They say that the only two certainties in life are death and taxes. The recently passed “Big Beautiful Bill,” however, claims to eliminate one of those — at least for overtime hours.
The budget bill, passed in July, followed up on a key Trump campaign promise to eliminate taxes on overtime pay. Even better: the law is retroactive to the beginning of 2025, giving those who work overtime an additional six months of tax-free wages ahead of all the money the bill will save them going forward.
But the reality may be far less generous than it sounds.
Before you start planning how to spend all that extra cash, be aware that the new law contains several big, not-so-beautiful catches.
Not all overtime pay is tax exempt
In touting the elimination of taxes on overtime pay in the budget bill, the White House claimed that the law “makes good on … President Trump’s cornerstone campaign promises and benefits hardworking Americans where they need it the most — their paychecks.”
And in some ways, it does. The reality, however, is that the “Big Beautiful Bill” only eliminates some tax on overtime pay.
To start, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) noted that the tax break only pertains to a portion of overtime pay, or the “‘half’ of ‘time and a half pay’, required under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.”
For example, if a worker makes $40 an hour, then their time and a half overtime would amount to $60 an hour. Of that $60, only $20 (the “half” part of “time and a half”) remains tax-free.
Additionally, “no tax on overtime” is a federal income-tax change only. State and local income taxes still apply (unless your state separately conforms), and Social Security and Medicare taxes are still withheld on all wages, including overtime.
As well, there’s a cap to how much overtime pay remains tax-exempt: $12,500 per person annually, or $25,000 for people filing together. Earners who make more than $150,000 (or $300,000 combined between two people filing together) are not eligible for tax-free overtime pay.
Another issue, raised by Forbes, is horizontal equity: two people with the same annual pay can end up taxed differently. An hourly worker who logs FLSA overtime can deduct part of that overtime, while a salaried worker putting in the same extra hours gets no break.
Then there are those workers whose overtime pay is dictated by different agreements or laws. The WSJ pointed to airline and railroad workers as examples of those “who often get overtime pay under union contracts and are exempt from FLSA because they are covered by the Railway Labor Act.” These workers generally will not qualify for the deduction on their contract overtime.
They added that “One result is different treatment for similar jobs. An airline jet mechanic wouldn’t get the deduction but an airplane mechanic at a separate maintenance company could.”
The long-term fallout
Beyond the immediate monetary effect, a more broad catch to the new law could make itself known in the long run.
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) raised concerns that the law will incentivize many to work as much overtime as possible to gain the extra income, including evenings and weekends — habits “associated with a range of negative impacts on physical and mental health, well-being, and productivity.”
In addition, those unable to work overtime for personal or health reasons will lose out on the benefits. The EPI called the law “another gimmick that does more harm than good” and suggested that offering workers raises so they don’t have to work the extra hours would prove a better option.
Forbes, meanwhile, labeled the law “a stealth anti-job creation measure” because it lessens the need for employers to hire more workers.
“A 50-hour week for one employee can be replaced by tacking on an additional 10 hours across five separate workers. The overtime deduction thus may boost take-home pay for some, but it does so by encouraging a labor distribution that concentrates hours in the hands of fewer people.”
That said, according to Tax Policy Center estimates, only 9% of American households will actually save money by paying fewer taxes on overtime pay, resulting in an average added windfall of roughly $1400 annually. Most workers will see the benefit at tax time.
And, of course, there’s one final caveat to the “no tax on overtime pay” law: it expires in 2028.
Tag Archives: united states
Dagens US: Russian Troops Troll Trump After Alaska Summit: Flies US Flag While Invading Ukraine
Money Talks News: “There’s No Way This Is Going to Happen to Us” : Army Sergeant, Before ICE Deports His Wife
Salon: Florida desensitized my family to cruel and unusual punishment
It’s not just at Alligator Alcatraz. Horrific conditions exist throughout the Sunshine State’s prisons
In the weeks since Alligator Alcatraz opened deep within the Everglades in southern Florida, there have been mounting reports of the horrific conditions inside: Maggots in the food, sewage overflowing near beds, people having to remove fecal matter from the toilets with their bare hands due to a lack of water. To protest the conditions, detainees have launched a hunger strike, which likely continues, despite the Department of Homeland Security’s attempts to deny and suppress information about it.
