South Korean Lawmakers Submit Motion to Impeach President Yoon Over Martial Law

SEOUL — South Korea’s opposition parties on Wednesday submitted a motion to impeach President Yoon Suk Yeol, who is facing pressure to leave office hours after he ended a short-lived martial law that prompted troops to encircle parliament before lawmakers voted to lift it.

Impeaching Yoon would require the support of two-thirds of parliament for the motion and then the backing of at least six Constitutional Court justices. The motion, submitted jointly by the main opposition Democratic Party and five smaller opposition parties, could be put to a vote as early as Friday.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Yoon’s senior advisers and secretaries offered to resign collectively and his Cabinet members, including Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun, were also facing calls to step down, as the nation struggled to make sense of what appeared to be a poorly-thought-out stunt.

In the capital, tourists and residents walked around, traffic and construction were heard, and other than crowds of police holding shields, it seemed like a normal sunny, cold December morning.

On Tuesday night, Yoon abruptly imposed the emergency martial law, vowing to eliminate “anti-state” forces after he struggled to push forward his agenda in the opposition-dominated parliament. But his martial law was effective for only about six hours, as the National Assembly voted to overrule the president. The declaration was formally lifted around 4:30 a.m. during a Cabinet meeting.

The liberal opposition Democratic Party, which holds a majority in the 300-seat parliament, said Wednesday that its lawmakers decided to call on Yoon to quit immediately or they would take steps to impeach him.

“President Yoon Suk Yeol’s martial law declaration was a clear violation of the constitution. It didn’t abide by any requirements to declare it,” the Democratic Party said in a statement. “His martial law declaration was originally invalid and a grave violation of the constitution. It was a grave act of rebellion and provides perfect grounds for his impeachment.”

Impeaching him would require support from 200 of parliament’s 300 members. The Democratic Party and other small opposition parties together have 192 seats. But when the parliament rejected Yoon’s martial law declaration in a 190-0 vote, 18 lawmakers from Yoon’s ruling People Power Party cast ballots supporting the rejection, according to National Assembly officials. The leader of the People Power Party, Han Dong-hun, who has long ties with Yoon dating to their days as prosecutors, criticized Yoon’s martial law declaration as “unconstitutional.” If Yoon is impeached, he’ll be stripped of his constitutional powers until the Constitutional Court can rule on his fate. Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, the No. 2 position in the South Korean government, would take over his presidential responsibilities. As calls mounted for Yoon’s Cabinet to resign, Han issued a public message pleading for patience and calling for Cabinet members to “fulfill your duties even after this moment.”

At least six of the Constitutional Court’s nine justices need to support the motion filed by lawmakers for Yoon to be removed from office. But the court currently has only six justices following the retirements of three justices, which is one below the minimum seven needed to handle a presidential impeachment case, requiring lawmakers to speed up the process of naming new justices.

Yoon’s martial law declaration, the first of its kind in more than 40 years, harkened to South Korea’s past military-backed governments when authorities occasionally proclaimed martial law and other decrees that allowed them to station combat soldiers, tanks and armored vehicles on streets or at public places like schools to prevent anti-government demonstrations. Such scenes of military intervention had not been seen since South Korea achieved a genuine democracy in the late 1980s until Tuesday night.

After Yoon’s declaration, troops carrying full battle gear, including assault rifles, tried to keep protesters away from the National Assembly as military helicopters flew overhead and landed nearby. One soldier pointed his assault rifle at a woman who was among protesters outside the building demanding that the martial law be lifted.

It wasn’t clear how the 190 lawmakers were able to enter a parliamentary hall to vote down Yoon’s martial law decree. Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung livestreamed himself climbing over the wall, and while troops and police officers blocked some from entering they didn’t aggressively restrain or use force against others.

No major violence has been reported. The troops and police personnel were later seen leaving the grounds of the National Assembly after the parliamentary vote to lift the martial law. National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik said: “Even with our unfortunate memories of military coups, our citizens have surely observed the events of today and saw the maturity of our military.”

Han, the People Power Party leader, demanded that Yoon explain his decision and fire Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun, who he said recommended the martial law decree to Yoon. The Defense Ministry has not commented.

Under South Korea’s constitution, the president can declare martial law during “wartime, war-like situations or other comparable national emergency states” that require the use of military force to restrict the freedom of press, assembly and other rights to maintain order. Many observers question whether South Korea is currently in such a state.

The constitution also states that the president must oblige when the National Assembly demands the lifting of martial law with a majority vote.

