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 Tortured Poets Department excavates her private life more deeply than ever—but somehow, it’s a story we’ve heard before.
This album is okay. I understand that Taylor Swift is not someone you’re supposed to feel okay about—she is either the great redeemer of English-language arts and letters in the 21st century, as her fans have it, or a total cornball foisted upon the public by the evil record industry, as the haters say. The truth is that she is a talented artist who has reinvigorated popular music as a storytelling medium—but who has, allalong, suffered from some quality-control issues.
The Tortured Poets Department, her 11th studio album, could recalibrate the way we talk about her. Much of the album is a dreary muddle, but with strange and surprising charms, and a couple of flashes of magic. This record is not a work of unimpeachable genius, nor does it feel engineered into existence by a committee of monied interests—it’s way too long and uneven to be, from any point of view, savvy. (And this opinion is based on the 16 songs of the main album; earlier today, she surprise-released 15 more tracks on top of those.) She’s just processing a weird chapter of her life.
In October 2003, Mark Zuckerberg created his first viral site: not Facebook, but FaceMash. Then a college freshman, he hacked into Harvard’s online dorm directories, gathered a massive collection of students’ headshots, and used them to create a website on which Harvard students could rate classmates by their attractiveness, literally and figuratively head-to-head. The site, a mean-spirited prank recounted in the opening scene of The Social Network, got so much traction so quickly that Harvard shut down his internet access within hours. The math that powered FaceMash—and, by extension, set Zuckerberg on the path to building the world’s dominant social-media empire—was reportedly, of all things, a formula for ranking chess players: the Elo system.
A quarter century on, the school shooters’ mythology has propagated a sprawling subculture that idolizes murder and mayhem.
Mass shootings didn’t start at Columbine High, but the mass-shooter era did. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold’s audacious plan and misread motives multiplied the stakes and inspired wave after wave of emulation. How could we know we were witnessing an origin story?
The legend of Columbine is fiction. There are two versions of the attack: what actually happened on April 20, 1999, and the story we all accepted back then. The mythical version explained it all so cleanly. A pair of outcast loners dubbed the “Trench Coat Mafia” targeted the jocks to avenge years of bullying. Dwayne Fuselier, the supervisory special agent who led the FBI’s Columbine investigation, is fond of quoting H. L. Mencken in response to the mythmaking: “There is always a well-known solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.”
The case has one important advantage the others don’t.
In the criminal case now unfolding in a Manhattan courtroom, Donald Trump is accused of having a sexual encounter with Stormy Daniels, finding a way to pay her to keep quiet about it, and then disguising those payments as a business expense. The facts are all very tabloid-y. They also took place before the 2016 election, long before January 6 or the “Stop the Steal” movement, or any of the more serious threats to democracy we associate with Trump.
But the Stormy Daniels case has distinct and simple advantages: In the other, more sprawling cases that deal directly with election interference, Trump’s lawyers have been remarkably successful at piling on delay tactics and are unlikely to go to court any time soon. But in the Stormy Daniels trial, the defendant has been summoned, the jury is being selected, witnesses have been called. And the D.A., Alvin Bragg, has honed his argument that the hush-money payments were in fact an attempt to interfere with the election.
If you feel too rushed even to read this, then your life could use a change.
Want to stay current with Arthur’s writing? Sign up to get an email every time a new column comes out.
Are you feeling a little guilty about reading this article? Not because of the content, of course—nothing scandalous here!—but rather because of the time it takes away from something else you feel you should be doing. Perhaps you are taking a break from work but feel that you shouldn’t because deadlines and obligations are nipping at your ankles this very minute.
If so, that’s because you’re probably too busy. Not that this is some amazing diagnosis: Most people are too busy. According to surveys conducted in recent years by the Pew Research Center, 52 percent of Americans are usually trying to do more than one thing at a time, and 60 percent sometimes feel too busy to enjoy life. When it comes to parents with children under the age of 18, a full 74 percent said that they sometimes feel too busy to enjoy life.
Progressive organizers are betting they can flip the conventional wisdom on voting.
