Donald Trump 2 - The Latremie Post

Are American workers being replaced? Inside the H-1B visa controversy

**Understanding the Controversy Surrounding H-1B Visas**

Following months of controversy, President Donald Trump issued a proclamation in September decrying the systemic abuse of the H-1B visa program. He argued that the program is fueling the “large-scale replacement of American workers” and has “undermined both our economic and national security.”

To address this, Trump instituted a $100,000 fee for companies seeking to obtain an H-1B visa, a move that has been widely criticized by business leaders, especially in the tech industry. The debate over the program has split both the American public and the GOP, with one side asserting that visa holders are poaching American jobs, while the other emphasizes the program’s importance to U.S. competitiveness.

So, what exactly are H-1B visas, and why have they become such a political flashpoint?

—

### What is an H-1B Visa?

An H-1B visa is a non-immigrant work visa that allows U.S. companies to hire highly-skilled foreign workers in specialty occupations. These visas are issued for an initial period of three years and can be extended up to six years.

According to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the visas are meant for individuals of “exceptional merit and ability.” To qualify, candidates must have at least a bachelor’s degree in a relevant field.

—

### Which Industries Use H-1B Visas Most?

By far, the tech industry is the largest user of H-1B visas, accounting for roughly 60 to 70 percent of all new applications in recent years. Other prominent sectors include consulting and professional services, engineering and manufacturing, healthcare and medical research, and higher education.

—

### How Many Foreign Workers Hold These Visas?

There is no official figure for the number of people currently holding H-1B visas. However, there is a yearly cap of 65,000 visas, with an additional 20,000 reserved for individuals holding master’s degrees or higher.

Most universities and non-profit research organizations are exempt from this cap, which further increases the number of people approved each year. The Pew Research Center estimated that about 400,000 H-1B visa applications were approved last year under the Biden administration.

—

### Where Do Visa Holders Come From?

Nearly three out of every four — 73 percent — of H-1B visa holders come from India, according to Pew. China ranks second, with 12 percent, while the remaining 15 percent come from various other countries, none exceeding a 2 percent share.

—

### Who Is Against H-1B Visas?

Criticism of the H-1B visa program comes from both sides of the political aisle, including former President Trump and Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Critics contend that the program has strayed from its original purpose — attracting top global talent — and is now being exploited by employers to import cheaper foreign labor, suppress wages, and displace American workers.

In response, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) reintroduced bipartisan legislation in September aimed at reforming the program, closing loopholes, protecting American workers, and preventing outsourcing of jobs.

On the state level, Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis issued guidelines in October to combat what he called a university loophole. He directed the Florida Board of Governors to require universities to prioritize American graduates and curb the practice of “importing foreign workers on H-1B visas instead of hiring Americans.”

—

### Who Supports H-1B Visas?

On the other side, many prominent figures argue that the program is essential for maintaining U.S. competitiveness. Elon Musk, for example, has publicly supported the H-1B program, stating, “The reason I’m in America along with so many critical people who built SpaceX, Tesla, and hundreds of other companies that made America strong is because of H1B.”

Musk also acknowledged that “the program is broken and needs major reform,” proposing to raise the minimum salary threshold and introduce yearly costs for maintaining H-1B status to make overseas hiring more expensive compared to domestic hiring.

Business leaders assert that the H-1B program is crucial for competing with countries like China, which recently launched its own talent visa program called the K-visa. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also supports the H-1B program.

—

### Are Visa Holders Taking American Jobs?

On September 19, President Trump issued a proclamation titled “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers,” claiming that the H-1B visa program is being “deliberately exploited to replace, rather than supplement, American workers with lower-paid, lower-skilled labor.”

He argued that this abuse artificially suppresses wages, disadvantages American workers in the labor market, and complicates efforts to attract and retain the highest-skilled subset of temporary workers — with the most significant impact in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields.

Trump stated that the large-scale replacement of American workers through systemic abuse of the program has undermined both economic and national security.

—

### New Rules and Fees

To curb abuses, Trump imposed a $100,000 fee on companies applying for H-1B visas, effective September 21, 2025, with the restriction set to expire one year later. His administration has also been directed to initiate rulemaking prioritizing high-skilled and high-paid applicants.

Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to narrow the definition of “specialty occupation,” increase worksite compliance inspections, and require employers to submit applications directly, aiming to prevent companies from contracting out H-1B workers to other firms.

—

### What’s Next?

The debate over H-1B visas is far from over. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration’s new $100,000 fee, arguing that it would make the program prohibitively expensive for many U.S. employers, particularly small and midsize businesses.

