Latest news with #FederalLaw
Time of India
6 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Columbia University to pay $200million to settle clash with Trump admin; accepts other demands too: 10 things to know about their deal
Columbia University on Wednesday announced that it agreed to pay over $220 million to the Trump administration to restore federal research funding that was previously cancelled due to concerns about antisemitism on campus. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The agreement requires the Ivy League institution to pay $200 million across three years, plus an additional $21 million to address alleged civil rights violations against Jewish staff following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel. "This agreement marks an important step forward after a period of sustained federal scrutiny and institutional uncertainty," acting University President Claire Shipman said. The institution faced potential losses of billions in government support, including over $400 million in cancelled grants. The funding was withdrawn due to the university's alleged inadequate response to antisemitism during the Israel-Hamas conflict. 10 things to know more about agreement Columbia has accepted various administrative requirements, including restructuring student disciplinary procedures and implementing a federally-endorsed definition of antisemitism in teaching and disciplinary matters involving students critical of Israel. The agreement, which includes no admission of wrongdoing, formalises these changes whilst maintaining university independence, according to Shipman. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said, "I am pleased to announce that the Trump Administration has reached a historic agreement with Columbia University. Columbia has agreed to pay a penalty of $200 Million Dollars to the United States Government for violating Federal Law, in addition to over $20 Million to their Jewish employees who were unlawfully targeted and harassed. Columbia has also committed to ending their ridiculous DEI policies, admitting students based ONLY on MERIT, and protecting the Civil Liberties of their students on campus. Numerous other Higher Education Institutions that have hurt so many, and been so unfair and unjust, and have wrongly spent federal money, much of it from our government, are upcoming. It's a great honor to have been involved, and I want to thank and congratulate Secretary Linda McMahon, and all those who worked with us on this important deal. I also want to thank and commend Columbia University for agreeing to do what is right. I look forward to watching them have a great future in our Country, maybe greater than ever before!" Education Secretary Linda McMahon described the deal as "a seismic shift in our nation's fight to hold institutions that accept American taxpayer dollars accountable for antisemitic discrimination and harassment." "Columbia's reforms are a roadmap for elite universities that wish to regain the confidence of the American public by renewing their commitment to truth-seeking, merit, and civil debate," McMahon stated. The pact comes after months of uncertainty and fraught negotiations at the more than 270-year-old university. It was among the first targets of Trump's crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus protests and on colleges that he asserts have allowed Jewish students be threatened and harassed. Columbia's own antisemitism task force found last summer that Jewish students had faced verbal abuse, ostracism and classroom humiliation during the spring 2024 demonstrations. The agreement includes previously announced changes from March, such as reviewing Middle East curriculum for balance, strengthening the Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies, and discontinuing programmes that promote unlawful race-based outcomes. The agreement requires Columbia to question international students about their motivations for studying in America and share information about disciplinary actions involving student visa holders with the government. The pressure on Columbia began with a series of funding cuts. Then Mahmoud Khalil, a former graduate student who had been a visible figure in the protests, became the first person detained in the Trump administration's push to deport pro-Palestinian activists who aren't U.S. citizens. Columbia was an early test case for the Trump administration as it sought closer oversight of universities that the Republican president views as bastions of liberalism. Yet it soon was overshadowed by Harvard University, which became the first higher education institution to defy Trump's demands and fight back in court. The Trump administration has used federal research funding as its primary lever in its campaign to reshape higher education. More than $2 billion in total has also been frozen at Cornell, Northwestern, Brown and Princeton universities. Columbia's reinstatement for federal research funding marks a significant development. The institution's removal from the federal blacklist enables access to previously frozen grant funds. Scientists at the university can now utilise their approved grants that were suspended. Additionally, the academic community at Columbia regains eligibility to apply for new federal research grants.
