By KONSTANTIN TOROPIN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered the military to provide dozens of lawyers to the Justice Department for temporary assignments in Memphis and near the U.S.-Mexico border that could run through next fall, according to a memo released this week and reviewed by The Associated Press.

Related Articles

Spiraling effects of the shutdown leave lawmakers grasping for ways to end it

Top Intel Democrat rips Trump administration over exclusion from boat strike briefing

Democrats, allied groups pour millions into Pennsylvania Supreme Court race to counter GOP campaign

4 Republicans back Senate resolution to undo Trump’s tariffs around the globe

Trump marshals an army of local cops for deportation dragnet

“I am directing you to collectively identify 48 attorneys and 4 paralegals from within your Military Department who may be suitable for detail” to the Justice Department to act as special assistant U.S. attorneys, Hegseth wrote in a memo dated Monday that was sent to all four services and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The memo appears to be the latest effort to send military and civilian attorneys working for the Pentagon to the Justice Department, this time to staff offices based along the U.S. southern border or where federal immigration enforcement operations are taking place.

Last month, the Pentagon also approved sending up to 600 military lawyers to the Justice Department to serve as temporary immigration judges in a separate effort. The Trump administration increasingly has tapped the military to bolster its immigration crackdown, from deploying to the southern border and a series of American cities.

This week’s memo says the Justice Department asked for 20 lawyers to help support its offices in Memphis, where the National Guard has been deployed by President Donald Trump; 12 for West Texas — specifically for the cities of El Paso, Del Rio, and Midland — and three lawyers and two paralegals for Las Cruces, New Mexico.

The memo does not specify what kind of litigation the volunteers would be asked to do, but it says that, ideally, attorneys would have “significant experience” in immigration and administrative law in addition to general prosecution and litigation experience.

The Pentagon said in a statement that it was “proud to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with our law enforcement partners, bringing the skill and dedication of America’s service members to deliver justice, restore order, and protect the American people.”

The Justice Department also confirmed the memo’s authenticity but did not provide additional details on the reason for its request or what the attorneys would be doing.

As with the prior request for hundreds of military attorneys to work as immigration judges, it is not immediately clear what impact removing a growing number of lawyers would have on the armed forces’ justice system. The attorneys, called judge advocates, have a range of duties much like civilian lawyers, from carrying out prosecutions, acting as defense attorneys or offering legal advice to service members.

The new request follows a Sept. 26 ask from the Justice Department for 35 attorneys and two paralegals from the military, according to the memo. It wasn’t immediately clear if that number was in addition to the 48 attorneys requested this week.

The AP also reviewed an email that was sent to military attorneys on Sept. 12 that said the Pentagon was looking for volunteers to become special assistant U.S. attorneys in West Texas and New Mexico without mentioning a total figure.

It is not clear how successful the Pentagon has been at getting lawyers to volunteer, but at least some of the services have been making the case to their attorneys through messages like the one sent by the Army’s top lawyer.

“These roles offer unparalleled opportunity to refine your advocacy, courtroom procedure, and functional knowledge of the federal legal system for future use in our military justice system or civil litigation,” Major Gen. Bobby Christine said in an email reviewed by the AP.

Christine said the work would be “in support of national priorities.”

However, Hegseth’s memo says that services only had until Thursday to identify the attorneys and alluded to troops being subject to involuntary mobilization orders.

The Army and Navy did not respond to questions about how many attorneys from their respective services are being sent to the Justice Department. The Air Force directed questions to the Pentagon.

Associated Press writer Alanna Durkin Richer contributed to this report.

Rebutting arguments against administrative citations in St. Paul

I want to debunk some of the recent arguments against Administrative Citations and tell you why I will be voting yes on City Question 1.

Administrative Citations are simply the ability for the city to issue fines for violations of ordinances. St. Paul is the only major city in Minnesota without them. Just look at the vacant Snelling Avenue CVS for how well the current system is working. Only now after three years of calls to police has the property been declared a nuisance and can be potentially demolished. With administrative citations, we could have had accountability and responsibility long ago.

Argument: The City Council sought to circumvent voter participation.

False. State law has allowed since 1973 the ability for cities to amend a charter by a unanimous city council vote, and allowed for a referendum by petition, which is why we are even having a referendum in the first place. The amendment has had rigorous vetting, three public hearings over three months, and dozens of public testifiers.

Argument: Administrative Citations is supported by “city special interests.”

False. Question 1 is supported by over a dozen labor, faith and community groups, including the Saint Paul Regional Labor Federation AFL-CIO, HOME Line, and Faith in Minnesota.

Argument: Administrative Citations was passed as a revenue raiser.

False. The charter amendment received a unanimous vote only on the condition it will not be a revenue raiser. Additionally, the St. Paul City Council unanimously voted to create an advisory committee to ensure it can be fairly and equitably implemented, and how to return fines to rental assistance, affordable housing, worker protections, and others.

The No Campaign’s arguments fall flat. While I think forcing a referendum on a unanimous issue is a waste of taxpayer money, we have the opportunity to vote for common sense in November. I want to live in a city where we can have accountability against absentee landlords, discriminatory employers, and fairness in our city.

