Latest news with #U.S.Constitution
Los Angeles Times
27 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Foie gras still on some store shelves in California, despite state ban
Despite California's ban on foie gras, the pumped-up bird livers are being sold in Southern California stores. Foie gras, which is made by force-feeding ducks and geese, was spotted by Times journalists this week on the shelves of Wild Fork Foods stores in Venice, Manhattan Beach and Westlake Village. Ben Williamson, the executive director of the animal welfare organization Animal Outlook, said he learned that the product was being sold in California after having read several Yelp reviews, including one in which a buyer was pleasantly surprised to find foie gras at at a Wild Fork store. 'Sure was nice to buy some foie gras,' the buyer wrote. 'Did not think u could purchase it in California.' The pre-sliced moulard duck liver product sold at Wild Fork stores is packaged by Fossil Farms and was being sold for $10.98 per vacuum-packed container. The duck livers were sourced from La Belle Farms in New York, which is one the nation's largest producers of foie gras. After The Times contacted Wild Fork Foods for comment, a Times journalist returned to two of the stores visited a day earlier and found that the foie gras was no longer on the shelves. Wild Fork Foods didn't respond to requests for comment. Nor did its parent company, Brazil's JBS Foods, the world's largest meat packer. Fossil Farms and La Belle Farms didn't respond to requests for comment. Foie gras is produced by farmers who ram tubes down the throats of male ducks or geese and force feed them several times a day, swelling their livers to more than 10 times their natural size. The feedings also increase the organ's fat content — making it buttery and light for bird-liver connoisseurs. The fowl are then slaughtered and their livers are sold as is, or whipped into a paste to spread on crackers or other food items. The animals are also typically confined to pens or cages in crowded farms. 'This systematic suffering for a so-called 'luxury' food product represents one of the most deliberate forms of animal cruelty in modern food production,' Williamson said. In 2004, California lawmakers passed Senate Bill 1520, which banned the production and sale of foie gras, described in the law as the 'force feed[ing of] a bird for the purpose of enlarging the bird's liver beyond normal size.' The law went into effect in 2012 and has been challenged several times since on grounds including federal preemption, for violating the due process and commerce clauses of the U.S. Constitution and for being unconstitutionally vague. The case has been declined for review by the U.S. Supreme Court twice, including as recently as 2023. In 2020, a judge opened the door for out-of-state sales to individuals, but maintained the state's store and restaurant bans — as well as the prohibition against producing the gastronomical delicacy in the state. That decision, and the sales ban, was were reinforced by the Ninth Circuit in 2022. The Los Angeles County district attorney's office is the designated law enforcement agency overseeing local sales of the liver product. 'California Health and Safety Code violations are enforced by local and state agencies that regulate businesses and various law enforcement or prosecuting agencies depending on the jurisdiction and whether the potential activity is criminal or civil in nature,' the District Attorney's office said in a statement. 'Our office does not comment on whether or not we are conducting an investigation.' Other state agencies that oversee various aspects of California's health and safety codes, including the Department of Public Health, the Department of Food and Agriculture and the state's Occupation Safety and Health Administration, said foie gras sales were not their purview. 'A product may not be sold in California if it is the result of force feeding a bird for the purpose of enlarging the bird's liver beyond normal size,' said the office in a statement, reiterating the text of the law. 'Violations are enforced by local jurisdictions.' State Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta's office, which has defended the state ban in court, said local law enforcement often oversees these kinds of violations and declined to provide an interpretation of the law as it stands. Williamson of Animal Outlook said such store sales of foie gras are rare in California. He suspects that the product may have 'just slipped through the cracks' to end up on the shelves of Wild Fork. He also noted that the Trump administration has taken issue with animal welfare laws, including seeking to overturn California's Proposition 12, which banned cages for egg-laying hens, gestation crates for pregnant pigs and veal crates for calves. That could suggest that the White House might be open to challenging California's foie gras ban, he said. The White House didn't respond to a request for comment. Times staff writers Corinne Purtill, Noah Haggerty and Sean Greene contributed to this report.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Politics
- Fox News
Colorado deputies violated new state law when sharing information with federal immigration agents
Two Colorado deputies have been disciplined for sharing information with federal immigration agents, which is a violation of state law enacted a few months ago. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser sued Mesa County Sheriff's Deputy Alexander Zwinck last week after his cooperation with federal immigration agents on a drug task force was exposed during a Brazilian college student's arrest for an expired visa, according to The Associated Press. While addressing the incident on Thursday, Mesa County Sheriff Todd Rowell said Caroline Dias-Goncalves, a 19-year-old nursing student, was pulled over by Zwinck for a traffic stop on June 5 after she was allegedly driving too close to a semi-truck. While Dias-Goncalves was released with a warning after about 20 minutes, federal immigration agents stopped her and arrested her shortly after. Zwinck had shared her location and a description of her vehicle in a group chat that included ICE agents, Rowell said. She was arrested by ICE and taken to a detention facility, where she was held for 15 days before being released on bond. An internal investigation revealed a second Mesa County deputy and task force member, Erik Olson, also shared immigration information with federal agents. The two deputies used a Signal chat to offer information to federal agents in an effort to assist immigration enforcement, according to the sheriff's office. Zwinck