Some experts say Yoon clearly violated the constitution in how he imposed martial law. While martial law allows “special measures” to restrict individual freedoms and the authority of agencies and courts, the constitution does not permit the functions of parliament to be restricted. But in following Yoon’s declaration on Tuesday, South Korea’s military proclaimed parliamentary activities were suspended and deployed troops to try to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.

Park Chan-dae, the Democratic Party’s floor leader, called for Yoon to be immediately investigated on charges of rebellion over the way he deployed troops to the parliament. While the president mostly enjoys immunity from prosecution while in office, the protection does not extend to alleged rebellion or treason.

In Washington, the White House said the U.S. was “seriously concerned” by the events in Seoul. A spokesperson for the National Security Council said President Joe Biden’s administration was not notified in advance of the martial law announcement and was in contact with the South Korean government.

Pentagon spokesman Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said there was no effect on the more than 27,000 U.S. service members based in South Korea.

In Seoul, the streets seemed busy like a normal day Wednesday.

Tourist Stephen Rowan, from Brisbane, Australia, who was touring Gyeongbokgung Palace, said he was not concerned at all.

“But then again, I don’t understand too much about the political status in Korea,” he said. “But I hear they are now calling for the current president’s resignation, so … apparently there’s going to be a lot of demonstrations. … I would have been concerned if martial law had stayed enforced.”

Yoon’s government and ruling party have been embroiled in an impasse with the Democratic Party over next year’s budget bill and a Democratic Party-led attempt to to impeach three top prosecutors.

During his televised announcement, Yoon also described the opposition as “shameless pro-North Korean anti-state forces who are plundering the freedom and happiness of our citizens.” He did not elaborate. North Korea had no immediate comments.

Natalia Slavney, research analyst at the Stimson Center’s 38 North website that focuses on Korean affairs, said Yoon’s imposition of martial law was “a serious backslide of democracy” that followed a “worrying trend of abuse” since he took office in 2022.

South Korea “has a robust history of political pluralism and is no stranger to mass protests and swift impeachments,” Slavney said, citing the example of former President Park Geun-hye, who was ousted from office and imprisoned for bribery and other crimes in 2017. She was later pardoned.

—Associated Press writer Jennifer McDermott contributed to this report.

source https://time.com/7199673/south-korea-impeach-president-yoon-martial-law/

Donald Trump’s Nomination of Pete Hegseth Is on Shaky Ground

This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox.

First came the raw shock of the nomination. A weekend host of a Fox News morning show to lead the Department of Defense, the largest employer in the United States? Really?

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Then came a reminder that Pete Hegseth doesn’t think women should be in combat roles. And then a nudge to recall that the former National Guardsman thinks diversity and inclusion programs at the Pentagon spawn “wokeness” in the ranks. Then there were the stories about his past advocacy for people accused of war crimes despite opposition from those leading the Department of Defense at the time. And then the stories about his unit’s alleged involvement with war crimes. And his anti-Muslim rhetoric. And maybe a white-Christian-nationalism tattoo. And a flag based on that tattoo to his higher-ups in the military that he could be an “insider threat” who shouldn’t be let near high-pressure environments.

Fine, said the crew down at Mar-a-Lago, the de facto White House-in-waiting. Republicans close to the incoming Donald Trump Administration say the team heading back to Washington knew all of this before they nominated Hegseth as their pick to become the next Secretary of Defense and sixth in line for the presidency itself. Republicans in the Senate held steady, even if behind closed doors there was a sinking feeling that they were on a familiar rollercoaster.

But what caught the Trump team by surprise were the stories that came next. Hegseth is alleged to have sexually assaulted a woman at a Republican women’s conference in California. There is a police report. And there is a hush-money settlement. (Hegseth has denied the assault allegations, arguing the encounter was consensual, and noting the police did not charge him. He also has stood by both his political stances and the tattoo, which Hegseth said disqualified him from guarding President Joe Biden’s Inauguration despite being “just a Christian symbol.”) 

Each story came out in recent days before reports surfaced that his own mother sent him a poison-pen email accusing him of being a serial abuser of women and something of a cad. And then there was the one about him as a bad steward of money raised by the powerful Koch network, a sexist bully, and a drunkard on the job who got canned. And the one that said he billed his wife’s credit card for hotel hookup venues. And the one that claimed his former Fox colleagues worried about his alcohol consumption.

All of which would probably block any other incoming administration’s pick for a receptionist—let alone a Secretary of Defense—from creeping forward. But this is Trump, and he likes to provoke. His top aides doubled-down on Tuesday despite some grumbling that this mightn’t be the best use of their political capital. 