The lawsuit claims the fee is unlawful as it overrides provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which require visa-related fees to be based on the government’s costs to process them.

As the political and economic battles continue, the future of the H-1B visa program remains uncertain, but its impact on the American workforce and technological innovation will continue to be a critical issue.

—

*Stay tuned for further updates on the evolving H-1B visa policy.*
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/american-workers-being-replaced-inside-h-1b-visa-controversy

Markets breathe a sigh of relief with an end to the government shutdown in sight

Stock futures rose early Monday on hopes that the longest federal government shutdown in American history will come to an end soon. The Senate voted to advance legislation to end the deadlock after a group of Democrats broke ranks to back a deal.

The bill would allow federal funding to restart and end the furlough of many employees, but it does not contain a guarantee to extend healthcare tax subsidies, a key Democratic demand.

“It looks like we’re getting closer to the shutdown ending,” President Donald Trump said Sunday night. “You’ll know very soon.” Markets breathed a sigh of relief.

S&P 500 futures were up by almost 1% early Monday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Nasdaq also rising. The rally extended to global stock indexes, with Japan’s Nikkei 225 rising 1.3% and Britain’s FTSE 100 surging 1%.

Jonathan Pingle, chief U.S. economist at UBS Investment Bank, told CNBC, “The Fed’s been stumbling around in this fog and I think markets would like some clarity one way or another.” He described the shutdown as a “huge inconvenience” and a “drag on growth.”

“There’s a certain amount of cheerleading growing on,” Pingle said about the Senate bill. “Businesses are going to be happy having a functioning government and getting past reports.”

Lawmakers voted 60-40 to advance the bill Sunday night before the Senate adjourned until Monday. The Republican-controlled House also needs to back the measure before it heads to President Trump’s desk for approval. That process could still take several days.

“A possible end to the longest running U.S. shutdown is a positive for markets,” said Prashant Newnaha, senior Asia-Pacific rates strategist at TD Securities, according to Reuters. “Our expectation is that the next step is for a House vote on Wednesday, with the government set to reopen this Friday.”

At 40 days, the current shutdown is the longest ever in the U.S., and until this weekend, Republicans and Democrats had been at an impasse. The shutdown has left 1.4 million federal employees without pay and halted key economic data releases.

The shutdown effectively closed the Bureau of Labor Statistics, hampering its ability to collect and produce timely data about the state of the U.S. economy.

Russ Mould, investment director at AJ Bell, said the lack of data “has created a considerable dose of the uncertainty which markets famously hate and it is also hampering the ability of the Federal Reserve to make informed decisions on interest rates.”

“In this context, it’s not a surprise to see investors react positively to signs of progress, with Asian shares higher, indices on the front foot in Europe and US futures pointing towards gains when Wall Street opens later.”

— Joseph Zeballos-Roig contributed to this article.
https://qz.com/government-shutdown-deal-stocks-markets-sp500-djia-nasdaq

Trump Grants Sweeping Pardons to Dozens Targeted After 2020 Election [WATCH]

President Donald Trump has issued a broad pardon proclamation extending clemency to dozens of allies who faced prosecution over efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election. The order, signed and released by the White House, declares the pardons part of an effort to correct what the president called a “grave national injustice” and move toward “national reconciliation.”

“This proclamation ends a grave national injustice perpetrated upon the American people following the 2020 presidential election and continues the process of national reconciliation,” the document reads.

The proclamation grants “a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all United States citizens for conduct relating to the advice, creation, organization, execution, submission, support, voting activities, participation in, or advocacy for or of any slate or proposed slate of presidential electors, whether or not recognized by any state or state official in connection with the 2020 presidential election, as well as for any conduct relating to their efforts to expose voting fraud and vulnerabilities in the 2020 presidential election.”

Among those named are several high-profile figures who became central to post-election investigations, including Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s former personal attorney and former mayor of New York; John Eastman, one of Trump’s lawyers involved in election-related legal strategies; and Tyler Bowyer, a senior member of Turning Point USA.

