President Trump fires acting attorney general for defying order, man charged in attack on a mosque in Quebec, and more from the United States and around the world.
President Trump fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates.
Kevin Lamarque / Reuters
—President Trump fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates on Monday night, hours after she instructed the Justice Department not to argue in defense of Trump’s immigration and refugee executive order. More here
—Alexandre Bissonnette, the suspect behind the deadly shooting at a Quebec mosque, was charged for perpetrating the attack that killed six people and injured 19 others. More here
—We’re tracking the news stories of the day below. All updates are in Eastern Standard Time (GMT -5).
Transgender boys will now be able to participate in the Boy Scouts of America, the organization announced Monday, accepting children based on their gender identities. Until now, the Boy Scouts only based its enrollment on the gender listed on birth certificates. But, the organization said in a statement, “that approach is no longer sufficient as communities and state laws are interpreting gender identity differently, and these laws vary widely from state to state.” Some Boy Scouts have previously been asked to leave the program after leaders found out the children were transgender. The new policy goes into effect immediately. The Boy Scouts have adopted more LGBTQ-friendly policies in recent years, amid pressure. In 2013, the organization said it would allow openly gay children to participate, and in 2015 allowed in gay troop leaders and employees. LGBTQ rights activists celebrated Monday’s announcement.
Trump Fires Acting Attorney General for Not Defending Immigration Order
Kevin Lamarque / Reuters
Updated at 9:45 p.m.
President Trump fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates on Monday night, hours after she instructed the Justice Department not to argue in defense of Trump’s immigration and refugee executive order.
“The acting attorney general, Sally Yates, has betrayed the Department of Justice by refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States,” the White House said in an unusual statement announcing the dismissal. “Ms. Yates is an Obama administration appointee who is weak on borders and very weak on illegal immigration.”
The White House said Dana Boente, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, would serve as acting attorney general in Yates’s stead until the Senate confirms Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions as attorney general.
Events unfolded rapidly after Yates sent a letter to Justice Department lawyers instructing them not to defend Trump’s controversial executive order in court, a surprising rebuke of the new president’s controversial efforts to block immigrants and refugees from seven largely Muslim countries from entering the United States. Yates had been confirmed by the Senate to the position of deputy attorney general in January 2015.
“At present I am not convinced that the defense of the executive order is consistent with [my] responsibilities nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful,” she wrote. “Consequently, for as long as I am the acting attorney general, the Department of Justice will not present arguments in defense of the executive order, unless and until I become convinced that it is appropriate.”
Her move came after a chaotic weekend at dozens of U.S. airports in which armies of volunteer lawyers and demonstrators attempted to aid those detained and deported by Trump’s executive order. Federal judges in five states blocked immigration officials from enforcing parts of the order over the past three days.
Yates’s directive also adds new energy to the Senate confirmation battle over Sessions, an immigration hardliner nominated by Trump to helm the Justice Department. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on Sessions’s nomination on Tuesday.
“My responsibility is to ensure that the position of the Department of Justice is not only legally defensible, but is informed by our best view of what the law is after consideration of all the facts,” she wrote. “In addition, I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution’s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right.”
SWAT team officers walk near the Centre Culturel Islamique de Québec on January 30, 2017. (Mathieu Belanger / Reuters)
Alexandre Bissonnette, the suspect behind the deadly shooting at a Quebec mosque, was charged Monday for perpetrating the attack that killed six people and injured 19 others, the Toronto Star reports. The 27-year-old university student faces six counts of first degree murder and five counts of attempted murder. Approximately 39 people were attending Sunday prayers at the Cultural Centre of Quebec’s Grand Mosque when a gunman entered the building and opened fire on the worshippers. Justin Trudeau, the Canadian Prime Minister, condemned the shooting as “a terrorist attack on Muslims in a centre of worship and refuge.”
Fort Lauderdale Airport Shooting Suspect Pleads Not Guilty
Estoban Santiago is transported to the federal courthouse in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on January 9, 2017. (Amy Beth Bennett / Reuters)
Estoban Santiago plead not guilty Monday to criminal charges accusing him of perpetrating a shooting that left five people dead and six others injured at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. The 26-year-old Iraq war veteran, who traveled to Florida on a one-way ticket from Alaska, faces 22 criminal charges for allegedly loading a handgun in an airport bathroom and opening fire on people in baggage claim. If convicted, he could face life in prison or the death penalty. Santiago’s family said he was receiving psychological treatment prior to the attack, and authorities are determining whether his mental health played a role. Santiago had previously told investigators he was inspired by the Islamic State after chatting with extremists online, though it is unclear if this is true.
