Category World News

Andrew’s brother, who is now a prince, has been ordered to leave his lavish residence close to Windsor Castle by King Charles III, according to a report released on Thursday by Buckingham Palace. According to observers, the Palace is finally taking action in response to allegations that Virginia Giuffre was sexually abused by the two men while she was a teenager as a result of Andrew’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein, a late sex offender.

Andrew, 65, the younger brother of King Charles and the second son of Queen Elizabeth, is increasingly being investigated for his ties to Epstein and his personal behavior. He was pressured into resigning as the Duke of York earlier this month.

“I’ve made the decision to prioritize my duty to my family and country as I always have.” Five years ago, Andrew said, “I stand by my decision to step down from public life.” He added that he “vigorously denies] the accusations” made against him.

Following years of compromise scandals, Buckingham Palace wants to draw a line. Due to his connections to Epstein, Andrew was fired from a number of royal responsibilities in 2022.

How were Andrew’s ties to Epstein exposed?

Andrew was a more well-known member of the British royal family who was renowned for his military service as a helicopter pilot during the Falklands War in 1982. He was born in 1960.

However, Andrew’s private antics have plagued the royal family’s patience for years and caused embarrassing headlines. For instance, court records in 2024 revealed a suspected Chinese spy as a close friend of Andrew’s business affairs.

However, Andrew eventually had to resign from his royal duties in 2019 due to his persistent ties to Jeffrey Epstein. In 2019 as he waited to be tried on sex trafficking charges, Epstein committed suicide in a US prison.

One of the most prominent accusers of Epstein, Virginia Giuffre, filed a lawsuit against then-Prince Andrew in 2021, alleging rape and sexual abuse. She claimed that, as a minor in the United States, she was repeatedly forced to have sex with him at the age of 17.

Giuffre’s accusations have never been refuted by Prince Andrew, even saying that a now-discredited photo that appeared to show them two together was fake. He agreed to settle the lawsuit in 2022, which he received as much as $ 16 million.

Virginia Giuffre committed suicide in April of this year. She was a 41-year-old woman.

More than two months after the prince told the BBC he had ended all ties with his former associate, according to British newspapers, Andrew had emailed him in February 2011 in an email earlier that month.

Andrew told Epstein that they were “in this together” and would “have to rise above it” during a period of increased media coverage of the Epstein scandal.

Buckingham Palace’s response on Thursday was ultimately provoked by these revelations.

What has been said by Buckingham Palace?

Buckingham Palace announced that Andrew Mountbatten Windsor would be the King’s brother in a statement released on Thursday night.

He will no longer be referred to as “Prince” or “His Royal Highness (HRH), and his royal patronages, including dukedom, earldom, barony, and military ranks, will no longer apply.

Additionally, it was revealed that he will be evicted from his sprawling Royal Lodge, which was once the Queen Mother’s residence, close to Windsor Castle in west London.

He has been given legal protection to remain in residence as a result of his lease on Royal Lodge. He will move to another private accommodation after receiving formal notice to renounce the lease, according to the palace statement.

The statement continued, “These censures are deemed necessary… Their Majesties wish to make clear that the victims and survivors of any and all forms of abuse are in their thoughts and have the utmost sympathies with them,” it continued.

According to a palace source, King Charles made the decision, but he also had the support of the rest of the royal family, including Prince William, the monarchy’s heir to the throne, to lessen the risk of reputational damage.

Culture secretary Lisa Nandy also claimed that survivors of sexual abuse would receive a “powerful message” from the king’s most recent decision in a “truly brave, important, and correct step.”

Why has Royal Lodge expelled Andrew?

After The Times newspaper reported on October 21 that Andrew had not paid rent on his 30-room mansion, known as Royal Lodge, for 20 years, speculation has rifed in the British press.

According to what it was discovered, Andrew was required to pay “one peppercorn” per year for the work that was being done on the property in exchange for carrying out renovations and keeping the mansion.

A British parliamentary committee on Wednesday questioned whether Andrew should still reside in the house, which is owned by the monarch and is located 5 kilometers (3 miles) south of Windsor Castle) in a rare political move.