Chris Olendorf, St. Paul. The writer is is co-lead of the Housing, Zoning & Development Committee of Sustain Saint Paul, which has endorsed City Question 1.

Not then, not now

As a Vietnam War Veteran, I recall the massive protests against the war in the ’60s and ’70s.  The mantra was “I hate the war, but I love our troops.”

The recent massive protests in some of our cities carry a similar message.  As participants carried the American flag the message was, “I hate our president but love our country.”

Sorry to say, I didnt believe your message then, I don’t believe your mantra now.

Jerry Wynn, St. Paul

Will it be too late?

We have all heard about people — very nice, normal, well-meaning, and otherwise intelligent people — who have been swindled by a smooth-operating con. Maybe these people have been swept off their feet by the con’s good looks. Or by the voice on the other end of the phone. Or by the uniform and ID that the con is wearing.

In some cases, people have been conned simply by a person’s apparent fame and fortune. By their opulence and their glamorous lifestyle.

It happens. Every day of every week of every month of every year. And, while everyone else within their network of friends, relatives, co-workers and such can see right through this person, the victim is simply blind and willing to go along with the con.

Blind and willing, that is, until they check their bank balance and find out that their life savings is gone. Or, more globally, that their country is missing.

Usually, it is only a matter of time before a person recognizes that they have been conned. But, when that time comes, when they finally do become “woke,” the question is, will it be too late?

John Fineberg, St. Paul

Tighten up, St. Paul

Time for the St. Paul to tighten its belt. Probably should have happened earlier. Things have changed quickly to where we need to be judicious where we put our resources. Instead of lofty plans only spend what is necessary.

Spending money to make a bike path on Summit Avenue is wasteful. The average household sees what is coming and is making adjustments. So should the city. City leaders should concentrate on encouraging more businesses to come to downtown St Paul. That could help ease the burden on the homeowners
Perhaps we need an audit to see where the money has gone so that we could prioritize for the future. We need leaders who can deal with the hard times coming.

Judy Schultz, St. Paul

Since President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January, speculation has swirled that he would try for a third term in 2028.

He is not ruling it out, to the terror of his critics. On Monday, in an exchange with reporters during his Asia trip, Trump, referring to the third term idea, said, “I would love to do it. I have my best numbers ever,” Reuters quoted him as saying.

When a reporter asked whether he was not ruling out a third term, Trump replied, “Am I not ruling it out? I mean, you’ll have to tell me.”

His acolytes have been promoting the prospect. Trump craves power and won’t easily relinquish it.

The U.S. Constitution’s 22nd Amendment would appear to prohibit Trump from another presidential term, according to legal scholars. If he does go down the third term road, a bevy of court challenges will take it to the U.S. Supreme Court. Since Trump enjoys a favorable reception from that body, brace for the possibility that it will give him the nod.

Wait. There could be an upside for Trump opponents. It’s a stretch, but maybe, just maybe, a big, ripe plum could drop from the tree. That juicy fruit’s name is Barack Hussein Obama.

If Trump can run for a third term, so can his ultimate nemesis.

Former President Obama could mount a comeback to take Trump out and save our democracy. Would he or wouldn’t he? (Only Michelle knows for sure.)

There is no stronger candidate for the Democratic Party than Obama. A recent poll found that Obama far outstrips Trump in popularity. “The poll found that 42% of Americans said they view Trump favorably, while 57% said they view him unfavorably, leaving the president with a net favorability -15 points,” according to an Oct. 1 report in Newsweek magazine.

Meanwhile, 57% of Americans said they view Obama favorably, while 40% saying they view him unfavorably, for a net favorability of +17 points.

The poll, conducted in September by Marquette University Law School, surveyed 1,005 adults nationwide, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

Obama’s “personal appeal, inspirational rhetoric, and unanticipated success in the 2008 presidential race continue to have strong public support,” Meena Bose, executive dean of Hofstra University’s Peter S. Kalikow School of Government, Public Policy and International Affairs, told Newsweek.

“The promise of hope and change are defining features of the Obama presidential campaign and still influence assessments of his presidency,” Bose added.

Trump knows just how dangerous Obama is. That’s why Trump has been attacking, demeaning and undermining Obama since he entered national politics.

The biggest political challenge the Democrats face today is not Trump and his scorched-earth assault on democracy, social justice and equity, and all the other things their party cherishes.

Their overarching problem is that there is no leadership at the top. A horde of prominent Democrats aspire to take on Trump, but no one has been able to capture the prevailing imagination and allegiance of the party’s base.

The list of Democratic hopefuls is mind-bogglingly long. Nationally known governors, including JB Pritzker, Gretchen Whitmer, Gavin Newsom, Wes Moore and Josh Shapiro, as well U.S. senators, including Cory Booker, Chris Murphy, Adam Schiff, John Fetterman and more.

Kamala Harris, the Democrats’ 2024 presidential nominee, recently suggested she might consider another run.