Less Than Two Weeks After Leaving, Obama Speaks Out
Credit POOL / Reuters
Less than two weeks since his successor Donald Trump was sworn in as president, former President Barack Obama made a public statement in support of the protests that erupted in response to Trump’s executive order barring travelers from certain majority-Muslim countries.
“President Obama is heartened by the level of engagement taking place in communities around the country,” reads the statement from Obama spokesperson Kevin Lewis. “Citizens exercising their Constitutional right to assemble, organize, and have their voices heard by their elected officials is exactly what we expect to see when American values are at stake.” Notably, in his last press conference, Obama implied he might re-enter the political arena if he believed that the nation had reached a moment “where I think our core values may be at stake.”
Obama’s decision to weigh in so soon after leaving office suggests a high level of concern over recent events––most presidents try to avoid weighing in on politics in the immediate aftermath of their administrations. But the decision was likely affected by the Trump administration’s decision to falsely characterize the ban as similar to policies pursued while Obama was in office––the Obama administration never barred all refugees, green card holders, or visa applications in the same manner.
“With regard to comparison to President Obama’s foreign police decisions,” Miller’s statement reads, “the President fundamentally disagrees with the notion of discriminating against individuals because of their faith or religion.”
Washington State Sues Donald Trump Over the Travel Ban
Elaine Thompson / AP
The attorney general for Washington state said Monday the state will sue President Trump over the executive order signed last week that bans migration to the U.S. from seven majority-Muslim countries. Washington is now the first state to file suit against the order. Washington’s attorney general was one of 15 others who signed a statement opposing Trump’s travel ban. On Monday, at a news conference announcing the suit, Governor Jay Inslee said of the order: “Its impact, its cruelty, its clear purpose is an unconstitutional religious test.” The suit will be backed by Washington-based companies like Expedia and Amazon.com, according toThe Seattle Times, and company representatives will provide testimonies about the economic harms Trump’s ban will bring. The order has set off waves of protests across the country, and over the weekend a huge crowd demonstrated outside the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, where two men were detained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection—and later released.
Iraqi lawmakers attend a session in Baghdad, Iraq, on September 8, 2014. (Thaier Al-Sudani / Reuters)
Iraqi lawmakers approved a measure Monday barring Americans from entering the country, the Associated Press reports. The measure, which is non-binding, comes in response to President Trump’s executive order Friday banning citizens from Iraq and six other Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. It is unclear when the ban will go into effect, or if it will affect American military personnel or non-government workers already in the country. Iraq’s foreign ministry released a statement Monday condemning the U.S. ban, which it characterized as a “wrong” move by “an ally and a strategic partner.” Indeed, the bans signal a strain in relations between Washington and Baghdad, whose joint efforts have focused on targeting the Islamic State in Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city. Iran, which is also on the U.S. list, responded to the U.S. ban Saturday with a retaliatory measure of its own, announcing it too would bar U.S. citizens from entering the country “until the offensive U.S. limitations against Iranian nationals are lifted.”
France Charges Brussels Bombing Suspect in Paris Attacks
A Belgian police officer secures the zone outside a courthouse while Brussels attacks suspects Mohamed Abrini and Osama Krayem appear before a judge in Brussels, Belgium, on April 14, 2016. (Yves Herman / Reuters)
French authorities have the charged the Brussels bombing suspect with involvement in the November 2015 Paris attacks. Belgian authorities handed over Mohamed Abrini, the “man in the hat,” to France for one day in connection with the Paris attack, French media quoted prosecutors as saying. Both attacks were claimed by ISIS, and Belgian authorities said they were planned and carried out by the same cell. The Brussels airport bombing on March 22, 2016, killed 32 people; the Paris attacks killed 130.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is calling the shooting deaths of six people at a mosque in Quebec City an act of terrorism. Two men have been arrested in connection with the shooting at the Islamic Cultural Center of Quebec; eight people were wounded in Sunday’s attack during evening prayers. Quebec’s Premier Philippe Couillard called the incident “murderous act directed at a specific community.” An unnamed witness told Radio-Canada that the shooting was carried out by two masked gunmen. Martin Coiteux, Quebec’s public-security minister, said places of worship across the province were given extra security following the attack. Last June, someone left a pig’s head at the doorstep of the Islamic Center during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan; Muslims regard the pig as an unclean animal. The motivation of the gunmen is not yet clear.
