing to me that it is just being ignored by my Republican colleagues. He’s going firm by firm – and not to every firm, just to the firms that have represented Democrats or brought cases against him – and he’s telling them that if they don’t fall in line and stop doing work to oppose him, their clients will lose access to federal work. That is extortion.”
    He concluded: “If journalists are constantly looking over their shoulder and unable to report on the truth; if protest is suppressed, even moderately, at universities; if lawyers start giving cover, instead of uncovering corruption and illegality in the regime. If companies start being mouthpieces for the regime, as a price of doing business. If all that happens, then we are not a real democracy anymore. We are a fake democracy. Elections still happen– like in Turkey, like Hungary, like Venezuela – but the rules are going to be tilted and dissent will be suppressed so much that the same side – Trump’s side – wins over and over and over. And this should matter not just to Democrats – not just to members of the minority party – this should matter to Republicans as well. We swear an oath to uphold the constitution and it’s time for us to see the game that is being played…Only if we come together are we going to have a chance to save ourselves from the fate that has befallen so many other countries that have slowly, too quietly, seen their countries transition from real democracy to fake democracy.”
    A full transcript of his remarks can be found below:
    MURPHY: “Thank you, Mr. President. 
    “Mr. President, I was sitting with the CEO of one of America’s biggest and most influential companies last month, and I asked him a simple question: what could President Trump do that would be a bridge too far for you? What attack on democracy or the rule of law could Trump make that would cause you to speak up?
    “His answer was pretty simple and it was pretty confident. He said that if Trump were to ignore a Supreme Court ruling, that would cross the line. He was reflecting a familiar theme. That until President Trump thumbs his nose definitively at a court ruling, then his attacks on democracy are troubling, but not lethal. It’s normal politics up until that dramatic confrontation between the executive branch and the judicial branch for which the Constitution, as we know, really has no prescribed remedy.
    “And for many Americans, they might breathe a sigh of relief that America’s most influential private sector leaders would rise up to defend democracy if this confrontation that we worry about came to pass. Combined with a massive public mobilization, we could be saved.
    “But I didn’t breathe a sigh of relief. The opposite: I’m deeply worried that we have really spent little time studying the paths that democracies take when they collapse. Most of the time, there is not a singular moment when the executive dramatically seizes power. There’s not normally a brazen attempt to burn down the Parliament building. No, instead democracies die when gradually, often quietly and methodically over time, the structures that hold the executive accountable–for corruption, for thievery, for wrongdoing–are dismantled. Dismantled so that citizens can no longer hold the executive accountable. Dismantled so that the political opposition never has enough room to maneuver meaningfully. There are still elections. The executive doesn’t try to stuff the ballot box. Occasionally, at lower levels, the opposition still wins. But what happens is that those structures of accountability are either so degraded or so completely co-opted by the regime that the truth is just buried and the political opposition loses the basic tools that it needs to win.
    “In every democracy that stops being a democracy, then, there’s a familiar story. There are four institutions that the regime attacks, and attacks relentlessly, until those structures of accountability are so disintegrated that even though elections continue to happen, the same party or the same person wins power election after election And those four institutions are the press, the legal profession, universities, and the business community. If you degrade or co-opt these four institutions, you never need a high stakes fight with the top court in your country. You don’t need to burn the Reichstag down. You can still have elections. But only one party will win.
    “So that’s why this CEO’s ‘assurance’ frankly sent a chill down my spine. Because our democracy isn’t at risk of dying. It isdying. As we speak. We are watching it die.
    “It is not too late to save it. Let me say that again – it is not too late to save our democracy. But we can’t continue to close our eyes and think that our democracy can survive a coordinated assault on those four key institutions of accountability. Democrats and Republicans need to see what is happening before our eyes, rise up, and defend the independence of journalists, of lawyers, of universities, and of the private sector.
    “So I want to spend a minute or two to walk you through what President Trump is doing, and how it frankly–chillingly–mirrors the tactics other leaders have used to transition real democracy into pretend, fake democracy.
    “It always starts with journalists. From Hungary to Belarus to Venezuela – countries that have elections but elections where one party just keeps on winning –  these are places journalists are subject to [a] non-stop harassment campaign from the regime, such that people just stop doing journalism, or journalists stop telling the full truth. Last month, for instance, the Turkish President Erdogan locked up 11 journalists simply for covering the protests against Erdogan’s jailing of the top opposition leaders. 
    “Now Trump has not started jailing journalists, but the pace of harassment in the first 60 days of his second term is alarming. He’s denied access to government buildings, including the White House, to journalists who don’t use pre-approved language from the White House. He is preferencing credentials to partisan journalists who simply parrot his party line. His FCC has begun to deliberately harass media companies that are owned by political opponents of the President.
    “But Trump’s campaign to destroy independent journalism has a darker and more menacing side. Because Trump isn’t just trying to intimidate journalists so that they’ll be afraid to tell the truth. He’s also trying to destroy the concept of truth itself. And again, this is a key facet of leaders who are elected who are trying to transition democracies away and into something very different. How do you destroy truth? Well, that’s why the Secretary of Defense looks into the camera and tells the American public that the text messages that everybody read – filled with classified information and war plans – did not include classified information and war plans. The White House wants you to believe that 1+1 does not equal 2 any longer. That you should doubt even the clear things you see with [your] eyes. That nothing is real and nothing is true. That if you’re a supporter of the regime and I tell you that one plus one equals three, then one plus one equals three. Those weren’t war plans. Those weren’t classified documents.
    “That’s also why the official position of White House on key issues – like tariffs – changes every hour. Because if the ground truth just changes constantly, then there’s no truth at all. Journalists are made to look foolish by reporting a true thing at 9am that becomes untrue at 10am. Journalism loses its credibility when the facts being distributed by the White House change all the time. Trump says the tariffs are permanent. Journalists report, ‘the president says the tariffs are permanent.’ An hour later, Trump says, ‘I never said they were permanent. They’re not permanent. I’m cutting deals.’ They write that he’s cutting deals. An hour later, they’re suspended, no more tariffs. When the truth changes constantly, it’s hard to believe that there’s anything true any longer.
    “Second, universities are always – always – the target of would-be autocrats. Again, in Turkey, the government has terminated thousands of professors, just because they criticize the government. In Hungary, one of the nation’s most prestigious universities was forced to move out of the country because President Orban attacked it so ceaselessly for fomenting protest against his government.
    “Universities, over the long history of democracy, have been the place where protest – especially youth protest – begins. They are a thorn in the side of leadership. The famous Tiananmen Square protests in China were, of course, started by university students. So it’s no surprise that if you want to crush democracy, you need to crush the independence of universities. 