But here’s the thing about Trump: he’s loyal until he isn’t. Late Tuesday afternoon, it became clear the nomination was going wobbly in a big way. Hegseth can afford to lose three Republican Senators, and it looks like there may be a few more doubters than that. While plenty of lawmakers have taken the pro-Trump line, some like Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina are signaling a “difficult” path ahead. Sen. Joni Ernst, a retired Army Reservist from Iowa who serves on the Armed Services Committee, says she plans a “frank” conversation with Hegseth. The Chairman of that committee, Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said Hegseth will have to answer questions from his panel if he is going to weather the drip of negative stories. Some Republicans who have been inconsistent allies to Trump could break the nomination; many are watching Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. Others are bracing for a whistleblower report and audit from Hegseth’s time running the Koch-backed veterans’ group.

Privately, Hill staffers are watching the nomination closely and with little certainty. Even as Trump’s team projected confidence, GOP leadership aides are increasingly skeptical. At least a half-dozen Republican Senators are seen as in play, according to three Hill aides.

This wouldn’t be Trump’s first Cabinet pick to go down. Trump really liked the idea of former Rep. Matt Gaetz to run the Department of Justice until it became clear he was going to be too much of a headache. The drip of bad news about Gaetz’s alleged sexual encounters with minors, drug use, and more—plus its dominance in the new cycle—proved too much for the President-elect. Trump can stand by someone as long as it doesn’t make him appear foolish; bad news is fine as long as it’s not new news to Number One. Crowding Trump off the front page is a fireable offense.

Gaetz’s downfall was the quickest exit of a Cabinet nomination in history so close to Election Day, rivaling a similar eight-day window that George W. Bush’s pick at Labor saw in 2000.

So far, Republicans who will control the confirmation—or not—of Trump’s Cabinet picks have largely held the line on Hegseth in a way they did not for Gaetz. But there are sufficient grumblings about moving forward with someone who has never before run something even comparable to the Pentagon to put the nomination in doubt. Senate Republicans fear Trump and his followers, but they also have to take a close eye on the person that will have Trump’s ear on major military action. There is a fine line between messy and untenable; Trump is testing it with Hegseth.

Democrats have, to this point, stepped aside and allowed Republicans to make trouble themselves. A favorite gif on the Hill since the nominations started has been some variation of someone watching with fascination as they toss popcorn in their mouths. Although Democrats won’t have a veto over Trump’s picks, they’re also not certain that they’re all going to get through. The chaos has already claimed Gaetz, and it, might soon be a fate shared by Hegseth or even Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s pick as the nation’s top spy master. Another pick raising eyebrows is Kash Patel, a former Hill hand who rose to become the Pentagon’s top aide during the first Trump term and is on deck to head the FBI. And of course there’s anti-vaxxer Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s nomination to head the Department of Health and Human Services.

For now, Trump’s team is telling allies to hold steady on the rest of the slate. Hegseth is on his version of a charm offensive with Hill offices, and many of the Republicans up there are signaling their fealty. “My position is what President Trump decides to do is what I will support,” Sen. Mike Crapo said when asked about the nominees going forward without so much as an FBI background check. (Since Crapo, an Idaho Republican, said this, the Trump campaign announced it would work with the feds on such vetting.)

And it’s worth remembering that for every moment of suspense when someone like Collins or Murkowski seems to balk at one of Trump’s moves, they were still more likely to side with Trump than not. Yet despite Trump’s strong support among the Senate’s rank and file, Hegseth still might be in trouble. Tuesday’s latest—that Hegseth billed hotels to his then-wife’s credit card while carrying out five affairs—further loosens his hold on the nomination. Trump loves to throw a surprise at his audience. He doesn’t like it the other way. Which may explain why some of his allies at the Capitol are not really investing their time preparing for Hegseth’s potential nomination hearing. Given just how messy the announced pick has been so far, that could be a waste of time. Washington is just watching for Trump to tire of this and move on to a different pick. Welcome to the Waiting Game, Trump’s Version.

Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter.

source https://time.com/7199646/pete-hegseth-nomination-trump-republican-senators/

South Korean President Declares Emergency Martial Law

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol declared an “emergency martial law,” Tuesday accusing the country’s opposition of controlling the parliament, sympathizing with North Korea and paralyzing the government with anti-state activities.

Yoon made the announcement in a televised briefing Tuesday, vowing to “eradicate pro-North Korean forces and protect the constitutional democratic order.”

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

It wasn’t immediately clear how Yoon’s step would affect the country’s governance and democracy. The move drew immediate opposition from politicians, including the leader of his own conservative party, Han Dong-hoon, who called the decision “wrong” and vowed to “stop it with the people.” Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung, who narrowly lost to Yoon in the 2022 presidential election, called Yoon’s announcement “illegal and unconstitutional.”

