People with some cancers live longer after a COVID vaccine

In nature 22 October 2025 (thanks to Mike C.)

Melanoma cells (artificially coloured). An immune-based therapy was more effective against this cancer in people who received an mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine within 100 days of the start of their cancer treatment.Credit: Steve Gschmeissner/SPL

A vaccine that helps to fight cancer might already exist. People being treated for certain deadly cancers lived longer if they had received an mRNA-based vaccine against COVID-19 than if they hadn’t, finds an analysis of medical records.

Follow-up experiments in mice show that the vaccines have this apparent life-extending effect not because they protect against COVID-19 but because they rev up the body’s immune system1. That response increases the effectiveness of therapies called checkpoint inhibitors, the animal data suggest.

“The COVID-19 mRNA vaccine acts like a siren and activates the immune system throughout the entire body”, including inside the tumour, where it “starts programming a response to kill the cancer”, says Adam Grippin, a radiation oncologist at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, an co-author of the report published today in Nature. “We were amazed at the results in our patients.”

The findings, which Grippin and his colleagues hope to validate in a clinical trial, suggest further hidden capabilities of mRNA vaccines, even as the administration of US President Donald Trump has slashed about US$500 million in funding for research investigating the technology.

The US Department of Health and Human Services, which cancelled the funding for mRNA research, did not respond to a request for comment.

Posted in Health, Science and Technology, Vaccines | Comments Off on People with some cancers live longer after a COVID vaccine

Julio’s last at bat for 2025

Thanks to Mike C.

Posted in Sports | Comments Off on Julio’s last at bat for 2025

Prescient Pogo

Thanks to Tom S. and SRA Climate Impact Subcommittee

Posted in environment, Health, Nature, Recycling, Science and Technology | Comments Off on Prescient Pogo

Fighting Authoritarianism

Thanks to Mary Jane F.

Indivisible co-founder and co-executive director Ezra Levin joins the podcast to talk about how his group is changing under the second Trump administration, why organizing and protesting is so important, and how we can successfully fight back against authoritarianism. Plus, some thoughts on the recent ICE raids in Chicago and across the country and what these events mean for our collective rights.

Posted in Government, Politics, protests | Comments Off on Fighting Authoritarianism

The Evolution of Classical Music From 1689 to 1935

Thanks to Bob P.

Lord Vinheteiro performed a seamless piano composition that featured the evolution of classical music from 1680 through 1935. As with many of his videos, the talented musician looked straight at the camera as he played.

Posted in History, Music | Comments Off on The Evolution of Classical Music From 1689 to 1935

Peaceful Protest

Thanks to Mary Jane F.

Posted in protests | Comments Off on Peaceful Protest

She can protest too

Thanks to Pearl McE.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on She can protest too

Undaunted

MIT, with several courageous universities to follow, shows it is made of sterner stuff
by Jennifer Rubin (thanks to Diana C.)

Elite institutions ranging from Columbia University to CBS News to the Paul, Weiss law firm have capitulated to Donald Trump’s bullying. Under the delusion that they could cut deals to save themselves from Trump’s wrath, they tossed overboard supposedly deeply held values including academic independence, freedom of the press, and the right to counsel. Instead, their cowardice whetted Trump’s appetite for more aggression and repression.

Over several months, surrender by a fleet of weak-kneed institutions suggested that Trump might succeed in his dictatorial mission. However, that disturbing trend appears to have stalled. Perhaps Trump overreached, or perhaps popular protests convinced institutional leaders to show some backbone.

In any event, Trump’s familiar extortion playbook seems to have lost some of its punch. Trump’s latest gambit, the so-called compact that he sent to nine prestigious universities, may have flopped. The New York Times reported on Oct. 2:

The Trump administration promised a select set of universities what the government said would be a great deal.

In exchange for agreeing to a list of demands, like limiting international students and protecting conservative voices, universities would get a leg up on grants, potentially beating out the competition for billions in federal funds.

At least one institution, the University of Texas, said it would be eager to sign up.

But then, a curious thing happened. Faculty, students, and alumni began to push back. Condemnation of the compact and talk of boycotts started “while Dartmouth College’s president has responded by saying she will always defend her university’s ‘fierce independence,’” Johns Hopkins professor Harry Farrell wrote last week. Meanwhile, California’s governor, Gavin Newsom threatened “to pull state funding from any institution that signs.”


