Connect with us

News

Police Pepper Spray Antisemitic Protesters at McGill University, 15 Arrested

Published

on

Police in Montreal say 15 individuals were arrested Thursday after a protest was violently dispersed at McGill University. The arrests occurred after activists stormed the main administration building prompting officers in riot gear to deploy chemical irritants.

Since late April, pro-Palestinian demonstrators have been camping on McGill’s lower field, demanding that the university withdraw its investments in Israel’s military and cut ties with Israeli academic institutions.

Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights. McGill, a student group involved in the encampment, announced on social media that “an autonomous group of students” had occupied the James Administration Building.

Approximately 100 protestors had congregated in front of the building, a few hundred metres from the main camping site.

According to a student group official, the blockade at the administration building was in reaction to a global appeal to exacerbate the situation in Rafah, the southern Gaza city where Israel is fighting Hamas.

Pro-Palestinian protesters

Pro-Palestinian protesters: Montreal Gazette Image

“Genocide made by McGill”

Rama Al Malah, who claims she was not involved in the occupation of the administration building, stated that the embargo was also due to McGill’s persistent role in the ongoing genocide in Gaza.

“We watched as our students (were) brutalized and arrested on the inside and students essentially refused to leave their ground,” Al Malah stated. “They remained in front of the administration building to support their comrades, as well as our requests.

“Police met this with tear gas and also by knocking people down to the ground, so physical assaults as well.”

Protesters stood in front of the building’s entrance, brandishing banners that read, “Genocide made by McGill.”

Two banners, one stating “You could have divested 41 days ago,” hung from a third-floor window. Officers were visible inside the building shortly after the protest began, and one of them removed a flag.

Police policemen wearing helmets and face masks stood on either side of the building, watching over the yelling demonstrators. Officers were reportedly blocking many additional exits to the downtown campus.

About two hours after the protest began, about 20 officers confronted McGill University demonstrators to the right of the administrative building, the majority of whom screamed “Shame, Shame.”

Montreal riot-squad officers pepper sprayed pro-Palestinian protestors

Montreal riot-squad officers pepper spray protestors: Montreal Gazette Image

Police Disperse McGill University Antisemitic Protesters

Then, police began to battle with members of the throng and used chemical irritants to disperse them, sending others fleeing and protecting their faces and eyes.

However, this did not succeed, as demonstrators regrouped shortly after and returned to confront police, yelling, “Why are you in riot gear? “There is no violence here.”

Police in riot gear forcibly removed demonstrators from the administration building, pushing them back to the lower field encampment.

Following a roughly 45-minute standoff, police used batons and shields to physically remove demonstrators out from the McGill University building. Officers then formed a line to block entry to the building, while demonstrators gathered farther away near the tents that had been placed up on the lower field since late April.

A woman using a loudspeaker instructed the throng of around 200, “If you’re injured, go to camp; otherwise, move to the street.”

Even though it was raining, some demonstrators congregated on Sherbrooke Street.

According to an early Friday morning update from the SPVM, operations ended around 10:30 Thursday night, with 13 persons detained for breaking and entering and two more arrested for disrupting police activity.

Antisemitism at McGill University has been a long-standing source of concern. Recently, incidents of hate speech and prejudice against Jewish students have surfaced. Students reported feeling uncomfortable and targeted within their college community.

The university administration has come under fire for failing to handle these concerns properly or quickly. Jewish student organizations have advocated for increased protections and stronger reactions to antisemitic acts.

Many believe that instructors and students are unaware of or insensitive to Jewish culture and history. As a result, Jewish students at McGill feel increasingly isolated and marginalized. Despite some efforts to address these challenges, much more work has to be done to create a truly inclusive and safe atmosphere.

The situation highlights the importance of continued education and dialogue regarding antisemitism and discrimination.

Source: Yahoo News, Montreal Gazette

Geoff Thomas is a seasoned staff writer at VORNews, a reputable online publication. With his sharp writing skills and deep understanding of SEO, he consistently delivers high-quality, engaging content that resonates with readers. Thomas' articles are well-researched, informative, and written in a clear, concise style that keeps audiences hooked. His ability to craft compelling narratives while seamlessly incorporating relevant keywords has made him a valuable asset to the VORNews team.

News

2024: Supreme Court Rules California Man Can’t Trademark ‘Trump Too Small’

Published

on

trump
Trump | Pixa Bay Image

WASHINGTON The Supreme Court decided unanimously on Thursday against a man seeking to trademark the oblique phrase “Trump too small.”

The court maintained that the government had the right to refuse Steve Elster, a Californian who wanted to use the slogan only on T-shirts and maybe other products, a trademark. It is one of many legal proceedings involving former President Donald Trump, including significant ones about the bloody assault on the Capitol in 2021. The court established guidelines earlier in the current term enabling public officials to be sued for removing detractors from their social media accounts. These instances had to do with Donald as well.

trumpe

trump | AP News image

Supreme Court Rules California Man Can’t Trademark ‘Trump Too Small’

The Justice Department backed President Joe Biden’s presumed opponent in the 2024 election, his predecessor. According to government representatives, the phrase “Trump too small” may still be used, but as Donald had not given his approval, it could not be trademarked. You can already buy “Trump too small” T-shirts online.

