By MICHAEL CASEY

BOSTON (AP) — Lawyers for a Tufts University doctoral student from Turkey who was seized by immigration officials off a street near Boston argued in federal court Thursday that she should be returned to Massachusetts, while the U.S. government insisted it did nothing wrong in moving her to a detention center in Louisiana.

Related Articles

States sue to block Trump’s election order, saying it violates the Constitution

Federal judge says she will temporarily block billions in health funding cuts to states

FACT FOCUS: Democratic leaders’ challenge to Trump’s election executive order misrepresented online

Senate confirms Mehmet Oz to take lead of Medicare and Medicaid agency

Judge says US government may have ‘acted in bad faith’ as he weighs contempt over deportation order

Rumeysa Ozturk, 30, was taken into custody as she walked along a suburban street March 25. After being transported to New Hampshire and then Vermont, she was put on a plane the next day and moved to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement center in Basile, Louisiana.

“She was grabbed by federal agents in front of her home and taken over the course of several hours to Vermont without any way to contact counsel or counsel to contact her and with her location for period 22 hours being undisclosed to the Department of Justice attorneys in this case,” Adriana Lafaille, one of her attorneys, told the court.

Ozturk’s lawyers asked U.S. District Judge Denise Casper to order that she be immediately returned to Massachusetts and released from custody. If Ozturk isn’t returned to Massachusetts, Lafaille added, she should be taken to Vermont.

Mark Sauter, a Justice Department lawyer, argued that ICE had a plan for her transport before she was detained and only moved her to Louisiana because there was no bed space for female immigration detainees in New England.

“There was no attempt to manipulate the jurisdiction,” Sauter told the court.

The U.S. attorneys have argued the case should go before an immigration judge.

Ozturk had been moved to Vermont by the time Casper in Boston had ordered authorities to keep her in Massachusetts, they said.

Ozturk’s lawyers said at the time they filed the petition, they had no way of knowing where she was. They have said her detention violates her constitutional rights, including free speech and due process.

Casper issued no immediate decision on the matter after hearing arguments.

Ozturk is among several people with ties to American universities who attended demonstrations or publicly expressed support for Palestinians during the war in Gaza and who recently had visas revoked or been stopped from entering the U.S.

She was one of four students who wrote an op-ed in The Tufts Daily last year criticizing the university’s response to student activists’ demands. The student activists were demanding that Tufts “acknowledge the Palestinian genocide,” disclose its investments and divest from companies with direct or indirect ties to Israel.

On Thursday, her lawyer released a letter from Ozturk in which she talked about her research and said she would continue to stand up against injustice.

“I believe the world is a more beautiful and peaceful place when we listen to each other and allow different perspectives to be in the room,” she wrote.

“Efforts to target me because of my op-ed in the Tufts Daily calling for the equal dignity and humanity of all people will not deter me from my commitment to advocate for the rights of youth and children,” she added.

Outside court Thursday, about 50 protesters chanting “Rumeysa Ozturk Now” and “ICE Out Of Boston” marched and held up signs like one reading: “No More Abductions.”

Recently, two dozen of Ozturk’s colleagues at Tufts University submitted letters to the court backing that request, describing her as a gentle, compassionate and cherished member of the Tufts community.

Reyyan Bilge, a close friend who collaborated with Ozturk on research, was present in court Thursday and described her as a “wonderful student, a wonderful human being.”

“It’s like a nightmare,” she said. “Who would have thought? She came here to do her job as a student, as an exceptional student … Out of the blue, she was taken for doing nothing wrong, How would you feel if you were to be either your daughter, or your niece, or like someone that’s close to you?”

A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson confirmed the termination of Ozturk’s visa last week. The official said investigations found she had engaged in activities in support of Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist group, but provided no evidence.

Hamas invaded Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and seizing about 250 hostages. Israel’s retaliatory offensive has killed more than 50,000 people, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, and destroyed much of the enclave.

Associated Press writers Kathy McCormack and Holly Ramer contributed from Concord, New Hampshire.

By LINDSAY WHITEHURST and CHRISTINA A. CASSIDY

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic officials in 19 states filed a lawsuit Thursday against President Donald Trump’s attempt to reshape elections across the U.S., calling it an unconstitutional invasion of states’ clear authority to run their own elections.

Related Articles

Lawyers for a detained Tufts student from Turkey demand she be returned to Massachusetts

Federal judge says she will temporarily block billions in health funding cuts to states

FACT FOCUS: Democratic leaders’ challenge to Trump’s election executive order misrepresented online

Senate confirms Mehmet Oz to take lead of Medicare and Medicaid agency

Judge says US government may have ‘acted in bad faith’ as he weighs contempt over deportation order

The lawsuit is the fourth against the executive order issued just a week ago. It seeks to block key aspects of it, including new requirements that people provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote and a demand that all mail ballots be received by Election Day.

“The President has no power to do any of this,” the state attorneys general wrote in court documents. “The Elections EO is unconstitutional, antidemocratic, and un-American.”

Trump’s order said the U.S. has failed “to enforce basic and necessary election protection.” Election officials have said recent elections have been among the most secure in U.S. history. There has been no indication of any widespread fraud, including when Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden in 2020.

The order is the culmination of Trump’s longstanding complaints about how U.S. elections are run. After his first win in 2016, Trump falsely claimed his popular vote total would have been much higher if not for “millions of people who voted illegally.” In 2020, Trump blamed a “rigged” election for his loss and falsely claimed widespread voter fraud and manipulation of voting machines.

Trump has argued his order secures the vote against illegal voting by noncitizens, though multiple studies and investigations in the states have shown that it’s rare.

It has received praise from the top election officials in some Republican states who say it could inhibit instances of voter fraud and will give them access to federal data to better maintain their voter rolls.