Construction at Alligator Alcatraz could be halted indefinitely in the wake of a lawsuit filed by environmental groups and an Indigenous tribe arguing the detention center’s development on protected wetlands violates environmental laws. Another suit brought by the ACLU claims detainees’ constitutional rights are being violated. Florida seems undeterred. The state is planning to build a second detention center at a correctional institution that was shuttered in 2021 after numerous reports of excessive violence and abuse of inmates by guards. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is calling the facility “the deportation depot.”
This scary reality is snowballing in its brutality as President Donald Trump and his administration, Republican politicians and large swaths of the American population continue to broaden the cultural profile of who we deem dangerous enough to lock up. Several states are developing similar concentration camps, including one at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas, and an Indiana facility dubbed “The Speedway Slammer.” I’m not surprised.
I’m also not surprised that Florida is leading the way in building these facilities. The U.S. has the largest incarcerated population in the world, and Florida locks up a higher percentage of its people than any independent democratic country on earth. To date, no other state has spent as much effort collaborating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during the second Trump administration. Following DeSantis’ special session on immigration in January, the Sunshine State passed laws requiring local jurisdictions to enter into agreements with ICE and offering a $1,000 bonus to local officers participating in ICE raids and operations. Immigration detention in Florida quadrupled in less than six months. As the state runs out of space, Florida jails are being used to house detainees, exacerbating overcrowded conditions and forcing people to sleep on the floor. When ICE staff opposed the plans to use Florida jails as ICE detention facilities because it would violate current federal regulations and standards, a local sheriff dismissed the claims, calling them “woke.”
Prisoners in the Florida Department of Corrections system are often held under many of the same inhumane conditions present at Alligator Alcatraz. My uncle is one of them.
I’ve visited him in facilities up and down the state: In detention centers; maximum security units; psych wards; private correctional institutions; facilities with barbed wire fences, search dogs and rooftops decorated with armed guards; places in towns so small the only store for miles is a Piggly Wiggly.
I don’t pretend that many of Florida’s prisoners are not guilty of the crimes they’ve been charged with, and I won’t downplay the severity of the crimes committed — my uncle’s included. Unlike the detainees held in Alligator Alcatraz, they have ostensibly been given due process, though we could argue about the justice system’s version of the right that is often applied to Black, brown and poor people. Regardless of the circumstances, however, I believe every person deserves to be treated with dignity and humanity. I don’t believe that violence and cruelty has ever nudged anyone toward a better version of themselves.
One Wednesday in May, I woke up to frantic voicemails from my mom. My uncle had been stabbed multiple times, and she wasn’t sure if he was alive or dead. It had happened two days earlier, but she’d just found out that morning from a fellow prisoner’s girlfriend. Details were spotty. My uncle was an inmate at Dade Correctional Institution, a facility in south Miami deemed the “deadliest in Florida” by the Miami Herald following an investigation into a record number of inmate deaths in 2017. An earlier investigation into the facility revealed that officers had made “sport” of tormenting mentally ill inmates, including forcing inmates into a specially rigged, scalding hot shower as punishment for unruly behavior.
My uncle had been transferred to the facility from another prison a few years ago because Dade Correctional Institution has an Americans With Disabilities Act unit and he, a lifer, has gone deaf from decades of loud, echoing conditions.
Since he’s deaf, he didn’t hear the man — or men — coming up on him with the knife. Despite our many requests, the Florida Department of Corrections has not gotten him a hearing aid that doesn’t beep loudly in his ears, so he prefers to stay in his own, soundless world.
I imagined him walking into the same yard where we’ve sat for visits, thinking about how he’ll get to pet his favorite rescue dog later, the one corrections officers bring in for training. He prefers the dogs to humans, saying they’re the only redeeming thing about the place. In my mind, he was thinking about the dog when he was surrounded by the other men. He was thinking about the dog as the knife pierced his skin, plunging into the back of his neck and then into his ear. I imagined and reimagined the scene, watching him get caught by surprise, his eyes widening at the pain.
Did he fall to the ground? Call out for help? The woman who called my mom said four other inmates were also stabbed, and that corrections officers were involved, but it’s impossible to verify.
There are so many questions. Did the officers provide the knife? Join in on the stabbing? Simply look the other way?