“Through this martial law, I will rebuild and protect the free Republic of Korea, which is falling into the depths of national ruin,” Yoon said during a televised speech, invoking South Korea’s formal name.

“I will eliminate anti-state forces as quickly as possible and normalize the country,” he said, while asking the people to believe in him and tolerate “some inconveniences.”

Yoon — whose approval rating has dipped in recent months — has struggled to push his agenda against an opposition-controlled parliament since taking office in 2022.

Yoon’s conservative People Power Party had been locked in an impasse with the liberal opposition Democratic Party over next year’s budget bill. The opposition has also been attempting to pass motions to impeach three top prosecutors, including the chief of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, in what the conservatives have called a vendetta against their criminal investigations on Lee, who has been seen as the favorite for the next presidential election in 2027 in opinion polls.

Yoon has also been dismissing calls for independent investigations into scandals involving his wife and top officials, drawing quick, strong rebukes from his political rivals. The Democratic Party reportedly called an emergency meeting of its lawmakers following Yoon’s announcement.

source https://time.com/7199557/south-korea-president-martial-law/

The History of Abolitionism Shows How One Person Can Help Spark a Movement

Division, crisis, and political violence are hardly new in the history of the United States. It may seem like the current political climate is driving the nation to a breaking point, but history points to examples that can serve as encouragement for those who feel they are powerless to change the political situation.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

In the early 19th century, division and violence rose rapidly as the nation faced an impending conflict over slavery. At the time, the eventual triumph over slavery was anything but certain. This ideological battle called for exceptional leadership willing and able to advance the position that enslaved people had long held—that of slavery’s morally corrosive nature. One rural minister out of Ripley, Ohio, the Reverend John Rankin, offered precisely this kind of leadership, leading many of his peers to refer to him as the “father of abolitionism.” His life is a sterling example of how one person’s resistance can help spark a whole movement.

Few today would include Rankin in a list of notable abolitionists. Frederick Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison are renowned, and rightly so. But in important ways, Rankin’s work provided a foundation for these titans to build even more support for abolition.

Read More: The Tormented Rise of Abolition in 1830’s America

The first few decades of the 19th century saw a steady rise in anti-slavery thought and activity. In this period, Rankin worked closely with Charles Osborn in east Tennessee following the formation of the Tennessee Manumissions Society in 1815. In other parts of the country, Black leaders like James Forten in Philadelphia opposed colonization efforts and worked to advance the equal standing of Black people in the United States. Abolitionist publications, like Benjamin Lundy’s Genius of Universal Emancipation, were also beginning to sprout.

Rankin gained broader attention through a series of Letters on American Slavery which he addressed to his brother Thomas in 1824 and 1825, following his discovery that Thomas had purchased enslaved people. Rather than writing directly and privately to his brother, however, Rankin published his letters through a new local paper in Ripley at the time—The Castigator.

While this was not an expressly abolitionist paper, the editor, David Ammen, was a friend and neighbor who shared many of Rankin’s anti-slavery views and who was eager to share Rankin’s arguments with his readers. This was the first time Ammen had engaged his paper in the debate over slavery in this fashion.

The influence of slavery in the United States was on the rise as Rankin’s letters circulated throughout the Ohio River Valley. The Missouri Compromise, passed in 1820, ensured that slavery would expand west of the Mississippi. Even in the north, pro-slavery sympathizers scoffed at the idea of limiting the institution any further. Rankin believed that without a widespread moral awakening, the prospect was slim that slavery could be abolished.

His intention wasn’t to publicly shame his brother, but to confront a culture of slavery that was gaining ground even among his own kin. Rankin was deeply disturbed by his brother’s actions. Both were raised in a deeply abolitionist household in the wilderness of eastern Tennessee at the dawn of the 19th century. If his own flesh and blood could abandon their family’s convictions, he wondered, what hope was there to defeat slavery?

Rankin wrote passionately, but he did not rage. He approached his brother with genuine concern for the state of his soul. No matter what possessed Thomas to embrace slavery, Rankin reasoned, malice would not get him to abandon it. He was also aware of the larger audience who would be reading his pleas to Thomas. He intended to leverage his words in The Castigator to drive a local campaign against slaveholding.

Rankin offered rebuttals to every argument in favor of slavery. “The love of gain first introduced slavery into the world and has been its constant support in every age,” he wrote in his first letter. “It gives energy to the tyrant’s sword, drenches the earth with blood, and binds whole nations in chains.”

