Hours after hundreds of President Donald Trump's supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol in a harrowing assault on American democracy, a shaken Congress on Thursday formally certified Democrat Joe Biden’s election victory.

US Congress confirms Biden's victory after harrowing Capitol Hill assault

In 1814, the British set fire to the American democracy. Their troops burnt the Capitol, the White House, which was then called the presidential mansion and other government buildings.&nbsp;

More than 200 years later, US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/donald-trump">Donald Trump </a>entered the White House.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-donald-trump-attempts-a-coup-355232/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In the four years that followed, he systematically shredded American democracy and tore the country apart.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/as-capitol-siege-sends-shockwaves-across-the-world-heres-a-timeline-of-how-it-unfolded-355224">As Capitol siege sends shockwaves across the world, here's a timeline of how it unfolded</a>

There are four pillars of every democracy, the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and the press.&nbsp;

Trump attacked all of them and then waged a war on the election.&nbsp;

He called the election process fraud and demanded that the counting be stopped.&nbsp;

Trump also tried to delegitimise the result.&nbsp;

There was no way Trump was going to leave office without insulting the system too.&nbsp;

What Washington witnessed on January 6 was shocking, but not surprising.&nbsp;

Trump filed lawsuits against the election results, sent late-night champagne to official election canvassers and hosted them at Trump hotels.&nbsp;

He terrorised election workers with threats and even tried bullying state governors.&nbsp;

When all his antics flopped, Trump incited thugs into attacking the US Capitol, attempting a coup.&nbsp;

In October 2020, there were articles being written about how Trump may orchestrate to overthrow an elected government and three months later, he did exactly that.&nbsp;

Trump violated his oath of office, committed sedition and attempted a coup d'état.&nbsp;

He made US Capitol looked like Egypt in 2018 when the then army chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi forcefully removed elected president Mohamed Morsi from office.&nbsp;

The scenes were similar to the ones that were seen in Sudan in 2019 when President Omar al-Bashir was overthrown.&nbsp;

The US Capitol looked like 2017's Zimbabwe, 2012's Mali and 2010's Niger, all our nations that are not textbook examples of democracy. &nbsp;

The coup d'état was happening in a country that is the world's oldest and most celebrated democracy.&nbsp;

The siege in US Capitol's only parallel was Wilmington insurrection in 1898 when White supremacists overthrew a multicultural government in North Carolina.&nbsp;

A century separates the two events, but never ever such an event happened on the orders of a sitting president.&nbsp;

In 1814, British forces burnt the Capitol; in 1915, the Senate Reception Room was bombed; the Capitol Room was attacked by four Puerto Rican nationalists in 1954 and there were bombings in 1971 and 1983 too.&nbsp;

The airlines that crashed into the World Trade Centre in September 2011 also attempted US Capitol.&nbsp;

About two decades later, the US president himself had the building attacked.&nbsp;

America's democracy was badly hurt today and what face it will show to the countries it invaded.&nbsp;

The breakdown of law and order in the US has raised eyebrows globally and after the mayhem ended, the democracy has been insulted.&nbsp;

After the US became a laughing stock among its adversaries, Trump says he will ensure a peaceful transfer of power.&nbsp;

The words were coming out from the mouth of a man who insulted the democracy.&nbsp;

The man who does not deserve to sit in the White House even for the remaining two weeks.&nbsp;

In 1814, the British set fire to the American democracy. Their troops burnt the Capitol, the White House, which was then called the presidential mansion and other government buildings.

In 1814, the British set fire to the American democracy. Their troops burnt the Capitol, the White House, which was then called the presidential mansion and other government buildings. More than 200 years later, US President Donald Trump entered the White House. Watch | In the four years that followed, he systematically shredded American democracy and tore the country apart. Also read | As Capitol siege sends shockwaves across the world, here's a timeline of how it unfolded There are four pillars of every democracy, the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and the press. Trump attacked all of them and then waged a war on the election. He called the election process fraud and demanded that the counting be stopped. Trump also tried to delegitimise the result. There was no way Trump was going to leave office without insulting the system too. What Washington witnessed on January 6 was shocking, but not surprising. Trump filed lawsuits against the election results, sent late-night champagne to official election canvassers and hosted them at Trump hotels. He terrorised election workers with threats and even tried bullying state governors. When all his antics flopped, Trump incited thugs into attacking the US Capitol, attempting a coup. In October 2020, there were articles being written about how Trump may orchestrate to overthrow an elected government and three months later, he did exactly that. Trump violated his oath of office, committed sedition and attempted a coup d'état. He made US Capitol looked like Egypt in 2018 when the then army chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi forcefully removed elected president Mohamed Morsi from office. The scenes were similar to the ones that were seen in Sudan in 2019 when President Omar al-Bashir was overthrown. The US Capitol looked like 2017's Zimbabwe, 2012's Mali and 2010's Niger, all our nations that are not textbook examples of democracy. The coup d'état was happening in a country that is the world's oldest and most celebrated democracy. The siege in US Capitol's only parallel was Wilmington insurrection in 1898 when White supremacists overthrew a multicultural government in North Carolina. A century separates the two events, but never ever such an event happened on the orders of a sitting president. In 1814, British forces burnt the Capitol; in 1915, the Senate Reception Room was bombed; the Capitol Room was attacked by four Puerto Rican nationalists in 1954 and there were bombings in 1971 and 1983 too. The airlines that crashed into the World Trade Centre in September 2011 also attempted US Capitol. About two decades later, the US president himself had the building attacked. America's democracy was badly hurt today and what face it will show to the countries it invaded. The breakdown of law and order in the US has raised eyebrows globally and after the mayhem ended, the democracy has been insulted. After the US became a laughing stock among its adversaries, Trump says he will ensure a peaceful transfer of power. The words were coming out from the mouth of a man who insulted the democracy. The man who does not deserve to sit in the White House even for the remaining two weeks.

After an assault on all democratic institutions, Donald Trump attempts coup d'etat

US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;on Friday said that he will not be present for the inauguration ceremony of President-elect <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a>.&nbsp;

"To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th," Trump wrote on Twitter.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347569870578266115?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

US President Donald Trump on Friday said that he will not be present for the inauguration ceremony of President-elect Joe Biden.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/joe-biden-has-a-daunting-task-ahead-of-him-says-eu-chief-ursula-von-der-leyen-over-capitol-riots-355425/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

"To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th," Trump wrote on Twitter.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/youtube-removes-thousands-of-videos-posted-from-donald-trumps-channel-355435">YouTube removes thousands of videos posted from Donald Trump's channel</a>

This was the third tweet Trump posted following the 12-hour suspension of his account over false claims on US presidential election and inciting violent protesters.&nbsp;

Twitter also warned the US president that his account will be permanently taken down if the platform's rules were violated again.&nbsp;

Trump has repeatedly rejected the victory of Biden in the presidential election in November and called for election rigging despite not providing any evidence to substantiate his claims.&nbsp;

On Wednesday, several pro-Trump protesters attacked the US Capitol causing violence and chaos that left five people dead.&nbsp;

Trump on Thursday finally vowed a smooth transition to Biden after facing backlash over the incident at US Capitol when the session on certification of US election results was ongoing.&nbsp;

Biden called the protesters "domestic terrorists" and said that the event as "one of the darkest days" in the history of the US.&nbsp;

There were also widespread calls to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from the office.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump on Friday said that he will not be present for the inauguration ceremony of President-elect Joe Biden. "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th," Trump wrote on Twitter.

US President Donald Trump on Friday said that he will not be present for the inauguration ceremony of President-elect Joe Biden. "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th," Trump wrote on Twitter. To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 8, 2021 × US President Donald Trump on Friday said that he will not be present for the inauguration ceremony of President-elect Joe Biden. Watch | "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th," Trump wrote on Twitter. Also read | YouTube removes thousands of videos posted from Donald Trump's channel This was the third tweet Trump posted following the 12-hour suspension of his account over false claims on US presidential election and inciting violent protesters. Twitter also warned the US president that his account will be permanently taken down if the platform's rules were violated again. Trump has repeatedly rejected the victory of Biden in the presidential election in November and called for election rigging despite not providing any evidence to substantiate his claims. On Wednesday, several pro-Trump protesters attacked the US Capitol causing violence and chaos that left five people dead. Trump on Thursday finally vowed a smooth transition to Biden after facing backlash over the incident at US Capitol when the session on certification of US election results was ongoing. Biden called the protesters "domestic terrorists" and said that the event as "one of the darkest days" in the history of the US. There were also widespread calls to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from the office.

Donald Trump says will not attend Joe Biden inauguration ceremony

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday described <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus-vaccine">coronavirus vaccines</a> produced by the US and the UK as "completely untrustworthy" and prohibited their import in the country.