In total, the list includes more than 70 individuals. Some of the names listed in the document are Mark Amick, Kathy Berden, Christina Bobb, Joseph Brannan, Carol Brunner, Mary Buestrin, Darryl Carlson, James “Ken” Carroll, Brad Carver, Robert Cheeley, Kenneth Chesebro, Hank Choate, Jeffrey Clark, Vikki Consiglio, Nancy Cottle, James DeGraffenreid, John Downey, Jenna Ellis, Boris Epshteyn, Amy Facchinello, Bill Feehan, Carolyn Fisher, Harrison Floyd, Clifford Frost, Kay Godwin, Edward Scott Grabins, Stanley Grot, John Haggard, Scott Hall, Misty Hampton, David G. Hanna, Mark Hennessy, Mari-Ann Henry, Durward James Hindle III, Andrew Hitt, Jake Hoffman, Burt Jones, Anthony T. Moorhead, Loraine Pellegrino, Sidney Powell, James Renner, Eileen Rice, Mayra Rodriguez, Mike Roman, Rose Rook, Kelly Ruh, Greg Safsten, David Shafer, Marian Sheridan, Ray Stallings Smith III, Robert F. Spindell Jr., Shawn Still, Ken Thompson, Pam Travis, James Troupis, Kent Vanderwood, Kelli Ward, Michael Ward, and C. B. Yadav.

The proclamation notes that the pardon applies only to those whose conduct was directly related to post-election challenges or alternate elector efforts, as well as activities tied to investigating or exposing alleged voting irregularities.

In a statement posted to X, Tyler Bowyer expressed gratitude toward President Trump and others who supported those charged in connection with the post-election cases.

“I am very grateful for the support of the President and his pardon attorney Ed Martin, and the many who have looked out for us since this expensive injustice has taken place in the swing states,” he wrote. “We were targeted to sideline many of us politically. It has nearly bankrupted and caused severe trauma to many good people on this list—this is why it is important to get to the bottom of what was carried out against good faith and active citizens who took to the courts to ask questions about the 2020 election.”

While the proclamation offers comprehensive relief for those prosecuted or investigated, it explicitly excludes President Trump himself.

“This pardon does not apply to the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump,” the document states. That clarification ensures that any ongoing or future legal proceedings involving the president personally are not affected by the order.

The move, however, effectively brings to a close years of prosecutions, investigations, and civil actions targeting individuals tied to Trump’s post-election legal and political efforts.
https://www.lifezette.com/2025/11/trump-grants-sweeping-pardons-to-dozens-targeted-after-2020-election-watch/

As Shutdown Drags On, Support Remains High For ACA Tax Credits, Poll Says

**Majority of Americans Want Congress to Extend Affordable Care Act Tax Credits, KFF Poll Finds**

Three in four Americans—and half of Republicans—want Congress to extend tax credits for low- and moderate-income individuals who purchase health insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), according to a new poll from KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation).

These tax credits, or subsidies, help make health insurance premiums more affordable for individuals and families. Enhanced in 2021 by the Biden administration and a Democratic-controlled Congress, the subsidies expanded access, allowing a record 24 million Americans to enroll in ACA plans—also known as “Obamacare”—and boosting the program’s popularity to all-time highs.

However, the enhanced subsidies are set to expire at the end of this year. Without congressional action, millions could see their health insurance premiums spike, making coverage unaffordable for many who rely on the ACA marketplace.

Currently, legislation to extend the tax credits remains stalled in Congress. The bill has yet to pass either the U.S. House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate. The dispute over whether to renew the enhanced tax credits has been a key sticking point in budget negotiations, playing a central role in the federal government shutdown. The current shutdown is now the longest in U.S. history, surpassing the 35-day lapse in government funding that occurred in 2019.

“The expiring tax credits are a central issue in the ongoing Congressional budget standoff, as Democrats want the tax credits extended as part of a budget deal while Republicans want to reopen the government before negotiating over an extension,” KFF said in its analysis of the poll data, which was released Thursday.

Public views on the extension of the tax credits have remained largely stable since before the shutdown began, according to KFF. However, support among Republicans has dipped—from 59% in September to 50% now. Among self-identified supporters of former President Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement, support for extension fell from 57% in September to 44% in the latest poll.

If Congress fails to act, individuals purchasing coverage through the federal or state ACA exchanges could see premium increases of 75% or more, according to health insurers. Open enrollment for 2025 coverage began November 1 and runs through December 15. Insurers have already reported that they expect to lose customers without the enhanced subsidies.

“We are supporting a population staring down (enhanced premium tax credit) expiration and potentially the wholesale loss of affordable healthcare coverage next year,” said Sarah London, CEO of Centene, the nation’s largest provider of Obamacare coverage with 5.8 million enrollees in its Ambetter brand health plans. Her comments came during Centene’s third quarter earnings call last week.

