5 Questions About The Law And Trump's Immigration Order

Enlarge this image

Activists stage a rally at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York on Saturday against President Trump's order barring travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days. Anadolu Agency/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

Activists stage a rally at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York on Saturday against President Trump's order barring travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days.

Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

President Trump's executive order on immigration late Friday ignited nationwide protests — and a slew of legal challenges.

At least four federal judges across the country have blocked part of the order and temporarily ensured refugees and travelers who reached U.S. soil would not be deported.

Here's an explanation of what happened so far and what could come next.

1. Who is covered by the executive order?

The order suspended new refugee admissions for 120 days. It capped the total number of refugees allowed into the country this year at 50,000, far lower than the Obama administration had allotted. And travelers from seven countries — Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya and Somalia — are barred for 90 days. Border Patrol agents and lawyers said the order and statements by top White House officials have not made clear how Green Card holders, or lawful permanent residents, are to be treated.

The Two-Way

Of Courts And Confusion: Here's The Reaction To Trump's Immigration Freeze

Parallels

Trump's Immigration Freeze Omits Those Linked To Deadly Attacks In U.S.

2. What have the federal courts ruled so far?

The American Civil Liberties Union sued in Brooklyn over the detention of two Iraqi clients at John F. Kennedy International Airport. Late Saturday, Judge Ann Donnelly issued a temporary restraining order barring the deportation of as many as 200 people. Judge Donnelly cited "irreparable harm" they would face, and she demanded that the Trump administration provide a list of all affected refugees and travelers. Later, a federal judge in suburban Virginia ordered that travelers be allowed to consult with volunteer attorneys. And another judge in Massachusetts ruled the travelers not only were free from deportation, but that those being held must be released from federal detention. There are reports from pro bono lawyers that border agents may not be complying with some of those directives from the federal judiciary.

3. What is the Trump administration saying about this?

White House officials said the policy is designed to protect U.S. borders and to restrict the entry of terrorism suspects. The Department of Homeland Security said fewer than 1 percent of the average 325,000 people who journeyed to the U.S. on Saturday were "inconvenienced." DHS said the president's order remains in place and "the U.S. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety."

Article continues after sponsorship

On NBC's Meet The Press on Sunday, White House chief of staff Reince Priebus said Green Card holders would not be affected "moving forward," but he went on to say that they would "be subjected to further screening" at the border.

4. Where do the legal challenges go from here?

The president has sweeping authority on matters of immigration. Federal law allows the president to suspend people or classes of people if he determines their entry is "detrimental" to the nation. But a 1965 update to that law, the Immigration and Naturalization Act, clarifies that people should not experience preferences or discrimination on account of their "race, sex, nationality, place of birth or place of residence."

Trump's order appears to grant some religious preference to Christians and to target seven majority-Muslim countries, though his order points out that people from those countries had already been singled out for extra vetting during the Obama years.

Lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union, immigrants rights groups and other advocates are likely to file more lawsuits in the coming days on the grounds that the order violates the 1965 immigration law, the right to due process, and the First Amendment clause that bars Congress from establishing a religion, among other things.

White House officials insisted they did not set out to create a "Muslim ban." But Trump associate Rudy Giuliani told Fox __news that Trump had reached out to him and others about how to make such a ban, which Trump proposed on the campaign trail in December 2015, legal. And the son of national security adviser Michael Flynn tweeted about a "Muslim ban," as well. Those statements could be used by refugee advocates to demonstrate the administration's intent.

5. What happens with Trump's nominees for key Cabinet posts?

Democrats argue that key offices within the State Department and the Justice Department were in the dark about the immigration order before it was made public. They want to know if Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, the nominee to be attorney general, advised Trump on the order — and whether Sessions will commit to making sure Justice Department lawyers are consulted in the future. The Senate Judiciary Committee is supposed to vote on Sessions' nomination on Tuesday. If he passes that vote, Sessions could be confirmed by the full Senate by the end of the week.

Labor Unions Appear Set For More State-Level Defeats In 2017

Enlarge this image

The first session of the New Hampshire House on Jan. 4, 2017, in Concord. The chamber will soon consider legislation that will likely curtail the financial strength of labor unions. Elise Amendola/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Elise Amendola/AP

The first session of the New Hampshire House on Jan. 4, 2017, in Concord. The chamber will soon consider legislation that will likely curtail the financial strength of labor unions.

Elise Amendola/AP

One consequence of Republican gains in the 2016 elections is playing out at the state level where organized labor appears likely to face big setbacks in the coming months.

Within days of convening this month, Kentucky lawmakers passed "right-to-work" legislation that prohibit labor unions from forcing non-union members to pay fees to the union.

It's the 27th state with such laws. State legislatures in Missouri and New Hampshire are also actively debating similar bills that could become law by February.

If all three states succeed in enacting "right-to-work" bills, it would be the most states rolling back union power in one year since 1947, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Success in New Hampshire would also make it the first state in the Northeast with a "right-to-work" law.

The bills are a further reflection of organized labor's falling clout. Just 10.7 percent of American workers belonged to a labor union in 2016, according to new data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, down from 20.1 percent in 1983, when the agency began tracking the data.

Article continues after sponsorship

Over time, the legislation is also likely to further reduce the state-level clout of Democrats, who rely on union money and volunteers during election years.

'Personal Freedom'

Last fall, Republicans held onto the New Hampshire statehouse and their candidate, Chris Sununu, was elected governor. After that, GOP lawmakers quickly sprang into action. They passed a "right-to-work" bill in the state Senate this month with just one vote to spare, despite boisterous opposition from union members. The legislation now heads to the House, where Republicans hold a 50-seat majority.

"This is the Live Free or Die State. So we are about personal freedom, we are about personal liberty," said state Sen. Andy Sanborn, a Republican. "What makes a stronger statement than reaffirming the fact that you are not being compelled to have to pay into a union if you don't want to pay into it?"

In Missouri, enactment of the policy became inevitable after Republican Eric Greitens captured the governorship last year. The political newcomer made signing "right-to-work" a major priority.

"We miss jobs every year and we miss businesses every year because of not being right-to-work," said state Rep. Holly Rehder, the Republican who sponsored the bill in the Missouri House.

It's an argument echoed in New Hampshire, where business executives have said they plan to give the state another look if it passes "right-to-work."