    “That’s why Trump’s decision to target universities that permit criticism of President Trump is so bone-chilling. He pretends like he’s standing up to anti-Semitism on campuses, but what he’s really trying to do is make clear that protest against his policies on campuses will result in federal funding being cut off. Columbia University was forced to agree to a stunning list of free speech concessions in order to gain assurances from President Trump that their federal funding would continue. They had to agree to allow campus police to arrest protestors. They had to essentially agree to receivership – federal receivership – over an academic department that houses professors who are critical of Trump and his policies. Effectively, the President of the United States got to pick the person who will oversee the Columbia department on the Middle East, South Asian and African Studies as well as the Center for Palestine Studies. That is extraordinary. That’s not what happens in a healthy democracy–the leader of the country micromanaging academic departments at major universities to assure that academic work aligns with the regime.
    “And now, having successfully forced Columbia to bend the knee and quell dissent on their campus, Trump is targeting other universities. Some of them will sign similar agreements, giving President Trump power over those campuses. But frankly, all Trump has to do is make an example of a handful of universities, and others will simply comply and obey in advance. Why, as an academic president, when you’ve got federal dollars that employ people at your university, would you permit a major protest against a Trump policy if you know that that’s going to jeopardize federal funds? Or maybe you allow it, because you don’t want to so brazenly stand in the way of free speech, but you just make sure that it’s not too big a protest, or it’s not too critical. You police speech to be on the right side of the regime. That is what happens in all of these fake democracies, and that is what’s happening here.
    “But controlling speech on campuses is not enough. Controlling and intimidating journalists is not enough. You’ve got to go after the lawyers too. Now maybe there’s not a lot of love for lawyers in this country, but lawyers are the ones that bring the lawsuits to stop the thievery and illegality. Lawyers are compelled, by their oath, to stand up for the Constitution. Putin arrested Nalvalny’s lawyers right on the eve of Navalny’s trial. In Venezuela, Maduro routinely harasses and detains lawyers – human rights lawyers – because he knows those are the ones that will hold him accountable. In Tunisia, the regime stormed the offices of the Bar Administration to intimidate the legal profession into silence.
    “Here in America, Trump is engaged in a shameless campaign of extortion against any major law firm that has taken a position against Trump or Trump’s interests. What he is doing is extraordinary, and it is mind blowing to me that it is just being ignored by my Republican colleagues. He’s going firm by firm – and not to every firm, just to the firms that have represented Democrats or brought cases against him – and he’s telling them that if they don’t fall in line and stop doing work to oppose him, their clients will lose access to federal work.
    “That is extortion. This body, Republicans and Democrats, should stand up against it. But it is working. Several law firms have signed deals with Trump that obligate them to support – guess what? Causes aligned with Donald Trump. Paul Weiss was targeted by an executive order and struck a deal. But so did Skadden – they struck a deal with Trump before they’d even been targeted. Already, collectively, these firms have pledged – think about this – about a quarter of a billion dollars of pro bono work to file cases in coordination with the President of the United States’s political interests. 
    “And just like what happened with universities, there’s a lot of extra compliance that’s happening. I know for a fact that firms that have already signed these agreements with Trump have gone above and beyond the terms of the agreements to quiet their criticism of the government. And no doubt, every single major law firm will think twice before bringing an action against an illegal or corrupt action of the President, in fear of Trump retaliating against their business. That’s the point. The point is to try to crush dissent. The point is to try to stand in the way of anybody who is going to hold Trump accountable by using the power – the official power granted to him by the people of the United States – to try to signal retaliation against anyone who dares oppose him.
    “But collective action–it can be a powerful tool. Together, the collective might of our universities and our law firms is significant. So they could choose to band together and decide to sign no agreements with Trump; to refuse to let the President of the United States dictate the terms of their speech, their business and their defense of the rule of law. 
    “And I don’t want to make the victim the perpetrator. This is all Trump’s fault, what he is doing to extort political loyalty from universities and law firms.  
    “But instead of their being collective action on behalf of these industries, the opposite is happening. In the legal profession, when Paul Weiss was targeted, the other big firms didn’t rise to their defense, they started making calls to Paul Weiss clients and lawyers, using Trump’s assault as a means to poach business or partners. That’s shameful, acting like ravenous vultures. Putting your profits first instead of your country’s interests or the interest of the legal profession, which pledges before a court to stand up for the rule of law. 
    “Instead, these big firms are aiding and abetting the destruction of the rule of law by doing Trump’s work for him, making targeted firms even more vulnerable by working behind the scenes to strip them bare for parts. There are good, patriotic lawyers at many of these high-priced firms who know this is wrong, and they should speak up. Some of them already have. 
    “And now, finally, Trump is coming for the rest of the private sector. Listen, I have no idea what the Trump tariff policy is. The constantly shifting positions of the last week are an embarrassment. It’s complete incompetent malpractice that has jeopardized jobs and retirement savings and college funds all across this country. 
    “But the tariffs are complicated and convoluted and hard to understand likely because they aren’t actually economic or trade policy. They are a political tool– this one designed to force every major company to come before Trump to plead for tariff relief in exchange for giving Trump the company’s political loyalty, no different than what’s happening in the legal progression or in America’s universities.  A tariff can be written very easily to favor one industry over another, or one company over another, and the confusing nature of the tariff regime is a means for Trump to require every major company in the country to come on bended knee to him to get the relief they need.
    “And that loyalty pledge could be anything – the purchase of Trump crypto coin, public support for Trump’s economic policies, donations to his political campaign. But having watched what Trump has done, one by one, to universities and law firms, why would we assume the tariffs aren’t just simply a tool to do the same thing to big companies?
    So what I’m trying to say here is that you don’t need a Battle Royale between the President and the Supreme Court for democracy to die. If journalists are constantly looking over their shoulder and unable to report on the truth; if protest is suppressed, even moderately, at universities; if lawyers start giving cover, instead of uncovering corruption and illegality in the regime. If companies start being mouthpieces for the regime, as a price of doing business. If all that happens, then we are not a real democracy anymore. We are a fake democracy. Elections still happen– like in Turkey, like Hungary, like Venezuela – but the rules are going to be tilted and dissent will be suppressed so much that the same side – Trump’s side – wins over and over and over. 
    “And this should matter not just to Democrats–not just to members of the minority party–this should matter to Republicans as well. We swear an oath to uphold the constitution and it’s time for us to see the game that is being played.
    “The good news is that the rules have NOT been fully rigged yet. There is still time – not loads of it – but there’s still time for this body to set a tone that causes the kind of massive public outrage necessary to stop this campaign of destruction in its tracks.
    “But that requires those of us who believe that the threat to democracy is urgent to act like it. That means saying to our Republican colleagues that we’re not going to act like business as usual. That we’re not going to proceed to legislation unless we have agreement – Republicans and Democrats –  to stop this assault on free speech and dissent. It requires the minority party to say that right now. Only if we come together are we going to have a chance to save ourselves from the fate that has befallen so many other countries that have slowly, too quietly, seen their countries transition from real democracy to fake democracy. 
    “I yield the floor.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Padilla, Western Senators Introduce Bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act to Combat Wildfires