Elster’s attorneys had contended that the ruling infringed his right to free speech, and a federal appeals court agreed.

Chief Justice John Roberts warned at arguments that if Elster prevailed, individuals would rush to trademark “Trump too this, Trump too that.”

While the nine judges unanimously agreed to reject Elster’s First Amendment argument, their reasoning varied and comprised 53 pages of opinions.

In the last six years, the justices have twice overturned federal law clauses that denied trademarks deemed scandalous or immoral in one case and insulting in another.

trump

Trump | PixaBay Image

Supreme Court Rules California Man Can’t Trademark

Elster’s case addressed a different rule that states that unless the person has provided “written consent,” a trademark application containing a name, photograph, or signature “identifying a particular living individual” will be denied.

The core of the lawsuit refers to a conversation Donald had with Florida Senator Marco Rubio during the 2016 campaign. At the time, Rubio was vying for the Republican presidential nomination.

At a speech, Rubio started the verbal sparring by telling supporters that Donald, who claims to be 6 feet 3 inches tall, had disproportionately small hands and that Donald had always called him “little Marco.” Had you looked at his hands? And you are aware of the saying regarding males with little hands, Rubio added. “You can’t rely on them.”

trump

Trump | Pixa Bay Image

Supreme Court Rules California Man Can’t Trademark ‘Trump Too Small’

Donald later brought up the remark during a televised debate on March 3, 2016.

Stare at those hands. Are those little hands? And he said something about my hands being small, so something else had to be, too. There is no difficulty, I promise you. You have my word,” he declared.

SOURCE – (AP)

Continue Reading

News

Yellen Says China’s Trade Policies Could ‘Interfere Significantly’ With US Bilateral Relationship

Published

on

yellen

Chinese “overconcentrated supply chains” threaten American jobs and recent investments intended to strengthen the country’s green energy industry, according to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. The Asian superpower’s trade policies “may interfere significantly with our efforts to build a healthy economic relationship.”

Yellen endorsed Biden administration initiatives meant to boost American economic competitiveness in a prepared speech she gave to Wall Street and corporate executives at the Economic Club of New York on Thursday afternoon.

yellen

Yellen | AP News Image

Yellen Says China’s Trade Policies Could ‘Interfere Significantly’ With US Bilateral Relationship

“When foreign subsidies threaten the viability of domestic firms” in important industries like green energy, she added, the United States should react. China’s green energy products are especially feared to undercut significant climate-friendly investments made possible by the Democrats’ August 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which President Joe Biden signed into law.

Former President Donald Trump is making his argument to the Business Roundtable in Washington, an organization of over 200 CEOs, on why the economy would be better if he were back in the White House while Yellen is speaking.

Voters have heard from Biden and Trump, his likely Republican opponent, that they will be harsh on China.

The United States imposed major new duties this month on Chinese electric cars, cutting-edge batteries, solar cells, steel, aluminum, and medical equipment. On Wednesday, the European Union also acted to increase import duties, or tariffs, on Chinese-made electric vehicles after preliminary findings of a continuing inquiry into Chinese EV subsidies revealed that the nation’s battery electric vehicle “value chain” benefited from “unfair subsidization” that damaged EU competitors.

yellen

Yellen | Forbes Image

Yellen Says China’s Trade Policies Could ‘Interfere Significantly’ With US Bilateral Relationship

Chinese companies can charge as little as $12,000 for an electric vehicle. Chinese officials contend that their manufacturing keeps costs low and would support a shift to a green economy. They also claim that their solar cells and steel and aluminum mills have enough capacity to supply most of the world’s demand.

Among other concerns, Yellen mentioned in her statement on Thursday the proportion of Chinese manufacturing companies that are losing money, the high savings rates compared to other OECD nations, and the stringent investment regulations.

Yellen listed industries where Chinese government subsidies have fueled fast output growth, including the production of electric cars and their batteries and solar energy equipment, which the U.S. administration is attempting to boost domestically.

yellen

Yellen | CNN Image

Yellen Says China’s Trade Policies Could ‘Interfere Significantly’ With US Bilateral Relationship

“I reject the idea that ‘decoupling’ would help the US economy in any way,” she stated. Concurrently, a level playing field is necessary for us to fully enjoy the possible advantages of our economic partnership.

Her trip to Guangzhou and Beijing earlier this year was centered on industrial strategy and what the United States and Europe call China’s manufacturing overcapacity.

SOURCE – (AP)

Continue Reading

News

President Joe Biden Faces First Lawsuit Over New Asylum Crackdown At The Border

Published

on

Biden Administration Plans for Potential Presidential Transition

Washington, D.C. On Wednesday, a coalition of immigrant advocacy groups sued the Biden administration, claiming that President Joe Biden’s recent order to essentially stop asylum claims at the southern border is no different from a similar action by the Trump administration that was thwarted by the courts.