"This law would provide a solid foundation for New Hampshire to begin building a reputation as a state that welcomes companies, along with the jobs, economic stability and growth that come with them," said Tom Sullivan, an executive at firearms maker Sturm, Ruger and Co. during a recent hearing.

'Free riders'

Still, just one-third of New Hampshire's approximately 62,000 union members work in the private sector with the other two-thirds belonging to public-sector unions (think teachers, government employees, public safety workers). With 9.4 percent of the workforce belonging to a labor union, New Hampshire is in the middle of the pack for union membership among U.S. states.

Opponents argue the laws create what's called a "free-riding" problem where non-union members reap the benefits of collective bargaining, such as higher wages and better benefits, without paying for it.

"It's just like you and I going out one night for a couple of beers. I choose the bar, we go out. We both have a couple of drinks," said Bobby Jones, which AFSCME Local 3657, a government worker union, "And then when the bill comes out, I pull out my wallet, and you don't reach for yours."

While Republicans and Democrats spar over the economic impact of the bill on wages and employment levels, its most visible impact may be during election season. Unions spent millions to successfully elect former governor Maggie Hassan, a Democrat, to the U.S. Senate even as they fell short in the gubernatorial race.

"Some people do view it as Republican payback against the role of unions in elections," said Dean Spiliotes, a political scientist at Southern New Hampshire University. "If you are reducing the level of funding through cutting their dues, that's going to have political impacts."

With reporting from Jason Rosenbaum of St. Louis Public Radio.

6 People Killed In Shooting At Quebec City Mosque

Enlarge this image

Police officers respond to a shooting in a mosque at the Quebec City Islamic Cultural Centre in Quebec City on Sunday. ALICE CHICHE/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

ALICE CHICHE/AFP/Getty Images

Police officers respond to a shooting in a mosque at the Quebec City Islamic Cultural Centre in Quebec City on Sunday.

ALICE CHICHE/AFP/Getty Images

Updated at 1:30 p.m. ET

Police in Quebec City have arrested a suspect following a shooting at a mosque there that left six people dead and wounded eight others Sunday night. After initially saying they had two suspects in custody, police said Monday that they determined one of the men was instead a witness.

According to Canadian authorities, a gunman opened fire inside the Quebec City Islamic Cultural Centre around 8 p.m. ET, as about 40 people were gathered for evening prayers.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Quebec Province Premier Philippe Couillard have described the shooting as an act of terrorism.

On Monday, Trudeau delivered a formal address to the House of Commons. "These people were just that — people, ordinary Canadians. They were brothers, uncles, fathers and friends," he said. "These were people of faith and of community, and in the blink of an eye, they were robbed of their lives in an act of brutal violence."

Canadians will not be broken by this violence. Our spirit & unity will only strengthen – we will mourn, and we will heal, together. pic.twitter.com/TVdFrbuHpq

— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) January 30, 2017

He added: "We will not close our minds. We will open our hearts. ... let us strive to be the best version of ourselves in these dark hours."

Article continues after sponsorship

In a statement late Sunday, Trudeau said he felt "tremendous shock, sadness and anger" upon learning of the shooting.

"We condemn this terrorist attack on Muslims in a centre of worship and refuge. ... It is heart-wrenching to see such senseless violence. Diversity is our strength, and religious tolerance is a value that we, as Canadians, hold dear.

"Muslim-Canadians are an important part of our national fabric, and these senseless acts have no place in our communities, cities and country. Canadian law enforcement agencies will protect the rights of all Canadians, and will make every effort to apprehend the perpetrators of this act and all acts of intolerance."

Police have not released details about the suspect in custody, or what motivated the attack.

"Why is this happening here? This is barbaric," the mosque's president, Mohamed Yangui said to reporters, according to the AP.

Yangui was not inside the mosque when the shooting occurred but said he received frantic calls from many who were inside at the time of the gunfire.

Mohamed Labidi, the mosque's vice president, told the wire service that a university professor and a businessman were among the victims. They were shot in the back, he said.

Reuters reports that "incidents of Islamophobia have increased in Quebec in recent years." Here's more from the __news service:

Tonight, Canadians grieve for those killed in a cowardly attack on a mosque in Quebec City. My thoughts are with victims & their families.

— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) January 30, 2017

"The face-covering, or niqab, became a big issue in the 2015 Canadian federal election, especially in Quebec, where the vast majority of the population supported a ban on it at citizenship ceremonies.

"In 2013, police investigated after a mosque in the Saguenay region of the province was splattered with what was believed to be pig blood. In the neighboring province of Ontario, a mosque was set on fire in 2015, a day after an attack by gunmen and suicide bombers in Paris."

Last June, during the holy month of Ramadan, as the CBC reported, someone also left a pig's head at Quebec City Islamic Cultural Centre, where Sunday night's attack took place.

"Tonight, Canadians grieve for those killed in a cowardly attack on a mosque in Quebec City," Trudeau said. "My thoughts are with victims & their families."

Trump Accuses Top Democrat Of 'Fake Tears' Over Executive Order

Enlarge this image

President Trump speaks during a meeting with business leaders in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on Monday. Evan Vucci/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Evan Vucci/AP

President Trump speaks during a meeting with business leaders in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on Monday.

Evan Vucci/AP

Is the commander in chief also acting as the troller in chief?

President Trump on Monday morning ridiculed Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, who became emotional Sunday while condemning the president's travel ban, which temporarily bars travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries.

"I noticed Chuck Schumer yesterday with fake tears," Trump said during an Oval Office photo op with small-business leaders. "I'm going to ask him who is his acting coach."

Trump went on, " 'Cause I know him. I don't see him as a crier." He added: "There's about a 5 percent chance it was real. But I think they were fake tears."

Politics

FACT CHECK: Trump Tweets On Christians, ISIS And Vetting Miss The Bigger Picture

Politics

Executive Order Or Memorandum? Let's Call The Whole Thing An 'Action'

Politics

Trump Acts To Roll Back Regulations On Businesses

The statement was remarkable for the setting and the vitriol. Of course, presidents often have their differences with congressional leaders, especially from the opposition party. But rarely, if ever, do they call them out by name and question the sincerity of their tears.

It's also odd for a president to use photo sprays — where the media are invited in for what are typically short moments to get pictures — to level insults at political opponents. Normally, the president might utter a couple of sentences about the event taking place to push that issue — in this case, small businesses — and maybe take a question before the media are hurried out.