UnitedHealthcare, the nation’s largest health insurer and a unit of UnitedHealth Group, currently covers 1.7 million people through ACA plans but expects to lose two-thirds of its ACA enrollees. “Where we are unable to reach agreement on sustainable rates, we are enacting targeted service area reductions,” said UnitedHealthcare CEO Tim Noel. “We believe these actions will establish a sustainable premium base while likely reducing our ACA enrollment by approximately two-thirds.”

As the debate in Congress continues, the fate of affordable coverage for millions of Americans hangs in the balance.
https://bitcoinethereumnews.com/finance/as-shutdown-drags-on-support-remains-high-for-aca-tax-credits-poll-says/

Trump heads to Miami to speak about his economic agenda on the anniversary of his election win

By SEUNG MIN KIM, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is heading to Miami on Wednesday, the anniversary of his reelection to a second term, to speak to a forum of business leaders and global athletes about what he sees as his economic achievements.

His speech to the American Business Forum will provide a broad look at his economic agenda and highlight how investments he has secured abroad are benefiting U.S. communities, according to a senior White House official. This marks a significant effort from Trump to put a positive spin on the economy, especially at a time when Americans remain uneasy about their finances and the cost of living. Many of Tuesday’s election campaigns were centered on issues of affordability and economic stability.

The AP Voter Poll, which surveyed more than 17,000 voters in New Jersey, Virginia, California, and New York City, indicated that the public is concerned about higher prices and fewer job opportunities. These worries persist despite Trump’s promises to tame inflation and spur growth.

In his speech, Trump is expected to address key issues including deregulation, energy independence, oil prices, and affordability, according to the senior White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to preview the president’s remarks.

Last week, Trump spent five days in Asia with stops in Malaysia, Japan, and South Korea, working to ease trade tensions with Beijing in a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. In Tokyo, he advocated for several major energy and tech projects that Japan will help fund for the U.S.

Miami Mayor Francis Suarez said he believes Trump’s recent travels “have been transformational in his presidency” and described the upcoming speech as a highlight of the forum. Organizers have characterized the event as a more accessible version of high-profile gatherings like the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, or the Milken Institute Global Conference, which convene the world’s elite for discussions on the economy.

“This conference not only is creating this incredible collection of people, but it’s also creating them in a particular moment in time,” said Suarez, a Republican.

Trump’s visit also underscores Miami’s growing influence during his second term. Next year, Trump is set to host leaders from the world’s leading rich and developing economies at the Group of 20 summit, to be held at his golf club in the nearby city of Doral. This decision has sparked criticism over the potential appearance of impropriety, though Trump has maintained that his family’s business will not profit from hosting the summit.

Trump’s sons are currently running the Trump Organization while their father is in office. The president has also stated that his family’s business will not make any money by holding the summit at the golf club.

Miami is also where Trump hopes to locate his future presidential library, although a legal challenge is underway regarding whether a plot of land in downtown Miami is being properly transferred for this purpose.

Additionally, Miami is one of the U.S. host cities for next year’s World Cup—an event the president has eagerly promoted as the kickoff to several major global sporting events that the U.S. will host. Ensuring the success of the World Cup has become a top priority for the Trump administration.
https://www.bostonherald.com/2025/11/05/trump-miami/

What to know about the Supreme Court arguments over Trump’s tariffs

**Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Trump’s Emergency Tariffs**

WASHINGTON — Three lower courts have ruled illegal President Donald Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose worldwide tariffs. Now, the Supreme Court—featuring three justices appointed by Trump who are generally favorable toward expanded presidential power—will have the final say.

In roughly two dozen emergency appeals, the justices have largely sided with Trump, temporarily allowing parts of his aggressive second-term agenda to take effect while lawsuits play out. However, the case being argued Wednesday marks the first time the court will issue a definitive decision on a major Trump policy.

**Why This Case Matters**

The stakes are enormous, both politically and financially. Tariffs have been central to Trump’s economic and foreign policy strategy, and he has described a negative Supreme Court ruling as a potential “disaster.” The outcome will have broad implications for presidential powers and the economic future of the United States.

**Understanding Tariffs**

Tariffs are taxes on imports. They are paid by companies importing finished products or parts, with the added cost often passed on to consumers. Through September, the government reported collecting $195 billion in revenue from tariffs.

The Constitution gives Congress the authority to impose tariffs. However, Trump claimed extraordinary power to act without congressional approval by declaring national emergencies under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

In February, he invoked IEEPA to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, arguing that the illegal flow of immigrants and drugs across the U.S. border constituted a national emergency demanding further action from these countries. By April, Trump imposed worldwide tariffs after declaring America’s longstanding trade deficits “a national emergency.”

