Columbia faculty lawsuit over Trump administration funding cuts dismissed
The American Association of University Professors and the American Federation of Teachers lack legal standing to sue, U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil determined.
'Conspicuously, Columbia, whose grants and contracts were terminated and whose funding is the subject of the relief Plaintiffs seek, is not a plaintiff,' Vyskocil wrote in her decision.
The judge said a case against these funding cuts should only be considered if it is brought on by Columbia, which has lost more than $400 million in federal funding from the Trump administration.
The Hill has reached out to the Education Department for comment.
'Our democracy cannot very well function if individual judges issue extraordinary relief to every plaintiff who clamors to object to executive action,' Vyskocil said.
The unions immediately appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
'This is a disappointing ruling, but by no means the end of the fight. The Trump administration's threats and coercion at Columbia University are part of an assault on education that extends far beyond Columbia. Ultimately, lifesaving research, basic civil liberties, and higher education in communities across the country are all on the line. Faculty, students, and the American public will not stand for it. We will continue to fight back,' the two groups said in a statement.
Columbia was the first school targeted by the Trump administration, suffering sweeping funding cuts both before and after it agreed to a list of demands from the White House.
The situation became more drastic after the Department of Education referred Columbia to its accreditor after its determination the university had violated Title VI. If Columbia loses accreditation, it could lose all access to federal student aid.
—Updated 9:40 a.m. EDT
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
5 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Social Security COLA for 2026 and Beyond: What Seniors Want
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. American seniors are frustrated with how Social Security adjusts for inflation, and they want change. A new report from The Senior Citizens League (TSCL) shows a clear demand among retirees to improve the way the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) is calculated. According to the group's latest survey of 1,92 individuals over the age of 62, 34 percent of respondents identified updating the COLA formula as their top policy priority for enhancing Social Security benefits. And when presented with specific policy options to raise future COLAs, seniors overwhelmingly supported a shift to a more targeted inflation measure. Currently, the Social Security Administration (SSA) calculates COLA based on the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). This index tracks inflation using the spending habits of younger, urban workers, not retirees. Since 1975, COLAs have been applied annually based on CPI-W data gathered during the third quarter of the year (July through September), with the goal of ensuring benefits rise in line with everyday costs, such as housing, food, and medical care. This year, benefits rose by 2.5 percent. The TSCL, based on current CPI-W readings, expects the 2026 COLA to increase slightly to 2.6 percent. However, regardless of the boost, for many retirees, that formula no longer works. According to the TSCL survey, 68 percent of seniors support replacing the current CPI-W model with the CPI-E, or Consumer Price Index for the Elderly. Developed by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the CPI-E is an index that tracks the spending habits of Americans aged 62 and older, focusing on the types of goods and services seniors typically use, such as health care, housing, and prescription drugs. "CPI-E is designed to better reflect the spending habits of people aged 62 and older," Colin Ruggiero, co-founder at told Newsweek. "It gives more weight to health care and housing costs which are two of the fastest-growing expenses for seniors. Switching to CPI-E would make COLAs more relevant and responsive to the real financial pressures seniors face." Chris Motola, a financial analyst at told Newsweek: "The main advantage of CPI-E would be to more heavily weight health care and housing costs in COLA calculations, both of which tend to disproportionately eat into seniors' budgets." Another popular idea is making up for what's already been lost. The TSCL survey found that 57 percent of respondents support a one-time "catch-up" COLA payment to compensate for years when benefits failed to keep pace with actual living costs. Composite image created by Newsweek. Composite image created by Newsweek. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/Canva "A catch-up COLA would be a recognition that past adjustments haven't kept pace with reality," Ruggiero said. "While it's feasible, it would require congressional approval and carry a hefty budgetary cost. Politically, it could gain traction as a way to restore fairness, especially if framed as a correction rather than a new ongoing expense." Still, the limits of these proposals are clear. While COLA reforms could help stabilize seniors' purchasing power, experts caution that they won't fix everything. "Adjusting the COLA is a great start, but it's not the cure-all," said Ruggiero. "We also need broader reforms to strengthen the entire retirement system, including benefit adequacy, solvency, and support for low-income seniors." Motola agreed: "It would go a long way, but again, a major problem is that Social Security isn't really meant to carry the burden alone. We've made it very difficult for people to save money for retirement, and the loss of pensions has placed enormous stress on the system."