In this case, Trump spoke for 13 minutes — without taking questions. For context, that's just three minutes shorter than his entire inaugural address.

Trump had earlier tweeted a similar annoyance with Schumer, saying, "Big problems at airports were caused by Delta computer outage, protesters and the tears of Senator Schumer."

Only 109 people out of 325,000 were detained and held for questioning. Big problems at airports were caused by Delta computer outage,.....

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 30, 2017

protesters and the tears of Senator Schumer. Secretary Kelly said that all is going well with very few problems. MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 30, 2017

Schumer's office said Trump's comments were not worthy of a response, though Schumer had earlier tweeted that the Statue of Liberty was in tears.

Trump had previously called Schumer the "head clown" in the Senate.

There are tears running down the cheeks of the Statue of Liberty tonight. pic.twitter.com/X6q40dMCsN

— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) January 27, 2017

NPR thanks our sponsors

Philippines Temporarily Halts Anti-Drug Raids, Citing Crimes By Police

Enlarge this image

Elizabeth Manosca tends to her baby during a wake for her slain husband and 7-year-old son, who were killed when unidentified gunmen shot through the door of their home in Manila, Philippines, in December. Dondi Tawatao/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Dondi Tawatao/Getty Images

Elizabeth Manosca tends to her baby during a wake for her slain husband and 7-year-old son, who were killed when unidentified gunmen shot through the door of their home in Manila, Philippines, in December.

Dondi Tawatao/Getty Images

The leader of the Philippine National Police said Monday that the agency's anti-drug units would be shut down and the deadly crackdown on people who use and sell drugs would be suspended.

Instead, the crackdown will temporarily shift to inside the police force itself.

"We will cleanse our ranks ... then maybe after that, we can resume our war on drugs," police Chief Ronald Dela Rosa said, according to the BBC.

Since President Rodrigo Duterte took office last summer, more than 7,000 suspected drug users and dealers have died in extrajudicial killings in the Philippines.

Parallels

In Philippine Drug War, Death Toll Rises And So Do Concerns About Tactics

Earlier this month, investigators revealed that a Korean businessman had been kidnapped by anti-drug officers and strangled to death at the national police headquarters, The Philippine Star newspaper reports. The officers "later extorted ransom money from his family under the pretense that he was alive," according to The New York Times.

The businessman's killing prompted protests in Manila. Phelim Kine of Human Rights Watch wrote that it was an "ominous indicator of the breakdown of rule of law" under Duterte, and that "Philippine police have good reason to believe that they can literally get away with murder."

Enlarge this image

Protesters gathered outside the headquarters of the Philippine National Police after an investigation revealed South Korean businessman Jee Ick-Joo was kidnapped and killed by policemen. Noel Celis/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Noel Celis/AFP/Getty Images

Protesters gathered outside the headquarters of the Philippine National Police after an investigation revealed South Korean businessman Jee Ick-Joo was kidnapped and killed by policemen.

Noel Celis/AFP/Getty Images

Dela Rosa announced that a counter-intelligence force would be created to catch, and potentially kill, corrupt officers, the Los Angeles Times reports.

"You policemen involved in syndicates, let's see what happens now. Fight back so you'll end up dead," Dela Rosa said. "You will be killed by this counter-intelligence task force."

"We have to focus our effort toward internal cleansing and by the time we have cleansed the national police, the president will determine that and he will instruct us to go back to our war on drugs," the newspaper quoted Dela Rosa as saying.

Article continues after sponsorship

The Two-Way

Former Hit Man Accuses Philippine President Of Ordering, Carrying Out Killings

Duterte campaigned on the promise of death to drug dealers, saying he would dump their bodies into Manila Bay and allegedly encouraging citizens to shoot drug dealers. "Forget the laws on human rights," he told supporters in a speech before election day.

Once he was sworn in, promises hardened into policy. "Do your duty, and in the process, you kill 1,000 persons, I will protect you," Duterte told police on July 1, the day after he was sworn in, Michael Sullivan reported for NPR.

In September, an admitted former assassin testified that Duterte had "personally ordering extrajudicial killings — and, in one case, pulling the trigger," while he was mayor of Davao City, as The Two-Way has reported.

The United Nations has condemned Duterte's "apparent endorsement of extrajudicial killing, which is illegal and a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms." The Obama administration largely steered clear of the issue, even after Duterte preemptively, and profanely, scolded then-President Obama for even considering bringing up the issue in an upcoming meeting.

That meeting was subsequently canceled.

Parallels

Who's The New Philippine Envoy? The Man Building Trump Tower Manila

As we have reported, Duterte said he hopes to get along with President Trump, and has appointed real estate magnate Jose E.B. Antonio as a special trade envoy to the U.S. It's worth noting that Antonio is the man building Trump Tower Manila.

Refugee Agencies Race Against Time To Beat Trump Immigration Ban

Enlarge this image

Protesters at Los Angeles International Airport rally Sunday against President Trump's executive order halting entry of refugees and others into the U.S. Amanda Edwards/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Amanda Edwards/Getty Images

Protesters at Los Angeles International Airport rally Sunday against President Trump's executive order halting entry of refugees and others into the U.S.

Amanda Edwards/Getty Images

Refugee advocates and resettlement groups spent a chaotic weekend struggling to adapt on the fly, with families in the air and no official guidance on President Trump's executive order that bans refugees from around the world.

"There's no way to get guidance, nothing is coming down from the top. It was chaos at the airports," says Melanie Nezer, the vice president of policy and advocacy of HIAS, a global Jewish nonprofit that protects and resettles refugees. Her group tried to intervene in individual cases over the weekend.

Politics

5 Questions About The Law And Trump's Immigration Order

By Sunday, advocates said they had received State Department assurances that some refugees already in the pipeline will be admitted through this Friday, extending the deadline by one week for those with travel documents — "refugees in transit," says Nezer.

The extended deadline hasn't been announced officially yet, adding to the uncertainty of a process that seems to change by the hour.

The extended deadline could allow entry to around 800 refugees, "but not refugees from the seven countries," says Nezer, referring to a presidential order that blocks citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. for 90 days: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

More than 50 percent of Muslim refugees admitted to the U.S. last year came from Syria and Somalia.

Article continues after sponsorship

The Two-Way

PHOTOS: Thousands Protest At Airports Nationwide Against Trump's Immigration Order

An email circulating among official resettlement agencies and obtained by NPR says those arriving this week "will be allowed entry to the U.S." But the State Department has not confirmed a change publicly.