The Castigator published his letters weekly between Aug. 17, 1824, and Feb. 22, 1825. Without giving his brother the opportunity to respond, Rankin addressed everything from the common belief in Black racial inferiority to biblical positions on slavery and oppression. In doing so, he offered the first comprehensive case for abolition that most readers had ever encountered.

As he closed his final letter, however, Rankin reassured Thomas that he would remain his brother even if he refused to change his ways. He pleaded with him “to ‘do justly, to love mercy,’ ‘and to let the oppressed go free!’” and asked him, “can you refuse?” Thomas didn’t refuse—he set the people he enslaved free in 1827.

Unbeknownst to Rankin as he wrote, he was providing the intellectual bedrock for the broader anti-slavery movement. William Lloyd Garrison became captivated by his arguments, crediting the Letters as “the cause of my entering the antislavery conflict.”

Read More: The Speech That Launched Frederick Douglass’s Life as an Abolitionist

Now fully embracing the cause of “immediate emancipation,” Garrison republished Rankin’s letters in The Liberator starting in 1832, and used them as a textbook on the moral appeal of abolition for budding anti-slavery societies across the country shortly after. Similar to the way the Federalist Papers made the case for the Constitution, Rankin’s Letters on Slavery did the same for abolitionism. As his profile grew, he increasingly found himself on the road as a popular speaker at anti-slavery gatherings across the country.

While many prominent abolitionists lived in New England and New York, geographically removed from the experience of slavery in the south, Rankin was on the front lines. Just up the river from Cincinnati, Ohio, the small community of Ripley was a crucial hub for Underground Railroad activity in the west, with Rankin’s home being the epicenter for Ripley.

“The real fortress and home to the fugitives was the house of Rev. John Rankin,” wrote John Parker, a Black conductor and formerly enslaved man who had settled in Ripley in part due to the abolitionist community that Rankin had cultivated. Rankin, Parker continued to write, was “a man of deeds as well as words,” and the “undoubted leader” of the Underground Railroad in Ripley. Rankin’s house became a beacon of hope for enslaved people who fled.

Rankin moved from Tennessee to Ohio to escape the influence of slavery. He could have kept going north, to the Western Reserve or to New England, where his abolitionist perspective might have been more appreciated. Instead, he only went as far as was necessary to do his work—just to the other side of the Ohio River, the border between slavery and freedom. Between 1829, when he purchased the property, and 1865, when the Thirteenth Amendment was ratified, over 2,000 enslaved people passed through Rankin’s hilltop fortress on their journeys north toward freedom.

Out of all those who sought refuge, none affected him as much as a woman who arrived in his home with her child in the dead of winter in 1838. Rankin and his family sat in astonishment as the woman detailed how she fled her enslaver near Dover, Ky., and crossed the icy river with slave hunters on her heels.

After helping the woman escape to Canada, Rankin would repeat the story to his closest friends, including Professor Calvin Stowe of Lane Seminary and his wife, Harriet Beecher Stowe. Stowe was so moved by what Rankin had described that she used this story as the basis for the character of “Eliza” in her sensational novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin (1852). Although this was technically a work of fiction, it became a bestseller in part thanks to the real-life stories that she drew from, including the woman whose story she heard from Rankin.

Read More: The Great Black Abolitionist the World Forgot

Yet Rankin’s work on the Underground Railroad made more enemies than allies. Ripley became known by enslavers as the place enslaved people went to disappear. As Rankin’s reputation grew as an abolitionist leader, suspicion grew about his activities in the town. Elevating tensions further, public sentiments toward abolitionists were hostile in the North and South alike. As Rankin helped anti-slavery societies sprout throughout Ohio, anti-abolitionist mobs were never far behind.

Throughout the 1830s, Rankin became closely familiar with the political violence that was all too frequent in the 19th century. Beyond being heckled, cursed at, and pelted with eggs and rocks, he was forced to hide from mobs. Bounties were placed on his head and assassination attempts were made against him and his family in response to his work on the Underground Railroad. Rankin remained committed to finding a peaceful solution to slavery in spite of the growing violence he faced.

While we have yet to arrive today at the level of division and violence faced in the days leading up to the Civil War, we’re closer than we should be. If we hope to overcome our modern political and cultural divide, it would be worthwhile to consider the powerful example left by America’s forgotten father of abolitionism.

Caleb Franz is the author of The Conductor: The Story of Rev. John Rankin, Abolitionism’s Essential Founding Father.

Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.

source https://time.com/7177123/rankin-abolition-moral-argument/

California Lawmakers to Begin Special Session to ‘Trump-Proof’ State Laws

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California Gov. Gavin Newsom and state lawmakers will return to the state Capitol on Monday to begin a special session to protect the state’s progressive policies ahead of another Trump presidency.