"Importing vaccines made in the US or the UK is prohibited. They're completely untrustworthy. It's not unlikely they would want to contaminate other nations. Given our experience with France's HIV-tainted blood supplies, French vaccines aren't trustworthy either," Khamenei wrote in a tweet on Friday.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Importing vaccines made in the US or the UK is prohibited. They're completely untrustworthy. It's not unlikely they would want to contaminate other nations. Given our experience with France's HIV-tainted blood supplies, French vaccines aren't trustworthy either. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CoronaVaccine?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CoronaVaccine</a>
— Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) <a href="https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1347489585983610880?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

In a televised speech, he also said that Washington and Britain are two worst-hit nations and therefore he has no confidence in the vaccines manufactured by these nations.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/slow-vaccine-rollout-stokes-tensions-among-eu-states-355109/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

"If the Americans had managed to manufacture a vaccine, this coronavirus fiasco wouldn't have happened in their own country,” Rouhani was quoted as saying in the speech by Al Jazeera.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/eu-increases-covid-vaccine-deal-with-pfizer-biontech-to-600-million-doses-355382">EU increases COVID vaccine deal with Pfizer-BioNTech to 600 million doses</a>

Iran is the worst-affected hit country by the pandemic in the Middle East and the first cases emerged in February 2020.&nbsp;

Earlier, Iran accused its arch-rival US of blocking its access to vaccines by enforcing tough sanctions regime.

Even though food and medicine are exempt from these sanctions, international banks tend to decline transactions that involve Iran.

Iranian President has said Washington had asked Tehran to pay for the drugs via US banks and said he feared the United States would seize the money.&nbsp;

Late in December, Iran announced the first phase of a clinical trial of an indigenous vaccine.&nbsp;

Tehran is also working to get 16.8 million doses of vaccines from COVAX, a global effort to provide vaccines by the World Health Organization.

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday described coronavirus vaccines produced by the US and the UK as "completely untrustworthy" and prohibited their import in the country.

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday described coronavirus vaccines produced by the US and the UK as "completely untrustworthy" and prohibited their import in the country. "Importing vaccines made in the US or the UK is prohibited. They're completely untrustworthy. It's not unlikely they would want to contaminate other nations. Given our experience with France's HIV-tainted blood supplies, French vaccines aren't trustworthy either," Khamenei wrote in a tweet on Friday. Importing vaccines made in the US or the UK is prohibited. They're completely untrustworthy. It's not unlikely they would want to contaminate other nations. Given our experience with France's HIV-tainted blood supplies, French vaccines aren't trustworthy either. #CoronaVaccine — Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) January 8, 2021 × In a televised speech, he also said that Washington and Britain are two worst-hit nations and therefore he has no confidence in the vaccines manufactured by these nations. Watch | "If the Americans had managed to manufacture a vaccine, this coronavirus fiasco wouldn't have happened in their own country,” Rouhani was quoted as saying in the speech by Al Jazeera. Also read | EU increases COVID vaccine deal with Pfizer-BioNTech to 600 million doses Iran is the worst-affected hit country by the pandemic in the Middle East and the first cases emerged in February 2020. Earlier, Iran accused its arch-rival US of blocking its access to vaccines by enforcing tough sanctions regime. Even though food and medicine are exempt from these sanctions, international banks tend to decline transactions that involve Iran. Iranian President has said Washington had asked Tehran to pay for the drugs via US banks and said he feared the United States would seize the money. Late in December, Iran announced the first phase of a clinical trial of an indigenous vaccine. Tehran is also working to get 16.8 million doses of vaccines from COVAX, a global effort to provide vaccines by the World Health Organization.

Iranian Supreme Leader announces ban on Covid-19 vaccines from US, UK

President-elect Joe Biden tweeted Thursday that the rioters who stormed the Capitol Wednesday would have been treated “very differently” than Black Lives Matter protesters, who have been demonstrating widely since the May police killing of George Floyd. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/as-capitol-siege-sends-shockwaves-across-the-world-heres-a-timeline-of-how-it-unfolded-355224">Also read | As Capitol siege sends shockwaves across the world, here's a timeline of how it unfolded</a>

“No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protestors yesterday that they wouldn’t have been treated very differently than the mob that stormed the Capitol,” Biden tweeted. “We all know that’s true — and it’s unacceptable.”

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protestors yesterday that they wouldn’t have been treated very differently than the mob that stormed the Capitol. 
 
We all know that’s true — and it’s unacceptable.
— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) <a href="https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1347298213422747649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

On Wednesday, Biden denounced the rioters who incited violence at the Capitol and called for the restoration of “just simple decency.”

“At this hour our democracy is under unprecedented assault unlike anything we’ve seen in modern times,” Biden said, adding that what unfolded was, “an assault on the rule of law like few times we have ever seen it.”

He said the uprising bordered on sedition, adding, “The scenes of chaos at the Capitol do not reflect a true America, do not represent who we are.” 
 
(With inputs from agencies)

President-elect Joe Biden tweeted Thursday that the rioters who stormed the Capitol Wednesday would have been treated “very differently” than Black Lives Matter protesters, who have been demonstrating widely since the May police killing of George Floyd.

President-elect Joe Biden tweeted Thursday that the rioters who stormed the Capitol Wednesday would have been treated “very differently” than Black Lives Matter protesters, who have been demonstrating widely since the May police killing of George Floyd. Also read | As Capitol siege sends shockwaves across the world, here's a timeline of how it unfolded “No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protestors yesterday that they wouldn’t have been treated very differently than the mob that stormed the Capitol,” Biden tweeted. “We all know that’s true — and it’s unacceptable.” No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protestors yesterday that they wouldn’t have been treated very differently than the mob that stormed the Capitol. We all know that’s true — and it’s unacceptable. — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) January 7, 2021 × On Wednesday, Biden denounced the rioters who incited violence at the Capitol and called for the restoration of “just simple decency.” “At this hour our democracy is under unprecedented assault unlike anything we’ve seen in modern times,” Biden said, adding that what unfolded was, “an assault on the rule of law like few times we have ever seen it.” He said the uprising bordered on sedition, adding, “The scenes of chaos at the Capitol do not reflect a true America, do not represent who we are.” (With inputs from agencies)

'Black Lives Matter' protestors would have been treated differently: Biden on police response during Capitol seize

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said: "I believe in the strength of US institutions and democracy. Peaceful transition of power is at the core.

'Joe Biden has a daunting task ahead of him', says EU chief Ursula von der Leyen over Capitol riots

The 25th Amendment says the vice-president and a majority of principal officers of the executive departments can provide a declaration to Congress that the president “is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” This can remove the President of the United States and will appoint Vice President to the office.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls for Trump's removal through 25th Amendment after Capitol Ruckus

Pro-Trump protesters tried to interrupt the certification of Joe Biden's electoral college win. During the Capitol riots, a woman shot dead too.

Pro-Trump protesters halt Biden's electoral college certification, hold violent protests

The woman who died during a violent rally at the US Capitol was an air force veteran and long time supporter of President Donald Trump.&nbsp;

Ashli Babbitt came to Washington from San Diego, her husband told the local news station KUSI, adding that she was a passionate supporter of Trump, reports The Guardian.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-presidential-elections-congress-affirms-joe-bidens-306-electoral-vote-win-donald-trump-355163/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Four people died on Wednesday, but Washington police chief Robert Contee said only Babbitt lost her life due to the violence caused in the rally.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-finally-concedes-defeat-pledges-orderly-transition-after-congress-affirms-biden-win-355120">Trump finally concedes defeat, pledges 'orderly transition' after Congress affirms Biden win</a>

The 35-year-old had also served the US Air Force and was shot dead amid the unrest that erupted after protesters stormed the Capitol building due to which some security personnel used their guns to control the violent mob.&nbsp;

In her Twitter account's bio, Babbitt noted her love for her country and recently retweeted messages in Trump's support and those participating in Wednesday's rally.&nbsp;

Her Twitter account was filled with posts that supported Trump and denounced the presidential election in November.&nbsp;

"Nothing will stop us....they can try and try and try but the storm is here and it is descending upon DC in less than 24 hours....dark to light!", she tweeted on Tuesday.&nbsp;

Her mother-in-law reportedly told KUSI that she doesn't know why the military veteran decided to participate in the rally.&nbsp;

The woman who died during a violent rally at the US Capitol was an air force veteran and long time supporter of President Donald Trump. Ashli Babbitt came to Washington from San Diego, her husband told the local news station KUSI, adding that she was a passionate supporter of Trump, reports The Guardian.