Then, the leader of one of the most prestigious universities weighed in. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) president Sally Kornbluth in a letter to Education Secretary Linda McMahon effectively told the Trump bullies to get lost.

Kornbluth first recited her university’s principles: rewarding merit, admitting students regardless of economic need, and guarding free expression. She then drew a line in the sand in terms that old-school conservatives would have appreciated:

We freely choose these values because they’re right, and we live by them because they support our mission—work of immense value to the prosperity, competitiveness, health and security of the United States. And of course, MIT abides by the law.

The [Trump proposed compact]… includes principles with which we disagree, including those that would restrict freedom of expression and our independence as an institution. And fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone. (continued on Page 2 or here)

Posted in Advocacy, Government, protests | Comments Off on Undaunted

Like I-5 and the Skybridge

Thanks to John R.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Like I-5 and the Skybridge

Original document

Thanks to Pearl McE.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Original document

Where the #!(%&! are they?

Thanks to MaryLou P. (also the keys, phone and hearing aids)!

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Where the #!(%&! are they?

I don’t think Washington understands how ticked off we truly are

By Dan Shanoff and Rafe Bartholomew in the NYT

Stephen A. Smith brought a taste of “First Take” to Washington, D.C., on Wednesday night.

The ESPN host, who has branched out into political commentary in recent months and even teased the possibility of running for president in 2028, issued a stern rebuke to the nation’s elected representatives over the ongoing federal government shutdown while participating in a cable TV town hall event for the cable network NewsNation. After he finished speaking, Smith walked off the stage for dramatic effect.

Seated alongside a bipartisan panel that included sitting lawmakers Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.), as well as former U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly, Smith was reacting to a question from a Dallas air traffic controller who described needing to deliver food for DoorDash in his off-duty hours to make up his lost income during the shutdown. Thousands of federal workers have been furloughed while Congress negotiates a plan to reopen the government; employees deemed essential, including air traffic controllers, are expected to work without pay.

“I’m trying to be very respectful to everybody, because they deserve it,” Smith began. “But let me say this: I don’t think Washington understands how ticked off we truly are.”

He described the issues he and the panelists had debated that night — how to make health care more affordable, the U.S. government’s financial support for Argentina amid the South American nation’s fiscal crisis, concerns over politically motivated prosecutions at the Department of Justice — and accused the government of being insensitive to the problems faced by everyday Americans, including federal workers who are missing paychecks.

“We’re listening to this kind of stuff while a young man walked up to the microphone and said that he had to leave here to go and work on DoorDash to help pay for his daughter’s tuition,” Smith said. “Meanwhile, everybody up here getting paid, but he ain’t. … This is why you have so many Americans — excuse my language — so pissed off at Washington, because somehow, some way, you get to have these conversations, engage in specific elements of it, to talk about what we need to do to get things better.

“Our debt is $37.8 trillion. Somehow, some way, the taxpayer has been paying this, been throwing money, because we all look at our check and it’s been going to the government. And somehow, some way, you’re supposed to be doing something constructive and productive enough to make sure that we don’t have that kind of deficit. It isn’t happening,” he said as members of the audience hooted whoops of approval.

“A government shutdown is going on right now,” Smith continued. “A man has to work on DoorDash when he’s really an air traffic controller that we applaud it, and we’re up here talking about how much some money is gonna cost, and the only person that don’t have a check coming is him.

“You know what I’m gonna do?” Smith asked, before standing up and leaving the stage. “I’m gonna take a break.”

Was this the debut of ‘America First Take’?

The first thing I thought of when I saw that clip of Stephen A. pop up on social media was the day in 2009 when CNBC correspondent Rick Santelli, on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, went off on a diatribe that is credited, if apocryphally, with sparking the “Tea Party” movement.

To be sure, that wasn’t this: NewsNation in 2025 isn’t CNBC in 2009 (and society isn’t remotely close to where we were 16 years ago), but if you squint, you can see the outline of “Stephen A. Populism” — a form of straight talk layered with just enough visceral disgust to match the mood of a segment of the population. (“America First Take?”)