News18
6 days ago
- Politics
- News18
Columbia University Reaches $220 Million Deal With Trump To Restore Federal Research Funding
Last Updated: Under the terms of the agreement, the Ivy League university will pay $200 million over three years. Columbia University has reached a $220 million settlement with the Trump administration, ending months of tension over allegations of antisemitism on campus and paving the way for the restoration of federal research funding that had been revoked earlier this year. Under the agreement, Columbia will pay $200 million over three years to the federal government. An additional $21 million will go toward resolving alleged civil rights violations against Jewish employees in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, according to the White House. 'This agreement marks an important step forward after a period of sustained federal scrutiny and institutional uncertainty," said Acting University President Claire Shipman. Columbia had faced the loss of more than $400 million in federal grants and the threat of billions more in funding being withdrawn after the administration accused the school of failing to adequately address antisemitism during the Israel-Hamas conflict. The Republican administration made clear that continued support would hinge on sweeping institutional reforms. In a statement following the agreement, President Donald Trump said, 'I am pleased to announce that the Trump Administration has reached a historic agreement with Columbia University. Columbia has agreed to pay a penalty of $200 million to the United States Government for violating Federal Law, in addition to over $20 million to their Jewish employees who were unlawfully targeted and harassed." I am pleased to announce that the Trump Administration has reached a historic agreement with Columbia University. Columbia has agreed to pay a penalty of $200 Million Dollars to the United States Government for violating Federal Law, in addition to over $20 Million to their…— Trump Truth Social Posts On X (@TrumpTruthOnX) July 24, 2025 The agreement, finalised on Wednesday, formalises a list of reforms that Columbia had begun implementing earlier this year. These include a revamp of the university's student disciplinary process and the application of a federally backed definition of antisemitism to both academic content and campus conduct evaluations—particularly in cases involving students critical of Israel. Columbia accepted the terms without admitting wrongdoing. Shipman emphasised that the deal preserves the university's autonomy. Education Secretary Linda McMahon hailed the settlement as a turning point: 'A seismic shift in our nation's fight to hold institutions that accept American taxpayer dollars accountable for antisemitic discrimination and harassment." She added that Columbia's changes 'are a roadmap for elite universities that wish to regain the confidence of the American public by renewing their commitment to truth-seeking, merit, and civil debate." Among the agreed reforms are measures first outlined in March: a review of the Middle East studies curriculum to ensure balance, new faculty appointments at the Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies, and the elimination of programs deemed to promote unlawful race-based diversity targets or DEI objectives. The university must also report to a federal monitor to verify that none of its programming supports unlawful DEI goals. The agreement follows a period of strained negotiations and leadership instability at Columbia, which has seen three interim presidents in the past year. It was one of the first institutions targeted under Trump's broader effort to clamp down on pro-Palestinian demonstrations and perceived antisemitism on campuses. Columbia's internal antisemitism task force concluded last summer that Jewish students had faced verbal abuse, ostracism, and classroom humiliation during the spring 2024 protests. At the same time, other Jewish students took part in the protests, and organisers insist their criticism was directed at Israeli government actions, not at Jewish individuals. As part of the settlement, Columbia has also agreed to include new screening questions for international applicants aimed at understanding their motives for studying in the US., and to implement protocols ensuring all students are committed to 'civil discourse." Additionally, the university committed to providing federal authorities with records of disciplinary actions involving international students on visas—specifically cases that led to suspensions or expulsions. This provision could aid Trump-era efforts to deport student activists involved in protests. On Tuesday, the university announced that over 70 students would face suspensions, expulsions, or degree revocations for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest inside the main library in May and an alumni weekend encampment last year. The crackdown on Columbia began with funding freezes, followed by the detention of Mahmoud Khalil, a former graduate student and prominent protester, as part of the Trump administration's broader effort to deport non-citizen pro-Palestinian activists. Federal investigators also searched Columbia housing as part of a Justice Department investigation into whether the university harboured undocumented individuals. At the time, Columbia leadership reaffirmed its commitment to following federal law. Columbia served as an early test case for the Trump administration's attempt to reshape American higher education, especially at institutions it has characterised as liberal strongholds. However, attention later shifted to Harvard University, which became the first major school to openly challenge the administration's demands in court. The administration has relied heavily on withholding federal research funds as leverage. More than $2 billion in funding has been frozen across other top-tier schools, including Cornell, Northwestern, Brown, and Princeton. In a separate case earlier this year, $175 million was pulled from the University of Pennsylvania over a dispute concerning women's sports and transgender athlete Lia Thomas. That funding was restored after the university agreed to revise records and policies. The administration's campaign has expanded beyond private universities. University of Virginia President James Ryan stepped down in June under pressure from a Justice Department investigation into DEI practices. A similar probe has since been opened at George Mason University. About the Author Abhro Banerjee Covering day-to-day national and international news for the last nine years across print and digital. Associated with as Chief Sub-Editor since 2022, covering innumerable big and small events, More Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from geopolitics to diplomacy and global trends. Stay informed with the latest world news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: July 24, 2025, 08:25 IST News world Columbia University Reaches $220 Million Deal With Trump To Restore Federal Research Funding Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