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)

    Padilla, Western Senators Introduce Bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act to Combat Wildfires

    Comprehensive legislation reduces wildfire risk, advances watershed restoration, improves forest health, and streamlines processes to protect communities

    A list of Fix Our Forests Act provisions particularly impactful for California is available here

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), co-chair of the bipartisan Senate Wildfire Caucus, and Senators John Curtis (R-Utah), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), and Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) introduced the Fix Our Forests Act, bipartisan legislation to combat catastrophic wildfires, restore forest ecosystems, and make federal forest management more efficient and responsive. The comprehensive bill reflects months of bipartisan negotiations to find consensus on how to best accelerate and improve forest management practices, streamline environmental reviews, and strengthen partnerships between federal agencies, states, tribes, and private stakeholders.

    The American West has long been prone to wildfires, but climate change, prolonged drought, and the buildup of dry fuels have increasingly intensified these fires and extended fire seasons. Wildfires today are more catastrophic — growing larger, spreading faster, and burning more land than ever before. Nationwide, total acres burned rose from 2.7 million in 2023 to nearly 9 million in 2024, a 231 percent increase.

    California averages more than 7,500 wildfires a year. Not including the recent Los Angeles fires, six of the top 10 most destructive fires, three of the top five deadliest fires, and all of the state’s nine largest fires have burned since 2017. The status quo is simply unsustainable, and responding to the scale and magnitude of the crisis on the ground is essential to keeping California communities safe.

    Additionally, wildfires release carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions that accelerate climate change. California’s 2020 fire season, the worst on record, emitted enough greenhouse gases to erase nearly two decades of progress on emissions reductions in California. Addressing this wildfire emergency is critical to ensuring that our climate progress is not undermined by the devastating impacts of these fires.

    “As increasingly frequent and catastrophic wildfires in California make clear, we need durable solutions to confront the growing impacts of the wildfire crisis,” said Senator Padilla. “This bill represents a strong, bipartisan step forward, not just in reducing wildfire risk in and around our national forests, but in protecting urban areas and our efforts to reduce climate emissions. It prioritizes building fire-resilient communities, accelerating the removal of hazardous fuels, and strengthening coordination across federal, state, and tribal agencies, including through the creation of the first-ever National Wildfire Intelligence Center. I look forward to continuing to advance forward-thinking, practical solutions to protect our communities from devastating wildfires — and that includes pushing for sustained funding and staffing for our federal land management agencies to ensure they have the tools to get this critical work done.”

    “Utah and the American West are on the front lines of a growing wildfire crisis—and the longer we wait, the more acres will burn, and more families will be impacted,” said Senator Curtis. “After months of bipartisan cooperation and consensus-building, my colleagues and I are introducing comprehensive legislation to support forest health, accelerate restoration, and equip local leaders—from fire chiefs to mayors—with the tools and data they need to protect lives, property, and landscapes. I’m proud of this bill and look forward to receiving additional input from my colleagues as it advances through Committee and the full Senate.”

    “The growing wildfire crisis threatens our Colorado communities,” said Senator Hickenlooper. “We need to act NOW with the speed required to mitigate wildfires and make our homes and businesses more resilient to these disasters, and to put in place protections for our communities and the environment.”

    “Better stewarding our forests is something we can all agree on, regardless of party, because it helps secure a stronger economy, more resilient, healthy forests, and safer communities. I’m proud to join my colleagues on this important legislation to support those on the frontlines protecting communities from catastrophic wildfire, better manage our forests, create more good-paying jobs, and unleash our resource economy,” said Senator Sheehy.

    “Extreme risk of catastrophic wildfires across the West demands urgent action,” said California Governor Gavin Newsom. “In California, we’re fast-tracking projects by streamlining state requirements and using more fuel breaks and prescribed fire. The Fix Our Forests Act is a step forward that will build on this progress — enabling good projects to happen faster on federal lands. I’m appreciative of Senator Padilla and the bipartisan team of Senators who crafted a balanced solution that will both protect communities and improve the health of our forests.”

    “About half of our lands in California are publicly owned and managed by the federal government,” explained California Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot. “So, reducing catastrophic wildfire risk clearly relies on helping our federal lands become healthier and more resilient to fire. This bipartisan Fix our Forests Act does just this, removing barriers to get more good work done across our federal lands more quickly. This act represents an opportunity for an all-lands, all-hands approach that is urgently needed at this moment.”