When Smith started dabbling in politics earlier this year, he made the point that in a debate, he would clean the clock of politicians. His rhetorical skill — honed over tens of thousands of morning arguments over Dak Prescott being over- or underrated — is unquestioned.

Simply stating the obvious can leave politicians off-balance, because so many of them carry on in a media bubble where “Embrace Debate” simply doesn’t exist. It doesn’t hurt that the national mood is decidedly against members of Congress; Smith wisely picked an easy target.

Was it performative for Smith to end his monologue by stomping off the set? Absolutely. Watching the clip, I don’t doubt that he felt genuine disgust, but I also don’t doubt that he knew exactly what he was doing. This might not spark the “Stephen A. Party,” but you can spot the outline of Smith’s more muscular approach to immersing in politics. — Dan Shanoff

Posted in Finance, Government, Media, Politics | Comments Off on I don’t think Washington understands how ticked off we truly are

Somehow they crossed over

thanks to John R.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Somehow they crossed over

Jealousy explained

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Jealousy explained

Chaos at the CDC

from The Epidemiologist

On Friday, about 1,300 CDC employees received a surprising email: they were fired. No warning. No time to plan. Their badges were immediately deactivated. The justification was a “reduction in force”—a bureaucratic term now being used as a political pawn in the broader Congressional shutdown fight.

This wasn’t the first wave. For months, CDC employees have endured mass layoffs, political interference, the firing of top scientific leaders, a lack of transparency, and fear and uncertainty. But this round struck at the agency’s core. Senior leaders, including the incident manager for the national measles response, were let go. The entire MMWR team—the scientific backbone that translates CDC data into outbreak reports and public guidance—gone. So were epidemic intelligence service officers, the nation’s “disease detectives” who detect and track emerging threats before they spread.

It didn’t stop there. Cuts hit every corner of CDC’s operations:

  • Data office: the infrastructure that collects, connects, and analyzes data nationwide.
  • CFA INFORM: the “weather service” for infectious diseases.
  • CDC Washington Office: the bridge between science and policy.
  • Global Health Center: the front line that stops diseases abroad before they reach U.S. shores.
  • Chronic Disease Policy and Comms: connecting science to action on diabetes and heart disease.
  • Injury Prevention Policy and Comms: addressing gun violence, opioid overdoses, and suicide.
  • Ethics teams, human resources, the CDC library (it’s hard to do science without access to scientific literature), and more.

Then came the whiplash. Within 24 hours, 700 employees were reinstated. The administration called it a “coding error.” Maybe. Or maybe it was a scramble to reverse a catastrophic mistake. It’s hard to know precisely who remains fired, but it seems to include staff from ethics, congressional outreach, health statistics, nutrition surveys, and all of human resources. Oh, also, the scientists who work on biodefense, such as weaponized pathogens, remain fired.

For those keeping track, this now accounts for 1 in 3 CDC employees lost over the past few months. This doesn’t account for the 50% additional budget cuts coming in 2026.

What we’re testing in real time

The U.S. is conducting an uncontrolled experiment to see what happens when a public health agency is gutted with immense speed and without a vision beyond destruction. We are getting increasingly close to system collapse. As often attributed to Amit Kalantri: “Systems fail when people with ability don’t have authority and people with authority don’t have ability.”

The questions we’re testing are:

  1. How much trauma can the workforce absorb? Scientists have been holding the ship together after surviving mass layoffs, working under political interference, getting 500 bullets aimed at them, and mourning colleagues who lost jobs overnight. Public health employees are there for the mission (certainly not the pay), and it’s unclear how much longer that trumps trauma. Of course, cruelty is the point. In February, the OMB said, “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work, because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down… We want to put them in trauma.”
  2. How thin can CDC be stretched? One in three employees has now been lost—either fired or quit—within months. And this is before the 2026 budget, which will cut CDC by an additional 50%.
  3. How political will CDC become? The fewer career scientists who remain, the more political appointees fill the void. Each round of cuts makes the agency less independent and more beholden to politicians.
  4. What breaks first, and how will it be felt in American lives? The ultimate question haunting many in public health, including me.