My mom and siblings and I called and emailed each of the prison’s classification officers, coordinators and wardens. This was not the first time in my uncle’s 30-year incarceration that we’ve had to hound the Florida Department of Corrections for answers about his well-being. It was not the first time we’ve received calls from another inmate’s girlfriend or relative about my uncle. There was the time, a few years ago at another facility, when he was taken to the medical unit for lesions in his stomach. He was kept on a gurney in a hallway for days without treatment. He was in so much pain he thought he might die, so he had a friend get in touch with us to let us know.
Then, like now, we called and tried to get information from the staff and were given the run around. The person with answers was always on break. The warden was never available. We were treated like nuisances for caring. They informed me I was not on “the list” to receive information, a bold-faced lie. I pleaded with anyone I could get on the line. They gave me one-word answers and told me to calm down in an almost bored tone. I cried, begging them to have some compassion, to imagine it was their loved one who was hurt.
I canceled a few work calls. Without thinking much about it, I texted my co-worker and told her my uncle was stabbed. She expressed alarm and concern. I kept calling, relaying information to my mom and siblings. I reached out to the media, including the writer who investigated Dade Correctional Institution years ago. She recommended that I request copies of my uncle’s inmate file, which is public record, and any incident reports involving his name. I did this and got nothing. I tried again — still, nothing. Unfortunately, none of this was newsworthy, and my sources inside were not considered credible, so the reporters I spoke with didn’t have much to go on. I reached out to an advocacy group and received a reply three months later stating that, due to a lack of resources and too much demand, they could not help me.
A coordinator at the prison eventually told us my uncle was alive, that he had received medical treatment and was being held in solitary confinement for his safety. We were given nothing else. When I asked why we weren’t notified of the incident, I was told that it’s the inmate’s responsibility to notify loved ones — as if he could call us after being stabbed multiple times, and while he was in solitary confinement with a disability that makes it difficult to communicate by phone.
Several weeks later, my uncle was transferred to another facility at the opposite end of the state. He had 28-day-old sutures he contemplated removing himself because they itched so badly. My fury was exhausting. My family and I stopped talking about the incident and went back to business as usual, putting money on his commissary, sending him books and figuring out how to get messages to him via the new facility’s byzantine communications systems. I dropped any hope of trying to get information about what happened, even from my uncle, who, speaking on a recorded line, just said, “Shit happens in here.” The upside, for him: At least the new facility has air conditioning.
The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, including the denial of necessary medical care for inmates. But thanks to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, it’s incredibly challenging for inmates to bring suits against this treatment, and just about 1% of all cases actually win. One ongoing lawsuit against Dade Correctional Institution concerns the lack of air conditioning that led to four inmates dying last year in Miami, where heat indexes can rise up to 115 degrees Fahrenheit. The Florida Department of Corrections sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the deaths were not caused by heat, but a federal judge allowed the lawsuit to proceed. The majority of Florida’s prison housing units are not air-conditioned.
I imagine the detainees in Alligator Alcatraz without adequate shelter or air conditioning in the middle of hurricane season in a South Florida swamp. I think of the cavalier way Republican lawmakers have denied claims about the detention camp’s conditions. I think of Isidro Perez, the 75-year-old Cuban man who died in ICE custody at the Krome Detention Center in Miami in July. I think of the elderly prisoner in a wheelchair who begged for help in the heat at Dade Correctional Institution and died after being refused medical attention. I think of all the lives we have lost to the normalization of cruel punishment, and how many more there are to lose.
Over the last 50 years, our bureaucratic desensitization to incarceration has grown largely unchecked. Prisons are built quietly, out of sight from the public. Visiting my uncle, regardless of where he is, requires a long drive, countless forms and hours waiting, adherence to seemingly arbitrary rules that differ from place to place and can change at any moment without notice. The point is isolation, to forget about these people. To systematically dehumanize them — first prisoners, then immigrants — and to watch as the public starts to believe they don’t deserve to be treated like humans.