**Legal Challenges**

Libertarian-backed businesses and several states challenged Trump’s tariffs in federal court. They secured favorable rulings from:

– A specialized trade court
– A district judge in Washington, D.C.
– A business-focused appeals court also in the nation’s capital

These courts found that Trump could not justify the tariffs under the emergency powers law, which doesn’t mention tariffs. However, the courts allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the legal process continued.

**The ‘Major Questions’ Doctrine**

The appeals court relied on the “major questions” legal doctrine, created by the Supreme Court. This doctrine requires Congress to clearly address matters of “vast economic and political significance.” It previously doomed several Biden administration policies, including:

– The eviction moratorium during the coronavirus pandemic
– A vaccine mandate for large businesses
– Student loan forgiveness totaling $500 billion over 10 years

In comparison, the stakes in the Trump tariff case are even higher—tax revenues from these tariffs are estimated to reach $3 trillion over ten years. Challengers to the tariffs have cited writings by Trump appointees Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh, urging the court to apply similar limitations to Trump’s signature policy.

For example, Barrett compared ambiguous congressional instructions to a babysitter’s vague directive to “make sure the kids have fun,” noting that such instructions could be interpreted in dramatically different ways. Kavanaugh, however, has suggested that the court should avoid imposing such limiting standards in foreign policy and national security contexts.

A dissenting appellate judge also argued that Congress intentionally gave presidents more leeway under the emergency powers law.

**A Renewed Nondelegation Challenge**

Some businesses challenging the tariffs have also raised a separate constitutional argument, claiming Congress cannot delegate its taxing power to the president. The so-called “nondelegation principle” hasn’t been used by the Supreme Court in 90 years, since striking down parts of the New Deal. Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justices Alito and Thomas, recently authored a dissent advocating for stricter limits on congressional delegations of power.

**Expedited Supreme Court Review**

The Supreme Court agreed to hear the tariff case in September and scheduled arguments less than two months later—a rapid turnaround by its standards. This likely means the justices will act swiftly. While most high-profile cases take half a year or more to resolve, the court has demonstrated an ability to decide quickly when necessary.

For example, the justices recently issued a unanimous ruling only a week after hearing arguments in the TikTok case, upholding a law requiring the popular social media app to be banned unless sold by its Chinese parent company. Trump has frequently intervened to keep laws like these from taking effect while negotiations continue.

**What’s Next?**

The Supreme Court’s upcoming decision on Trump’s emergency tariffs will shape both the balance of power between Congress and the presidency and the economic landscape for years to come. Observers across the political and business spectrum are watching closely as the justices prepare to weigh in on this landmark case.
https://www.clickorlando.com/business/2025/11/05/what-to-know-about-the-supreme-court-arguments-over-trumps-tariffs/

Only Reduced Food Stamps Benefits Will Be Issued, and May Take Months to Get To You

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced on Monday that it will pay about half of November benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). However, the department warned that benefits could take months to flow to recipients. This update came in a brief submitted to a federal court in Rhode Island.

### Partial Payment Amid Shutdown

The USDA’s four-page report responded to U.S. District Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr.’s order. The judge instructed President Donald Trump’s administration to pay at least a portion of benefits to the 42 million people who receive SNAP assistance by the end of Wednesday, despite the ongoing government shutdown.

Notably, the USDA’s action did not clarify what would happen if the shutdown continues beyond November.

### Political Backlash

Leading Democrats in Congress sharply criticized the administration’s decision to pay only part of the monthly benefits. They accused President Trump of willfully denying food assistance to needy Americans.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said, “Providing partial benefits is not enough, is not compliant with the law, and it’s particularly cruel of Trump with the Thanksgiving season around the corner.”

### Judge’s Options and USDA’s Choice

On Saturday, Judge McConnell laid out two options for the administration:

– Pay partial benefits by the end of Wednesday using a contingency fund that currently has about $4.65 billion available.
– Pay full month benefits by utilizing other reserve sources, such as funds from the child nutrition program, by the end of Monday.

The USDA chose to use the contingency fund, giving the department until Wednesday to distribute benefits.

### Delays Expected in Benefit Distribution

Patrick A. Penn, USDA’s deputy under secretary for food, nutrition, and consumer services, noted that administrative hurdles in calculating and delivering half-month benefits could delay payments “anywhere from a few weeks to up to several months.”

According to the status report, USDA began the process of resuming payments on Monday to comply with Judge McConnell’s order. The report stated:

> “USDA will fulfill its obligation to expend the full amount of SNAP contingency funds today by generating the table required for States to calculate the benefits available for each eligible household in that State. USDA will therefore have made the necessary funds available and have authorized the States to begin disbursements once the table is issued.”