Many of you have asked how MAHA (the movement I’ve been talking with for months) is reacting. It’s complicated. Some are cheering the cuts, seeing them as long-overdue accountability for institutions that failed them. Many have been harmed or dismissed by these very systems. They feel unseen, unheard, and hungry for change. Others, though, are uneasy and recognize that the pendulum has swung too far. And many simply don’t know this is happening, because echochambers continue to drive our information ecosystems. This shouldn’t be too big a surprise, given that MAHA isn’t a monolith.

The real danger

I welcome radical transformation of our systems. They need it. But the danger here isn’t just in what’s being dismantled and how cruelly it’s being done, but in what’s not being built to take its place.

There’s no plan. No rebuilding strategy. No vision grounded in American values of innovation, imagination, and hope, nor the kind of long-term vision that could deliver the health ecosystem Americans deserve. If we don’t fill this vacuum with credible leadership, imagination, and execution, it will be filled with noise, chaos, and ideology.

What this means for you: You won’t feel these latest cuts on the ground tomorrow or the next day, especially since some cores (like the measles lead) were reinstated. But this will continue to be a slow bleed. Eventually it will be measured in American lives.

Posted in Government, Health | Comments Off on Chaos at the CDC

Prophecy in Portland?

Thanks to Pearl McE.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Prophecy in Portland?

Something SERIOUS is About to Happen

Posted in Economics, Finance, Government, History | Comments Off on Something SERIOUS is About to Happen

Columbus Day – commentary by Heather Cox Richardson

On October 9, President Donald J. Trump’s office issued an official proclamation declaring Monday, October 13, “Columbus Day.” The proclamation says that the day is one on which “our Nation honors the legendary Christopher Columbus—the original American hero, a giant of Western civilization, and one of the most gallant and visionary men to ever walk the face of the earth. This Columbus Day, we honor his life with reverence and gratitude, and we pledge to reclaim his extraordinary legacy of faith, courage, perseverance, and virtue from the left-wing arsonists who have sought to destroy his name and dishonor his memory.”

The proclamation goes on to present a white Christian nationalist version of American history, with much more emphasis on Christianity than Trump’s previous, similar proclamations. It claims that Columbus was guided by a “noble mission: to discover a new trade route to Asia, bring glory to Spain, and spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ to distant lands.” “Upon his arrival,” it says, “he planted a majestic cross in a mighty act of devotion, dedicating the land to God and setting in motion America’s proud birthright of faith.”

“Guided by steadfast prayer and unwavering fortitude and resolve,” it goes on, “Columbus’s journey carried thousands of years of wisdom, philosophy, reason, and culture across the Atlantic into the Americas—paving the way for the ultimate triumph of Western civilization less than three centuries later on July 4, 1776.”

Then the proclamation turns to MAGA’s complaints about modern revisions of this triumphalist history, saying: “Outrageously, in recent years, Christopher Columbus has been a prime target of a vicious and merciless campaign to erase our history, slander our heroes, and attack our heritage.” Our nation, the proclamation says, “will now abide by a simple truth: Christopher Columbus was a true American hero, and every citizen is eternally indebted to his relentless determination.”

This proclamation completely misunderstands the fifteenth-century world of expanding European maritime routes that entirely reworked world trade—including trade in human beings—and the role of Italian mariner Christopher Columbus, who worked for Spain’s monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella, in that expansion.

It also misses what historians call the “Columbian Exchange”: the transfer of plants and animals between the Americas and the “Old World”—Europe, Asia, and Africa—after Columbus’s first landfall in the Bahamas in 1492. That exchange went both ways and transformed the globe, but its effect on the Americas was devastating. When Columbus and his sailors “discovered” the “New World,” they brought with them both ideologies and germs that would decimate the peoples living there.

Estimates of the number of Native people living in North America and South America in 1490 vary widely, but there were at least as many as 50 million, and possibly as many as 100 million. In the next 200 years, displacement, enslavement, war, and especially disease would kill about 90% of those native peoples. Most historians see the destruction of America’s Indigenous peoples as the brutal triumph of European white men over those they perceived to be inferior.

Historians are not denigrating historical actors or the nation when they uncover sordid parts of our past. Historians study how and why societies change. As we dig into the past, we see patterns that never entirely foreshadow the present but that give us ideas about how people in the past have dealt with circumstances that look similar to circumstances today. If we are going to get an accurate picture of how a society works, historians must examine it honestly, seeing the bad as well as the good. With luck, seeing those patterns will help us make better decisions about our own lives, our communities, and our nation in the present.