https://www.salon.com/2025/08/17/florida-desensitized-my-family-to-cruel-and-unusual-punishment
Inquisitr: Trump Admin’s New Crackdown Demands Immigrants Prove ‘Good Moral Character’ Beyond Just Staying Out of Jail
New USCIS rule gives officers sweeping power to judge applicants’ morality, from traffic tickets to tax returns
When it comes to immigrants who want to become citizens of the United States, the second-term government of Donald Trump has turned on the moral compass. Although “good moral character” has long been an essential part of the naturalization process, the DOHS is now looking into more detailed areas of an applicant’s life as opposed to just checking boxes, as has been routine for so long.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a new directive on Friday directing officers to give much more weight to whether an applicant’s character truly embodies American values, which go beyond just avoiding jail time.
As a result, immigrants who wish to become citizens after getting a green card will have to submit to a more extensive and private assessment of their contributions, behavior, and even violations of traffic laws!
For many years, the term “good moral character” has been a part of U.S. immigration law. Naturalization applicants already had to prove they were not “habitual drunkards,” d–g traffickers, or convicted murderers.
Even so, the Trump administration wants officers to start digging deeper.
The memo encourages officers to perform a “holistic assessment” of an applicant’s life rather than just relying on a mechanical checklist that looks for serious crimes. Community involvement, caregiving responsibilities, lawful employment, time spent in the United States, tax history, and academic achievements must now be taken into account throughout the review process.
To put it simply, you might rack up moral points by raising your children, filing your taxes, and helping out at the local food bank. Yet, because of the increased scrutiny, even legally allowed behaviors that were previously thought of as trivial, such as constantly reckless driving, harassment, or “aggressive solicitation,” can now be used against you.
Officers have more discretion as a result of this change. However, they also have more freedom to reject applicants for reasons that are not going to be clear to them at the time of application or even after it gets rejected.
According to the USCIS memo, “acts that are contrary to the average behavior of citizens in the jurisdiction where aliens reside” may be taken into account. It also means that a person’s bid for citizenship may be seriously limited by a poor driving record in California or unpaid child support in Texas — all pointing to their so-called “moral character.”
The goal is to raise the standard for what it means to be an American. The policy seeks to “restore integrity” to the naturalization process, according to agency chief spokesman Matthew Tragesser, who spoke to ABC News. According to him, “U.S. citizenship is the gold standard of citizenship — it should only be offered to the world’s best of the best.”
Donald Trump’s larger political message (that citizenship is a privilege rather than a right and ought to be saved for people who actively uphold American values instead of just adhering to the law) is made possible by this framing.
The new policy, which puts stricter standards and gives immigration officers greater flexibility, is also in line with the administration’s ongoing attempts to restrict possible paths to citizenship.
Critics perceive a more cynical element at work, though. Joe Biden-era USCIS official Doug Rand contends the new rule was created to scare new applicants away. Rand claims that the administration is, in essence, discouraging legal immigrants from applying for citizenship by broadening the definition of “bad moral character” to include minor, non-criminal behavior.
Rand told ABC News, “They’re trying to increase the grounds for denial of U.S. citizenship by (…) torturing the definition of good moral character to encompass extremely harmless behavior.”
Between 600,000 and 1 million immigrants become citizens of the United States each year, the Irish Star reports.
Years of legal residency, civics and English proficiency exams, and strict background checks are already part of the complex process. Now, staying true to constantly changing standards is more vital than avoiding crimes when defining “good moral character.”
News Nation: NYC student, 7, and family detained by ICE: ‘Should be getting ready for school’
New York Attorney General Letitia James also took to social media, saying, “This administration is ripping families apart. It’s cruel, inhumane, and wrong.”
ICE is detaining a 7-year-old girl and her immediate family, sources confirmed to Nexstar’s WPIX Saturday morning.
The 7-year-old, a student at a New York City Public School, and her mother were sent to an ICE detention center in Texas. Her 19-year-old brother remains in ICE custody in New Jersey, officials said.
“It is disgusting that a child would be taken into ICE detention this way,” Queens City Councilman Shekat Krishanan said in an interview with WPIX. “She should be with her mom, getting ready for school in a couple of weeks. She should be buying school supplies.”
This is the first known ICE arrest of a New York City child under 18, Krishnan said in a social media post.
The student’s name, which is not being released due to her age, was a student at Public School 89 in Queens.
The detention, first reported by the nonprofit news outlet The City, isn’t the first time ICE has detained a New York City public school student after they had been in the vicinity of the federal building.