### Challenges in Processing Payments

While Judge McConnell acknowledged that calculating reduced benefits would take time, giving USDA until Wednesday if choosing the partial funding route, Penn said this timeline was insufficient. Some states have outdated systems for processing benefits, contributing to delays.

The federal government planned to provide updated benefit tables by Monday. States then need to send updated files to vendors who process benefits and load funds onto beneficiaries’ Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards used for groceries.

### A Lengthy Shutdown

Monday marked the 34th day of the federal government shutdown, which began October 1 after Congress failed to approve funding or pass a temporary spending bill. The U.S. Senate was expected to hold another procedural vote to advance the House-passed GOP stopgap bill that would fund the government at fiscal 2025 levels through November 21.

Democrats have opposed this measure to push for negotiations on expiring tax credits for Affordable Care Act marketplace health insurance buyers.

If the shutdown continued past Tuesday, it would tie the longest government shutdown in history, from 2018 to 2019.

### Contingency Fund Dispute

Before October ended, the administration had claimed it was legally barred from using the contingency fund, originally intended for natural disasters and emergencies, to pay SNAP benefits during the shutdown.

However, two federal judges ruled on October 31 that the USDA could and must use the fund to keep SNAP benefits flowing.

Saturday marked the first lapse in benefit payments since SNAP’s inception during President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty.

Program advocates and experts warned that users would experience delays in receiving November benefits as the administration worked to restart payments.

### Funding and Spending Breakdown

Interestingly, this stance was a reversal from a USDA shutdown plan issued on September 30, which explicitly called for using the contingency fund to maintain benefits.

SNAP costs the federal government about $9 billion monthly. While USDA did not use the contingency fund to pay regular benefits, it spent approximately $750 million of the original $6 billion during October:

– $450 million for state administrative expenses
– $300 million for block grants to Puerto Rico and American Samoa

For November, USDA planned to spend $450 million on administrative expenses and $150 million for block grants, leaving about $4.65 billion available to pay benefits.

### Child Nutrition Funds Off-Limits

Deputy Under Secretary Penn also explained why USDA chose not to use funds from the child nutrition program to cover the SNAP shortfall, emphasizing the importance of preserving that fund.

> “Child Nutrition Program funds are not a contingency fund for SNAP,” he said. “Using billions of dollars from Child Nutrition for SNAP would leave an unprecedented gap in Child Nutrition funding that Congress has never had to fill with annual appropriations, and USDA cannot predict what Congress will do under these circumstances.”

The child nutrition program supports school meals, summer meals for children, and summer EBT benefits for low-income families. The school lunch program alone serves around 29 million children daily.

### Democratic Response: “Not Acceptable”

Democrats expressed dismay at the partial funding decision.

Senator Patty Murray of Washington state wrote on social media:

> “Just now paying the bare minimum to partially fund SNAP is not enough, and it is not acceptable. Trump should immediately work to fully fund benefits under the law.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the ranking member of the House Appropriations panel, called the situation “entirely avoidable,” accusing Trump of using hungry children, seniors, and veterans as political pawns.

> “Now, only partial benefits will be sent out late, and families will go hungry, while this administration continues to host lavish parties for their billionaire donors and political allies,” DeLauro said.

She urged USDA to “put politics aside and use the money they have available to ensure families do not go hungry.”

### House Speaker Defends Administration

At a press conference Monday, U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson defended Trump’s handling of the SNAP payments.

He stated, “The president is desperate for SNAP benefits to flow to the American citizens who desperately rely upon it.”

Johnson echoed arguments by Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins that the agency was legally constrained from tapping the contingency fund if the underlying fund was suspended.

He blamed congressional Democrats for voting against the stopgap spending bill and noted that two judges who ordered payments to resume—Judge McConnell and Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusetts—were appointed by Democratic former President Barack Obama.

Judge Talwani ruled Friday that USDA’s pause on SNAP was illegal but gave the administration until Monday to respond before she considers forcing benefits to be paid despite the shutdown.

Johnson acknowledged the complexity of releasing funds:

> “It’s not as easy as hitting go on a computer. You’ve got to go through and recalculate partial payments to the 42 million recipients of the program. That puts a huge burden on states and on the feds to try to figure that out in short order.”