History is different from commemoration. History is about what happened in the past, while commemoration is about the present. We put up statues and celebrate holidays to honor figures from the past who embody some quality we admire.

The Columbus Day holiday began in the 1920s, when a resurgent Ku Klux Klan tried to create a lily-white country by attacking not just Black Americans, but also immigrants, Jews, and Catholics. This was an easy sell in the Twenties, since government leaders during the First World War had emphasized Americanism and demanded that immigrants reject all ties to their countries of origin. From there it was a short step for native-born white American Protestants to see anyone different from themselves as a threat to the nation.

The Klan attacked the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal organization. Klan members spread the rumor that one became a leader of the Knights of Columbus by vowing to exterminate Protestants and to torture and kill anyone upon orders of Catholic leaders.

To combat the growing animosity toward Catholics and racial minorities, the Knights of Columbus began to highlight the roles those groups had played in American history. In the early 1920s they published three books in a “Knights of Columbus Racial Contributions” series, including The Gift of Black Folk by pioneering Black sociologist W.E.B. Du Bois.

They also turned to an old American holiday. Since the late 1860s, Italian Americans in New York City had celebrated a “Columbus Day” to honor the heritage they shared with the famous Italian explorer. In the 1930s the Knights of Columbus joined with media mogul Generoso Pope, an important Italian American politician in New York City, to rally behind the idea of a national Columbus Day. In 1934, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, aware of the need to solidify his new Democratic coalition by welcoming all Democratic voters, proclaimed Columbus Day, October 12, a federal holiday. In 1971 the day became unfixed from a date; it is now the second Monday in October.

The Knights intended for Columbus Day to honor the important contributions of immigrants—and Catholics—to American society. But in the 1960s a growing focus on the lives and experiences of Indigenous Americans forced a reckoning with the choice of Columbus as a standard bearer. Currently, seventeen states and the District of Columbia use the official holiday to celebrate Indigenous history. Some Oklahoma tribal members simply use the day to honor their tribe.

As society changes, the values we want to commemorate shift. In the 1920s, Columbus mattered to Americans who opposed the Ku Klux Klan because celebrating an Italian defended a multicultural society. Now, though, he represents the devastation of America’s Indigenous people at the hands of European colonists who brought to North America and South America germs and a fever for gold and God. It is not “left-wing arson” to want to commemorate a different set of values than the country held in the 1920s.

What is arson, though, is the attempt to skew history to serve a modern-day political narrative. Rejecting an honest account of the past makes it impossible to see accurate patterns. The lessons we learn about how society changes will be false, and the decisions we make based on those false patterns will not be grounded in reality.

And a society grounded in fiction, rather than reality, cannot function.

Posted in Advocacy, Education, Essays, Government, Health, History, Holidays, Immigration, Politics, Social justice | Comments Off on Columbus Day – commentary by Heather Cox Richardson

Nobel Peace Prize committee explain why Donald Trump didn’t win despite him saying ‘he deserved it’

The 2025 Nobel Peace Prize went to María Corina Machado of Venezuela instead

Joshua Nair in LADbible (thanks to Bob P.)

The Nobel Peace Prize committee has revealed why Donald Trump missed out on this year’s award.

Trump has made it abundantly clear that he feels like he ‘deserves’ the prize on several occasions, and all eyes were on today’s official announcement following the news of a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, which the US President was heavily involved in.

The award instead went to María Corina Machado of Venezuela, the Venezuelan opposition leader who disappeared and went into hiding in August 2024, following elections in the preceding month.

She has been honoured for her contributions to promoting democracy in the South American country, which has been described as a dictatorship by some under current leader Nicolás Maduro.

The chairman of the Nobel Prize committee has now commented on why Trump didn’t walk away with the award, when asked by the press.

Machado wrote a letter from 'hiding' to give her thanks to the committee (AFP VIDEOGRAPHICS/AFP via Getty Images)

Machado wrote a letter from ‘hiding’ to give her thanks to the committee (AFP VIDEOGRAPHICS/AFP via Getty Images)

Jørgen Watne Frydnes, the Nobel Peace Committee’s chairman, was asked about the pressure from the US President and some in the international community to give the award to the 79-year-old, and if the pressure affected their decision at all.