    “The bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act (FOFA) provides much-needed tools that will move the needle and improve our work to mitigate wildfires,” said CAL FIRE Director and Fire Chief Joe Tyler. “This bill will bring California’s use of cutting-edge technology to the rest of the country. The proposed Wildfire Intelligence Center will advance the kind of predictive services, monitoring, and early detection work already happening at California’s Wildfire Forecast and Threat Intelligence Integration Center.”

    The frequency and severity of California wildfires have surged over the past several years, with recent wildfires taking a devastating toll on California communities. Fueled by wind gusts of up to 100 miles per hour, the Los Angeles County fires earlier this year burned more than 40,000 acres — an area almost three times the size of Manhattan. The fires destroyed over 16,000 structures, forced tens of thousands of residents to evacuate, and took at least 30 lives.

    Forest health challenges are also increasing in frequency and severity due to climate stressors like drought and fire, and biological threats like invasive species — all of which the West is particularly vulnerable to. From 2001 to 2019, total forest area declined by 2.3 percent, while interior forest area decreased by up to 9.5 percent. The Intermountain region had the largest area losses, and the Pacific Southwest had the highest annual loss rates.

    To address these challenges, the Fix Our Forests Act would:

    • Establish new and updated programs to reduce wildfire risks across large, high-priority “firesheds,” with an emphasis on cross-jurisdictional collaboration.
    • Streamline and expand tools for forest health projects (e.g., stewardship contracting, Good Neighbor Agreements) and provide faster processes for certain hazardous fuels treatments.
    • Create a single interagency program to help communities in the wildland-urban interface build and retrofit with wildfire-resistant measures, while simplifying and consolidating grant applications.
    • Expand research and demonstration initiatives — including biochar projects and the Community Wildfire Defense Research Program — to test and deploy cutting-edge wildfire prevention, detection, and mitigation technologies.
    • Strengthen coordination efforts across agencies through a new Wildfire Intelligence Center which would streamline the federal response and create a whole-of-government approach to combating wildfires.
    • Improve reforestation, seedling supply, and nursery capacity; establish new programs for white oak restoration; and clarify policies to reduce wildfire-related litigation and expedite forest health treatments.

    A list of Fix Our Forests Act provisions particularly impactful for California is available here.

    The Senate version of the Fix Our Forests Act is endorsed by environmental groups, first responders, and wildfire organizations including: The Nature Conservancy; National Wildlife Federation; Environmental Defense Fund; National Audubon Society; Citizens’ Climate Lobby; Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership; Rural Voices for Conservation Coalition; The Stewardship Project; the Federation of American Scientists; CAL FIRE; the International Association of Fire Chiefs; Alliance for Wildfire Resilience; Megafire Action; the Association for Firetech Innovation; Climate & Wildfire Institute; Tall Timbers; Bipartisan Policy Center Action (BPC Action); and Hispanics Enjoying Camping, Hunting, and the Outdoors (HECHO).

    “TNC appreciates the serious undertaking of Senators Curtis, Hickenlooper, Sheehy, and Padilla to build on legislation targeted at preventing more catastrophic wildfires through improved forest and fuels management and expanded use of prescribed fire. TNC has been working to restore beneficial fire and improve the resilience of forest systems on the ground for more than 60 years. Every year, wildfires continue to grow deadlier and more devastating to communities and the environment, and we remain concerned that the significant cuts to the Forest Service workforce will impede work to protect people and nature from these wildfire risks.  We support this legislative effort aimed at improving the forest management process to better address catastrophic wildfires,” said Kameran Onley, Managing Director of North America Policy and Government Relations at The Nature Conservancy.

    “Our national forests provide essential wildlife habitat, store carbon, and supply communities across the nation with clean air and water. These vital landscapes are under threat and must be proactively stewarded if they are to survive the changing climate, rapidly intensifying wildfires, and past management missteps. The bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act will help increase the pace and scale of evidence-backed forest management, including the use of beneficial prescribed fire and the restoration of white oak forests. But we must have a robust and talented federal workforce in place for it to succeed,” said Abby Tinsley, vice president for conservation policy at the National Wildlife Federation. “We will work with Senators Hickenlooper, Padilla, Sheehy, Curtis, and Chairman Westerman in the House to strengthen and advance this important conversation.”

    “For many Americans, catastrophic wildfires are a very real and growing threat to their homes and lives,” said Environmental Defense Fund Executive Director Amanda Leland. “The U.S. Forest Service needs new tools and more resources now to prevent and control these wildfires, and with the right funding, this bipartisan proposal will help. Protecting people and nature from catastrophic wildfire requires both a robust, science-based plan of forest management and the resources to implement it.”

    “Wildfires grow more intense and destructive each year, leaving behind immense devastation for our forests, wildlife, and communities,” said Marshall Johnson, chief conservation officer at the National Audubon Society. “The bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act represents an important step in reducing wildfire risks across forested landscapes. Audubon thanks Senators Hickenlooper, Curtis, Padilla, and Sheehy for working together to craft a bill that sets the stage for improved forest management, and we urge Congress to dedicate the resources necessary to ensure federal agencies are well-equipped to reduce wildfire risks, steward our forestlands, and protect wildlife habitat.”

    “The growing frequency and severity of wildfires pose a tremendous threat to the health of our forests and the safety of countless communities. The Fix Our Forests Act takes important steps to mitigate wildfires, improve forest health, and protect local communities. We appreciate this thoughtful, bipartisan effort led by Senators Curtis, Hickenlooper, Sheehy, and Padilla to advance this important legislation,” said Jennifer Tyler, VP of Government Affairs at Citizens’ Climate Lobby.

    “The declining health of our National Forests and the fish and wildlife habitat that they provide is a concern for America’s hunters and anglers,” said Joel Pedersen, President and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “TRCP applauds the leadership of Senators Curtis, Sheehy, Hickenlooper, and Padilla for introducing the bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act in the Senate and urges Congress to advance these important forest management provisions and to accompany them with adequate resources and capacity to carry out on-the-ground work.” 