The BBC also made it known that Prince Andrew hosted Harvey Weinstein, the disgraced film producer convicted of rape, and Ghislaine Maxwell, one of Epstein’s associates who later served time for sex trafficking, at Royal Lodge on October 28.

Just two months after Epstein’s sexual assault conviction was cited in the United States, the three visited Andrew’s home in 2006 to celebrate his daughter’s 18th birthday.

Where will Andrew currently reside?

Andrew’s move to a private Sandringham Estate property, which will be funded by his brother, the king, is reportedly planned.

The Palace has not specified which property he will reside in, despite the fact that the larger Sandringham Estate has about 8,100 hectares (20, 000 acres) and 240 hectares (600 acres) of gardens.

Andrew’s relocation to Sandringham will be “as soon as practicable,” it is also reportedly understood.

Sarah Ferguson, his ex-wife, will also leave Royal Lodge and move into her own housing arrangements. She still lives there with him.

Have other British royals previously lost their titles?

King Charles III’s removal of Prince Andrew’s royal titles is unusual in contemporary British history.

Other royals have voluntarily given up their positions, including King Edward VIII, who wed Wallis Simpson, an American woman who had previously been divorced twice, and Princess Diana, who wed Prince Harry after her divorce from King Charles.

Others have lost their privileges for political reasons, such as Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, who sided with Germany in World War I, but there hasn’t been a case where an immediate family or a reigning monarch has been stripped of their status for scandal-related reasons.

Democrats and Republicans failed to reach a funding agreement on October 1st, leading to the US government shutdown, which has now passed one month. American people’s daily lives are becoming more and more sluggish.

According to data from the Bipartisan Policy Center, 73, 000 federal employees (32 percent of the workforce) have been without pay, while 670, 000 have been fired because government departments are unable to pay them. As the government departments become inoperable and the shutdown drags on, that number will increase.

A number of services, including essential food assistance, have been interrupted or even completely stopped as a result of the shutdown.

How long has the shutdown been in effect?

After Democrats refused to approve a spending bill supported by Republicans without important amendments that would restore funding for public health programs, US President Donald Trump threatened to launch massive federal layoffs in the weeks leading up to the shutdown in October.

The shutdown, which is now the second-longest in US history, was caused by neither side’s backs.

Government shutdowns have rarely occurred over the course of a few days, but they occasionally occur.

Trump’s first year as president of the United States was the shutdown’s last one. The longest in US history, lasting 35 days from December 22, 2018 to January 25, 2019, was despite only a partial shutdown. The conflict began with a row over the construction of a wall along Mexico’s border, and it only came to an end when Trump made a tentative agreement with congressional leaders to reopen the government for three weeks while negotiations raged.

The government has experienced 20 funding gaps, which have led to 10 shutdowns since 1976, the beginning of which was the process for establishing and approving government budgets.

What transpires during a shutdown, and what services are impacted?

Non-essential federal services like those offered by regulatory bodies and museums are temporarily suspended or reduced, and many government employees are furloughed and taken on unpaid leave.

Before funding is restored, essential personnel like military personnel, law enforcement personnel, air traffic controllers, and agents for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) must continue to work, frequently without compensation.

How many people are employed by the federal government?

The federal government employs more than two million people nationwide.

Just over seven percent (162, 489) of all federal workers are based in Washington, DC, followed by 6.7 percent (150, 679) in California, 6.5 percent (147, 358) in Virginia, 6.4 percent (144, 497) in Maryland and 5.8 percent (130, 686) in Texas.

The locations of 276 and 235 employees are not made public.

How many people work unpaid or furloughed?

The Bipartisan Policy Center’s most recent estimates indicate that about 730, 000 federal employees are paid untrained, and about 670, 000 have received furloughs.

97 percent of the Department of Veterans Affairs employees still carry out their duties. The majority of the department’s funding is being paid because it is not funded by annual appropriations, or Congress-approved budgets.

Secret Service agents, border control officers, airport security, Coast Guard workers, and emergency workers in disaster relief are among the department’s 271, 000 employees still employed, the majority of them without pay.