Here's What's Happening Today With Trump's Immigration Order
President Trump’s executive order led to massive protests, legal challenges, and an apparent reversal over the weekend. The order suspends the U.S. refugee intake for 120 days, bans all Syrian refugees until further notice, and bars people from seven countries—Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, or Yemen—for 90 days. Following large protests over the weekend at several U.S. airports and outside the White House, as well as legal challenges on the behalf of individuals detained at U.S. ports of entry, the Trump administration appeared to reverse course on a section of the ban the also applied to U.S. permanent residents. Other parts of the ban remain in effect. Protests are expected on Monday, though perhaps on a smaller scale as it’s the start of the workweek. Criticism of the order has spread across the Atlantic: In the U.K., a petition to stop Trump’s state visit has gained more than 1 million signatures; 100,000 signatures were needed for the petition to be considered for parliamentary debate.
The U.S. may end up with the worst COVID-19 outbreak in the industrialized world. This is how it’s going to play out.
Three months ago, no one knew that SARS-CoV-2 existed. Now the virus has spread to almost every country, infecting at least 446,000 people whom we know about, and many more whom we do not. It has crashed economies and broken health-care systems, filled hospitals and emptied public spaces. It has separated people from their workplaces and their friends. It has disrupted modern society on a scale that most living people have never witnessed. Soon, most everyone in the United States will know someone who has been infected. Like World War II or the 9/11 attacks, this pandemic has already imprinted itself upon the nation’s psyche.
A global pandemic of this scale was inevitable. In recent years, hundreds of health experts have written books, white papers, and op-eds warning of the possibility. Bill Gates has been telling anyone who would listen, including the 18 million viewers of his TED Talk. In 2018, I wrote a story for The Atlantic arguing that America was not ready for the pandemic that would eventually come. In October, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security war-gamed what might happen if a new coronavirus swept the globe. And then one did. Hypotheticals became reality. “What if?” became “Now what?”
The extent of Oscar Health’s work on coronavirus testing hasn’t been previously reported.
On March 13, President Donald Trump promised Americans they would soon be able to access a new website that would ask them about their symptoms and direct them to nearby coronavirus testing sites. He said Google was helping.
That wasn’t true. But in the following days, Oscar Health—a health-insurance company closely connected to Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner—developed a government website with the features the president had described. A team of Oscar engineers, project managers, and executives spent about five days building a stand-alone website at the government’s request, an Oscar spokesperson told The Atlantic. The company even dispatched two employees from New York to meet in person with federal officials in Washington, D.C., the spokesperson said. Then the website was suddenly and mysteriously scrapped.
The coronavirus outbreak may last for a year or two, but some elements of pre-pandemic life will likely be won back in the meantime.
The new coronavirus has brought American life to a near standstill, closing businesses, canceling large gatherings, and keeping people at home. All of those people must surely be wondering: When will things return to normal?
The answer is simple, if not exactly satisfying: when enough of the population—possibly 60 or 80 percent of people—is resistant to COVID-19 to stifle the disease’s spread from person to person. That is the end goal, although no one knows exactly how long it will take to get there.
There are two realistic paths to achieving this “population-level immunity.” One is the development of a vaccine. The other is for the disease to work its way through the population, surely killing many, but also leaving many others—those who contract the disease and then recover—immune. “They’re just Teflon at that point,” meaning they can’t get infected again and they won’t pass on the disease, explains Andrew Noymer, a public-health professor at the UC Irvine. Once enough people reach Teflon status—though we don’t yet know if recovering from the disease confers any immunity at all, let alone lifelong immunity—normalcy will be restored. (It may also turn out to be the case that people who are immune to the disease can still pass it on under certain circumstances.)*
China warned Italy. Italy warned us. We didn’t listen. Now the onus is on the rest of America to listen to New York.
In the emergency-department waiting room, 150 people worry about a fever. Some just want a test, others badly need medical treatment. Those not at the brink of death have to wait six, eight, 10 hours before they can see a doctor. Those admitted to the hospital might wait a full day for a bed.
I am an emergency-medicine doctor who practices in both Manhattan and Queens; at the moment, I’m in Queens. Normally, I love coming to work here, even though in the best of times, my co-residents and I take care of one of New York City’s most vulnerable, underinsured patient populations. Many have underlying illnesses and a language barrier, and lack primary care.
Across the country, social distancing is morphing from a public-health to political act. The consequences could be disastrous.
For Geoff Frost, the first sign of the coronavirus culture war came last weekend on the golf course. His country club, located in an affluent suburb of Atlanta, had recently introduced a slew of new policies to encourage social distancing. The communal water jugs were gone, the restaurant was closed, and golfers had been asked to limit themselves to one person per cart. Frost, a 43-year-old Democrat, told me the club’s mix of younger liberals and older conservatives had always gotten along just fine—but the guidelines were proving divisive.