On Indivisible’s website, the first words you’ll find—in large font and all caps—are “Defeat MAGA. Save democracy.” The progressive organizing group, formed shortly after Donald Trump’s 2016 win, sees the stakes of this fall’s presidential election as enormous, even existential. Yet when it deploys more than 2,000 volunteers to canvass neighborhoods in Arizona over the next seven months, the presidential race is the last topic it plans to bring up.
“We’re not going to be knocking on doors trying to convince people to vote for Joe Biden,” Indivisible’s co-founder Ezra Levin told me. Instead, its volunteers will be trying to turn out voters for just about every other Democrat on the ballot—including the party’s nominees for U.S. Senate and House seats and its candidates for the Republican-controlled state legislature—as well as a referendum that could restore abortion rights in Arizona.
Assessing a debate about a controversial hiring practice
This month, Professor Randall L. Kennedy, an eminent scholar of race and civil rights, published an op-ed in The Harvard Crimson denouncing the use of diversity, equity, and inclusion statements in academic hiring. “I am a scholar on the left committed to struggles for social justice,” he wrote. “The realities surrounding mandatory DEI statements, however, make me wince.”
More and more colleges started requiring faculty to submit these statements in recent years, until legislatures in red states began to outlaw them. They remain common at private institutions and in blue states. Kennedy lamented that at Harvard and elsewhere, aspiring professors are required to “profess and flaunt” their faith in DEI in a process that “leans heavily and tendentiously towards varieties of academic leftism.” He concluded that DEI statements “ought to be abandoned.”
They could benefit from a diversity of hormones, empathy about their experience, and a frank approach to sexuality—all hallmarks of trans health care.
After a decade working as an obstetrician-gynecologist, Marci Bowers thought she understood menopause. Whenever she saw a patient in her 40s or 50s, she knew to ask about things such as hot flashes, vaginal dryness, mood swings, and memory problems. And no matter what a patient’s concern was, Bowers almost always ended up prescribing the same thing. “Our answer was always estrogen,” she told me.
Then, in the mid-2000s, Bowers took over a gender-affirmation surgical practice in Colorado. In her new role, she began consultations by asking each patient what they wanted from their body—a question she’d never been trained to ask menopausal women. Over time, she grew comfortable bringing up tricky topics such as pleasure, desire, and sexuality, and prescribing testosterone as well as estrogen. That’s when she realized: Women in menopause were getting short shrift.
Despite the easing of taboos and the rise of hookup apps, Americans are in the midst of a sex recession.
These should be boom times for sex.
The share of Americans who say sex between unmarried adults is “not wrong at all” is at an all-time high. New cases of HIV are at an all-time low. Most women can—at last—get birth control for free, and the morning-after pill without a prescription.
If hookups are your thing, Grindr and Tinder offer the prospect of casual sex within the hour. The phrase If something exists, there is porn of it used to be a clever internet meme; now it’s a truism. BDSM plays at the local multiplex—but why bother going? Sex is portrayed, often graphically and sometimes gorgeously, on prime-time cable. Sexting is, statistically speaking, normal.
Flag dishes you want to make, or don’t: The point of this practice is pleasure, not pragmatism.
A certain type of person will tell you that they read cookbooks like they do novels. This usually means they flip through them at night, in bed, perhaps with the help of some gentle, warm light and a hot cup of tea. They pore over the notes and instructions that precede each recipe; they dream up menus the way a fiction reader might picture the furniture inside a character’s home. They might flag dishes they want to cook, or they might not. The point of this practice is pleasure, not pragmatism.
Of course, there are some cookbooks that lend themselves particularly well to this exercise, and with the right title, any of us can fall into late-night reveries over bouillabaisse or dumplings. These are not quick-and-dirty weeknight cookbooks, nor are they written to bend to a trend, as with the keto and air-fryer manuals that seem to proliferate like weeds these days. For a cookbook to be a great read, it should be written with a living, breathing (and often busy) home cook in mind, and also elevate and expand the genre. The eight books below are titles you should, and will want to, read front to back. Each is written with care and enthusiasm, not just for the practice of cooking but for the experience of eating.
