Individual fatally stabbed in Shah Alam due to quarrel over begging location, alleged perpetrator apprehended
Donald Trump's Executive Orders Under Fire
Here we go again, folks! In rapid succession, three US federal judges issued rulings on April 24th, thwarting key parts of President Donald Trump's latest executive orders.
The decisions effectively halted attempts to penalize sanctuary cities, impose strict voter registration rules, and restrict diversity and inclusion in education.
Sanctuary Cities Under the Microscope
California District Judge William H. Orrick, appointed by Barack Obama, put a stop to freezing funds for 16 sanctuary jurisdictions. Orrick pointed out constitutional violations of the Fifth and Tenth Amendments, stating that the orders improperly sought to commandeer local officials into enforcing federal immigration practices.
DEI Controversy
New Hampshire District Judge Landya B. McCafferty blocked part of an anti-DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusivity) directive threatening schools with funding cuts. McCafferty deemed the policy as textbook viewpoint discrimination, punishing educators for acknowledging structural racism.
Voter Registration Showdown
In Washington, DC, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly blocked crucial portions of an executive order requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote. She asserted that Trump overstepped legal limits, as the Constitution grants Congress and the states, not the president, the authority over federal elections.
Trump's contentious policies, instated mainly via executive orders, are swimming in a wave of lawsuits questioning their constitutionality. The legal challenges represent significant opposition to the administration's moves on sanctuary cities and civil rights.
Now let's dive a little deeper. The Executive Orders on sanctuary cities have triggered ongoing legal battles, with lawsuits aiming to secure injunctions against enforcing the funding restrictions[4]. The 2025 Executive Order curtailing enforcement of disparate impact civil rights protections has been met with criticism and is likely to face legal scrutiny[2][3], though specific lawsuits are yet to be detailed. Legal challenges related to voter registration and election processes under Trump's executive orders are either not specifically detailed or encompassed in broader litigation efforts without explicit final outcomes mentioned[1][4].
All in all, the Trump administration's 2025 executive orders relative to sanctuary cities and civil rights have sparked significant controversy, leading to active lawsuits aiming to challenge the constitutionality and implementation of these policies. Stay tuned for more updates as these legal battles unfold!
- The ruling by California District Judge William H. Orrick has prevented the freezing of funds for 16 sanctuary jurisdictions, citing constitutional violations of the Fifth and Tenth Amendments.
- Orrick stated that the executive orders improperly sought to commandeer local officials into enforcing federal immigration practices.
- New Hampshire District Judge Landya B. McCafferty has blocked part of an anti-DEI directive, deeming it as textbook viewpoint discrimination.
- McCafferty concluded that the policy punishes educators for acknowledging structural racism.
- In Washington, DC, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has blocked portions of an executive order requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote, asserting that Trump overstepped legal limits.
- The ongoing legal challenges to Trump's executive orders represent significant opposition to the administration's moves on sanctuary cities and civil rights.
- The legal battles unfolding are looking into the constitutionality and implementation of these policies, with the Executive Orders on sanctuary cities and civil rights being a significant source of controversy.