CBS News
22-07-2025
- Business
- CBS News
10 signs of a reputable debt relief company
When the debts you owe start controlling your life instead of the other way around, debt relief companies suddenly seem like they're everywhere, promising quick fixes and financial freedom. Their ads fill your inbox, pop up on social media and flood radio waves with testimonials that sound too good to be true. And often, they are. The reality is that the debt relief industry attracts both genuine helpers and outright scammers. While legitimate companies can provide real assistance to those drowning in debt, other firms prey on desperation and financial stress. These bad actors will gladly take your money while making your situation worse. The key to getting actual help lies in knowing how to separate the professionals from the others. But what exactly should you look for when trying to find a reputable debt relief company? Learn how the right debt relief strategy could benefit you today. Here's exactly what to look for when evaluating your options: A legitimate debt relief company will never demand payment before they have helped you settle at least one of your debts. Under federal law, debt relief companies cannot charge you any settlement fees until they've done so, and reputable companies understand this rule and structure their payment systems accordingly. This performance-based model ensures that the company has a genuine incentive to help you achieve results. Explore your debt relief options and discover the right strategy for you now. A reputable debt relief company will explain the fee structure up front, in plain English. They'll tell you exactly what you'll pay, when you'll pay it and what services you'll receive for that money. Legitimate companies typically charge a percentage of your enrolled debt, so be wary of companies that are vague about costs or have complex fee structures that seem designed to confuse rather than inform. Legitimate debt relief companies typically offer free consultations where they review your financial situation and explain your options. During this consultation, they should ask detailed questions about your debts, income and expenses to determine whether their services are appropriate for your situation. A reputable company will also discuss alternatives to their services, such as credit counseling, debt consolidation or even bankruptcy if that might be a better option for you. They're not just trying to sell you their services; they're trying to help you find the best solution for your specific circumstances. Reputable debt relief companies are properly licensed in the states where they operate and maintain memberships with recognized industry organizations. Don't just take their word for it, though. Do your own research to confirm their credentials before signing up. You can verify a company's licensing status by checking with your state's attorney general's office or department of consumer affairs. Established, reputable debt relief companies have years of experience and can provide evidence of their success. They should be able to share statistics about their settlement rates, average savings for clients and typical timeframes for completing the debt relief process. So, look for companies with positive reviews from multiple sources, including independent review sites, the Better Business Bureau and consumer protection agencies. Be cautious of companies that only have reviews on their website or that have numerous complaints about failed promises or poor customer service. Legitimate debt relief companies are honest about how long the process takes and what you can realistically expect to achieve. They won't promise unrealistic results like eliminating all your debt in a few months or reducing everything you owe by 90%. They should explain that debt settlement can take two to four years to complete, that not all creditors will agree to settle and that the process can have negative impacts on your credit score. This might not be what you want to hear, but it's essential for making an informed decision. Reputable companies will thoroughly explain the risks associated with debt relief, including the potential impact on your credit score, the possibility of being sued by creditors for nonpayment and the tax implications of forgiven debt. They want you to understand exactly what you're getting into before you commit. They should also explain that debt settlement isn't appropriate for everyone and discuss situations where other options might be better suited to your needs. Legitimate debt relief companies strive to maintain regular communication with their clients throughout the process. They should provide you with regular updates on the status of your accounts, negotiations with creditors and any changes to your settlement plan. You should be able to reach your assigned representative or customer service team when you have questions or concerns. Companies that are difficult to reach or that don't return calls promptly are red flags. Some debt relief firms even provide their customers with ongoing access to legal services in case a creditor gets its lawyers involved. While most debt relief companies charge an extra fee for legal services, a small number include legal services in the cost of their program. Reputable companies take the security of your personal and financial information seriously. Any debt relief company you consider should have a clear privacy policy that explains how they collect, use and protect your data. This policy should be easily accessible on their website and provided to you in writing. So, you should be cautious of companies that ask for sensitive information before you've signed a formal agreement with them. Many reputable debt relief companies offer some form of money-back guarantee or satisfaction guarantee. This might include a full refund if they can't settle any of your debts within a certain timeframe or a partial refund if you're not satisfied with their services. While the specific terms of these guarantees will vary, the willingness to offer them demonstrates confidence in their ability to deliver results and provides you with some protection if things don't work out as expected. Choosing a debt relief company is a significant decision that can have lasting impacts on your financial future. While there are disreputable companies in this industry, legitimate organizations do exist and can provide valuable assistance when you're struggling with overwhelming debt. So, be sure to do your research and keep an eye out for the signs that a company is doing its best to be transparent about the process, fees and solutions it offers. That way, you can ensure that you're making the best decision possible for your finances.