The woman who died during a violent rally at the US Capitol was an air force veteran and long time supporter of President Donald Trump. Ashli Babbitt came to Washington from San Diego, her husband told the local news station KUSI, adding that she was a passionate supporter of Trump, reports The Guardian. Watch | Four people died on Wednesday, but Washington police chief Robert Contee said only Babbitt lost her life due to the violence caused in the rally. Also read | Trump finally concedes defeat, pledges 'orderly transition' after Congress affirms Biden win The 35-year-old had also served the US Air Force and was shot dead amid the unrest that erupted after protesters stormed the Capitol building due to which some security personnel used their guns to control the violent mob. In her Twitter account's bio, Babbitt noted her love for her country and recently retweeted messages in Trump's support and those participating in Wednesday's rally. Her Twitter account was filled with posts that supported Trump and denounced the presidential election in November. "Nothing will stop us....they can try and try and try but the storm is here and it is descending upon DC in less than 24 hours....dark to light!", she tweeted on Tuesday. Her mother-in-law reportedly told KUSI that she doesn't know why the military veteran decided to participate in the rally.

Woman shot dead in US capitol violence was strong Trump supporter and military veteran

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has embarked on an eleventh-hour bid to undo some civil rights protections for minority groups, women, people with disabilities and LGBT people, according to a draft document, in a change that would mark one of the most significant shifts in civil rights enforcement in generations.

The Justice Department has submitted for White House approval a change to how it enforces Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits recipients of federal funding from discriminating based on race, color or national origin. The regulation covers housing programs, employers, schools, hospitals, and other organizations and programs.

Under the change, the department would continue to narrowly enforce the law’s protections in cases where it could prove intentional discrimination, but no longer in instances where a policy or practice at issue had a “disparate impact” on minority or other groups.

Civil rights groups say that the disparate impact rule is one of their most important tools for showing discrimination because it takes into account patterns of behavior that can seem neutral and compare outcomes for different groups to reveal inequities. Such cases make up most discrimination litigation, as businesses and organizations rarely disclose that they are purposefully engaging in the practice.

But the Justice Department argued that its current approach to enforcing civil rights protections addressed “a vastly broader scope of conduct” than the statute itself prohibits, according to a copy of its draft proposal to amend the regulations obtained by The New York Times. The most substantial amendments to the rule would eliminate references to policies and practices having “the effect of” subjecting individuals to discrimination.

The move is the latest in the Trump administration’s efforts to pare back civil rights protections for minority and other groups. It has curtailed other regulations, reversed affirmative action policies and cut government diversity training. The Justice Department effort also dovetails with a decadeslong project in the conservative legal movement to push back on civil rights protections seen as going beyond the law.

The Justice Department quietly submitted the change to the White House Office of Management and Budget on Dec. 21, making it one of former Attorney General William Barr’s final acts. It did not make the language available for public review or comment, as is typically required in the federal rule-making process, citing an exception for matters related to agency loans, grants and contracts because the rule covers organizations that receive federal funding.

Should the revised language be put in place, as the White House is expected to do, progressive legal groups are likely to challenge it, setting up a potential review by a Supreme Court with a conservative majority seen as hostile to civil rights protections. The incoming Biden administration could not immediately reverse the move, but a new attorney general could put its implementation on hold.

A Justice Department spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The change would be the Justice Department’s first substantial amendment to how it defines discriminatory behavior in Title VI since 1973, according to the draft document.

That proposed change would have broad effect across the federal government because the Justice Department is responsible for defining how the law prohibits discrimination and the attorney general must approve other agencies’ related regulations. The draft rule noted a signature line for Barr.

“The regulation and explanation are exceedingly sparse, and it shows the dangers of rule-making without following the legally required process, including opportunities for public comment,” said Lauren Sampson, a staff attorney at Lawyers for Civil Rights.

She added that the department’s proposal incorrectly says that the Supreme Court has raised questions about disparate impact as not legally sound, when it has upheld as recently as 2015 disparate impact as a vital tool in the work of protecting civil rights.

A widely cited example of disparate impact has been the Jim Crow-era literacy tests that some states created as a condition to vote. The tests did not ask about race and so seemed neutral on their face. But they disproportionately prevented Black people from voting because they had long been forced out of schools and could not read. The tests are generally thought of as discriminatory because of that disparate impact on Black people.

More recently, the protections against disparate impact were crucial to Education Department investigations into disproportionate discipline rates among Black and Latino students in schools. It allowed the department’s Office for Civil Rights to “look at policies and take into account harmful outcomes,” said Shiwali Patel, senior counsel for the National Women’s Law Center, who worked in the office during the Obama and Trump administrations.

In several cases, the office found that schools were disciplining students differently by race.

“Disparate impact analysis is important to create accountability at schools around discriminatory discipline policies, particularly since it’s difficult to prove racially motivated intent behind the policies,” Patel said.

The Trump administration has long sought to eliminate protections for groups at risk of suffering such impacts, arguing that the Civil Rights Act as passed by Congress only safeguards against intentional acts of discrimination.

The administration had embraced the legal objections of conservative allies, including the widely influential Heritage Foundation, and had put the regulation on a list of anti-discrimination laws championed by the Obama administration whose regulations it planned to revise had President Donald Trump won a second term.

“Federal agencies are honeycombed with policies that adopt the disparate-impact approach, and the Trump administration needs to root them out,” Roger Clegg, the former president and general counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity, a conservative think tank, wrote in The National Review in 2018.

The Trump administration has already signaled its objection to the concept and taken steps to undermine it.

In 2017, the administration closed a complaint from civil rights groups, including the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, alleging that the cancellation of a large transportation project in Maryland called the Red Line by Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, violated the Civil Rights Act because it disproportionately hurt the city’s Black residents. The Transportation Department shelved the complaint, which was opened on the last day of the Obama administration, without a finding or an explanation.

The most forceful denouncement of the regulation came in 2018, when the Trump administration essentially blamed an Obama-era guidance document that addressed the disproportionate discipline rates among children of color in the United States for the mass shooting carried out by a troubled white student in Parkland, Florida.

Trump administration officials sought extensively to link the document to the disparate impact doctrine. In the days before the Education and Justice departments rescinded the document in December 2018, a federal school safety commission headed by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued a report recommending the guidance be withdrawn because it “relies on a disparate impact legal theory, but that theory lacks foundation in applicable law.” It called the document’s reading of the law “dubious, at best.”

Last fall, the Department of Housing and Urban Development completed a rule that would have weakened anti-discrimination policies regulating the mortgage industry.

The move drew a highly unusual request from the country’s four biggest banks — which would benefit from the proposed changes — that the department avoid rewriting the requirements. The federal government “should acknowledge that Americans’ attention to racial discrimination is more pronounced and expansive,” Michael DeVito, Wells Fargo’s executive vice president for home lending, wrote in a letter to the housing secretary, Ben Carson.

Civil rights lawyers sued the department, and in October, a federal judge in Massachusetts issued a nationwide injunction on the rule, finding it arbitrary and capricious.

“These significant alterations, which run the risk of effectively neutering disparate impact liability under the Fair Housing Act, appear inadequately justified,” Judge Mark Mastroianni wrote.

Among the first cases in which the Supreme Court tackled disparate impact was an education dispute, Lau v. Nichols, in which non-English-speaking Chinese students sued the San Francisco Unified School District for not offering bilingual education or remedial English, arguing that they were not afforded the same educational benefits as their English-speaking peers.

In 1974, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, citing a provision of Title VI that “discrimination is barred which has that effect even though no purposeful design is present.”

The case cemented the concept of disparate impact as a bedrock of educational civil rights enforcement and is also credited for robust programming for English-language learners now. The Justice Department’s move could jeopardize that, advocates warned.