The Democratic governor, a fierce critic of President-elect Donald Trump, is positioning California to once again be the center of a resistance effort against the conservative agenda. He is asking his Democratic allies in the Legislature, who hold supermajorities in both chambers, to approve additional funding to the attorney general’s office to prepare for a robust legal fight against anticipated federal challenges.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

California sued the first Trump administration more than 120 times to various levels of success.

“We’re not going to be caught flat-footed,” Newsom said at a recent news conference.

Trump often depicts California as representing all he sees wrong in America. Democrats, which hold every statewide office in California and have commanding margins in the Legislature and congressional delegation, outnumber registered Republicans by nearly 2-to-1 statewide.

Trump called the Democratic governor “New-scum” during a campaign stop in Southern California and has relentlessly lambasted the Democratic stronghold over its large number of immigrants in the U.S. illegally, homeless population and thicket of regulations.

Trump also waded into a water rights battle over the endangered delta smelt, a tiny fish that has pitted environmentalists against farmers and threatened to withhold federal aid to a state increasingly under threat from wildfires. He also vowed to follow through with his campaign promise of carrying out the mass deportation of immigrants without legal status and prosecuting his political enemies.

Before the special session begins, state lawmakers are scheduled to swear in more than two dozen new members and elect leaders for the 2025 legislative session. Hundreds of people also are planning to march around the Capitol on Monday to urge the Legislature to try to stop Trump’s mass deportation plans.

State Attorney General Rob Bonta said his office will protect the state’s immigration population, while Newsom last week unveiled a proposal to revive a rebate program for electric vehicle purchases if the incoming Trump administration eliminates a federal tax credit for people who buy electric cars. Newsom is also considering creating a backup disaster relief fund for the wildfire-prone state after Trump’s threats.

Republican lawmakers blasted Newsom and his Democratic allies over the special session. Rep. Vince Fong, who represents the state’s Central Valley farm belt, said California should work with the incoming Trump administration instead.

“Gavin Newsom’s actions are tone-deaf to the concerns of Californians who disapprove of the direction of our state and country,” Fong said in a video on social media.

Legislators also are expected to spend the year discussing ways to protect dozens of laws expected to be targeted by the Trump administration, including one that has made the state a sanctuary for people seeking abortions who live in states where such practices have been severely limited.

California, the nation’s most populous state, was the first to mandate that by 2035 all new cars, pickup trucks and SUVs sold in California be electric, hydrogen-powered or plug-in hybrids. The state also extends state-funded health care to all low-income residents regardless of their immigration status.

Newsom hasn’t provided details about what actions the lawmakers will consider but said he wanted funding in place before Trump’s inauguration day, Jan. 20. The state spent roughly $42 million in litigation costs during the first Trump administration, officials said.

California is projected to face a $2 billion budget deficit next year, with bigger shortfalls ahead. Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, who sued the first Trump administration in 2017 when it tried to end a program to shield young immigrants from being deported, said lining up the funding now is “a wise investment.”

California successfully clawed back $57 million between 2017 and 2018 after prevailing in a lawsuit to block the Trump administration from putting immigration enforcement conditions on certain federal law enforcement grants. Another legal victory over the citizenship question in the 2020 census forced the federal government to return $850,000 to the state, according to the attorney general’s office.

“We are positioned, if necessary, to be the tip of the spear of the resistance and to push back against any unlawful or unconstitutional actions by the Trump administration,” said Gabriel, who chairs the budget committee.

During Trump’s first presidency, Democratic attorneys general banded together to file lawsuits over immigration, Trump’s travel ban for residents of Muslim countries, the environment, immigration and other topics. But Trump has one possible advantage this time around: He was aggressive in nominating conservative jurists to federal courts at all levels, including the Supreme Court.

source https://time.com/7199345/california-trump-proof-state-laws/

The Surprising Relationship Between Oral Health and IBD

Lenette Sparacino has had dental issues for as long as she can remember. “I’ve probably had at least 30 cavities over my lifetime, if not more,” she says. “I remember as a child getting seven cavities filled at one time.” She also remembers being plagued by mouth ulcers and gum inflammation. Years later, she started experiencing digestive symptoms, and was ultimately diagnosed with Crohn’s disease in 2014.

Her official diagnosis inspired her to learn more about her condition from online resources. “I started understanding that Crohn’s could affect your dental health,” she says. That’s when it all clicked: Years of untreated inflammation had been at the root of both her digestive problems and her dental problems.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

It may not be immediately obvious, but your mouth is a key part of your gastrointestinal tract. “Crohn’s disease in particular involves any part of the GI tract, anywhere from the oral cavity down to the colon and the anus,” says Dr. Shirley Cohen-Mekelburg, a spokesperson for the American Gastroenterological Association and assistant professor and gastroenterologist focusing on IBD at Michigan Medicine.