Law enforcement, FBI agents, criminal prosecutors, and prison guards are among the Department of Justice’s 115, 000 current employees, and 90% of them are still employed, largely without pay.

Conversely, 91% of its 4,300 employees are being laid off. Only those who continue to monitor markets and deal with urgent fraud problems work.

The Environmental Protection Agency’s 15, 000 employees have received furloughs, or about 89 percent. The work of security guards, criminal investigators, and emergency response personnel continues.

2,450 government employees at the Department of Education have been furloughed, or about 87 percent of them. Workers who still provide grants and student aid to schools are among those who are still employed.

What effects do federal programs experience?

Some vital government programs will completely lose funding when November 1st.

On October 10, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that it would not have enough funds to pay food benefits by the month’s end.

By the end of this week, the USDA will no longer have funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Food assistance is a necessity for more than 42 million Americans.

SNAP has access to a $5 billion contingency fund that could provide benefits for a few weeks; it costs the government $ 9.8 billion annually, or roughly $ 8.3 billion per month. However, Reuters claims that the USDA won’t use these for November-slated assistance that will expire.

The Trump administration has stated that it won’t fund the program with emergency funds.

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), which provides food, breastfeeding assistance, and education to more than six million pregnant women, young mothers, and children, is also in need of funding.

What will be the economic consequence?

The economy’s shutdown is typically temporary and has little to no impact. When a shutdown is over and funding is released, unpaid and furloughed employees’ pay is typically retroactive.

That doesn’t imply that it is insignificant. Contract workers are typically more negatively impacted than others because they only receive back pay from their contracting employers.

The Trump administration has also threatened to terminate workers altogether or not provide back pay, which would mean that the shutdown could have a bigger impact on the economy.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the partial shutdown in 2018-19 slowed the growth of the country’s GDP by about 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2018 ($3 billion) and by about 0.2% in the first quarter of 2019 ($8 billion). This was primarily due to delayed spending on goods and services as well as the loss of furloughed workers’ pay.

Since about $3 billion of these losses were not anticipated to be recovered, GDP is thought to be 0.2 percent lower than it would otherwise be in 2019.

Analysts predict that the shutdown will cut GDP by 0.1% to 0.2% for each week it lasts, which would be equivalent to about $15 billion per week.

The impact, according to economist Michael Feroli in a JPMorgan briefing note, “could be worse this time due to the looming layoffs and actual job losses, which could put a risk on both the labor market and consumer spending.”

In Valencia, where climate change and tourism threaten turtle populations along Spain’s coast, Carlos leads a fight.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement are legally barred from prosecution, according to Stephen Miller, deputy chief of staff for the White House.

Will Cain, a Fox News host, interrogated Miller on October 24. Cain, the governor of Illinois, “talked about interfering with and arresting ICE agents in Illinois.”

Cain inquired about the federal authority that the Trump administration might use to detain Pritzker if the governor attempted to detain ICE agents.

You are protected by federal immunity in the performance of your duties, Miller said. Anyone who touches you, tries to stop you, or tries to obstruct you is a criminal.

Any local or state official who “could conspire or engage in activity that unlawfully impedes federal law enforcement from carrying out their duties would be covered by Miller’s response.

The Illinois Accountability Commission was established by Pritzker the day before Miller’s comments, establishing an executive order directing local and state agencies to look into potential law violations. More than 3, 000 people have been arrested in Chicago as part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, according to agents there.

In an interview from October 16 on, Pritzker stated that “federal agents typically have federal immunity, but they’re not immune from the federal government holding them accountable and accountable.”

Pritzker noted that the federal government has the authority to prosecute federal agents even though Miller’s is less sweeping.

Immigration agents are protected when performing official duties, just like other law enforcement officials. If they violate state or federal law, they may still be held legally accountable.

In a July 17 report, Bryna Godar, a lawyer for the University of Wisconsin’s State Democracy Research Initiative, wrote that “federal officials are not categorically immune from state criminal prosecution even while on duty.”