—

*Reporters: Jacob Fischler, Shauneen Miranda, Florida Phoenix.*
https://flaglerlive.com/only-reduced-food-stamps-benefits-will-be-issued-and-may-take-months-to-get-to-you/

‘Bowing down to him’: Supreme Court faces ‘awkward’ predicament in new Trump case

The New York Times reports that on Wednesday, the Supreme Court will “consider for the first time whether to say ‘no’” to President Donald Trump “in a lasting way” as they weigh in on the president’s use of emergency powers to impose sweeping tariffs on nearly every U.S. trading partner.

According to the Times, the case is a difficult one, made even more complex by Trump’s efforts to personalize the dispute. Observers of the court noted that the justices would be keenly aware that Mr. Trump would perceive a legal defeat as a personal blow.

Donald B. Verrilli Jr., who served as solicitor general during the Obama administration, agrees, saying, “You can’t help but think that that’s going to be hovering over the decision-making process in this case.”

So far, the Supreme Court’s six conservative justices have been receptive to Mr. Trump’s claims of presidential authority, the Times says. However, the tariffs case marks the first time the justices will weigh in on the underlying legal merits of Trump’s actions.

“At the end of this term, we’ll see wins and losses for Trump on presidential power,” said Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law School professor and former top Justice Department lawyer under George W. Bush. “This is the case I think is the closest, so I don’t know which way it will cut.”

The Times notes that this case has divided the conservative legal community. Trump’s lawyers argue that an obscure 1977 statute gives him broad authority to impose tariffs when he believes an emergency exists. However, that law does not specifically mention tariffs, taxes, or duties.

“Emergency powers are meant to be used in emergencies,” said Michael W. McConnell, a former federal appeals court judge nominated by President George W. Bush, who is leading a coalition of small businesses challenging the tariffs. “No Supreme Court would want to provoke a confrontation with a president of the United States unnecessarily, but on the other hand, the law is the law.”

University of Texas at Austin law professor Tara Lee Grove believes it may be “a stretch” to characterize trade deficits as an emergency. Still, she says the 1977 statute “is broad and appears to give the president a lot of discretion.”

“The justices will be struggling with whether they want to second-guess any presidential decision about an emergency,” Grove added.

Court observers have pointed to a dissenting opinion from Judge Richard G. Taranto, appointed by President Barack Obama, as a possible guidepost for the Supreme Court’s conservatives should they decide to back Trump. Taranto argued that Congress intentionally used broad language to give presidents flexibility, embodying “an eyes-open congressional grant of broad emergency authority in this foreign affairs realm.”

D. John Sauer, the solicitor general, stated that Trump’s use of the 1977 statute to impose tariffs was not an unlimited delegation of power and referenced Judge Taranto’s dissent ten times in his filing.

Grove notes that the court will face a “legitimacy dilemma” as they weigh the implications of their decision for the president’s legacy and the economy. “No matter what they do in this case, it will be painted as political,” she says.

Goldsmith believes the Supreme Court still maintains some integrity, but if Trump attends oral arguments as he has indicated, it could make the situation “awkward.”

“I doubt the court wants to be perceived as bowing down to him,” Goldsmith said, “but if Trump does show up, it’s just going to make it harder for them to rule for him.”
https://www.alternet.org/trump-tariffs-supreme-court-2674259628/

Trump amenaza con posible acción militar en Nigeria por el asesinato de cristianos

El presidente Donald Trump instruyó al Departamento de Defensa de Estados Unidos para iniciar los preparativos de una “posible acción militar” en Nigeria, con el objetivo de eliminar a los terroristas islámicos responsables del asesinato de cristianos en ese país.

A través de su plataforma Truth Social, Trump acusó formalmente al Gobierno nigeriano de “permitir la matanza de cristianos”. En su publicación, advirtió:

“Si el Gobierno nigeriano sigue permitiendo la matanza de cristianos, Estados Unidos detendrá inmediatamente toda la ayuda y asistencia a Nigeria, y muy bien podría intervenir en ese ahora desprestigiado país, blandiendo armas, para eliminar completamente a los terroristas islámicos que están cometiendo esas horribles atrocidades”.

Asimismo, el presidente estadounidense declaró a Nigeria como “país de especial preocupación”, una designación oficial que se reserva para naciones involucradas en graves violaciones de la libertad religiosa.

### Intervención sería “rápida, despiadada y dulce”

Trump describió la posible intervención militar como un proceso que sería “rápida, despiadada y dulce, como los matones terroristas atacan a nuestros queridos cristianos”. Además de dar la orden de prepararse para una “posible acción”, instó al Gobierno nigeriano a “moverse rápido”.