The shifting application of Friday's presidential executive order underlines the ongoing confusion and comes after a weekend of panic for refugee families who had waited years to clear security checks for resettlement in the United States — only to be detained or deported upon arrival.

"We have two cases next week; now we are hopeful," Nezer says. Refugee agency officials say they are sending legal teams to the airports in case of detentions.

Chris George, who heads IRIS, a refugee resettlement office in New Haven, Conn., told NPR in an email that he was alerted by Church World Service, one of IRIS's partners, to expect arrivals this week from Afghanistan and Colombia.

One refugee whose future is at stake is 17-year-old Sardar Hussain, an Afghan orphan who has waited for years for resettlement. The Taliban killed his entire family when he was 13. The Lutheran Community Services in Spokane, Wash., finally accepted him in a program for unaccompanied minor refugees.

"I am very worried," Heike Lake, with the Lutheran group, said late Friday.

She feared Hussain would be barred from a Monday flight to the U.S. But Lake was alerted late Sunday that the State Department's extension for refugees in the pipeline would apply to Hussain, who is now expected to arrive in Spokane on Monday and will become a resident in a foster home.

The State Department's deadline extension could give a reprieve to some 800 refugees who will be resettled in the United States, refugee advocates say. Then the program will be frozen for 120 days.

After a weekend of nationwide protests, criticism from faith-based groups and some backlash within the Republican Party, President Trump defended his order, saying the U.S. will show compassion to those fleeing oppression. But he insisted that he is "protecting our own citizens and border." He argued that his policy is not a Muslim ban, "as the media is falsely reporting," but "about terror and keeping our country safe."

"The Muslim ban is in effect," counters HIAS President and CEO Mark Hetfield, reached by phone on Sunday at a pro-refugee rally in Washington, D.C. He believes the executive order "killed the refugee program" and says, "We are making a lot of noise. We are going to try to litigate it."

On Saturday, a federal court for the Eastern District of New York issued an emergency stay for travelers with valid green cards and visas, but the order did not come in time for some refugees, Hetfield says.

Hetfield tried but failed to intervene on behalf of a Syrian mother traveling with two young children. She had been granted approval to join her husband in Connecticut after a three-year separation.

"She went through all the vetting," Hetfield says, and boarded a trans-Atlantic flight before the order was signed on Friday. But she was prevented from taking a transit flight in Kiev after the order became official.

"So now, she's stuck with no legal recourse," Hetfield says. "It's incredibly cruel. I don't recognize this country."

A HIAS-run program to resettle religious minorities from Iran is also on hold, Hetfield says. "It's not high-profile; the majority are Christians," he said, with around 2,000 people resettled every year for the past two decades. But Iran is one of seven countries from where visas are now blocked.

But the official resettlement tally shows the number of Christian refugees is roughly equal to Muslims.

The president carved out an exception for religious minorities in his executive order.

"They've been horribly treated," Trump said in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network on Friday. "If you were a Muslim, you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible."

But the "Christian exception" still has to be approved by the secretary of state and Department of Homeland Security on a "case by case" basis, Hetfield said.

The impact of the executive order has already been profound on individual lives — from the Iraqis who worked for the U.S. military and intelligence services to a Sudanese doctor at the Cleveland Clinic who was barred from re-entry to the United States on Friday. A Syrian clarinetist, a legal immigrant touring with cellist Yo-Yo Ma, does not know if he will be able to return to his Brooklyn apartment at the end of the tour.

Fort Lauderdale Airport Shooting Suspect Pleads Not Guilty To 22 Counts

Enlarge this image

Esteban Santiago (center) is led from the Broward County jail for an arraignment in federal court on Monday in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Lynne Sladky/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Lynne Sladky/AP

Esteban Santiago (center) is led from the Broward County jail for an arraignment in federal court on Monday in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

Lynne Sladky/AP

The 26-year-old man accused of opening fire at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport earlier this month pleaded not guilty to 22 counts at his arraignment in a federal court on Monday.

Esteban Santiago Ruiz allegedly traveled from Alaska and started firing in the Florida airport's crowded baggage claim area. Investigators say he continued until he ran out of ammunition, then dropped his weapon and was arrested by law enforcement officers.

Five people were killed and six were injured during the attack. According to the criminal complaint, Santiago told investigators that he planned the assault.

"Esteban Santiago, shackled and wearing a prison jumpsuit, stood while Magistrate Judge Barry Seltzer read all 22 counts," NPR's Greg Allen reports from the court in Fort Lauderdale. Here's more:

"Seltzer explained to Santiago each count, and the maximum penalty. With the combined counts, if found guilty, Santiago faces a maximum penalty of death or life in prison. Santiago told the judge he understood each of the charges against him and the penalties. His lawyer said Santiago pleaded not guilty to all charges. A date will now be set for a jury trial."

Article continues after sponsorship

Seltzer repeatedly emphasized the victims' names as he read the entire indictment aloud, according to The Associated Press.

The indictment "includes five counts of 'violence at an international airport resulting in death,' as well as numerous weapons charges for allegedly firing a Walther 9-millimeter pistol," The Two-Way reported.

The Two-Way

What We Know About The Fort Lauderdale Shooting Suspect

Santiago served in the National Guard, including a tour in Iraq, and was discharged for unsatisfactory performance.

Authorities say Santiago also suffered from mental health issues. He sought help from the FBI in Anchorage, Alaska, last year, saying he was having "terroristic thoughts." He was taken to a mental health facility but was released.

The Two-Way has compiled a rundown of what we know about Santiago, found here.

French-Canadian Student Charged With Murdering 6 In Quebec City Mosque

Enlarge this image

Flowers at a makeshift memorial near the Islamic Cultural Center in Quebec City Monday. Alice Chiche/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Alice Chiche/AFP/Getty Images

Flowers at a makeshift memorial near the Islamic Cultural Center in Quebec City Monday.

Alice Chiche/AFP/Getty Images

Canadian authorities say a 27-year-old man was solely responsible for the armed attack on a Quebec City mosque on Sunday.

The man, who has been identified as Alexandre Bissonnette, faces 11 charges: six counts of murder and five counts of attempted murder. In a brief appearance in court he did not enter a plea.

The Associated Press, citing local hospital officials, reports five shooting victims remain in critical condition and 12 others suffered minor injuries.