At the driving range, while Frost and his like-minded friends slathered on hand sanitizer and kept six feet apart, the white-haired Republicans seemed to delight in breaking the new rules. They made a show of shaking hands, and complained loudly about the “stupid hoax” being propagated by virus alarmists. When their tee times were up, they piled defiantly into golf carts, shoulder to shoulder, and sped off toward the first hole.
The dominant conservative philosophy for interpreting the Constitution has served its purpose, and scholars ought to develop a more moral framework.
In recent years, allegiance to the constitutional theory known as originalism has become all but mandatory for American legal conservatives. Every justice and almost every judge nominated by recent Republican administrations has pledged adherence to the faith. At the Federalist Society, the influential association of legal conservatives, speakers talk and think of little else. Even some luminaries of the left-liberal legal academy have moved away from speaking about “living constitutionalism,” “fundamental fairness,” and “evolving standards of decency,” and have instead justified their views in originalist terms. One often hears the catchphrase “We are all originalists now.”
Originalism comes in several varieties (baroque debates about key theoretical ideas rage among its proponents), but their common core is the view that constitutional meaning was fixed at the time of the Constitution’s enactment. This approach served legal conservatives well in the hostile environment in which originalism was first developed, and for some time afterward.
Trump is utterly unsuited to deal with this crisis, either intellectually or temperamentally.
For his entire adult life, and for his entire presidency, Donald Trump has created his own alternate reality, complete with his own alternate set of facts. He has shown himself to be erratic, impulsive, narcissistic, vindictive, cruel, mendacious, and devoid of empathy. None of that is new.
But we’re now entering the most dangerous phase of the Trump presidency. The pain and hardship that the United States is only beginning to experience stem from a crisis that the president is utterly unsuited to deal with, either intellectually or temperamentally. When things were going relatively well, the nation could more easily absorb the costs of Trump’s psychological and moral distortions and disfigurements. But those days are behind us. The coronavirus pandemic has created the conditions that can catalyze a destructive set of responses from an individual with Trump’s characterological defects and disordered personality.
“This time of isolation could be a period of great growth or great struggle in your relationship.”
Humans have evolved with a drive to share life with a partner—just not all day long. Our hunter-gatherer ancestors on the savanna formed pair-bonds, but they parted in the morning to go about their separate tasks. So did our ancestors on the farm. For hundreds of thousands of years, even the most devoted couples have been uttering some version of that basic romantic principle: “I married you for better or for worse, but not for lunch.”
So what happens now that spouses are staying home all day, and many unmarried couples suddenly find themselves quarantined together? The peril facing relationships quickly became obvious to the pioneers of this new intimacy on the Diamond Princess cruise ship, where couples were cooped up for two weeks in their cabin during the ship’s quarantine. Ellis Vincent, a retired airline executive from Australia, told a reporter that he and his wife, Kimberly, were passing the time by having long conversations during which she displayed a remarkable memory.
The president is transmuting his calamitous failures into political gold.
Donald Trump is presiding over one of the worst calamities to befall the nation in living memory, and anyone who has followed his response since the coronavirus morphed from a worrisome outbreak in a Chinese province into a global pandemic knows the truth: Trump’s response has been disastrous. It’s no wonder that just a couple of weeks ago, a writer in this magazine concluded that “the Trump presidency is over.”
It seemed reasonable, logical. But once the polls started coming in, it turned out the American public—at least for now—disagrees. Despite his well-documented incompetence and lies, Trump is now enjoying some of the highest approval ratings of his presidency. Even more baffling, a majority of Americans—as many as 60 percent in one poll—think he’s doing a good job tackling the crisis.
President Trump’s targets have been Democratic leaders. But the outbreak isn’t going to stay confined to Democratic states.
It shouldn’t be all that remarkable when two leaders talk in a crisis. On Sunday morning, President Donald Trump got on the phone with Mayor Bill de Blasio to discuss what New York City needs to survive a white-hot outbreak that is only getting worse. De Blasio asked him to send more ventilators and military personnel, warning that in a week’s time, the health-care system could be overwhelmed.
Yet with these particular leaders at this particular point in history, it is remarkable. Until recently, de Blasio told me, none of his calls to the upper reaches of the White House were returned. Two weeks ago, the Democratic mayor said publicly that Trump was “betraying” his native city by not sending more life-saving medical equipment. Ever sensitive to criticism, Trump said, in turn: “I’m not dealing with him.”
Quarantined Italians record messages to themselves 10 days ago, when the pandemic hadn’t yet killed 1,809 people and infected more than 24,000 across the country.
/media/None/YSerhan_Headshot-1/original.png)
/media/img/mt/2020/03/Atlantic_quar_relationship_2/original.png)