The White House referred to a letter written to California officials on October 23 that US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche wrote to PolitiFact when asked for comment.

According to Blanche, “The Department of Justice finds any federal agents and officers’ arrests in the performance of their official duties to be both illegal and futile.”

He cited the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution as well as a number of federal laws and regulations. According to legal experts, the provision provides blanket immunity from federal agents who violate state law.

According to Steve Vladeck, a professor of constitutional law at Georgetown University, Miller’s statement is “wrong on its face.”

Immigration agents who violate the law can be prosecuted by the federal government.

Federal immigration officers cannot commit a criminal offense with impunity.

A US Customs and Border Protection agent was found guilty and sentenced to prison in 2024 for using excessive force against two people at the southern border. The case was investigated by department of homeland security watchdog officers.

In court arguments, the federal government cited its authority to hold agents accountable. In a 2019 Supreme Court brief, the Justice Department stated that the federal government is looking into allegations of excessive force by agents and may pursue a federal criminal prosecution if necessary. A Mexican boy, 15, was shot and killed by a Border Patrol agent at the southern border in 2010.

Non-profit organizations can also bring legal action against the federal government for their actions. The Trump administration is being sued by a number of organizations in Chicago, including journalists’ organizations, alleging that the government is “using a pattern of extreme brutality in a concerted and ongoing effort to silence the press and civilians.”

In that case, federal district judge Sara Ellis instructed immigration agents to refrain from using tear gas and other riot control measures unless there is a clear threat of death. A verbal warning must be given first if the agents intend to use tear gas.

Gregory Bovino, the senior Border Patrol official overseeing the federal immigration actions in Chicago, was ordered by Ellis to meet with her every weeknight to report all encounters officers had with the public after it was discovered that agents weren’t following the court order. Since then, a federal appeals court has temporarily halted Ellis’ order.

According to Vladeck, the federal government has the authority to do so even if the Trump administration doesn’t conduct an investigation or prosecute immigration agents who might have broken the law.

His state’s commission, according to Pritzker, aims to document actions that might lead to future prosecution.

Federal agencies are not prohibited from prosecuting them, according to state&nbsp.

Immigration agents who violate state law can also be prosecuted by the states. However, the US Constitution’s provision that says federal law supersedes conflicting state laws places a cap on supremacy clause immunity.

Federal agents’ legal protections date back to a Supreme Court decision from 1890. A Supreme Court justice was being protected by a US marshal named David Neagle, who shot and killed the justice. Neagle was detained and charged with murder in California. Because Neagle was performing official duties, the state was denied a prosecutorial hearing by the Supreme Court.

Federal agents are typically exempt from state prosecution if their actions were required and “necessary and proper” for the purposes of performing their duties.

A customs agent was exempt from state charges for speeding while operating a drug in 1990, according to a federal court decision. According to the court, the agent acted in accordance with US laws and felt justified in deciding that speeding was necessary to discharge his duties.

However, a US Marine was denied immunity in 1990 after he fatally injured a person driving in a military convoy in North Carolina.

According to Godar, “While Supremacy Clause immunity provides federal officials with a partial shield from state prosecution,” that immunity is not unalienable.

According to Vladeck, it is not illegal for local or state authorities to detain someone who has probable cause to believe committed a state crime, contrary to Miller’s claim.

The court would need to know whether an officer reasonably believed the actions were necessary to carry out federal duties if a state charged federal immigration officers.

That’s a respectable standard, Vladeck wrote. It is not, however, a “get-out-of-prosecution-free card.”

Our decision

You have federal immunity in the performance of your duties, Miller said to all ICE officers.

Immigration agents are protected when performing official duties, just like other law enforcement officers. However, if they violate federal or state law, they are subject to legal action.

Federal lawbreakers are subject to federal law enforcement’s authority and authority.

If agents were acting within the permitted parameters of their official duties, states cannot prosecute them for breaking state law. However, those limitations do not always apply.

Federal immigration agents have some state prosecution immunity, according to the statement. The protections, however, have a different sweeping effect than Miller intended. Federal agents have faced state prosecution and can continue.