Newsweek
6 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump's 'Largest Deal Ever' Faces Japan Diet in Crisis
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. When President Donald Trump revealed that his administration had struck a "massive" trade and investment deal with Japan, he described it as "completed"—but it must still pass the Japanese parliament, called the Diet, which is riven with political turmoil. The deal will likely require—at least in part, if not in full—approval by the Diet, where Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba's coalition government very recently lost its majority in the upper chamber, having already become the minority in the lower chamber in 2024. A Japanese lawmaker in the lower house, who chairs a key policy committee of the left-leaning Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP), the main opposition, told Newsweek they are closely scrutinizing the Trump deal to assess whether they are satisfied with it. They will then decide how to proceed. Ishiba, of the right-wing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), still the largest party in the Diet, said he would stay on to see through the implementation of the U.S. trade deal, rather than cave to calls for his immediate resignation and create a political vacuum. Analysts said that opposition parties may seek to criticize Ishiba and the deal, but the alternative of blocking it in the Diet could backfire and lead to higher tariffs. Newsweek has contacted the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative for comment. U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a joint press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba in the East Room at the White House on February 7, 2025 in Washington, DC. U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a joint press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba in the East Room at the White House on February 7, 2025 in Washington, It Matters Trump has said he will make deals that benefit both sides, hailing his unique abilities to do so. But the intense "America First" messaging surrounding Trump's deals poses a challenge for U.S. trading partners. They must balance Trump's demands against their own national interests, economic needs, and views of voters, while projecting a degree of strength and independence to show they are securing gains and not merely surrendering to Washington. The Japanese deal, whose advantages to the U.S. Trump has heavily emphasized, highlights the potential vulnerability of these agreements to domestic politics. Trump's Japan Trade Deal The deal was struck ahead of Trump's August 1 deadline, when, in a letter to Ishiba, he had said Japanese imports would face a 25 percent tariff in the U.S. if negotiations failed to bear fruit. Trump had previously questioned the strategic U.S.-Japan partnership, including a long-standing security agreement with its key East Asian ally, citing what he said was an unfair set of trading terms because the Japanese market was too closed off to Americans. Trade talks between the two sides had been stuck on imports of American rice in particular. But negotiations continued, and Trump revealed the deal in a post on his Truth Social platform on Tuesday, July 22. Trump said Japan had agreed "at my direction" to invest $550 billion into the U.S.—spanning energy, semiconductors, critical minerals, pharmaceuticals, and shipbuilding—but that 90 percent of the profits from these would be kept by the U.S. He also said Japan would open up to American car and truck exports, rice and other agricultural products, and more goods. Japan would still face a 15 percent tariff, Trump said, but U.S. businesses will have a zero tariff. Among the specific measures in the deal are a Japanese commitment to immediately increase rice imports from the U.S. by 75 percent and a Japanese purchase of 100 Boeing aircraft, according to a White House fact sheet. Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba attends a press conference at the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) headquarters on July 21, 2025 in Tokyo, Japan. Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba attends a press conference at the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) headquarters on July 21, 2025 in Tokyo, Japan. Philip Fong - Pool/ Getty Images Japan's CDP Will 'Carefully Scrutinize' Trump Deal Kazuhiko Shigetoku, a lawmaker in the Diet's lower house from the opposition CDP, told Newsweek that the deal means "the uncertainty of the economic outlook has eased." "However, in terms of the perspective of the national interest, we need to carefully scrutinize the content of the agreement to determine whether it is satisfactory and how it will affect the Japanese economy," Shigetoku said. "We will determine our future actions based on explanations from the government at the Diet and other meetings. Although the need for congressional approval is unclear at this stage, we believe that it is important to maintain and expand free trade." Mixed Reactions in Japan Ishiba's recent election loss was driven in large part by voter frustration with rising prices while wage growth is slow. His weakened minority government must now push through a hard-fought trade agreement, one that Trump has touted as a major win for the U.S. "Early reactions among Japanese lawmakers have been mixed, with the Ishiba administration touting the deal as a success and members of the opposition claiming it is bad for the Japanese economy," Kristi Govella, Associate Professor at the University of Oxford and Japan Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), told Newsweek. "For Japanese people, trade negotiations with the U.S. have been seen as a litmus test of the current government's leadership ability, so politicians are currently fighting to control the narrative about how good this deal really is for Japan." Kazuto Suzuki, professor at the Graduate School of Public Policy at the University of Tokyo, Japan, and director of the Institute of Geoeconomics at International House of Japan, said the Trump deal was "well received by both the ruling and opposition parties." "Given that many lawmakers did not expect the Ishiba administration to succeed in reaching an agreement, the fact that it was achieved came as a surprise," Suzuki told Newsweek. "Moreover, while it was considered difficult to lower tariffs on automobiles and automobile parts, the fact that they were reduced to 15 percent is highly regarded. "However, this does not compensate for the major defeat in the Upper House election on July 20, and criticism of Prime Minister Ishiba is growing." He added: "It is unlikely that the Diet will reject this agreement. If it were to reject it, higher tariffs would inevitably be imposed, which would benefit no one." Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba delivers his policy speech during a plenary session at the lower house of parliament on January 24, 2025, in Tokyo, Japan. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba delivers his policy speech during a plenary session at the lower house of parliament on January 24, 2025, in Tokyo, National Interest Govella said opposition parties "have a great deal of incentive to criticize the trade deal and to capitalize on the weakness of the Ishiba government," but "actually blocking the deal's approval could backfire badly." Higher tariffs "would have significantly worse impacts on the Japanese economy and on Japanese people who are already feeling the effects of inflation," she said. Japanese voters have "generally been skeptical about the opposition's ability to lead" after their experience with the Democratic Party of Japan from 2009 to 2012, she continued. "So if the current opposition parties are perceived to be acting against Japan's national interest by blocking this deal, they could lose the supporters they've recently gained," Govella said. What People Are Saying President Trump posted to Truth Social: "We just completed a massive Deal with Japan, perhaps the largest Deal ever made … This is a very exciting time for the United States of America, and especially for the fact that we will continue to always have a great relationship with the Country of Japan." Prime Minister Ishiba told reporters, per The Wall Street Journal: "The government was determined to protect national interests," adding that the deal "will lead to Japan and the U.S. working together to create jobs, produce high-quality goods, and contribute to fulfilling various roles in the world going forward." What's Next Japanese lawmakers are scrutinizing the trade deal with the U.S.. They are unlikely to block it should they be called to vote on some or all of its components, though the Ishiba government no longer has a majority in either house of the Diet, complicating its passage.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I love standing on the soil of Scotland, Donald Trump says after landing in country
DONALD Trump has said he 'loves standing on the soil of Scotland' after landing in the country on Friday evening, according to the Scottish Secretary. Ian Murray told the PA news agency what the US President's first words were after disembarking from Air Force One in Prestwick. The UK Government minister was the first person to greet the president in Scotland as he begins his four day visit to the country. Speaking after meeting the American leader, Murray told PA: 'The president came off the flight, and I said, 'Mr president, welcome to Scotland – the home country of your dear mother', and he said, 'It's great to be here, I always love standing on the soil of Scotland'. READ MORE: LIVE: Updates as protesters rally against Donald Trump in Scotland 'I said, 'I hope you're looking forward to a bit of downtime with some golf this weekend', and he said, 'Yes'. And I said, 'Well, we've whipped up a bit of a wind for you to make it a bit more competitive', and he went, 'I'm looking forward to it'.' Murray said Trump was given a 'warm reception' as he got off his presidential plane. Hundreds gathered on the Mound overlooking Prestwick Airport for the president's arrival. A Trump flag was flown while a few spectators wore 'Make America Great Again' hats, although many of those attending were locals and aviation enthusiasts, including some who had travelled from England. Murray said: 'Spotters hills, as it's called, where all the plane spotters come to Prestwick, was absolutely full. 'You could see that from the tarmac and as Air Force One came in, people were snapping away on their photographs. 'To see all that happening is quite a spectacle in itself. 'It's really good to have that kind of focus on Scotland.' Trump will meet Prime Minister Keir Starmer during his trip to discuss the UK-US trade deal as Britain hopes to be spared from the president's tariff regime. The Scottish Secretary said: 'Really, the purpose of this weekend, the purpose of greeting the president off the plane, the purpose of the Prime Minister's relationship with the president is to build that close relationship, to make sure that that old alliance is nurtured, and to do that for the benefit of the national interest, which is about jobs and growth here in the UK, and particularly Scotland.' Trump will meet Scottish First Minister John Swinney during his trip as he opens a new golf course in Aberdeenshire. (Image: PA) Before flying to Prestwick, Trump said in Washington that he was 'looking forward' to meeting Swinney, describing him as a 'good man' – the same phrase he used for the Prime Minister after landing in Scotland. Asked about the president's relationship with the UK, Murray said: 'The Prime Minister has taken a very pragmatic approach to the relationship with the president of the United States, because it's in our national interest to do so, whether it be on defence, security, trade, cultural, historic ties. 'It's a historic alliance, and that alliance has to be nurtured and continue through to the future, because it's quite clear that our relationship with United States is good for jobs and growth here in Scotland and across the UK. 'The Prime Minister knows that, and knows that working very closely with the US is in our national interest.' Asked about protests, which are expected across the country, Murray said people had a right to demonstrate, adding: 'Freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom to protest is a key cornerstone of both countries, America and the UK, and the right to be able to protest if they so wish to so.'