“Deleting this regulation not only denies the government an important enforcement tool for detecting and addressing racial discrimination, but it will draw into question long-standing requirements that organizations that take federal funds from the department provide meaningful access to their programs to people who do not speak or read English,” said Seth Galanter, the senior director of the National Center for Youth Law.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has embarked on an eleventh-hour bid to undo some civil rights protections for minority groups, women, people with disabilities and LGBT people, according to a draft document, in a change that would mark one of the most significant shifts in civil rights enforcement in generations.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has embarked on an eleventh-hour bid to undo some civil rights protections for minority groups, women, people with disabilities and LGBT people, according to a draft document, in a change that would mark one of the most significant shifts in civil rights enforcement in generations. The Justice Department has submitted for White House approval a change to how it enforces Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits recipients of federal funding from discriminating based on race, color or national origin. The regulation covers housing programs, employers, schools, hospitals, and other organizations and programs. Under the change, the department would continue to narrowly enforce the law’s protections in cases where it could prove intentional discrimination, but no longer in instances where a policy or practice at issue had a “disparate impact” on minority or other groups. Civil rights groups say that the disparate impact rule is one of their most important tools for showing discrimination because it takes into account patterns of behavior that can seem neutral and compare outcomes for different groups to reveal inequities. Such cases make up most discrimination litigation, as businesses and organizations rarely disclose that they are purposefully engaging in the practice. But the Justice Department argued that its current approach to enforcing civil rights protections addressed “a vastly broader scope of conduct” than the statute itself prohibits, according to a copy of its draft proposal to amend the regulations obtained by The New York Times. The most substantial amendments to the rule would eliminate references to policies and practices having “the effect of” subjecting individuals to discrimination. The move is the latest in the Trump administration’s efforts to pare back civil rights protections for minority and other groups. It has curtailed other regulations, reversed affirmative action policies and cut government diversity training. The Justice Department effort also dovetails with a decadeslong project in the conservative legal movement to push back on civil rights protections seen as going beyond the law. The Justice Department quietly submitted the change to the White House Office of Management and Budget on Dec. 21, making it one of former Attorney General William Barr’s final acts. It did not make the language available for public review or comment, as is typically required in the federal rule-making process, citing an exception for matters related to agency loans, grants and contracts because the rule covers organizations that receive federal funding. Should the revised language be put in place, as the White House is expected to do, progressive legal groups are likely to challenge it, setting up a potential review by a Supreme Court with a conservative majority seen as hostile to civil rights protections. The incoming Biden administration could not immediately reverse the move, but a new attorney general could put its implementation on hold. A Justice Department spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The change would be the Justice Department’s first substantial amendment to how it defines discriminatory behavior in Title VI since 1973, according to the draft document. That proposed change would have broad effect across the federal government because the Justice Department is responsible for defining how the law prohibits discrimination and the attorney general must approve other agencies’ related regulations. The draft rule noted a signature line for Barr. “The regulation and explanation are exceedingly sparse, and it shows the dangers of rule-making without following the legally required process, including opportunities for public comment,” said Lauren Sampson, a staff attorney at Lawyers for Civil Rights. She added that the department’s proposal incorrectly says that the Supreme Court has raised questions about disparate impact as not legally sound, when it has upheld as recently as 2015 disparate impact as a vital tool in the work of protecting civil rights. A widely cited example of disparate impact has been the Jim Crow-era literacy tests that some states created as a condition to vote. The tests did not ask about race and so seemed neutral on their face. But they disproportionately prevented Black people from voting because they had long been forced out of schools and could not read. The tests are generally thought of as discriminatory because of that disparate impact on Black people. More recently, the protections against disparate impact were crucial to Education Department investigations into disproportionate discipline rates among Black and Latino students in schools. It allowed the department’s Office for Civil Rights to “look at policies and take into account harmful outcomes,” said Shiwali Patel, senior counsel for the National Women’s Law Center, who worked in the office during the Obama and Trump administrations. In several cases, the office found that schools were disciplining students differently by race. “Disparate impact analysis is important to create accountability at schools around discriminatory discipline policies, particularly since it’s difficult to prove racially motivated intent behind the policies,” Patel said. The Trump administration has long sought to eliminate protections for groups at risk of suffering such impacts, arguing that the Civil Rights Act as passed by Congress only safeguards against intentional acts of discrimination. The administration had embraced the legal objections of conservative allies, including the widely influential Heritage Foundation, and had put the regulation on a list of anti-discrimination laws championed by the Obama administration whose regulations it planned to revise had President Donald Trump won a second term. “Federal agencies are honeycombed with policies that adopt the disparate-impact approach, and the Trump administration needs to root them out,” Roger Clegg, the former president and general counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity, a conservative think tank, wrote in The National Review in 2018. The Trump administration has already signaled its objection to the concept and taken steps to undermine it. In 2017, the administration closed a complaint from civil rights groups, including the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, alleging that the cancellation of a large transportation project in Maryland called the Red Line by Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, violated the Civil Rights Act because it disproportionately hurt the city’s Black residents. The Transportation Department shelved the complaint, which was opened on the last day of the Obama administration, without a finding or an explanation. The most forceful denouncement of the regulation came in 2018, when the Trump administration essentially blamed an Obama-era guidance document that addressed the disproportionate discipline rates among children of color in the United States for the mass shooting carried out by a troubled white student in Parkland, Florida. Trump administration officials sought extensively to link the document to the disparate impact doctrine. In the days before the Education and Justice departments rescinded the document in December 2018, a federal school safety commission headed by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued a report recommending the guidance be withdrawn because it “relies on a disparate impact legal theory, but that theory lacks foundation in applicable law.” It called the document’s reading of the law “dubious, at best.” Last fall, the Department of Housing and Urban Development completed a rule that would have weakened anti-discrimination policies regulating the mortgage industry. The move drew a highly unusual request from the country’s four biggest banks — which would benefit from the proposed changes — that the department avoid rewriting the requirements. The federal government “should acknowledge that Americans’ attention to racial discrimination is more pronounced and expansive,” Michael DeVito, Wells Fargo’s executive vice president for home lending, wrote in a letter to the housing secretary, Ben Carson. Civil rights lawyers sued the department, and in October, a federal judge in Massachusetts issued a nationwide injunction on the rule, finding it arbitrary and capricious. “These significant alterations, which run the risk of effectively neutering disparate impact liability under the Fair Housing Act, appear inadequately justified,” Judge Mark Mastroianni wrote. Among the first cases in which the Supreme Court tackled disparate impact was an education dispute, Lau v. Nichols, in which non-English-speaking Chinese students sued the San Francisco Unified School District for not offering bilingual education or remedial English, arguing that they were not afforded the same educational benefits as their English-speaking peers. In 1974, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, citing a provision of Title VI that “discrimination is barred which has that effect even though no purposeful design is present.” The case cemented the concept of disparate impact as a bedrock of educational civil rights enforcement and is also credited for robust programming for English-language learners now. The Justice Department’s move could jeopardize that, advocates warned. “Deleting this regulation not only denies the government an important enforcement tool for detecting and addressing racial discrimination, but it will draw into question long-standing requirements that organizations that take federal funds from the department provide meaningful access to their programs to people who do not speak or read English,” said Seth Galanter, the senior director of the National Center for Youth Law.

Justice dept seeks to pare back civil rights protections for minorities

All eyes are now on crucial senate runoff in the United States. Votes are now being counted in Georgia. Result to decide who will control the senate for the next 4 years.

United States: All eyes on senate race, votes are being counted in Georgia

Pro-Trump protesters gathered in Washington D.C. to support the outgoing-President ahead of the U.S. Congress certification of the November election.

U.S: Pro-Trump protesters gathered in Washington to support outgoing-President

As a flood of government aid programs is offset at least temporarily amid the Coronavirus pandemic, US bankruptcy filings for 2020 have reached their lowest levels since 1986.

World Business Watch: Bankruptcy filings hit lowest level since 1986 in U.S.

The 'outgoing-president' of United States Donald Trump has signed an executive order banning transactions with 8 Chinese application. The move is likely to escalate tensions between Washington and Beijing.

Donald Trump targets the China yet again, transactions with 8 Chinese apps banned

The United States has reported more than 3,900 coronavirus-related deaths in a single day, a new record of daily deaths since the onset of the pandemic in the country.

News Alert: United States report more than 3,900 deaths due to COVID-19 in 24-hrs

Whereas by January 01, vaccination expectations of 20 million Americans had ceased after a dull start. The United States now faces new challenges in the fight against COVID-19.

United States faces new challenges in fight against COVID-19

The Iranian forces have seized a South Korean tanker in the state of Hormuz amidst the rising tensions with the United States in the final days of Donald Trump's Presidency.

S.Korea to send diplomat for Tehran talks after Iran seizes tanker

Iran seizes South Korean tanker amidst rising tensions with the U.S.

South Korean tanker held by Iran in port of Bandar Abbas

British judge Vanessa Baraitser has refused the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States amidst fears that Assange 'may commit suicide'.

U.S. disappointed with ruling of British court in Julian Assange extradition case

One of the senior-most officials in the United States has claimed that a "growing body of evidence" suggests that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is potentially the "most credible source" for the origin of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus">novel coronavirus</a>.&nbsp;

US's Deputy National Security Advisor Matthew Pottinger said China's claims of the virus originating from Wuhan market are false.

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-plus-who-will-bear-the-cost-of-the-pandemic-354078/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Pointing to the latest intelligence inputs, Pottinger said that: ''there is a growing body of evidence that the lab is likely the most credible source of the virus", as quoted by Daily Mail.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/traces-of-coronavirus-found-on-auto-parts-packaging-in-china-354384">Traces of coronavirus found on auto parts packaging in China</a>

He also said that Covid-19 may have escaped via a "leak or an accident".&nbsp;

Pottinger made these commends in a Zoom videoconference with British MPs last week and come at a time when experts from the World Health Organization (WHO) are preparing to travel Wuhan to know the virus's origins

Sam Armstrong, communications director at the Henry Jackson Society foreign policy think-tank said that when a "senior and respected" intelligence official is pushing these claims, the UK government must "seek both answers about and compensation for Covid-19.'