Local authorities initially were looking for two suspects, but another man arrested at the mosque was determined to be just a witness to the shooting, which occurred Sunday evening.

The police have not discussed a possible motive for the attack. The New York Times reports that Bissonnette has a history of anti-Islam comments online and had expressed support for the far-right French political party, the National Front.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Quebec Province Premier Philippe Couillard quickly called the shootings an act of terrorism.

Mass shootings are rare in Canada. Adding to the shock and outrage is the fact that Quebec City, a metropolitan area of about 806,000 people, saw just two killings in all of 2015. Nevertheless, Canadian Muslim activists report that the mosque has seen an uptick in threats and vandalism.

Article continues after sponsorship

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said that President Trump had called Trudeau to express his condolences. In a telegram, Russian President Vladimir Putin did the same.

Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo said her city would signal its solidarity with Quebec City by turning off the lights on the Eiffel Tower Monday.

Trump Acts To Roll Back Regulations On Businesses

Enlarge this image

President Trump signs an executive action in the Oval Office of the White House on Monday in Washington, D.C., saying he will "dramatically" reduce small business regulations overall. Andrew Harrer/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Andrew Harrer/Getty Images

President Trump signs an executive action in the Oval Office of the White House on Monday in Washington, D.C., saying he will "dramatically" reduce small business regulations overall.

Andrew Harrer/Getty Images

President Trump signed another executive order Monday morning, fulfilling another campaign pledge, this one to eliminate two federal regulations for every new regulation enacted.

Trump signed the order during an Oval Office photo op, saying, "We're cutting regulations massively for small business and large business," adding, "This will be the biggest such act our country has ever seen."

The order stipulates:

"Unless prohibited by law, whenever an executive department or agency (agency) publicly proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates a new regulation, it shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed."

Trump said earlier Monday that he wants to eliminate "a little more than 75 percent" of the regulations now on the books. "We don't need 97 different rules to take care of one element," he said.

Politics

President Trump's Tweets, Annotated

The directive exempts regulations relating to the military, national security and foreign affairs.

Politics

Trump Accuses Top Democrat Of 'Fake Tears' Over Executive Order

Business groups applauded Trump's order. The National Federation of Independent Business calls it "a good first step on the long road toward eliminating ball-and-chain regulations."

Environmental groups however were dismayed. Center for Biological Diversity director Kieran Suckling called the new policy "as dumb as it gets." In a statement, Suckling said, "So you'll protect my drinking water but only in exchange for allowing oil drilling in national parks and more lead in my paint?"

Rolling back regulations has long been a goal of Republican and Democratic administrations, but its not easy, as we've reported.

There are some 80,000 pages in the Federal Register, where all federal rules are published. But in order to repeal a regulation, a federal agency has to go through the same notice and comment rule making process used to formulate new regulations. And that generally takes at least a year.

Article continues after sponsorship

Politics

Executive Order Or Memorandum? Let's Call The Whole Thing An 'Action'

There is a workaround for newly enacted regulations, the Congressional Review Act. It gives lawmakers the opportunity to repeal regulations approved in the last 60 days of the congressional session. But that, too, is a time-consuming process, and given the Senate's need to act on Trump's nominations, it's likely that only a relatively few regulations will be repealed in this manner.

One is likely to come up this week. House leaders say they will attempt to repeal the stream protection rule, an Obama administration regulation that forbids coal companies from dumping rocks and other debris created by mountain top removal mining into nearby streams.

Republicans and the coal industry say the regulation threatens jobs. The Natural Resources Defense Council says mountain-top removal mining, in which ground is blasted to access coal seams below, has been responsible for the destruction of 2,000 miles of streams in Appalachia.

It's Fred Korematsu Day: Celebrating A Foe Of U.S. Internment Camps

Enlarge this image

Fred Korematsu, whose fight against internment led all the way to the Supreme Court — and who later warned of acting against groups due to their race or religion — is being honored by several states today. He died in 2005. Robin Weiner/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Robin Weiner/AP

Fred Korematsu, whose fight against internment led all the way to the Supreme Court — and who later warned of acting against groups due to their race or religion — is being honored by several states today. He died in 2005.

Robin Weiner/AP

It was an executive order in 1942 that created the system forcing Americans of Japanese descent to live in internment camps.

Days after President Trump used an executive order to dramatically shift U.S. immigration policy, Fred Korematsu Day is attracting special attention — including as the subject of a Google Doodle.

Korematsu fought a discriminatory federal program all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court — and lost. Years later, he was awarded America's highest civilian honor.

As NPR has reported:

"Korematsu was born in Oakland, Calif., but his U.S. citizenship didn't keep him from being arrested for refusing to be relocated to an internment camp in 1942. He challenged his arrest in court, and two years later the case made its way to the Supreme Court.

"Korematsu challenged the constitutionality of Executive Order 9066, the decree that forced the relocation of people of Japanese descent to internment camps. The court ruled in favor of the government and against Korematsu in what is now widely considered one of its worst decisions. The majority of justices claimed the detentions were not based on racial discrimination but rather on suspicions that Japanese-Americans were acting as spies."

Article continues after sponsorship

In 1983, the U.S. District Court in San Francisco formally vacated Korematsu's conviction. At the time, he told Judge Marilyn Patel that instead of a legal pardon, he wanted to be assured the U.S. government would never again take such an action.

"If anyone should do any pardoning," he said, "I should be the one pardoning the government for what they did to the Japanese-American people."

Over the weekend, the civil rights hero's daughter, Karen, who leads the Fred T. Korematsu Institute, told member station KQED that she didn't know of her father's stand until she learned about it in high school.

"He simply said it happened a long time ago and what he thought he did was right and the government was wrong, and I could just see this hurt go over his face," she told KQED.

She added, "Why should he go to a prison camp when there were no charges, there was no day in court, there was no access to an attorney?"

All Tech Considered

Is Today's Google Doodle A Poke At The Trump Administration?

A welder whose family ran a flower nursery in California before they were forced to leave and live in a Utah camp, Korematsu died in 2005. Since then, several states have enacted laws to celebrate his birthday, Jan. 30. California was the first state to adopt the Fred Korematsu Day of Civil Liberties and the Constitution.

Signed by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the 2010 law recognizes "the importance of preserving civil liberties, even in times of real or perceived crisis."