He replied, noting that ‘in the long history’ of awarding the prize, the committee has experienced all types of ‘media tension’, even receiving thousands of letters each year from those who explain ‘what for them leads to peace’. (continued on Page 2 or here)

Posted in Advocacy, Ethics, Government, Justice, Kindness | Tagged | Comments Off on Nobel Peace Prize committee explain why Donald Trump didn’t win despite him saying ‘he deserved it’

Marjorie speaks up!

Thanks to Pearl McE.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Among Portland Protests, It’s Frogs and Sharks and Bears, Oh My!

By Anna Griffin and Aaron West in the NYT (thanks to Linda T.)

Animal costumes are the new black.

Exceedingly aware that the black garb worn by demonstrators in 2020 informed President Trump’s apocalyptic view of Portland, Ore., protesters this year have gone to the frogs — and unicorns, raccoons, sharks, bears, dinosaurs and the hot animal of this particular pop culture moment, a capybara.

“It was just to contrast the narrative that we are violent extremists,” said Seth Todd, 24, whose appearance at Portland’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility early in the summer as a bulbous green frog started the trend. “The best way to show that for me is being in a frog costume.”

A person hula hoops in a green inflatable costume.

In Portland 2025, whimsy and merriment have replaced the masked anarchist look of 2020.Credit…Jordan Gale for The New York Times

Portland has long been a little bit different in how residents protest. Outside the ICE building, demonstrators against the Trump administration’s immigration policies have blown bubbles at ICE agents, formed a flash mob to dance the “Cha-Cha Slide,” held formal afternoon tea services and gone “ICE fishing” — tying doughnuts to poles and pretending to lure federal officers with the pastries. Cyclists are planning a special edition of Portland’s famed “naked bike ride” past the ICE facility on Sunday.

“Portland has a long heritage of ‘keep Portland weird,’” Steven Schroedl, 60, a retiree whose inflatable costume made it look as if he were riding an ostrich, said on Friday. “It’s something we didn’t necessarily cultivate. It’s just fundamentally who we are.”

But the arrival and proliferation of inflatable costumes at the ICE facility in South Portland has taken the city’s penchant for irreverence to new, surreal heights and eased some of the tension, at least as both sides wait for a court to decide whether President Trump can bring in the National Guard. (continued on Page 2 or here)

Posted in Advocacy, Animals, Dance, Government, Humor, Law, Military, Politics, protests, Satire | 1 Comment

Mastering vacuous circumlocution

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Mastering vacuous circumlocution

A remodel downgrade – David Horsey

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Federal Judges, Warning of ‘Judicial Crisis,’ Fault Supreme Court’s Emergency Orders

Dozens of sitting judges shared with The Times their concerns about risks to the courts’ legitimacy as the Supreme Court releases opaque orders about Trump administration policies.

By Mattathias Schwartz and Zach Montague in the NYT

More than three dozen federal judges have told The New York Times that the Supreme Court’s flurry of brief, opaque emergency orders in cases related to the Trump administration have left them confused about how to proceed in those matters and are hurting the judiciary’s image with the public.

At issue are the quick-turn orders the Supreme Court has issued dictating whether Trump administration policies should be left in place while they are litigated through the lower courts. That emergency docket, a growing part of the Supreme Court’s work in recent years, has taken on greater importance amid the flood of litigation challenging President Trump’s efforts to expand executive power.

While the orders are technically temporary, they have had broad practical effects, allowing the administration to deport tens of thousands of people, discharge transgender military service members, fire thousands of government workers and slash federal spending.

The striking and highly unusual critique of the nation’s highest court from lower court judges reveals the degree to which litigation over Mr. Trump’s agenda has created strains in the federal judicial system.

Sixty-five judges responded to a Times questionnaire sent to hundreds of federal judges across the country. Of those, 47 said the Supreme Court had been mishandling its emergency docket since Mr. Trump returned to office.

The judges responded to the questionnaire and spoke in interviews on the condition of anonymity so they could share their views candidly, as lower court judges are governed by a complex set of rules that include limitations on their public statements.

