标签： North America

The Trump administration has ignited a heated debate by suggesting that some federal workers furloughed during the ongoing government shutdown may not receive back pay once the funding impasse is resolved. This stance, outlined in a memo from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), contradicts a 2019 law signed by President Trump that guarantees retroactive pay for employees affected by shutdowns. The memo argues that the law does not apply to workers temporarily asked not to report to work. Trump reinforced this position on Tuesday, stating that back pay ‘depends on who we’re talking about’ and implying that some employees ‘don’t deserve to be taken care of.’ Approximately 750,000 federal workers are currently without pay as the shutdown enters its first week. Democratic leaders, including House Representative Hakeem Jeffries, have vehemently opposed Trump’s interpretation, asserting that the law clearly entitles all furloughed employees to back pay. The OMB memo, prepared last week but reported on Tuesday, has drawn sharp criticism from both sides of the aisle. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia called it ‘totally illegal,’ while some Republicans, including Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, labeled the approach a ‘strategic mistake.’ The shutdown, which began on October 1, stems from a deadlock between Senate Republicans and Democrats over resolutions to reopen the government, with Democrats pushing for healthcare provisions and Republicans advocating for a ‘clean’ budget bill. The controversy over back pay adds another layer of complexity to the already tense political standoff.

In a significant development for US border security, illegal crossings at the US-Mexico border have plummeted to their lowest levels in over half a century, according to federal data obtained by CBS News. During the 2025 fiscal year, which included four months under former President Joe Biden’s administration, US Border Patrol agents apprehended 238,000 migrants attempting to cross the southern border illegally. This marks the lowest number of apprehensions since 1970, when 202,000 unlawful crossings were recorded. Jennie Murray, president of the National Immigration Forum, hailed the figures as evidence of progress in border security, urging bipartisan efforts to pass comprehensive immigration legislation. Preliminary data indicates that over half of these apprehensions occurred in the first three months of the fiscal year, spanning October 2024 to September 2025. The figures reflect the number of times border officials intercepted and processed migrants attempting illegal entry, including repeat offenders. During Biden’s four-year presidency, US Customs and Border Patrol recorded approximately 11 million border encounters. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson attributed the decline to President Trump’s policies, stating that his administration has successfully curbed unchecked illegal immigration and drug trafficking. Trump’s executive orders, including deploying additional troops to the border, ending asylum requests, and expanding ICE’s enforcement capabilities, have been pivotal in achieving these results. The president has also intensified immigration enforcement through raids in major cities like Los Angeles and Chicago and has vowed to deport millions of undocumented immigrants during his tenure.

Pam Bondi’s appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday was a fiery and contentious affair, marked by sharp partisan exchanges and a focus on the Justice Department’s handling of high-profile cases, including the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey and the ongoing Epstein investigation. This was Bondi’s first congressional oversight hearing as Attorney General, and it came at a politically charged moment. Just two weeks prior, her department indicted Comey, sparking outrage among Democrats. A day before the hearing, a group of former Justice Department employees accused Bondi of undermining the department’s mission to uphold the rule of law. Bondi entered the hearing ready for battle, employing a strategy of aggressive counterattacks against senators from both parties. She deflected questions about the Comey case, Epstein’s client list, and her communications with the White House, often pivoting to emphasize the Trump administration’s crime-fighting achievements. Democrats, led by Senators Dick Durbin and Sheldon Whitehouse, pressed Bondi on Epstein’s ties to powerful figures, including Trump, but she refused to provide details. Republicans, meanwhile, used the hearing to air grievances about the Biden administration and past Democratic actions. The five-hour session ended with both sides accusing the other of politicizing the Justice Department, leaving little room for bipartisan agreement.

Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, key figures in the 2022 ‘Freedom Convoy’ protests that paralyzed Ottawa, have been handed conditional sentences, avoiding further incarceration. The duo was convicted of mischief in April after a protracted trial but were acquitted of most other charges. The protests, which saw hundreds of trucks and vehicles blockading the capital for three weeks, were a response to COVID-19 mandates and the policies of then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government. The Crown had initially sought seven and eight-year prison terms for Lich and Barber, respectively, but the court opted for 18-month conditional sentences. This includes 12 months of home confinement with limited outings, followed by six months under curfew, plus 100 hours of community service. Additionally, the Crown is pursuing the seizure of Barber’s ‘Big Red’ truck, a prominent symbol of the protest, with a hearing scheduled for November. In a separate legal development, the Crown is appealing the lenient sentence given to Pat King, another protest organizer, who received three months of house arrest despite prosecutors pushing for a decade-long sentence. The protests, which began in February 2022, were triggered by a federal vaccine mandate for cross-border truckers and were eventually quelled when Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act, marking its first use in Canadian history. The act empowered law enforcement to dismantle the blockades and imposed restrictions on public gatherings.

In a cordial meeting at the White House, US President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney addressed the complexities of trade negotiations between their nations. Trump described the relationship as one of ‘natural conflict,’ particularly in industries like automotive and steel, where both countries compete. Despite this, he expressed optimism about reaching a future agreement that would satisfy both parties. Carney echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the deep economic ties between the two nations and expressing confidence in securing a favorable deal. Trump’s administration has imposed significant tariffs on Canadian imports, including 35% on general goods and sector-specific levies of 50% on metals and 25% on automobiles. However, exemptions exist under the USMCA, a trade agreement negotiated during Trump’s first term. The meeting marked Carney’s second visit to the White House since taking office in March and concluded on a friendly note, with both leaders praising each other’s leadership. This contrasts sharply with Trump’s previously contentious relationship with former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. While trade negotiations have extended past an August deadline, the tone of the discussions suggests progress toward a mutually beneficial resolution.

On his first day back in the White House, President Donald Trump signed an executive order declaring a national emergency at the US southern border. He directed his top officials to evaluate the potential use of the Insurrection Act of 1807, a rarely invoked 19th-century law that permits the deployment of active-duty military personnel for domestic law enforcement. Trump emphasized that he would consider invoking the Act if federal courts obstructed his plans to deploy the National Guard to protect federal buildings and enforce immigration laws. The Insurrection Act grants the president broad authority to mobilize troops in response to situations where it becomes ‘impracticable to enforce’ US law through standard judicial processes. This could include quelling civil unrest, enforcing court orders, or detaining migrants. Trump’s administration has already implemented aggressive measures at the border, including nationwide deportation sweeps and transferring alleged gang members to foreign prisons. However, these actions have faced legal challenges. Migrant apprehensions have significantly declined in recent months, yet Trump continues to frame the border situation as a critical national emergency. His consideration of the Insurrection Act follows a federal judge’s decision to block the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, which Trump claims is overrun by ‘domestic terrorists.’ White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller echoed this sentiment, describing court rulings against the administration as a ‘legal insurrection.’ Historically, the Insurrection Act has been used sparingly, most notably during the Civil War, the Ku Klux Klan’s racist violence, and the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Trump’s potential invocation of the Act raises questions about its legal implications and the broader use of military force on US soil.