was placed on three weeks of unpaid leave and Olson was placed on two weeks of unpaid leave, Rowell said in a statement. Both were removed from the task force. Two supervisors were also disciplined, with one suspended without pay for two days and another receiving a letter of reprimand. A third supervisor received counseling. "The Mesa County Sheriff's Office should not have had any role in the chain of events leading to Miss Dias-Goncalves' detention, and I regret that this occurred. I apologize to Miss Dias-Goncalves," Rowell said. Zwinck was sued under a new state law signed by Democrat Gov. Jared Polis about two weeks before Dias-Goncalves' arrest. The measure prohibits local government employees, including law enforcement, from sharing identifying information about people with federal immigration officials. Previously, only state agencies were barred from sharing such information. The law is one of several passed over the years limiting the state's involvement in immigration enforcement. It has led to a lawsuit from the Department of Justice, which alleges that the protective policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Zwinck and Olson allegedly told officials that they believed they were following long-standing procedures, though an internal investigation found they had both received and read two emails about previous limits on cooperation with immigration officials. An email sent on Jan. 30, 2025, told law enforcement specifically to not contact Homeland Security Investigations or ICE if someone being arrested for a violent crime is suspected of not being a citizen. Zwinck said at his disciplinary hearing that he was not aware of the new law nor was he interested in contributing to immigration enforcement. Olson, a longtime deputy, testified that sending information to federal agents during traffic stops was "standard practice." "It was routine for ICE to show up on the back end of a traffic stop to do their thing," Olson said. "I truly thought what we were doing was condoned by our supervision and lawful." Rowell said drug task force members from other law enforcement agencies, including the Colorado State Patrol, also shared information with immigration agents on the Signal chat, although the state patrol denied the accusation. The sheriff criticized Weiser for suing Zwinck before an internal investigation was finished and called on the attorney general to drop the lawsuit. "As it stands, the lawsuit filed by the Attorney General's Office sends a demoralizing message to law enforcement officers across Colorado — that the law may be wielded selectively and publicly for maximum political effect rather than applied fairly and consistently," he said. Weiser said last week that he was probing whether other officers in the group chat violated state law. A spokesperson for Weiser said he was presented with evidence of a "blatant violation of state law" and had to act. "The attorney general has a duty to enforce state laws and protect Coloradans, and he'll continue to do so," spokesperson Lawrence Pacheco said.
The Herald Scotland
6 hours ago
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
US court to review Trump's power to impose tariffs
In hearing arguments in two cases brought by five small U.S. businesses and 12 Democratic-led U.S. states, judges pressed government lawyer Brett Shumate to explain how the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets, gave Trump the power to impose tariffs. More: Trump's final stumbling blocks for countries hoping to avoid tariff hikes: Live updates Trump is the first president to use IEEPA to impose tariffs. "IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them," one of the judges said. Shumate said that the law allows for "extraordinary" authority in an emergency, including the ability to stop imports completely. He said IEEPA authorizes tariffs because it allows a president to "regulate" imports in a crisis. The states and businesses challenging the tariffs argued that they are not permissible under IEEPA and that the U.S. Constitution grants Congress, and not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. Neal Katyal, a lawyer for the businesses, said the government's justification for the tariffs amounted to "a breathtaking claim to power that no president has asserted in years. The arguments - one day before Trump plans to increase tariff rates on imported goods from nearly all U.S. trading partners - mark the first test before a U.S. appeals court of the scope of his tariff authority. The president has made tariffs a central instrument of his foreign policy, wielding them aggressively in his second term as leverage in trade negotiations and to push back against what he has called unfair practices. Trump has said the April tariffs were a response to persistent U.S. trade imbalances and declining U.S. manufacturing power. More: Trade whiplash: Appeals Court allows Trump to keep tariffs while appeal plays out He said the tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico were appropriate because those countries were not doing enough to stop illegal fentanyl from crossing U.S. borders. The countries have denied that claim. "Tariffs are making America GREAT & RICH Again," Trump wrote in a social media post on July 31. "To all of my great lawyers who have fought so hard to save our Country, good luck in America's big case today." During the July 31 arguments, Shumate cited a 1975 appeals court decision that authorized President Richard Nixon's across-the board surcharge of 10% on imported merchandise to slow inflation. But that decision added that the president did not have authority to impose "whatever tariff rates he deems desirable." Shumate also said that courts cannot review a president's actions under IEEPA or impose additional limits that are not included in the law. Several judges said that the argument would essentially allow one law, IEEPA, to overwrite all other U.S. laws related to tariffs and imports. The case is being heard by a panel of all of the court's active judges, eight appointed by Democratic presidents and three appointed by former Republican presidents. The timing of the court's decision is uncertain, and the losing side will likely appeal quickly to the U.S. Supreme Court. Trade negotiations Tariffs are starting to build into a significant revenue source for the federal government, with customs duties in June quadrupling to about $27 billion, a record, and through June have topped $100 billion for the current fiscal year. That income could be crucial to offset lost revenue from Trump's tax bill passed into law earlier this month. But economists say the duties threaten