However, a contest among these aspirants would be a squabble in a teapot. None have Obama’s experience, charisma and vote-getting ability. He would clobber everyone else in the ring and clear that field.

With the specter of another Trump presidential term, Obama would energize the party’s base. Latino voters will reconsider their past support for Trump, whose administration vows to give every immigrant in the nation a one-way ticket to Palookaville.

Progressives have their problems with Obama, but he would be the only one standing among the Democratic White House hopefuls. All others would fade away in comparison.

Imagine, Obama versus Trump. In 2028, Obama will be sharp at 67. Trump, an 82-year-old dinosaur. That’s a match with betting odds that would favor the Democrats. FanDuel and DraftKings would have a tough time finding Republicans to bet on Trump.

A challenge from Obama would put Trump into an unprecedented tizzy. Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize, something Trump craves but knows he will never get.

Let’s hope Trump won’t be in the ring in 2028, but if he is, there is one powerhouse candidate to take him on. If Trump wants to open the third-term door, bring on Obama.

Laura Washington is a political commentator and longtime Chicago journalist. She wrote this column for the Chicago Tribune.

By BECKY BOHRER, Associated Press

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — A fragment of a mask that was preserved for hundreds of years in permafrost sat in the muck of a low tide in the western Alaska community of Quinhagak. Wooden spoons, toys, a fishing lure and other artifacts were strewn, in some cases for miles, along the beach.

The Yup’ik community near the edge of the Bering Sea was spared the widespread devastation wrought by the remnants of Typhoon Halong on its neighbors further west earlier this month. But it suffered a different kind of blow: The lashing winds and storm surge devoured dozens of feet of shoreline, disrupting a culturally significant archaeological site and washing away possibly thousands of unearthed artifacts.

About 1,000 pieces, including wooden masks and tools, were recovered in Quinhagak after the storm ravaged parts of southwest Alaska on Oct. 11 and 12. But many more pieces — perhaps up to 100,000 — were left scattered, said Rick Knecht, an archaeologist who has worked on the Nunalleq, or old village, project for 17 years. That’s roughly the number of pieces previously recovered from the archaeological site.

Meanwhile, freezing temperatures and ice have settled into the region, stalling immediate efforts to find and recover more displaced artifacts on searches done by four-wheeler and foot.

Knecht called what happened a major loss. The site has yielded the world’s largest collection of pre-contact Yup’ik artifacts. Much of what’s known about Yup’ik life before outsiders arrived stems from the project, said Knecht, an emeritus senior lecturer in archaeology at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland.

“When there are holes or disturbances in the site, it’s like trying to read a book with holes in the pages. You’re going to miss a few things,” he said. “And the bigger those holes are, the weaker the story gets. There’s a few holes in the book right now.”

While the name of the original village isn’t known, it was attacked by another village and burned around 1650, he said. Knecht has worked with elders and others in Quinhagak to combine their traditional knowledge with the technology and techniques used by the archaeology teams to study the past together.

Quinhagak has about 800 residents, and subsistence food gathering is critically important to them.

Related Articles

Study finds EVs quickly overcome their energy-intensive build to be cleaner than gas cars

How climate change is changing the way athletes train ahead of the Winter Olympics

Anxiety over global warming is leading some young Americans to say they don’t want children

Bill Gates calls for climate fight to shift focus from curbing emissions to reducing human suffering

What to know about uncontacted Indigenous peoples and efforts to protect them

The storm dispersed artifacts from a site long preserved by permafrost, Knecht said. A longstanding concern has been the threat that climate change — melting permafrost, coastal erosion, the potential for more frequent or stronger storms — has posed to the site, he said.

It poses risks to the community itself. Erosion threatens major infrastructure in Quinhagak, including a sewage lagoon, homes and fish camps. Thawing permafrost is also unsettling and undermining buildings, according to a 2024 report from the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium.

The excavation project itself began after artifacts began appearing on the beach around 2007. Part of the site that washed out had been excavated previously.

“There was a big chunk where we’d only gone about halfway down and left it for later because we prioritized parts of the site that were most at risk from marine erosion,” Knecht said.

When he left in July, there was a roughly 30-foot buffer to the sea. The storm took out the buffer and another 30 feet of the site, he said. It also left what Knecht described as piano-sized clumps of tundra on the tidal flats.

Knecht didn’t recognize the site at first after Halong.

“I just drove right by it because all the landmarks I’m used to on the beach and at the site were gone or changed,” he said.

Work to preserve the rescued artifacts has included soaking the marine salts from the wood and placing the pieces in special chemicals that will help them hold together when they dry out, he said. If one were to just take one of the wooden artifacts off the beach and let them dry, they’d “crack to pieces, sometimes in a matter of hours.”

There is a lab at the museum in Quinhagak where the artifacts are kept.

Archaeologists hope to return to the site next spring for a “rescue excavation” of layers exposed by the storm, he said. In some ways, it feels like when teams saw the site in 2009: “We’ve got this raw site with artifacts popping off in every way,” he said. “So we’re starting from scratch again.”