Of the judges who responded, 28 were nominated by Republican presidents, including 10 by Mr. Trump; 37 were nominated by Democrats. While those nominated by Democrats were more critical of the Supreme Court, judges nominated by presidents of both parties expressed concerns.

In interviews, federal judges called the Supreme Court’s emergency orders “mystical,” “overly blunt,” “incredibly demoralizing and troubling” and “a slap in the face to the district courts.” One judge compared their district’s current relationship with the Supreme Court to “a war zone.” Another said the courts were in the midst of a “judicial crisis.”

The responses to The Times serve as the most comprehensive picture to date about the extraordinary tensions within the judiciary, hints of which have begun to spill out publicly.

At a hearing in September, Judge James A. Wynn Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit said his court was “out here flailing” as it tried to apply vague emergency rulings from the Supreme Court that left judges “in limbo.” Ruling on a different case, Judge Allison D. Burroughs of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts noted that the emergency orders “have not been models of clarity.”

The Supreme Court has so far issued emergency orders in about 20 cases involving the Trump administration’s policies. In at least seven of those orders, the majority offered no reasoning for its decision.

At public events, some Supreme Court justices have defended their use of the emergency docket as a legitimate response to the increase in swift presidential policy-making by executive order, as opposed to legislation passed through Congress. Offering extensive reasoning or explanation, they argued, would risk locking the court into a position that might not turn out to be its final view.

A spokeswoman for the Supreme Court did not respond to a request for comment.

The Times reached out to more than 400 judges, including every judge in districts that have handled at least one legal challenge to a major piece of Mr. Trump’s agenda.

Most of those who declined to participate did not give a reason. Others said they did not think it was their place to judge the work of the Supreme Court.

The judges who responded may not represent the views of the entire judiciary, but to have even several dozen judges out of the nation’s more than 1,000 district, appellate and senior judges express such concern about the Supreme Court’s behavior is highly unusual.

Forty-two judges went so far as to say that the Supreme Court’s emergency orders had caused “some” or “major” harm to the public’s perception of the judiciary. Among those who responded to the question, nearly half of the Republican-nominated judges said they believed the orders had harmed the judiciary’s standing in the public eye.

Twelve judges who responded to the questionnaire said they believed the Supreme Court had handled its emergency docket appropriately. But only two said public perception of judges had improved as a result of how the Supreme Court had handled its recent work.

Note: Eleven judges who either declined to respond to this question or said they did not know are not included. (continued on Page 2 or here)

Posted in Government, Law, Politics | Comments Off on Federal Judges, Warning of ‘Judicial Crisis,’ Fault Supreme Court’s Emergency Orders

M.I.T. Rejects a White House Offer for Special Funding Treatment

By Vimal Patel in the NYT

M.I.T. became the first university to reject an agreement that would trade support for the Trump administration’s higher education agenda in exchange for favorable treatment.

The proposal, called the “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” was sent to nine universities and would require colleges to cap international student enrollment, freeze tuition for five years, adhere to definitions of gender and prohibit anything that would “belittle” conservative ideas.

In a letter on Friday to the Trump administration, M.I.T.’s president, Sally Kornbluth, wrote that the university has already freely met or exceeded many of the standards outlined in the proposal, but that she disagrees with other requirements it demands, including those that would restrict free expression.

“Fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone,” Dr. Kornbluth wrote.

A White House spokeswoman, Liz Huston, said in a statement that “any university that refuses this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to transform higher education isn’t serving its students or their parents — they’re bowing to radical, left-wing bureaucrats.”

“The best science can’t thrive in institutions that have abandoned merit, free inquiry, and the pursuit of truth,” she added. “President Trump encourages universities to join us in restoring academic excellence and common sense policies.”

The White House has said it wants responses from the universities by Oct. 20. The other eight colleges are the University of Arizona, Brown University, Dartmouth College, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, the University of Texas, Vanderbilt University and the University of Virginia.

The idea of the compacts has been deeply unpopular among faculty members and free speech advocates, who view them as yet another political intrusion into the affairs of academia. They argue that the Trump administration is threatening the independence of American higher education by cutting hundreds of millions of dollars in research funding to force top universities to adopt its agenda. (continued on Page 2 or here)

Posted in Advocacy, Education, Government | Comments Off on M.I.T. Rejects a White House Offer for Special Funding Treatment