to raise prices for U.S. consumers and reduce corporate profits. Trump's on-again, off-again tariff threats have roiled financial markets and disrupted U.S. companies' ability to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. Dan Rayfield, the attorney general of Oregon, one of the states challenging the levies, said that the tariffs were a "regressive tax" that is making household items more expensive. On May 28, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade sided with the Democratic states and small businesses that challenged Trump. It said that the IEEPA did not authorize tariffs related to longstanding trade deficits. The Federal Circuit has allowed the tariffs to remain in place while it considers the administration's appeal. The case will have no impact on tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as duties on steel and aluminum imports. The president recently announced trade deals that set tariff rates on goods from the European Union and Japan, following smaller trade agreements with Britain, Indonesia and Vietnam. Trump's Department of Justice has argued that limiting the president's tariff authority could undermine ongoing trade negotiations, while other Trump officials have said that negotiations have continued with little change after the initial setback in court. Trump has set an August 1 date for higher tariffs on countries that don't negotiate new trade deals. There are at least seven other lawsuits challenging Trump's invocation of IEEPA, including cases brought by other small businesses and California. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled against Trump in one of those cases, and no judge has yet backed Trump's claim of unlimited emergency tariff authority.
10 hours ago
- Politics
Colorado deputies disciplined for helping federal immigration agents
DENVER -- Two Colorado deputies have been disciplined for violating state law by helping federal agents make immigration arrests, and their sheriff says officers from other agencies have done the same. One of the deputies, Alexander Zwinck, was sued by Colorado's attorney general last week, after his cooperation with federal immigration agents on a drug task force was revealed following the June arrest of a college student from Brazil with an expired visa. Following an internal investigation, a second Mesa County Sheriff's Office deputy and task force member, Erik Olson, was also found to have shared information. The two deputies used a Signal chat to relay information to federal agents, according to documents released Wednesday by the sheriff's office. Zwinck was placed on three weeks of unpaid leave, and Olson was given two weeks of unpaid leave, Mesa County Sheriff Todd Rowell said in a statement. Both were removed from the task force. Two supervisors also were disciplined. One was suspended without pay for two days, and another received a letter of reprimand. A third supervisor received counseling. The lawsuit and disciplinary actions come as lawmakers in Colorado and other Democratic-led states have crafted legislation intended to push back against President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Since Trump took office, pro-immigrant bills have advanced through legislatures in Illinois, Vermont, California, Connecticut and other states. The measures include stronger protections for immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters. Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. The Republican also relaxed longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals. Zwinck was sued under a new state law signed by Gov. Jared Polis about two weeks before the arrest of the student from Brazil. It bars local government employees including law enforcement from sharing identifying information about people with federal immigration officials. Previously, only state agencies were barred from doing that. It's one of a series of laws limiting the state's involvement in immigration enforcement passed over the years that has drawn criticism and a lawsuit from the federal government. The U.S. Department of Justice has also sued Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Zwinck and Olson told officials they thought they were operating according to long-standing procedures. However, the internal investigation found they had both received and read two emails prior to the passage of the new law about previous limits on cooperation with immigration officials. The most recent was sent on Jan. 30, 2025, after an official for Homeland Security Investigations, part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, had asked state and local law enforcement officers at a law enforcement meeting to contact HSI or ICE if they arrested a person for a violent crime who was believed not to be a citizen, the investigation documents said. The email said not to contact HSI or ICE. Zwinck said he didn't know about the new law and was not interested in immigration enforcement. 'When I was out there, I wanted to find drugs, guns and bad guys," Zwinck said at a July 23 disciplinary hearing. "And sending that information to HSI they provided the ability to give me real time background information on the person I was in contact with,' he said. Olson, who said he had been with the sheriff's office 18 years, testified at his disciplinary hearing that it was 'standard practice' to send information up to federal agents during traffic stops. "It was routine for ICE to show up on the back end of a traffic stop to do their thing,' Olson said. 'I truly thought what we were doing was condoned by our supervision and lawful.' A lawyer at a law firm listed as representing both deputies, Michael Lowe, did not immediately return a telephone call or email seeking comment. Rowell said drug task force members from other law enforcement agencies, including the Colorado State Patrol, also shared information with immigration agents on the Signal chat. The state patrol denied the claim. The sheriff faulted Attorney General Phil Weiser for filing the lawsuit against Zwinck before a local internal investigation was complete. He called on the Democrat, who is running for governor, to drop it. 'As it stands, the lawsuit filed by the Attorney General's Office sends a demoralizing message to law enforcement officers across Colorado — that the law may be wielded selectively and publicly for maximum political effect rather than applied fairly and consistently,' he said. Weiser said last week that he was investigating whether other officers in the chat violated the law. Spokesperson Lawrence Pacheco said Weiser was presented with evidence of a 'blatant violation of state law' and had to act.