    “As FAS continues to emphasize, failing to address the root causes of devastating wildfires is a policy choice. And it’s a choice we can no longer afford,” said Daniel Correa, Chief Executive Officer of the Federation of American Scientists. “Swift passage of the Fix Our Forests Act in the Senate would put us on track to better manage the entire wildfire lifecycle of prevention, suppression, and recovery, including through smart and systematic use of science and technology for decision support.”

    “The science is clear: tackling the wildfire crisis requires better forest management, increasing the use of prescribed fire, and investing in and deploying the next generation of wildfire technologies. The Fix Our Forests Act will get this urgently needed work done. Now is the time for the Senate to build on the bipartisan leadership demonstrated by the sponsors and pass this bill,” said James Campbell, Wildfire Policy Specialist at the Federation of American Scientists.

    “I thank Senators Hickenlooper, Padilla, Curtis, and Sheehy for introducing this bipartisan legislation,” said Fire Chief Josh Waldo, the President and Board Chair of the International Association of Fire Chiefs. “As we saw in January’s fires in Los Angeles, the nation faces a serious and growing risk from fires in the wildland urban interface (WUI). This legislation will enact many of the recommendations of the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission. It also will improve coordination of federal wildland fire preparedness efforts; promote the use of prescribed fires and other preventative measures to prevent WUI fires; and promote the development of new technologies to help local fire departments. We look forward to working with the bill’s sponsors to pass this legislation.”

    “We are thrilled to see the Fix Our Forests Act introduced in the Senate through a bipartisan cooperation between Senators Curtis, Hickenlooper, Padilla, and Sheehy. The bill greatly expands upon the version that passed the House, adding critical details to support wildfire risk reduction in the built environment and provisions for mitigating the health impacts of smoke to communities while promoting expanded use of prescribed fire. Covering a third of the recommendations of the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission, this bill is a significant step forward in wildfire policy and, coupled with sufficient funding and staffing to realize the proposed tools and programs, will make a real difference in our nation’s experience with wildfire,” said Annie Schmidt and Tyson Bertone-Riggs, Managing Directors, Alliance for Wildfire Resilience.

    “As the megafire crisis grows larger and more severe with each fire season, we need policy solutions that reflect the urgency and scale of the problem. Senators Curtis, Hickenlooper, Padilla and Sheehy have negotiated a Senate companion to the Fix Our Forests Act that will move the federal government towards a science-based, strategic approach to addressing megafires. We look forward to working with the sponsors to advance this bill and enact the most transformative wildfire and land management law since the Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003, if not the National Forest Management Act of 1976,” said Matt Weiner, CEO, Megafire Action.

    “AFI supports the Fix our Forests Act and calls on the United States Senate to pass it with the urgency the $100 billion a year wildfire crisis warrants from our elected officials,” said Bill Clerico, Founding Chair of the Association for Firetech Innovation (AFI) and Managing Partner of Convective Capital, a venture firm investing in wildfire technology. “AFI is particularly supportive of the legislation’s inclusion of a Wildfire Intelligence Center, a long-overdue step to better integrate and coordinate wildfire response efforts and invest in cutting-edge technology. Our country’s wildfire response efforts are antiquated and are leaving us ill-prepared for this growing crisis. FOFA is a critical step to refining our wildfire response efforts and protecting our communities.”

    In the aftermath of the devastating Southern California fires, Senator Padilla has introduced more than 10 bills to help prevent and respond to future disasters. In February, Padilla introduced bipartisan legislation to create a national Wildfire Intelligence Center to streamline federal response and create a whole-of-government approach to combat wildfires. He also announced a package of three bipartisan bills to bolster fire resilience and proactive mitigation efforts, including the Fire-Safe Electrical Corridors Act, the Wildfire Emergency Act, and the Disaster Mitigation and Tax Parity Act. In January, Padilla introduced another suite of bipartisan bills to strengthen wildfire recovery and resilience, including the Wildland Firefighter Paycheck Protection Act, the Fire Suppression and Response Funding Assurance Act, and the Disaster Housing Reform for American Families Act. Additionally, last week, he introduced the FEMA Independence Act, bipartisan legislation to restore the Federal Emergency Management Agency as an independent, cabinet-level agency and improve efficiency in federal emergency response efforts.

    A one-pager on the bill is available here.

    A section-by-section on the bill is available here.

    Full text of the bill is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Mike Levin Reintroduces Bipartisan Legislation to Protect Lagoons, Estuaries, and Enhance Coastal Communities

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Levin (CA-49)

    April 11, 2025

    Washington, D.C.- Today, U.S. Representatives Mike Levin (CA-49), Brian Mast (FL-21), Suzanne Bonamici (OR-1), and Jen Kiggans (VA-2) reintroduced the bipartisan Resilient Coasts and Estuaries Act, which would revitalize federal efforts to strengthen and protect lagoons and estuaries. This bill would reauthorize and enhance the Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program (CELCP) and require the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to work toward designating five new National Estuarine Research Reserves and to enhance the Reserve System.

    Congress established the CELCP to provide grants to state and local governments to protect coastal and estuarine areas deemed to have conservation, recreation, ecological, historical, or aesthetic value. This program supports locally driven efforts to protect coastal and estuarine lands for conservation, research, and recreation. CELCP’s authorization expired in fiscal year 2013 and other federal funding mechanisms ran out in 2017.

    The Resilient Coasts and Estuaries Act would revive funding for CELCP at $60 million per year and expand the eligibility for program to include nongovernmental organizations. The bill would prioritize funding for projects in communities that lack resources for coastal hazards, areas threatened by climate change, and areas that might help mitigate the effects of environmental changes through blue carbon storage.

    The Resilient Coasts and Estuaries Act would also support and expand the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS), which the Tijuana River Estuarine Research Reserve is a part of. The NERRS is a network of 30 coastal sites covering 1.4 million acres designated to protect and study estuarine systems. The Reserves specialize in research and data monitoring to support conservation and management efforts locally and around the country.

    “As the proud representative of a coastal community, I know the critical role lagoons and estuaries play in safeguarding against environmental hazards and enhancing our local economy,” said Rep. Levin. “This bill restores a common-sense measure to protect coastal and estuary habitats. As we continue to find creative solutions to combat coastal erosion and rising sea levels, and protect our environment, I’m eager to work with my colleagues on this bipartisan bill to advance this priority for our communities.”