When he awarded Korematsu the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1998, President Clinton praised him for being someone whose stand for civil rights helped the lives of millions of Americans, comparing him to names on landmark civil rights cases such as Brown v. Board of Education.

But as The Atlantic has noted, the Supreme Court's Korematsu decision "belongs to what legal scholars describe as the anti-canon of American constitutional law — a small group of Supreme Court rulings universally assailed as wrong, immoral, and unconstitutional. Dred Scott v. Sandford, Plessy v. Ferguson, Buck v. Bell, and Korematsu form the anti-canon's core; legal scholars sometimes include other decisions as well."

Trump Set To Announce Supreme Court Nominee

Enlarge this image

A protester carries a sign in front of the Supreme Court during a protest about President Trump's recent executive orders on Monday in Washington, D.C. Alex Brandon/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Alex Brandon/AP

A protester carries a sign in front of the Supreme Court during a protest about President Trump's recent executive orders on Monday in Washington, D.C.

Alex Brandon/AP

President Trump is set to announce his pick for the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, fulfilling a promise he made to social conservatives on the campaign trail to name someone like the late Justice Antonin Scalia, a conservative icon whose seat has been vacant for almost a year.

The White House moved up the announcement by two days, a step that observers saw as an attempt to change the subject away from the president's controversial immigration order. The order has provoked widespread criticism in the U.S. and among allies abroad, not to mention among leading Republicans in Congress.

Politics

Obama Criticizes Trump's Travel Ban, Says 'Values Are At Stake'

Whoever the president selects, the confirmation hearings are likely to set up a full-scale attack from Democrats on some of Trump's immigration policies.

The leading contenders for the nomination are said to be three federal appeals court judges: all very conservative, all relatively young, all millionaires and all nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush.

Article continues after sponsorship

The Two-Way

7 Targeted Countries React To Trump's Ban On Immigration

The two who seem to be at the head of the line are Neil Gorsuch, a well-regarded 49-year-old judge on the appeals court based in Denver, and Thomas Hardiman, a popular 51-year-old judge on the appeals court based in Philadelphia. Hardiman is said to be well-liked by Maryanne Trump Barry, the president's sister, a judge on the same Philadelphia court.

Gorsuch and Hardiman seem in some ways to be the flip sides of each other: Gorsuch is a scholarly Ivy Leaguer and Hardiman is a longtime litigator with lots of experience trying cases, who is said to have a "practical approach."

The diplomatic Ivy Leaguer

Gorsuch, a Colorado native, is proof that you can acquire a personality that is diametrically different from your parents. His mother, Anne Gorsuch Burford, was a highly controversial, take-no-prisoners head of the Environmental Protection Agency during the Reagan administration, and known for being quite the bomb thrower.

But lawyers and judges alike describe her son as unfailingly polite, diplomatic, a good listener and a good colleague — to the point of being obsequious.

Gorsuch is a reliable conservative on social issues. His best-known votes are in decisions siding with challenges to regulations requiring employers to provide birth control coverage for women under the Affordable Care Act.

Law

Justices Divide By Gender In Hobby Lobby Contraception Case

He earned his undergraduate degree at Columbia University, where he co-founded a newspaper aimed at rebutting what he considered the dominant liberal and "politically correct" philosophy on campus. A graduate of Harvard Law School, he also earned a doctorate in legal philosophy at Oxford University, where he studied as a Truman Scholar.

In private practice in Washington, D.C., Gorsuch represented mostly corporate clients, and in 2005 he became principal associate attorney general in the Bush administration Justice Department. A year later, Gorsuch was nominated to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where he has earned a reputation as a cerebral conservative with a flair for vivid and clear writing that is similar to — though not as sharp in tone as — Justice Scalia's.

The Two-Way

4 Questions With NPR's Nina Totenberg About Justice Antonin Scalia

He is known as a critic of a decades-old Supreme Court legal precedent that requires courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous language in broad statutes. In that sense, he is more conservative than Scalia, who supported that precedent.

The "down to earth," pro-Second Amendment nominee

In contrast to Judge Gorsuch, Judge Hardiman is not an Ivy Leaguer, but as one of his friends put it, he went to the "Catholic Ivy Leagues" — Notre Dame University for his undergraduate degree and Georgetown for his law degree, where he helped put himself through school driving a cab.

He was initially nominated by President George W. Bush to the federal district court in Pittsburgh and was later elevated to the Philadelphia appeals court.

His conservatism has demonstrated itself most prominently in gun cases, where he has ruled often in favor of the right to bear arms. For instance, he dissented from a decision that upheld New Jersey's restrictive law on who may receive a permit to carry a gun. The Supreme Court left that decision in place by refusing to review it.

It did review — and uphold — a decision Hardiman wrote declaring that jails were justified in conducting strip searches of individuals arrested but not yet convicted of any charge, even a minor traffic charge.

Hardiman is one of those people who is well-liked by associates of all political stripes. He is described as "down to earth" and smart; he is, as a friend put it, "a closet scholar." He "knows the Hobbes and Lockean philosophy behind the Federalist Papers."

Friends and associates describe him as "a devout Catholic," one who "knows Thomas Aquinas."

Several people noted that because of his many years as a trial lawyer and trial judge, he has more experience trying cases than most of the other Supreme Court justices.

The nominee who would cause an uproar

The third contender for the vacant Supreme Court seat is Alabama's William H. Pryor Jr., who sits on the federal appeals court based in Atlanta. He was the odds-on favorite going in, in part because he is a protege of Sen. Jeff Sessions, Trump's pick for attorney general.

But Pryor's record is by far the most controversial. Among other things, he called Roe v. Wade the "worst abomination" in American jurisprudence. As Alabama state attorney general, Pryor urged the Supreme Court to uphold state laws that criminalized private consensual homosexual conduct.

Politics

5 Takeaways From Jeff Sessions' Attorney General Hearing, So Far

While Judges Hardiman and Gorsuch were both confirmed without dissent, Pryor was blocked by Democrats and was only confirmed in a later deal. So a Pryor nomination would undoubtedly spark a major donnybrook.

Democrats, of course, are in the minority in the Senate, which must confirm the president's nominee.

Many Democratic senators view the Supreme Court nomination as one that was stolen from them when Republicans, in a precedent-setting move, refused for almost a year to even consider President Barack Obama's nominee to fill the seat left vacant when Justice Scalia passed away.