The order also requires states to exclude any mail-in or absentee ballots received after Election Day, and puts states’ federal funding at risk if election officials don’t comply. Some states count ballots as long as they are postmarked by Election Day or allow voters to correct minor errors on their ballots.

Forcing states to change, the suit says, would violate the broad authority the Constitution gives states to set their own election rules. It says they decide the “times, places and manner” of how elections are run.

Congress has the power to “make or alter” election regulations, at least for federal office, but the Constitution doesn’t mention any presidential authority over election administration.

“We are a democracy – not a monarchy – and this executive order is an authoritarian power grab,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha said the Trump administration is requiring states to either comply with an unconstitutional order or lose congressionally approved funding, something he said the president has no authority to do.

“In one fell swoop, this president is attempting to undermine elections and sidestep the Congress, and we’re not going to stand for it,” he said.

FILE – Chester County, Pa., election workers process mail-in and absentee ballots at West Chester University in West Chester, Pa., Nov. 4, 2020. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File)

The attorney general and secretary of state in Nevada, a presidential battleground, defended their state’s elections as fair, secure and transparent, and objected to the president’s attempt to interfere in how they are run.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta said Trump’s executive order was an attempt to impose “sweeping voting restrictions” across the country and disenfranchise voters.

A request sent to the White House was not immediately returned.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts by the Democratic attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.

Other lawsuits filed over the order argue it could disenfranchise voters because millions of eligible voting-age Americans do not have the proper documents readily available. People are already required to attest to being citizens, under penalty of perjury, in order to vote.

Under the order, documents acceptable to prove citizenship would be a U.S. passport, a REAL ID-compliant driver’s license that “indicates the applicant is a citizen,” and a valid photo ID as long as it is presented with proof of citizenship.

Democrats argue that millions of Americans do not have easy access to their birth certificates, about half don’t have a U.S. passport, and married women would need multiple documents if they had changed their name. That was a complication for some women during recent town elections in New Hampshire, the first ones held under a new state law requiring proof of citizenship to register.

Not all REAL ID-compliant driver’s licenses designate U.S. citizenship.

Cassidy reported from Atlanta.

Several changes in leadership in Stillwater Area Public Schools began on Thursday and will remain in effect for the remainder of the school year.

Brett Stringer, who has served as interim principal at Brookview Elementary School this winter, assumes the permanent role of principal. He brings more than a decade of experience as a school leader and has built a strong connection with the Brookview community, district officials said.

Malinda Major, who previously served as principal of Brookview, is serving as a principal on special assignment at Stillwater Middle School, with assigned duties as assistant principal.

Kristin Rolling, who has served as the assistant principal at Stillwater Middle School, is now assistant principal of Brookview and Lake Elmo elementary schools. Rolling began her career in Stillwater Schools as a school psychologist at the elementary level, district officials said.

The moves are part of a strategy to “place each administrator in a position where their skills can be most effective,” Superintendent Mike Funk said.

Related Articles

Woodbury attorney disbarred after being convicted of swindling client

Charges: Woodbury HS student had replica gun in backpack, ran from school

Forest Lake ‘career offender’ gets 12½-year prison term for swindling businesses, homeowners

Report of student with gun at Woodbury HS leads to search, apprehension

‘Like having a bunch of nice friends’: Volunteer phone line for positive messages marks 30th year

By DEVNA BOSE

A federal judge will temporarily block President Donald Trump’s administration from cutting billions in federal dollars that support COVID-19 initiatives and public health projects throughout the country.

Related Articles

Senate confirms Mehmet Oz to take lead of Medicare and Medicaid agency

Judge says US government may have ‘acted in bad faith’ as he weighs contempt over deportation order

Pentagon watchdog to review Hegseth’s use of Signal app to convey plans for Houthi strike

Trump’s tariffs aren’t strictly reciprocal. Here’s how he calculated them

These are the places affected by Trump’s tariffs

U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy, appointed by Trump in 2019 but first nominated by former President Barack Obama, in Rhode Island said Thursday that she plans to grant the court order sought by 23 states and the District of Columbia.

“They make a case, a strong case, for the fact that they will succeed on the merits, so I’m going to grant the temporary restraining order,” said McElroy, who plans to issue a written ruling later.

New York Attorney General Letitia James tweeted about the judge’s decision immediately after the hearing, saying: “We’re going to continue our lawsuit and fight to ensure states can provide the medical services Americans need.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Kane objected to the temporary restraining order in court but she said she was limited in the argument she could make against it, adding that her office was unable to thoroughly review the thousands of documents under the time limitation.

The states’ lawsuit, filed Tuesday, sought to immediately stop the $11 billion in cuts. The money was allocated by Congress during the pandemic and mostly used for COVID-related initiatives, as well as for mental health and substance use efforts. The lawsuit said losing the money would devastate U.S. public health infrastructure, putting states “at greater risk for future pandemics and the spread of otherwise preventable disease and cutting off vital public health services.”

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has defended the decision, saying that the money was being wasted since the pandemic is over.

State and local public health departments already have laid off people, including nearly 200 employees at the Minnesota Department of Health. North Carolina says it stands to lose about $230 million, and California officials put their potential losses at $1 billion.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, who is also part of the lawsuit, said half a billion dollars in public health grants that support long-term care for the elderly and immunizations for children were at stake in his state.

“As a result of taking the Administration to court, these dollars will now start flowing again,” he wrote on X.

The temporary block on chopping health funding is the latest legal setback for the Trump administration, which is facing some 150 lawsuits on issues ranging from immigration to deep financial and job cuts at federal agencies to transgender rights. Federal judges have issued dozens of orders slowing — at least for now — the president’s ambitious conservative agenda.

AP reporter Lindsay Whitehurst in Washington contributed to this report.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.