    “Healthy estuaries are important to thriving coastal communities and a robust economy,” said Rep. Bonamici. “This bipartisan effort to conserve and rehabilitate these vital ecosystems will improve resilience along our country’s waterways and coasts, and I thank my co-sponsors for their support.”

    “Coastal Virginia is blessed to be home to a large network of estuaries and other wetlands that act as critical barriers against hurricanes, tropical storms, and other natural disasters,” said Congresswoman Kiggans. “Through this important legislation, we can provide state and local governments the resources they need ensure these lands in southeast Virginia and around the country are protected. I’m proud to join my colleagues on this bipartisan effort to preserve our wetlands and support our coastal communities!”

    “Estuaries are an essential part of our community. The problems facing the Indian River Lagoon, Caloosahatchee, St. Lucie, and Lake Worth Lagoon have shown repeatedly that our work to protect and restore our waterways is not over,” said Rep. Brian Mast. “I’m proud to support the bipartisan Resilient Coasts and Estuaries Act to reauthorize a successful program that allows us to better safeguard our coastal environments for future generations to come.”

    “With over 80 percent of America’s population living in coastal states, millions of hunters and anglers rely on coastal habitats to support recreational passions and economies. The Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program and the National Estuarine Research Reserve System have provided vital state and local stewardship for these habitats, safeguarding at-risk ecosystems and promoting public access for all. The TRCP is proud to support the bipartisan Resilient Coasts and Estuaries Act, and we commend Reps. Levin, Mast, Bonamici, and Kiggans for working to reauthorize common-sense conservation funding,” said Joel Pedersen, President and CEO, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership

    “Surfrider applauds Representative Levin and the introduction of this bill to establish a Coastal and Estuarine Resilience and Restoration Program. For too long our shorelines and coastal wetlands have been overlooked as critical natural defenses against climate change. This bill will help bolster the resilience of vulnerable coastal ecosystems and communities from the impacts of sea level rise and climate change while protecting the rich habitats and wildlife that they support,” said Zach Plopper, Sr, Environmental Director, Surfrider Foundation

    “We welcome the reintroduction of the Resilient Coasts and Estuaries Act which reauthorizes critical programs that will increase conservation of coastal land, improve estuarine data and research, and provide more public access and recreational opportunities in an era of massive coastal change. By balancing the protection, conservation, responsible use, and sustainable economic development of America’s coasts and ensuring every state can manage its own coastal zone, coastal communities and habitats can thrive into the future.” said Derek Brockbank, Executive Director of Coastal States Organization.

    “Thank you to Representatives Levin, Mast, Bonamici and Kiggans for their leadership; they know that as the challenges facing our coasts intensify, we need strong, effective programs that protect people, places, and economies,” said Rebecca Roth, director of the National Estuarine Research Reserve Association (NERRA). “The National Estuarine Research Reserve System and the Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program are time tested initiatives that consistently meet coastal community needs with training, science, data, education, land protection and more. Reauthorization of these programs will ensure they remain a cornerstone of our national policy, a value added for states, and a direct benefit to local communities and economies for generations to come.”

    “Healthy estuaries support our coastal communities and serve as nurseries and feeding grounds for birds, fish, and other wildlife,” said Romaric Moncrieffe, marine conservation policy manager at the National Audubon Society. “The Resilient Coasts and Estuaries Act will fund the essential federal programs that protect coastal habitats from threats like sea-level rise, flooding, and erosion.”

    The bill would provide support for several estuary habitats in the 49th District and Southern California, including the San Mateo Lagoon, San Luis Rey River, and San Elijo Lagoon. Additionally, the bill would provide support to the Tijuana River Estuarine Research Reserve, which supports ecosystem management and the cleanup of the Tijuana River Valley.

    The Resilient Coasts and Estuaries Act is endorsed by the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Coastal States Organization, National Estuarine Research Reserve Association, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, Surfrider Foundation, Oceana, National Audubon Society, American Sportsfishing Association, National Wildlife Federation, Bonefish & Tarpon Trust, American Fly Fishing Trade Association (AFFTA), American Shore & Beach Preservation Association, Bass Anglers Sportsman Society (B.A.S.S.), American Fisheries Society, North American Falconers Association, International Game Fish Association, Land Trust Alliance, Wild Salmon Center, and Angler Action Foundation.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Apollo 13 Launch: 55 Years Ago

    Source: NASA

    NASA astronauts Jim Lovell, Fred Haise, and Jack Swigert launch aboard the Apollo 13 spacecraft from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida on April 11, 1970. The mission seemed to be going smoothly until 55 hours and 55 minutes in when an oxygen tank ruptured. The new mission plan involved abandoning the Moon landing, looping around the Moon and getting the crew home safely as quickly as possible. The crew needed to go into “lifeboat mode,” using the lunar module Aquarius to save the spacecraft and crew. On April 17, the crew returned to Earth, splashing down in the Pacific Ocean near Samoa.
    Image credit: NASA

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Secretary Noem Reminds Foreign Nationals to Register or Face Legal Penalties

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: Secretary Noem Reminds Foreign Nationals to Register or Face Legal Penalties

    ASHINGTON – Today, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem reminded all foreign nationals present in the United Stated longer than 30 days that the deadline to register under the Alien Registration Act is coming up on April 11

      
    This law requires all aliens in the United States for more than 30 days to register with the federal government

    Failure to comply is a crime, punishable by fines, imprisonment, or both

     
    “President Trump and I have a clear message for those in our country illegally: leave now

    If you leave now, you may have the opportunity to return and enjoy our freedom and live the American dream,” said Secretary Noem

    “The Trump administration will enforce all our immigration laws—we will not pick and choose which laws we will enforce

    We must know who is in our country for the safety and security of our homeland and all Americans


    BACKGROUND: 
    On January 20, 2025, President Donald J

    Trump signed Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion, directing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to restore order and accountability to our immigration system

    This includes enforcing the long-ignored Alien Registration Act

     
    COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS: 
    On or by April 11, 2025, the following will apply to all noncitizens, regardless of status: 