Wuhan is coronavirus's first epicentre and Beijing has constantly denied the involvement of the high-security lab in the region behind the leak of Covid-19.&nbsp;

Meanwhile, a WHO team will arrive in China in January to find the coronavirus origins and recently one of the team members told news agency AFP that they will explore all avenues and will not focus on finding the "guilty" country or authority.&nbsp;

One of the senior-most officials in the United States has claimed that a "growing body of evidence" suggests that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is potentially the "most credible source" for the origin of the novel coronavirus.

One of the senior-most officials in the United States has claimed that a "growing body of evidence" suggests that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is potentially the "most credible source" for the origin of the novel coronavirus. US's Deputy National Security Advisor Matthew Pottinger said China's claims of the virus originating from Wuhan market are false. Watch | Pointing to the latest intelligence inputs, Pottinger said that: ''there is a growing body of evidence that the lab is likely the most credible source of the virus", as quoted by Daily Mail. Also read | Traces of coronavirus found on auto parts packaging in China He also said that Covid-19 may have escaped via a "leak or an accident". Pottinger made these commends in a Zoom videoconference with British MPs last week and come at a time when experts from the World Health Organization (WHO) are preparing to travel Wuhan to know the virus's origins Sam Armstrong, communications director at the Henry Jackson Society foreign policy think-tank said that when a "senior and respected" intelligence official is pushing these claims, the UK government must "seek both answers about and compensation for Covid-19.' Wuhan is coronavirus's first epicentre and Beijing has constantly denied the involvement of the high-security lab in the region behind the leak of Covid-19. Meanwhile, a WHO team will arrive in China in January to find the coronavirus origins and recently one of the team members told news agency AFP that they will explore all avenues and will not focus on finding the "guilty" country or authority.

'Growing evidence' suggests Covid-19 originated from Wuhan lab: Senior US official

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange going to British court today, Julian Assange is charged with espionage in the United States.

WikiLeaks founder facing UK Court today for extradition trial

A small plane crash into a home in Michigan in the United States killing at least three people . According to reports fatalities believed to be the pilot and two passengers. Here's the details.

United States: A small plane crash into a home in Michigan killing at least three people

KABUL, Afghanistan — After four decades of grinding combat in Afghanistan, peace negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban have raised at least a possibility that the long cycle of violence might someday end.

But that milestone is a long way off. The most recent round of discussions, which began in September, has been riddled with bureaucratic hang-ups and monthslong debates over minor issues.

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistan-radio-journalist-shot-dead-in-ghor-province-353909">Afghanistan: Radio journalist shot dead in Ghor province</a>

And though those talks resulted in an agreement on the principles and procedures that will guide the next round of peace negotiations, they came with a price. While the two sides met in Doha, Qatar, bloodletting on battlefields and in Afghan cities surged.

Now with peace talks scheduled to reconvene Jan. 5, the details of what is being negotiated next remain murky.

While both the Afghan government and the Taliban have said they will not publicly release their lists of priorities for the next round of negotiations, here is what security analysts, researchers, and government and Taliban officials expect to be on the docket — and what hurdles these talks must overcome.

<h2>What are the end goals of these talks?</h2>

The ultimate goal of the negotiations is the creation of a political road map for a future government. The head of the government negotiation team, Masoom Stanikzai, said Wednesday that a cease-fire would be the delegation’s top priority. The Taliban, who have used attacks against security forces and civilians as leverage, seek instead to negotiate a form of governance based on strict Islamic law before discussing any cease-fire.

But getting to these larger fundamental issues will not be easy, as the two sides remain stuck on the meaning of basic terms like “cease-fire” and “Islamic.” There are many forms of cease-fire, from permanent and nationwide to partial and conditional, yet the public portion of the February agreement between the United States and the Taliban calling for the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops mentions but does not specifically mandate or fully define what it should look like.

The Taliban also refuse to specify what they mean by “Islamic,” and the government’s own insistence on an “Islamic” republic has been a subject of intense debate.

“The Taliban say they want an Islamic system, but they don’t specify what kind,” said Abdul Haifiz Mansoor, a member of Afghanistan’s negotiating team, pointing out that there are nearly as many systems as there are Islamic countries.

Also complicating the next round of talks is a Taliban demand that the government release more Taliban prisoners. The government’s release of more than 5,000 prisoners removed the last obstacle to negotiations in September, but President Ashraf Ghani has thus far refused to release any others.

<h2>Where does the fighting stand?</h2>

Both sides exploited violence on the ground in Afghanistan for leverage during negotiations in Doha, but the Taliban have been more aggressive in their assaults than the government, whose troops tend to stay on bases and at checkpoints, responding to persistent attacks.

The killing of security force members and civilians surged while talks were underway this fall, according to a New York Times tally, before dropping once Afghan government and Taliban negotiators announced in early December that they had reached an agreement on the procedures for future talks, though cold weather likely also contributed to the decline. At least 429 pro-government forces were killed in September, and at least 212 civilians were in October — the worst tolls in each category in more than a year.

“Killing and bloodshed have reached new peaks,” said Atiqullah Amarkhel, a military analyst in Kabul. “What kind of will for peace is this?”

Ibraheem Bahiss, an independent Afghan research analyst, said the Taliban are pursuing two tracks simultaneously: violence and negotiation.

“Their aim is to get into power and have a particular type of government system,” Bahiss said. “Whether they achieve it through talks or through fighting, both entail costs they are willing to bear.”

<h2>What role is the U.S. playing right now?</h2>

Although the Taliban have greatly reduced direct attacks on U.S. forces since February, the insurgent group has inexorably expanded the territory it controls by besieging local security forces.

In response, the Americans have launched airstrikes in instances where Afghan troops were under extreme duress during Taliban onslaughts. A Taliban official framed the group’s levels of violence as a direct response to airstrikes by the United States or to military and ill-received diplomatic moves by the Afghan government.

U.S. airstrikes salvaged the crumpling defenses of Afghan units in Kandahar and Helmand provinces this fall, exposing, once more, deficiencies in Afghan ground and air forces that are under constant attack. The forces’ slumping morale has drawn increasing concern from Gen. Austin Miller, commander of the U.S.-led mission in the country, according to U.S. officials.

At the same time, U.S. troop numbers have dropped from about 12,000 in February to a projected 2,500 by mid-January, with a complete withdrawal planned by May if the agreement holds. That has left Afghan officials unsure of how their forces can hold ground without U.S. support.

The importance of the talks to the United States was underscored in November, when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Doha and met with negotiators, and again in mid-December, when the chair of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Mark Milley, did the same.

A Pentagon statement said Milley had pressed the Taliban for “an immediate reduction of violence,” a term U.S. officials have used several times this year that is open to a wide range of interpretations. U.S. officials are trying to establish an equilibrium on the battlefield.

Both sides are also waiting to see whether President-elect Joe Biden will honor the troop withdrawal schedule or, conceivably, move to renegotiate the entire deal.

If Biden decides to leave a residual U.S. military counterterrorism force in Afghanistan after May 2021, as some U.S. lawmakers are proposing, Bahiss said, “the Taliban have made it clear that would nullify the entire agreement.”

<h2>What other obstacles could stall the negotiations?</h2>

Given the recriminations and suspicions in Doha, some Afghan analysts fear the talks could remain deadlocked for months.

“Mistrust between the two sides has led to an increase in violence, but nothing has been done to eliminate that mistrust,” said Syed Akbar Agha, a former leader of the Taliban’s Jaish-ul-Muslimeen group.

That could indefinitely delay serious attempts to address core government concerns like human rights, a free press, rights for women and religious minorities, and democratic elections, among others.

Taliban negotiators have said they support women’s rights, for example, but only under strict Islamic law. Many analysts interpret that to mean the same harsh oppression of women practiced by the Taliban when they governed Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001.

The deeply divided government in Kabul also worries that the Taliban will try to run out the clock until all U.S. forces leave, whereas the Taliban contend that Ghani, who was reelected in a bitterly disputed election last spring, is stalling to serve out his five-year term. If some form of government of national unity or a transitional government were agreed upon, Ghani would be unlikely to continue as president.

Another complication is division within the Taliban, from hard-line commanders in Afghanistan to political negotiators in Doha’s hotels. Some Taliban factions believe they should fight and defeat the Americans and the Afghan government, not negotiate with them.

Agha, the former Taliban leader, said little progress was likely unless an impartial mediator emerged who could break down the lack of trust in Doha.