WPIX did not immediately receive a response from federal authorities regarding the detainments but, according to a Department of Homeland Security statement shared with The City, the girl’s mother illegally entered the U.S. from Ecuador in 2022.
Mamadou Diallo, another New York City student, was detained by ICE during a routine hearing, City Council Member Lincoln Restler said.‘
Other cases of New York City students being detained have also been reported, prompting New York City Public Schools to issue the following statement:
“New York City Public Schools stands with all of our students, and we are committed to supporting every child and family in our system. When we hear about a family that is being detained, we have – with their permission – connected them with community and agency partners who can offer legal support and other resources. We want to reassure all families: our schools are safe, welcoming places, and we encourage you to continue sending your children to school, where they are cared for and valued.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James also took to social media, saying, “This administration is ripping families apart. It’s cruel, inhumane, and wrong.”
Kansas City Star: Trump Suffers Double Legal Blow
District Judge Jennifer Thurston has ordered the release of Syrian asylum seeker Salam Maklad and barred her rearrest without constitutional safeguards. Advocates have raised concerns that contested grant rules are disrupting essential services, while officials have noted that the cases have tested federal authority.
In addition to Thurston’s decision, U.S. District Judge William Smith has blocked new Justice Department grant conditions related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and transgender rights. Both rulings represent legal blows to the Trump administration, as they directly challenge and overturn key policy actions.
Both rulings, issued this month, limit the administration’s ability to enforce its immigration and social policy priorities. Critics say this highlights judicial checks on executive authority despite Republican control in Congress and the White House.
Thurston wrote, “Respondents are PERMANENTLY ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-arresting or re-detaining Ms. Maklad absent compliance with constitutional protections, which include at a minimum, pre-deprivation notice—describing the change of circumstances necessitating her arrest—and detention, and a timely bond hearing.”
Thurston added, “At any such hearing, the Government SHALL bear the burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that Ms. Maklad poses a danger to the community or a risk of flight, and Ms. Maklad SHALL be allowed to have her counsel present.”
Thurston ordered Maklad’s release after an ICE check-in triggered her detention, noting she has no criminal history and is not a flight risk. She barred ICE from rearresting Maklad without notice of changed circumstances and a timely bond hearing.
Smith granted preliminary relief to 17 nonprofits challenging updated Office on Violence Against Women grant terms. He found the conditions likely arbitrary under federal law.
Smith wrote, “On the one hand, if the Court does not grant preliminary relief, then the Coalitions will face real and immediate irreparable harm from the challenged conditions, conditions which the Court has already concluded likely violate the APA.”
Smith added, “This could result in the disruption of important and, in some cases, life saving services to victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. On the other hand, if the Court grants preliminary relief, then the Office will simply have to consider grant applications and award funding as it normally does.”
Democracy Forward President Skye Perryman said, “The Justice Department should be exploring what they can be doing to keep people and communities safe, not threatening funding for local and community organizations with proven results.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/trump-suffers-double-legal-blow/ss-AA1KGtBW
Washington Post: A night in D.C. after Trump’s National Guard deployment
Spend the night with us in one of D.C.’s nightlife hubs, as federal police roam, crowds are smaller, bartenders worry and clubgoers try to enjoy themselves.
The sunlight dimmed along this stretch of U Street to the familiar soundtrack of a city ready for the weekend: rumbling buses taking home tired commuters, high heels clacking along sticky sidewalks and chattering crowds ready to order their first round.
Then a group gathered on a street corner with pots and pans, jingling them as the darkness grew closer. They whooped and cheered for a few minutes, a brief moment of joyful resistance seeking to counteract the image of the crime-ridden city described by the president.
Among the clubgoers in miniskirts and sweat-soaked T-shirts, there were federal agents hopping in and out of unmarked cars. A protester held a sign reading “America has no kings.” Police officers were met with boos and phones ready to record.
Welcome to the first Friday night in D.C. since President Donald Trump announced he was placing the local police under federal control and sending in National Guard troops to a city where 9 in 10 voters cast ballots for his opponent. The next morning, the White House would announce that the overnight operation yielded 52 arrests and the seizure of three illegal firearms. Twenty-two multiagency teams were deployed throughout the city.