Estas declaraciones surgen después de una serie de denuncias realizadas el día anterior, en las que el presidente estadounidense calificó de “masacre” la violencia contra cristianos en Nigeria.

### Gobierno nigeriano rechaza las afirmaciones de Trump

En respuesta, el Gobierno de Nigeria, encabezado por el presidente Bola Ahmed Tinubu, rechazó las acusaciones de la Casa Blanca, afirmando que “no reflejan la realidad sobre el terreno”.

La administración nigeriana reiteró su “compromiso de luchar contra el terrorismo, fortalecer la armonía interreligiosa y proteger la vida y los derechos de todos sus ciudadanos”, según comunicados oficiales.

### Violencia yihadista presente desde hace 16 años

La situación de seguridad en el noreste de Nigeria se ha visto afectada desde 2009 por los ataques del grupo yihadista Boko Haram, que se intensificaron en 2016 con la aparición de su escisión, el Estado Islámico de la Provincia de África Occidental (ISWAP).

Ambos grupos buscan imponer un Estado islámico en Nigeria, un país que se caracteriza por tener una mayoría musulmana en el norte y una población predominantemente cristiana en el sur.

Datos oficiales indican que Boko Haram y el ISWAP han causado la muerte de más de 35,000 personas — muchas de ellas musulmanas — y han generado aproximadamente 2.7 millones de desplazados internos, principalmente en Nigeria y sus países vecinos: Camerún, Chad y Níger.

—

*Con información de EFE.*
https://eldiariony.com/2025/11/02/trump-amenaza-con-posible-accion-militar-en-nigeria-por-el-asesinato-de-cristianos/

Bitcoin Broke the Uptober Streak, but a Handful of Altcoins Managed to Finish Higher

Bitcoin closed October lower, snapping its six-year “Uptober” streak, while BNB eked out a gain as a mid-month jolt left most majors stuck below early highs.

The shock landed on October 10, when President Donald Trump threatened steep new tariffs on China amid rare-earth tensions, touching off a broad risk-off move. Bitcoin slid from roughly the low $120,000s toward about $105,000 in fast trade, and altcoins fell harder as thin liquidity met heavy leverage.

Over October 10-11, derivatives venues auto-liquidated an estimated tens of billions of dollars in positions, and more than half a trillion dollars in market value evaporated before a shaky rebound set a floor. This was a macro headline colliding with crowded positioning, not a crypto-specific catalyst.

By month’s end, CoinDesk Data showed Bitcoin finishing October in the red, breaking what traders call “Uptober.” On CoinGlass’s Bitcoin Monthly Returns heat map, October 2025 is the first red October since 2018 and ends a green run that stretched from 2019 through 2024.

This lore matters because the pattern persisted across very different regimes—late-cycle surges and post-sell-off recoveries alike. So, a miss in 2025 resets expectations and reminds traders that seasonality is a tendency, not a promise.

The month’s shape was remarkably consistent across one-month TradingView charts. Bitcoin started firm, suffered the synchronized October 10-11 air pocket, then spent the back half of the month climbing without retaking its early peak.

Ether traced the same flush-base-fade arc and stalled beneath the round-number band it tested in the first week. Solana and XRP echoed that rhythm with a sequence of lower highs into the final sessions.

In practical terms, late rebounds did not flip resistance into support, which is why the monthly candles printed red for those four.

BNB broke ranks. It absorbed the mid-month downdraft, carved higher lows through the final third of the month, and closed October about 4.2% higher—leaving a green print while peers slipped.

Outside the top 10, several names also finished October up, including ZEC, XMR, and WBTC, underscoring that pockets of strength persisted beneath the surface even as leaders cooled.

Why the “Uptober” brand stuck is straightforward. It is a community nickname born from Bitcoin’s tendency to post gains in October over the past decade, reinforced by that CoinGlass grid showing every October from 2019 through 2024 in the green.

Flipping the cell to red this year does not erase the historical tilt, but it does nudge risk management back to tape confirmation rather than calendar confidence.

The numbers that different dashboards show can diverge for mundane reasons. CoinGlass presents calendar-month, close-to-close results that isolate October. Rolling 30-day readings on major trackers update continuously and often include early-October highs, so they can show a steeper decline into November 1 even when the strict calendar month looks milder.

The direction is the same; the measurement window drives the magnitude.
https://bitcoinethereumnews.com/bitcoin/bitcoin-broke-the-uptober-streak-but-a-handful-of-altcoins-managed-to-finish-higher/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=bitcoin-broke-the-uptober-streak-but-a-handful-of-altcoins-managed-to-finish-higher