CNN
03-07-2025
- CNN
Sean ‘Diddy' Combs was convicted on prostitution transportation charges under the Mann Act. Here's what to know about the 1910 law
After seven weeks of intense, emotional and sometimes graphic testimony, Sean 'Diddy' Combs was acquitted Wednesday of the most serious charges in his sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy trial trial. The hip-hop mogul, however, was convicted on two lesser prostitution-related charges under the federal Mann Act. The Mann Act, enacted in 1910 and originally known as the 'White-Slave Traffic Act,' criminalizes transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution. Its language, which legal scholars have defined as vague, has led to controversial prosecutions, including against Black champion heavyweight boxer Jack Johnson in 1913. It was more recently used in high-profile cases, including against R&B singer R. Kelly and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, a longtime confidante of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Here's what we know: According to the original text of the Mann Act, an individual could be convicted for transporting a woman or girl across state lines 'for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose.' But the original language around an 'immoral purpose' was considered vague – and meant the law was used to punish consensual sexual activity and common sex work, often against Black defendants. It was removed from the act by an amendment in the 80s. The law's broad wording and subsequent Supreme Court interpretation once allowed prosecutors to bring cases against 'unlawful premarital, extramarital, and interracial couples,' according to Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute. In 1913, an all-White jury convicted Johnson under the Mann Act for transporting a White woman – reported to be his girlfriend – across state lines. Johnson served just under a year in prison, and the conviction derailed his career. President Donald Trump posthumously pardoned him in 2018. The Mann Act has since been amended several times and now criminalizes transporting any person across state lines 'with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense.' Combs' defense argued in February the Mann Act has a racist history, claiming he was targeted for being a powerful Black man. 'What was racist in its inception has often been racist in its operation,' his attorneys said in a court filing, claiming no White person had faced a similar prosecution. Prosecutors denied allegations of racism, arguing that most of Combs' accusers are people of color, the Associated Press reported. 'He baselessly accused the government of engaging in a racist prosecution,' one of the prosecutors told the judge at an October hearing, adding that the accusations posed a 'serious risk' for a fair trial. The aim of the mogul's attorneys was to get the transportation to engage in prostitution charges dismissed. In 2021, Maxwell was convicted under another provision of the Mann Act for transporting minors with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity. She was also found guilty of charges including sex trafficking of a minor and three other charges relating to conspiracy. Maxwell, who helped set up a scheme to lure young women into sexual relationships with Epstein, is currently serving a 20-year sentence. R. Kelly, the disgraced R&B singer who is currently serving a 30-year sentence, was also convicted in 2021 of eight counts of violations of the Mann Act, after he was found guilty of using his fame to ensnare victims he sexually abused. He was also convicted on one charge of racketeering. CNN's Dakin Andone, Lauren del Valle, and Nicki Brown contributed to this report.
CNN
03-07-2025
- CNN
Sean ‘Diddy' Combs was convicted on prostitution transportation charges under the Mann Act. Here's what to know about the 1910 law
After seven weeks of intense, emotional and sometimes graphic testimony, Sean 'Diddy' Combs was acquitted Wednesday of the most serious charges in his sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy trial trial. The hip-hop mogul, however, was convicted on two lesser prostitution-related charges under the federal Mann Act. The Mann Act, enacted in 1910 and originally known as the 'White-Slave Traffic Act,' criminalizes transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution. Its language, which legal scholars have defined as vague, has led to controversial prosecutions, including against Black champion heavyweight boxer Jack Johnson in 1913. It was more recently used in high-profile cases, including against R&B singer R. Kelly and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, a longtime confidante of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Here's what we know: According to the original text of the Mann Act, an individual could be convicted for transporting a woman or girl across state lines 'for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose.' But the original language around an 'immoral purpose' was considered vague – and meant the law was used to punish consensual sexual activity and common sex work, often against Black defendants. It was removed from the act by an amendment in the 80s. The law's broad wording and subsequent Supreme Court interpretation once allowed prosecutors to bring cases against 'unlawful premarital, extramarital, and interracial couples,' according to Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute. In 1913, an all-White jury convicted Johnson under the Mann Act for transporting a White woman – reported to be his girlfriend – across state lines. Johnson served just under a year in prison, and the conviction derailed his career. President Donald Trump posthumously pardoned him in 2018. The Mann Act has since been amended several times and now criminalizes transporting any person across state lines 'with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense.' Combs' defense argued in February the Mann Act has a racist history, claiming he was targeted for being a powerful Black man. 'What was racist in its inception has often been racist in its operation,' his attorneys said in a court filing, claiming no White person had faced a similar prosecution. Prosecutors denied allegations of racism, arguing that most of Combs' accusers are people of color, the Associated Press reported. 'He baselessly accused the government of engaging in a racist prosecution,' one of the prosecutors told the judge at an October hearing, adding that the accusations posed a 'serious risk' for a fair trial. The aim of the mogul's attorneys was to get the transportation to engage in prostitution charges dismissed. In 2021, Maxwell was convicted under another provision of the Mann Act for transporting minors with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity. She was also found guilty of charges including sex trafficking of a minor and three other charges relating to conspiracy. Maxwell, who helped set up a scheme to lure young women into sexual relationships with Epstein, is currently serving a 20-year sentence. R. Kelly, the disgraced R&B singer who is currently serving a 30-year sentence, was also convicted in 2021 of eight counts of violations of the Mann Act, after he was found guilty of using his fame to ensnare victims he sexually abused. He was also convicted on one charge of racketeering. CNN's Dakin Andone, Lauren del Valle, and Nicki Brown contributed to this report.