    Present in the U

    S

    for 30 days or more as of April 11, 2025, without registration evidence: Register immediately via USCIS

    Entering on or after April 11, 2025, without registration evidence: Register within 30 days of arrival

    Turning 14 in the U

    S

    : Re-register and submit fingerprints within 30 days of your 14th birthday, even if previously registered

    Parents or guardians of minors under 14: Register minors if they remain in the U

    S

    for 30 days or longer

    Upon registration and fingerprinting, DHS will issue proof of registration

    All noncitizens 18 and older must carry this documentation at all times

    This administration has directed DHS to prioritize enforcement, there will be no sanctuary for noncompliance

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Joins Multistate Coalition in Opposing Tennessee Anti-Abortion Law

    Source: US State of California

    OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined a coalition of 20 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in support of a challenge to Tennessee’s “abortion trafficking” law, which threatens to punish medical providers and residents alike for providing information or assistance to certain patients within Tennessee seeking to access lawful abortion care outside of Tennessee. In the brief, filed in Welty v. Dunaway, the coalition writes in support of plaintiffs-appellees, arguing that the law will chill the free flow of information and threaten access to safe and effective abortion care within their borders.  

    “Tennessee’s abortion laws are among the most restrictive in the nation. There are no exceptions for victims of rape or incest, despite the overwhelming support for those exceptions among Democrats and Republicans alike,” said Attorney General Bonta. “My fellow attorneys general and I are supporting the challenge to Tennessee’s so-called ‘abortion trafficking’ law because we have a sovereign interest in protecting access to safe and legal abortion care within our borders and preserving the free flow of information about that care. We will not be bullied by Tennessee or any other state.”

    Tennessee’s law, which took effect on July 1, 2024, purports to impose criminal and civil penalties on anyone who “recruits” a minor for the purpose of procuring an abortion, obtaining abortion medication, or concealing an abortion from the minor’s parents or legal guardian — even if the abortion at issue is accessed legally out of state. The plaintiffs-appellees in Welty v. Dunaway successfully obtained a preliminary injunction from a federal district court, blocking enforcement of this provision. Tennessee appealed and the case is now pending in the Sixth Circuit. 

    In their amicus brief, the attorneys general urge the Sixth Circuit to affirm the lower court’s injunction, writing that: 

    • Their States have chosen to preserve access to abortion care within their borders by enacting statutes that protect abortion access and by amending their constitutions to expressly guarantee the right to access abortion care. California’s Constitution, for example, explains that “[t]he state shall not deny or interfere with an individual’s reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion.”
    • Their States have received a surge of out-of-state patients, including patients from Tennessee, seeking reproductive care that they cannot access in their home states. Indeed, interstate travel for abortion care in the United States has nearly doubled since 2020.  
    • In light of the prohibitions on abortion care in Tennessee and other States, more and more individuals are turning to organizations, helplines, abortion funds, and other forms of assistance to secure abortion care. But these trusted individuals and organizations may choose to significantly limit their communications, or even to not speak at all, when threatened with harsh civil and criminal liability under laws like Tennessee’s. 
    • If medical providers and other residents of their States are not able to counsel individuals within Tennessee about their ability to obtain legal abortion care, those individuals — and especially minors — will face increased barriers to accessing safe care. This can result in delays in patients’ ability to access care, leading to increased health risks, lifelong complications, and death.  
    • By hampering the flow of information about lawful abortion care, Tennessee’s law increases the risks associated with such care, thus impairing their States’ commitment to ensuring safe and effective abortion care is available within their own borders. The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized that a State has no authority to prevent its residents from accessing abortion care in other States where it is legal — much less from accessing and sharing information about such care.

    Attorney General Bonta has joined two multistate amicus briefs challenging a similar Idaho law in Matsumoto v. Labrador when that case was before the district court in 2023 and the Ninth Circuit in 2024.

    In filing today’s amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

    A copy of the amicus brief can be found here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: In trade war with the US, China holds a lot more cards than Trump may think − in fact, it might have a winning hand

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Linggong Kong, Ph.D. Candidate in Political Science, Auburn University

    When Donald Trump pulled back on his plan to impose eye-watering tariffs on trading partners across the world, there was one key exception: China.

    While the rest of the world would be given a 90-day reprieve on additional duties beyond the new 10% tariffs on all U.S. trade partners, China would feel the squeeze even more. On April 9, 2025, Trump raised the tariff on Chinese goods to 125%.

    The move, in Trump’s telling, was prompted by Beijing’s “lack of respect for global markets.” But the U.S. president may well have been smarting from Beijing’s apparent willingness to confront U.S. tariffs head on.

    While many countries opted not to retaliate against Trump’s now-delayed reciprocal tariff hikes, instead favoring negotiation and dialogue, Beijing took a different tack. It responded with swift and firm countermeasures. On April 11, China dismissed Trump’s moves as a “joke” and raised its own tariff against the U.S. to 125%.

    The two economies are now locked in an all-out, high-intensity trade standoff. And China is showing no signs of backing down.

    And as an expert on U.S.-China relations, I wouldn’t expect China to. Unlike the first U.S.-China trade war during Trump’s initial term, when Beijing eagerly sought to negotiate with the U.S., China now holds far more leverage.

    Indeed, Beijing believes it can inflict at least as much damage on the U.S. as vice versa, while at the same time expanding its global position.

    A changed calculus for China

    There’s no doubt that the consequences of tariffs are severe for China’s export-oriented manufacturers – especially those in the coastal regions producing furniture, clothing, toys and home appliances for American consumers.

    Amid tariffs, China’s President Xi Jinping senses a historic opportunity.
    Carlos Barria/AFP via Getty Images

    But since Trump first launched a tariff increase on China in 2018, a number of underlying economic factors have significantly shifted Beijing’s calculus.

    Crucially, the importance of the U.S. market to China’s export-driven economy has declined significantly. In 2018, at the start of the first trade war, U.S.-bound exports accounted for 19.8% of China’s total exports. In 2023, that figure had fallen to 12.8%. The tariffs may further prompt China to accelerate its “domestic demand expansion” strategy, unleashing the spending power of its consumers and strengthening its domestic economy.