“If not,” he said, “I don’t think the next round of talks will end with a positive result.”

Some analysts fear an even more ominous outcome. Torek Farhadi, a former Afghan government adviser, said, “One thing is clear: Without a settlement, we are headed for a civil war.” 
&nbsp;

KABUL, Afghanistan — After four decades of grinding combat in Afghanistan, peace negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban have raised at least a possibility that the long cycle of violence might someday end.

KABUL, Afghanistan — After four decades of grinding combat in Afghanistan, peace negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban have raised at least a possibility that the long cycle of violence might someday end. But that milestone is a long way off. The most recent round of discussions, which began in September, has been riddled with bureaucratic hang-ups and monthslong debates over minor issues. Also read | Afghanistan: Radio journalist shot dead in Ghor province And though those talks resulted in an agreement on the principles and procedures that will guide the next round of peace negotiations, they came with a price. While the two sides met in Doha, Qatar, bloodletting on battlefields and in Afghan cities surged. Now with peace talks scheduled to reconvene Jan. 5, the details of what is being negotiated next remain murky. While both the Afghan government and the Taliban have said they will not publicly release their lists of priorities for the next round of negotiations, here is what security analysts, researchers, and government and Taliban officials expect to be on the docket — and what hurdles these talks must overcome. What are the end goals of these talks? The ultimate goal of the negotiations is the creation of a political road map for a future government. The head of the government negotiation team, Masoom Stanikzai, said Wednesday that a cease-fire would be the delegation’s top priority. The Taliban, who have used attacks against security forces and civilians as leverage, seek instead to negotiate a form of governance based on strict Islamic law before discussing any cease-fire. But getting to these larger fundamental issues will not be easy, as the two sides remain stuck on the meaning of basic terms like “cease-fire” and “Islamic.” There are many forms of cease-fire, from permanent and nationwide to partial and conditional, yet the public portion of the February agreement between the United States and the Taliban calling for the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops mentions but does not specifically mandate or fully define what it should look like. The Taliban also refuse to specify what they mean by “Islamic,” and the government’s own insistence on an “Islamic” republic has been a subject of intense debate. “The Taliban say they want an Islamic system, but they don’t specify what kind,” said Abdul Haifiz Mansoor, a member of Afghanistan’s negotiating team, pointing out that there are nearly as many systems as there are Islamic countries. Also complicating the next round of talks is a Taliban demand that the government release more Taliban prisoners. The government’s release of more than 5,000 prisoners removed the last obstacle to negotiations in September, but President Ashraf Ghani has thus far refused to release any others. Where does the fighting stand? Both sides exploited violence on the ground in Afghanistan for leverage during negotiations in Doha, but the Taliban have been more aggressive in their assaults than the government, whose troops tend to stay on bases and at checkpoints, responding to persistent attacks. The killing of security force members and civilians surged while talks were underway this fall, according to a New York Times tally, before dropping once Afghan government and Taliban negotiators announced in early December that they had reached an agreement on the procedures for future talks, though cold weather likely also contributed to the decline. At least 429 pro-government forces were killed in September, and at least 212 civilians were in October — the worst tolls in each category in more than a year. “Killing and bloodshed have reached new peaks,” said Atiqullah Amarkhel, a military analyst in Kabul. “What kind of will for peace is this?” Ibraheem Bahiss, an independent Afghan research analyst, said the Taliban are pursuing two tracks simultaneously: violence and negotiation. “Their aim is to get into power and have a particular type of government system,” Bahiss said. “Whether they achieve it through talks or through fighting, both entail costs they are willing to bear.” What role is the U.S. playing right now? Although the Taliban have greatly reduced direct attacks on U.S. forces since February, the insurgent group has inexorably expanded the territory it controls by besieging local security forces. In response, the Americans have launched airstrikes in instances where Afghan troops were under extreme duress during Taliban onslaughts. A Taliban official framed the group’s levels of violence as a direct response to airstrikes by the United States or to military and ill-received diplomatic moves by the Afghan government. U.S. airstrikes salvaged the crumpling defenses of Afghan units in Kandahar and Helmand provinces this fall, exposing, once more, deficiencies in Afghan ground and air forces that are under constant attack. The forces’ slumping morale has drawn increasing concern from Gen. Austin Miller, commander of the U.S.-led mission in the country, according to U.S. officials. At the same time, U.S. troop numbers have dropped from about 12,000 in February to a projected 2,500 by mid-January, with a complete withdrawal planned by May if the agreement holds. That has left Afghan officials unsure of how their forces can hold ground without U.S. support. The importance of the talks to the United States was underscored in November, when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Doha and met with negotiators, and again in mid-December, when the chair of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Mark Milley, did the same. A Pentagon statement said Milley had pressed the Taliban for “an immediate reduction of violence,” a term U.S. officials have used several times this year that is open to a wide range of interpretations. U.S. officials are trying to establish an equilibrium on the battlefield. Both sides are also waiting to see whether President-elect Joe Biden will honor the troop withdrawal schedule or, conceivably, move to renegotiate the entire deal. If Biden decides to leave a residual U.S. military counterterrorism force in Afghanistan after May 2021, as some U.S. lawmakers are proposing, Bahiss said, “the Taliban have made it clear that would nullify the entire agreement.” What other obstacles could stall the negotiations? Given the recriminations and suspicions in Doha, some Afghan analysts fear the talks could remain deadlocked for months. “Mistrust between the two sides has led to an increase in violence, but nothing has been done to eliminate that mistrust,” said Syed Akbar Agha, a former leader of the Taliban’s Jaish-ul-Muslimeen group. That could indefinitely delay serious attempts to address core government concerns like human rights, a free press, rights for women and religious minorities, and democratic elections, among others. Taliban negotiators have said they support women’s rights, for example, but only under strict Islamic law. Many analysts interpret that to mean the same harsh oppression of women practiced by the Taliban when they governed Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. The deeply divided government in Kabul also worries that the Taliban will try to run out the clock until all U.S. forces leave, whereas the Taliban contend that Ghani, who was reelected in a bitterly disputed election last spring, is stalling to serve out his five-year term. If some form of government of national unity or a transitional government were agreed upon, Ghani would be unlikely to continue as president. Another complication is division within the Taliban, from hard-line commanders in Afghanistan to political negotiators in Doha’s hotels. Some Taliban factions believe they should fight and defeat the Americans and the Afghan government, not negotiate with them. Agha, the former Taliban leader, said little progress was likely unless an impartial mediator emerged who could break down the lack of trust in Doha. “If not,” he said, “I don’t think the next round of talks will end with a positive result.” Some analysts fear an even more ominous outcome. Torek Farhadi, a former Afghan government adviser, said, “One thing is clear: Without a settlement, we are headed for a civil war.”

What to know as troubled Afghan peace talks enter a new phase

The new American law to bolster support to Tibet comes at a time when China has stepped up its oppression campaign in Tibet.&nbsp;

From people being forced into re-education camps to forced labour, China's Xinjiang playbook is implemented in Tibet.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-how-china-is-waging-an-assault-on-the-tibetan-identity-353026/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

This report will tell you the crimes of the dragon in this region.&nbsp;

China has built multiple slave camps across Tibet which are run by People's Armed Police, a paramilitary organisation.

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-signs-laws-to-further-uss-support-to-taiwan-tibet-drawing-chinas-criticism-352951">Donald Trump signs laws to further US's support to Taiwan, Tibet; drawing China's criticism</a>

Rural Tibetans moved into these camps must dress in uniforms and perform military drills.&nbsp;

Reports say their teaching program includes curriculum on skills, legal, and gratitude education and all the subjects have one driving theme, loyalty to the Communist Party of China.&nbsp;

News agency Reuters earlier this year conducted an investigation into these camps and they found local-level officials have been given quotas.&nbsp;

These officials must send a fixed number of Tibetan workers to factories where they are employed in low-paying jobs. Officials who meet their quotas are rewarded. Those who fall short of quotas are punished. Bigger districts have bigger quotas.&nbsp;

In the first seven months of 2020, more than half a million people were trained in these camps, which is 15 per cent of Tibet's population.&nbsp;

Out of these, 50 thousand people were transferred to jobs within Tibet, while thousands more were shipped across China.

Many of them ended up in low-paying jobs in textile, manufacturing, construction and agriculture, among others.

<h2>Why does Beijing want to ship out Tibetans?</h2>

The exodus is part of a campaign of cultural cleansing for forced assimilation of Tibet into China.&nbsp;

China's Tibet mission has several objectives.&nbsp;

First, it wants to homogenise the population and to do that Tibet is being flooded with the majority Han Chinese.&nbsp;

Six years ago, China began promoting mixed marriages between Han Chinese and Tibetans.