Already, some Democrats are promising to filibuster any nominee. The filibuster is still in place for Supreme Court nominees, meaning it would take 60 votes to confirm.

But Republicans could change that rule pretty much any time they want. Some Democrats may want to save that card for the next battle — when, if there is a vacancy, President Trump would likely be replacing, not a conservative like Scalia, but a more liberal justice, thus changing the balance on the Supreme Court for decades.

Sales Of Short-Term Insurance Plans Could Surge If Health Law Is Relaxed

Enlarge this image

As Republicans look for ways to loosen the Affordable Care Act's coverage requirements, sales of short-term health insurance policies could take off. Petrol/Westend61/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Petrol/Westend61/Getty Images

As Republicans look for ways to loosen the Affordable Care Act's coverage requirements, sales of short-term health insurance policies could take off.

Petrol/Westend61/Getty Images

Short-term health plans have been around for decades, bridging coverage gaps for people who are between jobs or have recently graduated from school, among other things.

After the Affordable Care Act was enacted, some people gravitated toward the short-term plans because they were willing to trade comprehensive coverage for a cheaper sticker price — even if it meant paying a tax penalty for not having the comprehensive coverage required in the law. Sales increased sharply.

Now, as Republicans look for ways to loosen the health law's coverage requirements and explore the possibility of not enforcing the requirement that people have health insurance, sales of short-term plans may be poised to grow even more. If that happens, consumer advocates say it could be bad for consumers.

As the policies' name suggests, short-term plans provide coverage for a limited period, often six months or less. They generally don't cover such things as pre-existing conditions, maternity services or prescription drugs. The policies typically have maximum coverage limits of about $1 million. Insurers can turn people down if they're sick and may decide not to renew someone's policy. All of these practices are prohibited in plans that qualify as individual insurance under the Affordable Care Act.

Article continues after sponsorship

Precisely because of these limitations, however, the premiums are typically a lot cheaper than those for ACA-compliant coverage. In the fourth quarter of 2016, the average monthly premium a shopper would pay for a short-term plan sold through eHealth.com was $124, compared with $393 for someone who bought a regular Obamacare plan and didn't qualify for premium subsidies.

When the health law passed, insurers increasingly began offering short-term plans that stretched the definition of "short," sometimes providing coverage for as long as 364 days.

"Carriers were exploiting a loophole in the law that defined a health insurance plan as one that was 365 days," said Sabrina Corlette, a research professor at Georgetown University's Center on Health Insurance Reforms. "If they were shorter they didn't have to comply with ACA protections."

Short-term plans serve a tiny but growing proportion of the roughly 22 million people who have coverage on the individual market. At the end of 2013, before the health law's major reforms took effect, there were approximately 108,800 people covered by these policies, which earned premiums of $97.5 million, according to figures from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. Two years later, roughly 148,100 people had short-term plans and premium earnings have grown to $160.5 million.

Some insurers have taken notice. Online health insurance vendor Health Insurance Innovations launched Agile Health Insurance in the spring of 2015 to focus on sales of short-term plans. In the third quarter 2016, Agile sold 21,000 short-term policies.

"These short-term plans are not regulated like Obamacare plans, so carriers have a lot of flexibility in benefits and pricing," said Sam Gibbs, Agile's executive director. "It's almost like the old individual market before the ACA."

Not all insurers embrace widespread sale of short-term plans. "The big health insurance companies are really mixed on this," said Timothy Jost, professor emeritus at Washington and Lee University School of Law and a close watcher of the health law. "They see this as a seriously destabilizing force in the market, this crap coverage."

Last October, the Obama administration issued a final rule that would make it more difficult for consumers to buy short-term plans to substitute for regular Obamacare plans. The regulation, which takes effect April 1, said short-term plans must be less than three months in duration. People can request a renewal of the policies, but insurers can turn them down. The policies and related materials also have to prominently display a warning that they don't satisfy the law's requirement that people have health insurance.

Some hope that the rule may be changed or rescinded by the Trump administration or overturned by the new Congress under the little-used Congressional Review Act. Neither option can happen at the stroke of a pen, however.

Health insurance brokers and agents would like to continue to sell longer term short-term plans.

"Our folks do a lot of business with short-term plans," said Marcy Buckner, vice president of government affairs at the National Association of Health Underwriters, an industry group. The regulation is one that the group will request that the Trump administration rescind.

"In most areas [a short-term plan] is cheaper, and it's some consumers' way of saying, 'I don't need all of those things,'" said Buckner.

Kaiser Health __news is an editorially independent __news service that is part of the nonpartisan Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Follow Michelle Andrews on Twitter: @mandrews110.

Don't Invite Trump For State Visit, Say More Than 1 Million In U.K.

Enlarge this image

President Trump and British Prime Minister Theresa May walk along the colonnades of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Friday. Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

President Trump and British Prime Minister Theresa May walk along the colonnades of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Friday.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

More than 1.3 million people have signed an official U.K. petition to prevent President Trump from making a state visit to the U.K. — and the number continues to grow.

"Donald Trump should be allowed to enter the UK in his capacity as head of US Government," the petition states, "but he should not be invited to make an official State Visit because it would cause embarrassment to Her Majesty the Queen."

The U.K. Parliament will consider this petition for a debate, because it has surpassed the threshold of 100,000 signatures.

British Prime Minster Theresa May, while she was in Washington, D.C., last week, actually already extended an invitation to Trump on the queen's behalf, and he has accepted.

Today, according to the BBC, 10 Downing St. reiterated that the visit is still on: "The USA is one of this country's closest allies, and we look forward to hosting the president later this year." It added that the visit is "substantially in the national interest," according to The Guardian.

The petition gained steam after Trump issued an executive order Friday that freezes admission into the U.S. for all refugees and temporarily blocks entry to citizens and dual nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Article continues after sponsorship

From London, NPR's Frank Langfitt said Trump's travel ban has proved embarrassing to May. Here's more:

"On Friday, she became the first foreign leader to meet the new president at the White House. After __news of the travel ban broke, though, May was slow to respond. Leading critics to say she's been too eager to cozy up to Trump. A protest against the travel ban is planned today outside Downing Street."

Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn said Trump "should not be welcomed to Britain while he abuses our shared values with his shameful Muslim ban and attacks on refugees' and women's rights." He added that May would be "failing the British people if she does not postpone the state visit."