Trump justified the exertion of executive power to reduce crime by depicting the city as a lawless wasteland, despite violent crime reaching 30-year lows. But many of those gathered around the bars and clubs in Northwest Washington on Friday night said they felt more unsettled by the federal presence than any other safety concerns.
Washington Post journalists spent Friday night in a popular section of U Street — a nightlife hub that is among the areas of the city with the highest number of crimes reported this year. Earlier this summer, D.C. police implemented a youth curfew over concerns about rowdy crowds in some areas.
Nearby, two nights earlier, a mix of local and federal authorities pulled over drivers for seat belt violations or broken taillights while onlookers chanted: “Go home, fascists.”
On Friday, crowds were smaller, bartenders and club managers said, and they wondered if patrons were staying inside to avoid federal authorities. And yet, there were still people ready to party.
The largest police response The Post witnessed Friday night was over a claim of a stolen bike. It was around 8:30 p.m., and the sky was ink blue.
One couple heading home from an event at a nearby synagogue looked on with furrowed brows. They spotted a few D.C. police cruisers blocking traffic and agents donning vests labeled “HSI” — Homeland Security Investigations. They hadn’t seen that before, not here.
A pair of French tourists, in D.C. for the first time and looking for a bar, paused when they saw the police cruisers and growing crowd. Earlier, they had strolled by the White House and marveled at the Capitol, and now they were trying to make sense of the flashing lights.
They had loosely followed the week’s headlines and were still thrilled to be visiting.
“We’re on vacation, so we try to cut [out] the news,” Solène Le Toullec said, and they walked on.
At the sight of local and federal law enforcement throughout the night, people pooled on the sidewalk — watching, filming, booing.
“Get out!”
“Go!”
“Quit!”
Such interactions played out again and again as the night drew on. Onlookers heckled the police as they did their job and applauded as officers left.
…
Click the links below to read the rest:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-night-in-d-c-after-trump-s-national-guard-deployment/ar-AA1KFJnn
Politico: DC sues over Trump administration’s attempted takeover of city police
Washington officials are suing the Trump administration over what they call a “baseless power grab” after the Department of Justice ordered a new “emergency” head of District police.
“By illegally declaring a takeover of MPD, the Administration is abusing its temporary, limited authority under the law,” Schwalb wrote in an X post Friday. “This is the gravest threat to Home Rule DC has ever faced, and we are fighting to stop it.”
The lawsuit, filed in federal court, warns that the attempted takeover could “wreak operational havoc” on the Metropolitan Police Department because of the confusion about who has operational control. The city’s lawyers say the push by President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi violates the law in multiple ways — exceeding the president’s legal power to intervene in city affairs and rescinding policies adopted by local government.
They’re asking a federal judge to immediately rescind Bondi’s attempted takeover and effort to rewrite Washington police policies, declaring them to be unlawful. It’s unclear how quickly a judge will act, but the emergency nature of the filing could lead to proceedings as soon as Friday.
The suit is the biggest pushback from city officials since Trump invoked a provision of the Home Rule Act — the 1970s law that allows for limited self-governance by Washington’s government — that allows the president to direct the Metropolitan Police Department’s services to address “special conditions of an emergency nature.”
The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee known for her take-no-prisoners approach from the bench. Reyes, most notably, blocked Trump’s transgender military ban before her injunction was paused by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Amid the litigation, the Justice Department filed a complaint against Reyes for her pointed comments to government attorneys — though she at times also praised their advocacy and made similarly pointed comments to lawyers for the transgender service members.
In a declaration accompanying the city’s bid for an immediate restraining order, D.C. Police Chief Pamela Smith said the administration’s gambit is “endangering the safety of the public and law enforcement officers.”
“In my nearly three decades in law enforcement, I have never seen a single government action that would cause a greater threat to law and order than this dangerous directive.”
The suit underscores that no president in history has invoked the authority to manage the city’s police department. And the city’s lawyers say the president’s power to do so requires cooperation between city officials and the federal government, not a hostile takeover.
Bondi on Thursday issued an order that directed Drug Enforcement Administration head Terry Cole to assume “all the powers and duties” of the city’s police chief as the new “Emergency Police Commissioner,” “effective immediately.”