The American Civil Liberties Union and others filed the lawsuit on behalf of the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Centre and the Refugee and Immigrant Centre for Education and Legal Services, or RAICES. It is the first legal challenge to Biden’s broad border crackdown, which followed months of internal White House deliberations and is intended in part to fend off political criticism of the president’s immigration policy.

biden

Joe Biden | AP News Image

President Joe Biden Faces First Lawsuit Over New Asylum Crackdown At The Border

“We were forced to file this lawsuit by enacting an asylum ban that is legally indistinguishable from the Trump ban we successfully blocked,” said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt.

The directive Biden issued last week will restrict the processing of asylum applications once 2,500 people are encountered between ports of entry each day. The current estimates were significantly higher, at almost 4,000 daily, so it went into effect right away.

The limits would remain in place for two weeks following the seven-day average of those daily encounter counts at or below 1,500. When the numbers might fall that low, though, is unclear; the last time was in July 2020, during the COVID-19 epidemic.

When the order entered into force on June 5, officials of the Biden administration stated they anticipated record numbers of deportations.

Advocates counter that, among other issues, suspending asylum for refugees who fail to show up at a predetermined point of entry—as the Biden administration is attempting to do—violates current federal immigration law.

For a long time, the United States has welcomed refugees seeking protection from persecution. That national commitment became legally codified with the Refugee Act of 1980. The groups said in their case filed on Wednesday that although Congress has, throughout time, imposed certain restrictions on the right to seek asylum, it has never allowed the Executive Branch to outright prohibit asylum based on where a noncitizen enters the nation.

Biden cited Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the same legal basis that the Trump administration used to justify its asylum restriction. Under this clause, a president may restrict the number of migrants admitted if it is judged “detrimental” to the country’s interests.

While running, Biden has frequently attacked the immigration policy of former President Donald Trump. His government counters that his order is unique because it has multiple humanitarian exclusions. Limits would not apply, for instance, to victims of human trafficking, unaccompanied minors, or people experiencing serious medical difficulties.

“The Securing the Border rule is legal, important to enhancing border security, and is already having an impact,” a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said, declining to comment on the complaint. We shall keep putting the contested actions into practice; they are still in force.

biden

Joe Biden | AP news Image

President Joe Biden Faces First Lawsuit Over New Asylum Crackdown At The Border

The immigrant rights organisations contend in the complaint that exceptions are “extremely limited.”

The White House forwarded questions regarding the complaint to the Justice Department, which declined to comment. According to White House spokesman Angelo Fernández Hernández, Biden’s action was required because congressional Republicans thwarted a bipartisan agreement that “would have provided critical resources, statutory changes, and additional personnel to the border.”

As per Biden’s decision, migrants who show up at the border without expressing a fear of going back to their own countries will be deported from the US in a few days or even hours. Sanctions for those migrants can include a five-year ban on entering the country again or criminal prosecution.

Proponents of the lawsuit contended that it is the migrants’ responsibility to exhibit fear, which is sometimes known as displaying fear.

“In practice, noncitizens who have just crossed the border, and may be hungry, exhausted, ill, or traumatised after fleeing persecution in their home countries and danger in Mexico, are likely to be intimidated by armed, uniformed Border Patrol officers, and are thus unlikely to ‘manifest’ their fear of return,” the lawsuit states.

However, a U.S. asylum officer will evaluate anyone who indicates fear or a desire to seek asylum, but to a higher level than is now in place. Should they clear the screening, they are eligible for more restricted humanitarian protection, such as the U.N. Convention Against Torture, which forbids sending someone back to a nation where they are likely to be subjected to torture.

biden

Joe Biden | NY Times Image

President Joe Biden Faces First Lawsuit Over New Asylum Crackdown At The Border

These revised, more stringent asylum limitations do not apply to migrants who utilise the CBP One app while in Mexico to make an appointment to present themselves at an official border crossing point to seek admission. The app is a component of the administration’s attempts to persuade migrants to attempt to enter the nation through its preferred routes rather than just crossing the border, locating a Border Patrol agent, and turning themselves in.

Advocates did, however, provide a laundry list of grievances against the app in the case. Many immigrants, for instance, lack the Wi-Fi connectivity or cellphone data plan required to use it. While some migrants are illiterates, others do not speak any of the languages the programme offers. And compared to the amount of migrants wishing to enter the nation, there are only a few spots open each day.

“As a result, numerous asylum seekers have been forced to wait indefinitely under precarious conditions in Mexico in the hope of obtaining scarce appointments,” the lawsuit says.

Together with the ACLU, additional organisations filing the complaint were the Texas Civil Rights Project, Jenner & Block LLP, National Immigrant Justice Centre, Centre for Gender & Refugee Studies, and ACLU of the District of Columbia.

SOURCE – (AP)

Continue Reading

Download Our App

vornews app

Advertise Here

Volunteering at Soi Dog

People Reading

Trending