Winnipeg Free Press
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
Colorado deputies disciplined for helping federal immigration agents
DENVER (AP) — Two Colorado deputies have been disciplined for violating state law by helping federal agents make immigration arrests, and their sheriff says officers from other agencies have done the same. One of the deputies, Alexander Zwinck, was sued by Colorado's attorney general last week, after his cooperation with federal immigration agents on a drug task force was revealed following the June arrest of a college student from Brazil with an expired visa. Following an internal investigation, a second Mesa County Sheriff's Office deputy and task force member, Erik Olson, was also found to have shared information. The two deputies used a Signal chat to relay information to federal agents, according to documents released Wednesday by the sheriff's office. Zwinck was placed on three weeks of unpaid leave, and Olson was given two weeks of unpaid leave, Mesa County Sheriff Todd Rowell said in a statement. Both were removed from the task force. Two supervisors also were disciplined. One was suspended without pay for two days, and another received a letter of reprimand. A third supervisor received counseling. State laws push back against Trump crackdown The lawsuit and disciplinary actions come as lawmakers in Colorado and other Democratic-led states have crafted legislation intended to push back against President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Since Trump took office, pro-immigrant bills have advanced through legislatures in Illinois, Vermont, California, Connecticut and other states. The measures include stronger protections for immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters. Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. The Republican also relaxed longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals. Zwinck was sued under a new state law signed by Gov. Jared Polis about two weeks before the arrest of the student from Brazil. It bars local government employees including law enforcement from sharing identifying information about people with federal immigration officials. Previously, only state agencies were barred from doing that. It's one of a series of laws limiting the state's involvement in immigration enforcement passed over the years that has drawn criticism and a lawsuit from the federal government. The U.S. Department of Justice has also sued Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Officers say they were following established procedures Zwinck and Olson told officials they thought they were operating according to long-standing procedures. However, the internal investigation found they had both received and read two emails prior to the passage of the new law about previous limits on cooperation with immigration officials. The most recent was sent on Jan. 30, 2025, after an official for Homeland Security Investigations, part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, had asked state and local law enforcement officers at a law enforcement meeting to contact HSI or ICE if they arrested a person for a violent crime who was believed not to be a citizen, the investigation documents said. The email said not to contact HSI or ICE. Zwinck said he didn't know about the new law and was not interested in immigration enforcement. 'When I was out there, I wanted to find drugs, guns and bad guys,' Zwinck said at a July 23 disciplinary hearing. 'And sending that information to HSI they provided the ability to give me real time background information on the person I was in contact with,' he said. Olson, who said he had been with the sheriff's office 18 years, testified at his disciplinary hearing that it was 'standard practice' to send information up to federal agents during traffic stops. 'It was routine for ICE to show up on the back end of a traffic stop to do their thing,' Olson said. 'I truly thought what we were doing was condoned by our supervision and lawful.' A lawyer at a law firm listed as representing both deputies, Michael Lowe, did not immediately return a telephone call or email seeking comment. Rowell said drug task force members from other law enforcement agencies, including the Colorado State Patrol, also shared information with immigration agents on the Signal chat. The state patrol denied the claim. The sheriff faulted Attorney General Phil Weiser for filing the lawsuit against Zwinck before a local internal investigation was complete. He called on the Democrat, who is running for governor, to drop it. 'As it stands, the lawsuit filed by the Attorney General's Office sends a demoralizing message to law enforcement officers across Colorado — that the law may be wielded selectively and publicly for maximum political effect rather than applied fairly and consistently,' he said. Weiser said last week that he was investigating whether other officers in the chat violated the law. Spokesperson Lawrence Pacheco said Weiser was presented with evidence of a 'blatant violation of state law' and had to act. 'The attorney general has a duty to enforce state laws and protect Coloradans and he'll continue to do so,' Pacheco said. ___ Brown reported from Billings, Montana.