[“Bimbo#3”] Bondi’s order also purported to rescind or suspend several Washington police orders — including one issued by Smith earlier on Thursday that allowed for limited cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser and Schwalb — both Democrats elected by Washington residents — insisted late Thursday that [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi could not legally disrupt the typical chain of command for MPD officers by requiring them to report to Cole.
“Therefore, members of MPD must continue to follow your orders and not the orders of any official not appointed by the Mayor,” Schwalb wrote in a letter Thursday to Smith that was circulated by Bowser. “Regardless of the [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi order, no official other than you may exercise all the powers and duties of the Chief of Police.”
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said Democrats’ attempts to “stifle” [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi’s orders are “par for the course” for the party.
“The Trump Administration has the lawful authority to assert control over the D.C. Police, which is necessary due to the emergency that has arisen in our Nation’s Capital as a result of failed leadership,” Jackson said in a statement.
A Department of Justice spokesperson declined to comment.
Trump on Monday issued an executive order invoking the Home Rule Act, insisting that the District was overrun by violence. He also deployed the National Guard to the city.
But before [“Bimbo#3”] Bondi’s order Thursday looking to replace the MPD chief, city officials have largely limited their criticism of the Trump administration, noting that Washington was in a fairly unique situation that gave the federal government broad powers and authorities.
“The feds have an outsize role in D.C., we all know that,” Bowser told POLITICO Wednesday morning. “Right now, having a surge of officers enhances our MPD forces on a temporary basis. We’re going to stay focused on hiring more MPD or, when this temporary surge is over, figuring out more permanent partnerships to tap into when we need a surge of officers.”
But Trump’s Monday press conference went far beyond what his executive order said, with the president saying his administration would “take our capital back.”
“Giving us additional resources is a good thing, but that’s also quite different than federalizing our police force,” D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson said Wednesday in an interview. “Donald Trump is not going to tell our police how to police.”
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have introduced dueling legislation over Trump’s moves. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) announced a resolution Friday to grant Trump “the authority to maintain federal control of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) in Washington, D.C. for as long as necessary to restore law and order.”
Democratic lawmakers also introduced a joint resolution Friday to terminate the administration’s control of D.C. police by voiding Trump’s proclamation of a crime emergency in Washington. But without control of either chamber of Congress, the effort among Democrats is almost certainly futile.
“Trump has made clear that his efforts in D.C., where 700,000 taxpaying American citizens lack the protections of statehood, are part of a broader plan to militarize and federalize the streets of cities around America whose citizens voted against him,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) in his statement.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/15/dc-police-trump-lawsuit-00511086
SpaceX Gets Billions From the Government. It Gives Little to Nothing Back in Taxes.
Elon Musk’s rocket company relies on federal contracts, but years of losses have most likely let it avoid paying federal income taxes, according to internal company documents.
SpaceX, Elon Musk’s rocket and satellite internet company, has received billions of dollars in federal contracts over its more than two-decade existence.
But SpaceX has most likely paid little to no federal income taxes since its founding in 2002 and has privately told investors that it may never have to pay any, according to internal company documents reviewed by The New York Times.
The rocket maker’s finances have long been secret because the company is privately held. But the documents reviewed by The Times show that SpaceX can seize on a legal tax benefit that allows it to use the more than $5 billion in losses it racked up by late 2021 to offset paying future taxable income. President Trump made a change in 2017, during his first term, that eliminated the tax benefit’s expiration date for all companies. For SpaceX, that means that nearly $3 billion of its losses can be indefinitely applied against future taxable income.
Tax experts consulted by The Times said that not having to pay tax on $5 billion in taxable income was substantial and notable for a company that has relied on contracts with the U.S. government to an unusual degree. SpaceX works closely with the Pentagon, NASA and other agencies, giving it a vital role in national security. In 2020, federal contracts generated almost 84 percent of the rocket maker’s revenue, according to the documents, a figure that had not been previously reported.
Larger tech companies — including some that have taken advantage of the tax benefit — often pay billions in federal income taxes. Microsoft, for one, said it expected to pay $14.1 billion in federal income taxes in its last fiscal year.
Tax F’Elon!
Tax SpaceX!
Fund Social Security!
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/15/technology/spacex-musk-government-contracts-taxes.html