You can think of it all as one long pipeline, adds Dr. Earl Campbell, a gastroenterologist at Wellstar Health System. And your mouth and your intestines aren’t just linked physically, but also chemically. “They’re anatomically continuous, and saliva and digestive enzymes are passing from the mouth through the gut,” he says.

This is commonly referred to as the “oral-gut axis,” a communication pathway from the mouth to the anus, along which inflammation can spread its effects. And that inflammation is especially perilous in the case of the inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. People with IBD are more likely to have gum inflammation than people without these conditions. And vice versa: Those with oral inflammation and various dental health symptoms are likelier to have gut trouble, too.

In fact, as many as 35% of people with IBD have some kind of oral manifestation of the condition, such as canker sores, the gum disease gingivitis, cavities, and angular cheilitis, which causes painful sores at the corners of the mouth. Oral symptoms are slightly more common in people with Crohn’s disease than in those with ulcerative colitis.

Read More: How to Navigate Dating When You Have IBD

Oral symptoms can crop up before, at the same time, or after intestinal symptoms arise. But people with Crohn’s disease may be more likely to notice oral lesions before any other symptoms appear.

Sparacino, who now shares about her experience with IBD on Instagram and Tiktok @_lifewithcrohnsdisease_, had to come to that realization on her own. She never had a gastroenterologist explain that dental hygiene can be related to IBD or a dentist who asked her about any oral symptoms, even knowing she has Crohn’s disease. “I feel like there’s a big gap between doctors and dentists either not knowing or not sharing this information and patients not knowing this information,” she says. She estimates it took her about four to five years after her Crohn’s diagnosis to discover the link with oral health symptoms.

Ideally, a care provider will help you navigate this relationship. Pointing out that canker sores are a common manifestation of Crohn’s disease, especially during a flare-up of symptoms, for example, helps empower patients to understand their experiences, Cohen-Mekelburg says. She makes sure to explain this link to newly diagnosed patients.

Research supporting this relationship has gained more traction in the last 10 years or so, says dentist and periodontist Andre Paes, a tenured associate professor at Case Western Reserve University, who has researched the link between gastrointestinal disorders and gum diseases. “There are potential inflammatory mediators…in the mouth that could affect other parts of the body and vice versa,” he says.

For example, IBD-related inflammation has also been associated with higher risks of diabetes and heart disease, he says. In addition, there’s been a growing appreciation for the way an imbalance of bacteria in the gut — a common marker of IBD called dysbiosis, which can spark inflammation — may also affect the balance of bacteria in the mouth, he says.

It makes a certain amount of intuitive sense: “If you’re worsening systemic inflammation [anywhere] in the body, you’re going to worsen IBD as well,” Campbell explains. Plus, “more than half of the bacteria in the human body resides in the GI tract and the oral cavity,” Campbell says. In fact, 29% resides in your gut and 26% resides in your mouth. But there’s still a lot to be discovered about how those major hubs of bacteria might be influencing each other along the oral-gut axis, he says.

What experts still don’t know

It’s unclear exactly why some people have oral IBD symptoms and others don’t, Cohen-Mekelburg says. 

We also still need more research on which oral bacteria might contribute to gut symptoms and vice versa, as well as exactly how an imbalance of bacteria in one area affects the balance in another, Campbell adds.

But as future research learns more about how bacteria in the mouth may lead to IBD, addressing an oral bacteria imbalance might help delay or prevent disease progression, Cohen-Mekelburg hypothesizes.

For now, the direction of that relationship isn’t even understood, Paes adds. We still don’t know if changes in oral inflammation and bacteria imbalances happen before or after similar changes in the gut. The answer could one day change the course of treatment.

And if researchers were to identify the specific strains of bacteria involved in oral or gut inflammation, people with IBD might be able to take specific probiotics to help restore balance to their oral or gut microbiomes, Campbell says.

Read More: Why Gut Health Issues Are More Common in Women

Common risk factors underlie both

Amid the unknowns, there are some known risks for both IBD and dental health concerns. 

For example, “we know that smoking can impact your gum health and your oral health, and it could definitely impact your GI health in general,” Cohen-Mekelburg says. “Patients who have Crohn’s disease who smoke are much more likely to have severe disease.”