From 2008 to 2013, mixed marriages saw double-digit growth in Tibet.&nbsp;

The government also offered incentives for such marriages, including social security, vacations, reproductive rights, among others.&nbsp;

In fact, children that were a product of mixed marriages were promised special treatment, including funding for education, assured employment and even membership of the Communist Party.&nbsp;

Beijing followed this up with an assault on the Tibetan culture and faith and recently local officials ordered the destruction of Tibetan flags.&nbsp;

A U.S. State Department report lists more crimes of the Communist Party.&nbsp;

There are reports of former detainees being beaten up until they lost consciousness. Monks and nuns being forced to wear military clothing and undergo political indoctrination in detention centres.&nbsp;

The US has accused the Chinese government of restricting the size of Buddhist monasteries with evictions of monks and nuns who are being banned from practising Buddhism.&nbsp;

All this tells one story that Tibet has become a police state with the iron hand controlling the life of every Tibetan and execute forced assimilation of Tibet into China.&nbsp;

The new American law to bolster support to Tibet comes at a time when China has stepped up its oppression campaign in Tibet. From people being forced into re-education camps to forced labour, China's Xinjiang playbook is implemented in Tibet.

The new American law to bolster support to Tibet comes at a time when China has stepped up its oppression campaign in Tibet. From people being forced into re-education camps to forced labour, China's Xinjiang playbook is implemented in Tibet. Watch | This report will tell you the crimes of the dragon in this region. China has built multiple slave camps across Tibet which are run by People's Armed Police, a paramilitary organisation. Also read | Donald Trump signs laws to further US's support to Taiwan, Tibet; drawing China's criticism Rural Tibetans moved into these camps must dress in uniforms and perform military drills. Reports say their teaching program includes curriculum on skills, legal, and gratitude education and all the subjects have one driving theme, loyalty to the Communist Party of China. News agency Reuters earlier this year conducted an investigation into these camps and they found local-level officials have been given quotas. These officials must send a fixed number of Tibetan workers to factories where they are employed in low-paying jobs. Officials who meet their quotas are rewarded. Those who fall short of quotas are punished. Bigger districts have bigger quotas. In the first seven months of 2020, more than half a million people were trained in these camps, which is 15 per cent of Tibet's population. Out of these, 50 thousand people were transferred to jobs within Tibet, while thousands more were shipped across China. Many of them ended up in low-paying jobs in textile, manufacturing, construction and agriculture, among others. Why does Beijing want to ship out Tibetans? The exodus is part of a campaign of cultural cleansing for forced assimilation of Tibet into China. China's Tibet mission has several objectives. First, it wants to homogenise the population and to do that Tibet is being flooded with the majority Han Chinese. Six years ago, China began promoting mixed marriages between Han Chinese and Tibetans. From 2008 to 2013, mixed marriages saw double-digit growth in Tibet. The government also offered incentives for such marriages, including social security, vacations, reproductive rights, among others. In fact, children that were a product of mixed marriages were promised special treatment, including funding for education, assured employment and even membership of the Communist Party. Beijing followed this up with an assault on the Tibetan culture and faith and recently local officials ordered the destruction of Tibetan flags. A U.S. State Department report lists more crimes of the Communist Party. There are reports of former detainees being beaten up until they lost consciousness. Monks and nuns being forced to wear military clothing and undergo political indoctrination in detention centres. The US has accused the Chinese government of restricting the size of Buddhist monasteries with evictions of monks and nuns who are being banned from practising Buddhism. All this tells one story that Tibet has become a police state with the iron hand controlling the life of every Tibetan and execute forced assimilation of Tibet into China.

US comes to the rescue when China ramped up oppressions campaign in Tibet

About a dozen people lined up to shred the things they wanted to forget about 2020, including but not limited to the deadly global pandemic that swept the world, at the annual "Good Riddance" event held in New York City's Times Square on Monday (December 28).

'Good riddance' - New York ceremoniously knocks out '2020'

United States President-elect Joe Biden on Sunday claimed that the US is facing "four historic crises at once". The soon to be elected leader of the US claimed that his team is attempting to tackle the challenges ahead before he takes charge of the office of the president later in January.&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/joe-biden-promises-to-reverse-trumps-immigration-policies-352419/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Biden was referring to the crisis of COVID-19 along with climate change, racial injustice, and the economic condition of the country. 
 
"From COVID-19 and the economy to climate change and racial justice -- our nation is facing four historic crises at once. And come January, there will be no time to waste. That`s why my team and I are hard at work preparing to take action on day one," Biden tweeted.

A few hours after Biden's tweet, incumbent President Donald Trump signed the coronavirus relief bill, which will ensure that Americans receive government aid.&nbsp;

President Donald Trump signed a $1.4 trillion spending bill and accompanying $900 billion economic stimulus package into law on Sunday evening, averting a Tuesday government shutdown and clearing the way for $600 stimulus checks and $300 weekly enhanced unemployment benefits after nearly a week's delay and under pressure from all sides.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-signs-900-billion-covid-relief-bill-days-after-he-suggested-he-would-block-it-352808" hreflang="en">Trump signs $900 billion Covid relief bill days after he suggested he would block it</a>

On Saturday, Biden had called out Trump for "abdicating responsibility", and urged Trump to immediately sign the coronavirus relief bill which was cleared by the US house earlier, and required Trump's signature. 
 
"It is the day after Christmas, and millions of families don`t know if they`ll be able to make ends meet because of President Donald Trump`s refusal to sign an economic relief bill approved by Congress with an overwhelming and bipartisan majority," Biden said in a statement.

The $2.3 trillion package was passed with bipartisan support in the US Congress, and members of both the parties had urged Trump to sign the historic bill.

Earlier, on Sunday, Dr Anthony Fauci, top infectious disease expert in the US warned that the US was headed for the worst of COVID-19 in the coming few weeks, with Americans travel during the holiday season.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/covid-19-situation-in-us-may-worsen-after-holidays-dr-fauci-352793" hreflang="en">COVID-19 situation in US may worsen after holidays: Dr Fauci</a> 
 
"The reason I`m concerned and my colleagues in public health are concerned also is that we very well might see a post-seasonal, in the sense of Christmas, New Year`s, surge," CNN quoted Fauci as saying.

US President-elect Joe Biden last week said that the "darkest days'' against COVID-19 are still making inlays in the US, claiming the worst is ''ahead of us, not behind us''.

On Sunday, the US had surpassed the 19-million mark for the number of cases, the highest ever in the world.

The country`s current death toll stands at 333,069.

United States President-elect Joe Biden on Sunday claimed that the US is facing "four historic crises at once". The soon to be elected leader of the US claimed that his team is attempting to tackle the challenges ahead before he takes charge of the office of the president later in January.

United States President-elect Joe Biden on Sunday claimed that the US is facing "four historic crises at once". The soon to be elected leader of the US claimed that his team is attempting to tackle the challenges ahead before he takes charge of the office of the president later in January. Biden was referring to the crisis of COVID-19 along with climate change, racial injustice, and the economic condition of the country. "From COVID-19 and the economy to climate change and racial justice -- our nation is facing four historic crises at once. And come January, there will be no time to waste. That`s why my team and I are hard at work preparing to take action on day one," Biden tweeted. A few hours after Biden's tweet, incumbent President Donald Trump signed the coronavirus relief bill, which will ensure that Americans receive government aid. President Donald Trump signed a $1.4 trillion spending bill and accompanying $900 billion economic stimulus package into law on Sunday evening, averting a Tuesday government shutdown and clearing the way for $600 stimulus checks and $300 weekly enhanced unemployment benefits after nearly a week's delay and under pressure from all sides. Also read: Trump signs $900 billion Covid relief bill days after he suggested he would block it On Saturday, Biden had called out Trump for "abdicating responsibility", and urged Trump to immediately sign the coronavirus relief bill which was cleared by the US house earlier, and required Trump's signature. "It is the day after Christmas, and millions of families don`t know if they`ll be able to make ends meet because of President Donald Trump`s refusal to sign an economic relief bill approved by Congress with an overwhelming and bipartisan majority," Biden said in a statement. The $2.3 trillion package was passed with bipartisan support in the US Congress, and members of both the parties had urged Trump to sign the historic bill. Earlier, on Sunday, Dr Anthony Fauci, top infectious disease expert in the US warned that the US was headed for the worst of COVID-19 in the coming few weeks, with Americans travel during the holiday season. Also read: COVID-19 situation in US may worsen after holidays: Dr Fauci "The reason I`m concerned and my colleagues in public health are concerned also is that we very well might see a post-seasonal, in the sense of Christmas, New Year`s, surge," CNN quoted Fauci as saying. US President-elect Joe Biden last week said that the "darkest days'' against COVID-19 are still making inlays in the US, claiming the worst is ''ahead of us, not behind us''. On Sunday, the US had surpassed the 19-million mark for the number of cases, the highest ever in the world. The country`s current death toll stands at 333,069.