    And while China entered the 2018 trade war in a phase of strong economic growth, the current situation is quite different. Sluggish real estate markets, capital flight and Western “decoupling” have pushed the Chinese economy into a period of persistent slowdown.

    Perhaps counterintuitively, this prolonged downturn may have made the Chinese economy more resilient to shocks. It has pushed businesses and policymakers to come to factor in the existing harsh economic realities, even before the impact of Trump’s tariffs.

    Trump’s tariff policy against China may also allow Beijing a useful external scapegoat, allowing it to rally public sentiment and shift blame for the economic slowdown onto U.S. aggression.

    China also understands that the U.S. cannot easily replace its dependency on Chinese goods, particularly through its supply chains. While direct U.S. imports from China have decreased, many goods now imported from third countries still rely on Chinese-made components or raw materials.

    By 2022, the U.S. relied on China for 532 key product categories – nearly four times the level in 2000 – while China’s reliance on U.S. products was cut by half in the same period.

    There’s a related public opinion calculation: Rising tariffs are expected to drive up prices, something that could stir discontent among American consumers, particularly blue-collar voters. Indeed, Beijing believes Trump’s tariffs risk pushing the previously strong U.S. economy toward a recession.

    U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Chinese President Xi Jinping during the plenary session at the G20 Summit on July 7, 2017, in Hamburg, Germany.
    Photo by Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images

    Potent tools for retaliation

    Alongside the changed economic environments, China also holds a number of strategic tools for retaliation against the U.S.

    It dominates the global rare earth supply chain – critical to military and high-tech industries – supplying roughly 72% of U.S. rare earth imports, by some estimates. On March 4, China placed 15 American entities on its export control list, followed by another 12 on April 9. Many were U.S. defense contractors or high-tech firms reliant on rare earth elements for their products.

    China also retains the ability to target key U.S. agricultural export sectors such as poultry and soybeans – industries heavily dependent on Chinese demand and concentrated in Republican-leaning states. China accounts for about half of U.S. soybean exports and nearly 10% of American poultry exports. On March 4, Beijing revoked import approvals for three major U.S. soybean exporters.

    And on the tech side, many U.S. companies – such as Apple and Tesla – remain deeply tied to Chinese manufacturing. Tariffs threaten to shrink their profit margins significantly, something Beijing believes can be used as a source of leverage against the Trump administration. Already, Beijing is reportedly planning to strike back through regulatory pressure on U.S. companies operating in China.

    Meanwhile, the fact that Elon Musk, a senior Trump insider who has clashed with U.S. trade adviser Peter Navarro against tariffs, has major business interests in China is a particularly strong wedge that Beijing could yet exploit in an attempt to divide the Trump administration.

    Chinese and U.S. flags fly at a booth during the first China International Import Expo on Nov. 6, 2018, in Shanghai.
    Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images

    A strategic opening for China?

    While Beijing thinks it can weather Trump’s sweeping tariffs on a bilateral basis, it also believes the U.S. broadside against its own trading partners has created a generational strategic opportunity to displace American hegemony.

    Close to home, this shift could significantly reshape the geopolitical landscape of East Asia. Already on March 30 – after Trump had first raised tariffs on Beijing – China, Japan and South Korea hosted their first economic dialogue in five years and pledged to advance a trilateral free trade agreement. The move was particularly remarkable given how carefully the U.S. had worked to cultivate its Japanese and South Korean allies during the Biden administration as part of its strategy to counter Chinese regional influence. From Beijing’s perspective, Trump’s actions offer an opportunity to directly erode U.S. sway in the Indo-Pacific.

    Could China’s dragon economy slay Trump’s tariffs?
    Wang Zhao/AFP via Getty Images

    Similarly, Trump’s steep tariffs on Southeast Asian countries, which were also a major strategic regional priority during the Biden administration, may push those nations closer to China. Chinese state media announced on April 11 that President Xi Jinping will pay state visits to Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia from April 14-18, aiming to deepen “all-round cooperation” with neighboring countries. Notably, all three Southeast Asian nations were targeted with now-paused reciprocal tariffs by the Trump administration – 49% on Cambodian goods, 46% on Vietnamese exports and 24% on products from Malaysia.

    Farther away from China lies an even more promising strategic opportunity. Trump’s tariff strategy has already prompted China and officials from the European Union to contemplate strengthening their own previously strained trade ties, something that could weaken the transatlantic alliance that had sought to decouple from China.

    On April 8, the president of the European Commission held a call with China’s premier, during which both sides jointly condemned U.S. trade protectionism and advocated for free and open trade. Coincidentally, on April 9, the day China raised tariffs on U.S. goods to 84%, the EU also announced its first wave of retaliatory measures – imposing a 25% tariff on selected U.S. imports worth over €20 billion – but delayed implementation following Trump’s 90-day pause.

    Now, EU and Chinese officials are holding talks over existing trade barriers and considering a full-fledged summit in China in July.

    Finally, China sees in Trump’s tariff policy a potential weakening of the international standing of the U.S. dollar. Widespread tariffs imposed on multiple countries have shaken investor confidence in the U.S. economy, contributing to a decline in the dollar’s value.

    Traditionally, the dollar and U.S. Treasury bonds have been viewed as haven assets, but recent market turmoil has cast doubt on that status. At the same time, steep tariffs have raised concerns about the health of the U.S. economy and the sustainability of its debt, undermining trust in both the dollar and U.S. Treasurys.

    While Trump’s tariffs will inevitably hurt parts of the Chinese economy, Beijing appears to have far more cards to play this time around. It has the tools to inflict meaningful damage on U.S. interests – and perhaps more importantly, Trump’s all-out tariff war is providing China with a rare and unprecedented strategic opportunity.

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

    ref. In trade war with the US, China holds a lot more cards than Trump may think − in fact, it might have a winning hand – https://theconversation.com/in-trade-war-with-the-us-china-holds-a-lot-more-cards-than-trump-may-think-in-fact-it-might-have-a-winning-hand-254173

    MIL OSI – Global Reports