IBD may also affect how your body absorbs certain nutrients, and when you’re low in some key vitamins or minerals, you might be more likely to experience oral health symptoms. “Angular cheilitis or glossitis are two manifestations you can get around the mouth or on the tongue that could actually be a sign of a vitamin deficiency with IBD, but not necessarily the IBD itself,” Cohen-Mekelburg says.

Taking care of your oral and your gut health

If you have any concerns about your oral health, it can’t hurt to talk to your dentist and ask if you have signs of inflammation in your mouth, Paes says. 

In general, it’s important to discuss any changes in oral or gut symptoms with your doctors, too. “Be aware of what symptoms you’re experiencing and begin to differentiate what the issues are,” Cohen-Mekelburg says. “Talk to your doctor about anything that’s concerning, and then it’s the job of your care team to help build your awareness of what [symptoms] matter most.”

Together, your care providers might help you identify patterns in your symptoms. For example, maybe your oral symptoms worsen around flare-ups of your digestive symptoms. In that case, you want to make sure you’re following your treatment protocol to limit flares as much as possible. “It’s about being proactive, making sure patients are taking medications, that they’re healing,” Cohen-Mekelburg says.

If your IBD treatment protocol involves medications like steroids, which fight IBD-related inflammation, you might also notice reduced inflammation in your mouth, Paes says. When you have IBD, it’s generally a good idea to limit your exposure to factors that can increase inflammation throughout your body—like air pollution, chronic stress, or infections—as they might affect both oral and digestive symptoms, he adds.

Read More: 8 Apps That Can Help You Manage IBD

Your gastroenterologist might not always think to mention it (appointments are short, after all), but it’s also important to keep up with general dental hygiene practices, Campbell says. That means “brushing, flossing, and making sure you get regular cleanings.” He acknowledges that’s easier said than done: “My wife is a dentist and it’s been a while since I’ve gone in to get a cleaning, so I think individuals with IBD should be more vigilant on making sure they’re getting in for their routine cleanings with their dentists.”

Sparacino does all she can to ensure her gums and teeth stay as healthy as possible. For example, she uses an extra-strength toothpaste designed for people at higher risk of cavities and tooth decay that a new dentist recommended after she explained her Crohn’s disease and oral health history. “I’ve used that for probably five or six years, since I kind of put the pieces together, and I’ve noticed a lot fewer mouth issues since then. I’m not having cavities at the rate I was having them before.”

Her Crohn’s treatment seems to be helping, too. Ever since starting a type of medication called a biologic, which targets specific proteins to decrease inflammation, she’s rarely had mouth ulcers or gum irritation. “When I would floss, my gums would be so sore. Now, they’re just normal,” she says. She also avoids sticky, chewy sweets like caramel, doesn’t skip dental cleanings, and flosses regularly. “I just try to make a point to take care of my mouth really well.”

source https://time.com/7199308/ibd-oral-dental-health-connection/

Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger Retires

Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger has retired, with David Zinsner and Michelle Johnston Holthaus named as interim co-CEOs.

Gelsinger, whose career has spanned more than 40 years, also stepped down from the company’s board. He started at Intel in 1979 at Intel and was its first chief technology officer. He returned to Intel as chief executive in 2021.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Intel said Monday that it will conduct a search for a new CEO.

Read More: Intel’s CEO on Turning Skeptics Into Believers

Zinsner is executive vice president and chief financial officer at Intel. Holthaus was appointed to the newly created position of CEO of Intel Products, which includes the client computing group, data center and AI group and etwork and Edge Group.

Frank Yeary, independent chair of Intel’s board, will become interim executive chair.

“Pat spent his formative years at Intel, then returned at a critical time for the company in 2021,” Yeary said in a statement. “As a leader, Pat helped launch and revitalize process manufacturing by investing in state-of-the-art semiconductor manufacturing, while working tirelessly to drive innovation throughout the company.”

Last week it was revealed that the Biden administration plans on reducing part of Intel’s $8.5 billion in federal funding for computer chip plants around the country, according to three people familiar with the grant who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

The reduction is largely a byproduct of the $3 billion that Intel is also receiving to provide computer chips to the military. President Joe Biden announced the agreement to provide Intel with up to $8.5 billion in direct funding and $11 billion in loans in March.

The changes to Intel’s funding are not related to the company’s financial record or milestones, the people familiar with the grant told The Associated Press. In August, the chipmaker announced that it would cut 15% of its workforce — about 15,000 jobs — in an attempt to turn its business around to compete with more successful rivals like Nvidia and AMD.

Unlike some of its rivals, Intel manufactures chips in addition to designing them.

Shares of the Santa Clara, California, company, jumped more than 4% in premarket trading.

source https://time.com/7199294/intel-gelsinger-zinsner-johnston-holthaus/