United States is facing 'four historic crises at once', says President-elect Joe Biden

China expressed opposition on Monday after US President Donald Trump signed into laws that further backs US's support for Taiwan and Tibet.

Trump on Sunday signed Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 and Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2020, which had been included in the USD 2.3 trillion aid package for coronavirus pandemic.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/head-of-tibetan-government-in-exile-hails-us-legislation-351760/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

As per the Tibetan act, the US will open a US consulate in Lhasa, Tibet and Washington will assist non-governmental organisations in support of Tibetan communities.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-congress-passes-new-tibet-law-on-the-next-dalai-lama-infuriates-china-351594">US Congress passes new Tibet law on the next Dalai Lama; infuriates China</a>

It also authorises the Tibetan community to select exiled spiritual leader Dalai Lama's successor and has provisions to sanction Chinese officials who interfere with the selection process.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said Beijing was "resolutely" opposes both acts.

"The determination of the Chinese government to safeguard its national sovereignty, security and development interests is unwavering," Zhao told reporters, as quoted by news agency Reuters.&nbsp;

He also said Washington should not put parts in acts which "target China" to avoid damaging Sino-US ties.&nbsp;

China considers 14th Dalai Lama as a "separatist" figure who is trying to separate Tibet from China.&nbsp;

The Tibet Act also provides more than USD 20 million for various initiatives for the development of the Tibetan region.&nbsp;

It also says the Secretary of State should not allow the opening up of a new Chinese consulate in the US unless China gives permission for an American consulate in Lhasa.

Lobsang Sangay, president of Tibetan government-in-exile has said that "History made again!" after Trump's approval to the law &nbsp;

"History made again! President Trump signs the Omnibus bill, which means the Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2020 is now LAW," Lobsang tweeted.&nbsp;

Taiwan has also lauded the US move, with its presidential office calling Washington an "important ally" for sharing values of "freedom and democracy". 
&nbsp;

China expressed opposition on Monday after US President Donald Trump signed into laws that further backs US's support for Taiwan and Tibet. Trump on Sunday signed Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 and Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2020, which had been included in the USD 2.

China expressed opposition on Monday after US President Donald Trump signed into laws that further backs US's support for Taiwan and Tibet. Trump on Sunday signed Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 and Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2020, which had been included in the USD 2.3 trillion aid package for coronavirus pandemic. Watch | As per the Tibetan act, the US will open a US consulate in Lhasa, Tibet and Washington will assist non-governmental organisations in support of Tibetan communities. Also read | US Congress passes new Tibet law on the next Dalai Lama; infuriates China It also authorises the Tibetan community to select exiled spiritual leader Dalai Lama's successor and has provisions to sanction Chinese officials who interfere with the selection process. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said Beijing was "resolutely" opposes both acts. "The determination of the Chinese government to safeguard its national sovereignty, security and development interests is unwavering," Zhao told reporters, as quoted by news agency Reuters. He also said Washington should not put parts in acts which "target China" to avoid damaging Sino-US ties. China considers 14th Dalai Lama as a "separatist" figure who is trying to separate Tibet from China. The Tibet Act also provides more than USD 20 million for various initiatives for the development of the Tibetan region. It also says the Secretary of State should not allow the opening up of a new Chinese consulate in the US unless China gives permission for an American consulate in Lhasa. Lobsang Sangay, president of Tibetan government-in-exile has said that "History made again!" after Trump's approval to the law "History made again! President Trump signs the Omnibus bill, which means the Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2020 is now LAW," Lobsang tweeted. Taiwan has also lauded the US move, with its presidential office calling Washington an "important ally" for sharing values of "freedom and democracy".

Donald Trump signs laws to further US's support to Taiwan, Tibet; drawing China's criticism

The vehicle explosion that rocked United states is believed to be an intentional act as being describe by the police, three people injured in Nashville Christmas blast. Explosion shatters several other vehicles and damages buildings.

Vehicle explosion rocks Nashville, U.S and according to police the explosion was intentional

With fists raised in victory, Oneita and Clive Thompson were feeling jubilant as they came out of the Tabernacle United Church in Philadelphia, US.&nbsp;

The couple can finally stay in the United States after spending two and a half years in churches to avoid deportation.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/court-rules-for-dreamers-rejects-trumps-limits-on-immigration-programme-343218">Court rules for 'Dreamers', rejects Trump's limits on immigration programme</a>

"We won," Oneita Thompson, 48, told supporters who were present outside the church, as quoted by the New York Times.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-election-2020-joe-biden-calls-donald-trumps-immigration-policies-criminal-337306">US election 2020: Joe Biden calls Donald Trump's immigration policies 'criminal'</a>

The victory was by no means easy for the couple, but Oneita said that she was hopeful that someday this day would arrive.&nbsp;

After living for 14 years legally in the US and bringing up seven children, in 2018 Oneita was informed by the immigration authority that she and her husband had to leave the country.&nbsp;

The couple arrived in the US in 2004 seeking asylum over gang violence in their native country Jamaica.

Each year, Thompsons application was denied, but they used to get a one-year extension to stay.

However, things changed dramatically when Donald Trump became the President of the United States in 2016.&nbsp;

The policies of Trump, who during his presidential election campaign, vowed of acting tough on immigration, meant that the Jamaican couple would now have to leave the US.

Oneita came in touch with Peter Pedemonti, co-director of the New Sanctuary Movement of Philadelphia, who suggested that refuge in a church is the only viable option.&nbsp;

For decades, families have stayed in churches to avoid deportation and buy time to urge immigration authorities to allow them to stay.&nbsp;

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has designated churches as "sensitive locations" and by and large don't interfere with shelters here.&nbsp;

In August 2018, the couple shifted into First United Methodist Church of Germantown with their two children.&nbsp;

After spending two years in the church, the Thompsons moved to Tabernacle United Church in September.&nbsp;

After a long struggle, help came via their eldest daughter's way.&nbsp;

On Dec 10, Oneita was got to know that since her daughter is a US citizen, she can submit a petition for an "alien relative".&nbsp;

She immediately printed the email.

"I had to physically look at it, touch it," Oneita said.&nbsp;

"I literally felt numb."&nbsp;

With fists raised in victory, Oneita and Clive Thompson were feeling jubilant as they came out of the Tabernacle United Church in Philadelphia, US. The couple can finally stay in the United States after spending two and a half years in churches to avoid deportation.

With fists raised in victory, Oneita and Clive Thompson were feeling jubilant as they came out of the Tabernacle United Church in Philadelphia, US. The couple can finally stay in the United States after spending two and a half years in churches to avoid deportation. Also read | Court rules for 'Dreamers', rejects Trump's limits on immigration programme "We won," Oneita Thompson, 48, told supporters who were present outside the church, as quoted by the New York Times. Also read | US election 2020: Joe Biden calls Donald Trump's immigration policies 'criminal' The victory was by no means easy for the couple, but Oneita said that she was hopeful that someday this day would arrive. After living for 14 years legally in the US and bringing up seven children, in 2018 Oneita was informed by the immigration authority that she and her husband had to leave the country. The couple arrived in the US in 2004 seeking asylum over gang violence in their native country Jamaica. Each year, Thompsons application was denied, but they used to get a one-year extension to stay. However, things changed dramatically when Donald Trump became the President of the United States in 2016. The policies of Trump, who during his presidential election campaign, vowed of acting tough on immigration, meant that the Jamaican couple would now have to leave the US. Oneita came in touch with Peter Pedemonti, co-director of the New Sanctuary Movement of Philadelphia, who suggested that refuge in a church is the only viable option. For decades, families have stayed in churches to avoid deportation and buy time to urge immigration authorities to allow them to stay. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has designated churches as "sensitive locations" and by and large don't interfere with shelters here. In August 2018, the couple shifted into First United Methodist Church of Germantown with their two children. After spending two years in the church, the Thompsons moved to Tabernacle United Church in September. After a long struggle, help came via their eldest daughter's way. On Dec 10, Oneita was got to know that since her daughter is a US citizen, she can submit a petition for an "alien relative". She immediately printed the email. "I had to physically look at it, touch it," Oneita said. "I literally felt numb."

Jamaican couple, who hid in church for 2.5 years, can finally walk free in US

Donald Trump issues a wave of pardons, including former Blackwater security guards convicted for killing Iraqi civilians in 2007. This has cast a shadow over the most powerful & controversial tool in American constitution. Molly Gambhir explains the U.S. Presidential Power.

Most notable pardons in U.S. history

united-states

United States, News on United States, stories on United States, articles on United States, United States stories at Wion, United States news, United States latest news

united states