Crimea? So last month.
The Obama administration announced Thursday that it will sanction individuals in South Sudan.
The executive order freezes assets under U.S. jurisdiction, blocking Americans from providing financial support to — or receiving it from — sanctioned individuals. It also blocks sanctioned individuals from traveling to the United States.
“The executive order signed by President Obama today sends a clear message: Those who threaten the peace, security, or stability of South Sudan, obstruct the peace process, target U.N. peacekeepers, or are responsible for human rights abuses and atrocities will not have a friend in the United States and run the risk of sanctions,” the White House said in a statement.
Although the executive order doesn’t specify who will be sanctioned, it allows State and Treasury department officials to identify individuals who are responsible for threatening the peace, security, or stability of South Sudan; undermining democratic institutions; spreading conflict; obstructing peace talks; recruiting child soldiers to fight in the country’s conflicts; or engaging in a wide array of violence.
The young country — which separated from Sudan in 2011 — has seen increased violence since South Sudan President Salva Kiir dismissed Riek Machar from his government in July. Kiir said late last year that supporters of Machar attempted a coup. Shortly thereafter the United States ordered all nonemergency personnel out of South Sudan and temporarily closed its embassy.
In a letter to Congress, Obama said that he is “declaring a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by the situation in and in relation to South Sudan,” adding that “the order does not target the country of South Sudan” but specific individuals.
What We're Following See More »
"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."
"Federal regulators on Thursday delayed a vote on a proposal to reshape the television market by freeing consumers from cable box rentals, putting into doubt a plan that has pitted technology companies against cable television providers. ... The proposal will still be considered for a future vote. But Tom Wheeler, chairman of the F.C.C., said commissioners needed more discussions."
"The Supreme Court is taking up a First Amendment clash over the government’s refusal to register offensive trademarks, a case that could affect the Washington Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. The justices agreed Thursday to hear a dispute involving an Asian-American rock band called the Slants, but they did not act on a separate request to hear the higher-profile Redskins case at the same time." Still, any precedent set by the case could have ramifications for the Washington football team.
The Hollywood Reporter takes a look at a little-known intersection of politics and entertainment, in which Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon is still raking in residuals from Seinfeld. Here's the digest version: When Seinfeld was in its infancy, Ted Turner was in the process of acquiring its production company, Castle Rock, but he was under-capitalized. Bannon's fledgling media company put up the remaining funds, and he agreed to "participation rights" instead of a fee. "Seinfeld has reaped more than $3 billion in its post-network afterlife through syndication deals." Meanwhile, Bannon is "still cashing checks from Seinfeld, and observers say he has made nearly 25 times more off the Castle Rock deal than he had anticipated."