The petition's authors explained their rationale like this: "Donald Trump's well documented misogyny and vulgarity disqualifies him from being received by Her Majesty the Queen or the Prince of Wales."

Last year, Parliament held a similar debate in response to a petition calling for Trump to be banned from the U.K. after he proposed "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" while on the campaign trail, as the Guardian reported. "MPs described him as a 'fool', a 'buffoon' and a 'wazzock' in the lengthy parliamentary debate in January last year" — but decided not to block him.

One protester's story: Paying the price for seeking freedom in Egypt

Image caption Mahmoud Hussein says he needs a crutch because of abuse and medical neglect in prison

It is six years since the outbreak of the 18-day revolution in Egypt which swept the autocrat, Hosni Mubarak, from power. But human rights campaigners say the situation in the country is now far worse than before the uprising, as Orla Guerin reports from Cairo.

With every step he takes, Mahmoud Mohammed Hussein is reminded of the price he paid for wanting freedom and democracy in Egypt.

The 21-year-old has a pronounced limp and relies on a crutch - a legacy, he says, of beatings during almost 800 days in a series of prisons. Ten months have passed since his release, but he still appears frail.

Mahmoud is one of thousands who have been detained in recent years under Egypt's latest strongman, President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi.

As army chief he led the military overthrow of Egypt's first democratically-elected president, Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, in 2013.

Since then Mr Sisi has presided over a sweeping crackdown on dissent - ensnaring Islamists, liberals, journalists, aid workers, and icons of the revolution of 2011.

Image copyright AFP

Image caption People took to the streets of Cairo on 25 January 2011 to demand Hosni Mubarak resign

Mahmoud joined the throngs behind bars back in 2014, when he was just 18.

His ordeal began on 25 January, the anniversary of the outbreak of the revolution. His fate was sealed by his T-shirt which read: "A nation without torture."

"It was a day of celebration for me," said Mahmoud, who has dark curly hair and a ready smile.

"I wasn't part of the revolution, but I believed in it and its goals. It made me feel like a human being, with rights and duties.

"Nowadays, people see the anniversary as a black day, they worry when it comes. For me the mood was one of celebration."

Image copyright AFP

Image caption Supporters of Abdul Fattah al-Sisi were allowed to take to the streets on 25 January 2014

But then - as now - the streets were reserved for President Sisi's supporters. They could gather freely, unlike his critics. Protests are virtually banned here.

We witnessed police opening fire that day - with live rounds - on unarmed demonstrators.

Mahmoud said he was not involved in any of the protests, but that he was detained as he headed for home.

"The officer who arrested me told me, 'You have my picture on your T-shirt'," he said.

"The T-shirt was inspired by the revolution. I saw it as a beautiful thing, not a crime. A country without torture is a dream that everyone wishes for."

Image copyright AFP

Image caption Dozens died in clashes with security forces at anti-government protests three years ago

That dream was apparently not shared by the police he encountered that day. Mahmoud said they soon employed the torture skills for which human rights groups have long condemned the Egyptian police.

"I was abused at the checkpoint where I was arrested," he told us.

"Then they transferred me to the police station. I was electrocuted on my private parts. They kicked me with their military boots, and hit me with sticks.

"Everyone knew I was there because of the T-shirt. They believed this was a personal insult to them, so they beat me."

The aim, he said, was to get him to sign a false confession.

Image copyright Egyptian government

Image caption Mahmoud Hussein (centre) was photographed with the T-shirt reading "A nation without torture"

"A senior officer beat me and kicked me and then asked junior police officers to do the job," he said.

"They wanted me to sign a report saying I was against the police. I refused. The juniors have their own ways - if beating doesn't work, then electrocution might do the job.

"I was stripped naked, without even boxer shorts, and I was beaten just to admit to certain charges".

Mahmoud asked the officers to spare his leg, which was injured in the past.

"They insisted on kicking me and beating me on that leg," he said.

"Because of all the abuse and the medical neglect in prison I now need my friend, the crutch, and two surgeries."

His account is consistent with testimony from others who have been detained in recent years. We asked the Egyptian government for a response to the allegation that detainees have been beaten and tortured in custody. There was no reply.

In the past the authorities have denied there is systematic torture, but said there may be individual cases.

Image caption Mahmoud faces charges including joining a banned terrorist group - something he denies

Mahmoud described both physical and psychological abuse.

He told us he spent 14 months in one overcrowded cell where he could barely move, and could not see daylight.

There were about 150 other prisoners, including Islamists and men held for rape and murder.

"I always had this element of fear," he said, "All the time, because prison is like a tomb. It's a place that takes away your soul, and kills everything beautiful in you."

Image copyright AFP

Image caption Tens of thousands of people have been jailed in a sweeping crackdown on dissent since 2013

Mahmoud was released from detention last March - following campaigns at home and abroad.

While he is back home with his family in Cairo, he is not completely free.

He still faces charges including joining an unauthorized protest, possession of explosives and joining a banned terrorist group - all of which he denies.

"I could go back to prison at any time," he said. "They could just pick me walking on the street.

"Since my release that has happened twice. I was held for a few hours and then they let me go."

Image copyright Getty Images

Image caption Public criticism and peaceful opposition are effectively banned in Egypt, rights activists say

Mahmoud has also been receiving threatening phone calls.

"One told me I would not have time to come back to prison," he said, "meaning that someone could stab me or kill me. I didn't reply. I just hung up."

In spite of all the dangers, including the risk that he could be put on trial, Mahmoud refuses to be silenced.

"In Egypt my rights and the rights of thousands of others like me are violated, just for dreaming or hoping for freedom," he said.

"Their destiny is prison, or death. That's not going to stop me from speaking out, or caring for thousands like me. "

Officials here would not give us a comment on allegations that all dissent is being crushed.

Image copyright AFP

Image caption President Sisi said in September that "there can be no return to dictatorship"

President Sisi has said in the past that stability is more important than freedom, but he maintains that dictatorship cannot return to Egypt. Critics believe in some key respects it never left.

When asked if the revolution is now dead, Mahmoud gave a swift response.

"No, not at all," he insisted. "25 January is a dream that will never die. The revolution lives in the hearts of people like me, of everyone who believes in it.

"The current regime is trying desperately to erase it from memory."

As for the T- shirt that cost him his freedom, he has no regrets.

"I always say that if I could go back, in spite of all the abuses I suffered, I would wear the T-shirt again," he said.