"I am very concerned about the weaponization of the Justice Department," Sen. Bill Cassidy (R–La.) told reporters in August, explaining his reservations about voting to confirm Todd Blanche as attorney general. Cassidy specifically cited the attempt to prosecute Cassidy Hutchinson, a White House aide during President Donald Trump's first term, based on her 2022 testimony before the House select committee that investigated the 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol. "I'm told there is a grand jury being empaneled to investigate her," Cassidy said. "Why? Tell me that. Shouldn't every American be afraid of the weaponization of the Justice Department?"

Grand jurors in Washington, D.C., who on Tuesday declined to approve an indictment of Hutchinson, apparently shared the senator's concerns about the case against her. That setback is part of a pattern: Grand juries, which historically have almost never rejected charges proposed by federal prosecutors, have done so repeatedly during the last two years, reflecting the Trump administration's tendency to pursue politically motivated cases based on inadequate evidence.

A grand jury hears only the government's side of a case, and the probable cause standard for approving an indictment, which requires reasonable grounds to believe a crime has been committed and that the person identified by prosecutors committed the crime, is much less demanding than the proof beyond a reasonable doubt required for a conviction. But the Justice Department's manual for prosecutors says they should not pursue criminal charges unless "the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient" to meet the latter test. It is a pretty striking indication that prosecutors are disregarding that injunction when a grand jury determines that they have failed to meet the minimal burden of establishing probable cause.

Hutchinson, who at the time of the Capitol riot was White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows' principal assistant, delivered the testimony at the center of the failed indictment on June 28, 2022. She described Trump as unconcerned about weapons carried by some of the people who attended the speech he delivered the day of the riot, during which he reiterated his false claim that Joe Biden had stolen the 2020 presidential election and urged his supporters to "fight like hell" against congressional ratification of his victory.

Hutchinson said Trump wanted the Secret Service to stop screening rally participants with magnetometers because he was worried it would reduce the size of the crowd. "I don't effing care that they have weapons," Trump said, according to Hutchinson's approximate recollection. "They're not here to hurt me. Take [the] effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in."

Hutchinson also said Trump was irate when the Secret Service told him he could not join the protesters at the Capitol. That much was consistent with the testimony of other witnesses. But Hutchinson added disputed details, saying Deputy Chief of Staff Tony Ornato had told her Trump was so angry that he "lunge[d] towards Bobby Engel," the head of his protective detail, and "reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel." The Secret Service agent who was Trump's driver that day contradicted Hutchinson's account, and Ornato said he had no recollection of any such incident.

Last March, Reps. Barry Loudermilk (R–Ga.) and Jim Jordan (R–Ohio) urged the Justice Department to prosecute Hutchinson for lying to Congress. "Hutchinson's potential prosecution became a point of controversy between lawmakers and employees of the Justice Department," CNN reports. "Some inside the department believed there was not enough evidence to bring a viable criminal case."

You would expect such a case to be handled by Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. But the investigation of Hutchinson was instead conducted by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, which is run by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, another Trump loyalist.

You might wonder what scrutinizing Hutchinson's testimony had to do with "protecting the civil and constitutional rights of all Americans," which is how Dhillon's division describes its mission. Dhillon's involvement is all the more puzzling given that Pirro previously had not hesitated to pursue dubious charges against the president's enemies.

Last February, Pirro sought an indictment of six Democratic members of Congress who appeared in a November 2025 video that reminded U.S. military personnel of their duty to "refuse illegal orders." Trump condemned that message as "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL," saying the lawmakers "should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL." But as a federal judge later noted, the allegedly criminal video was "unquestionably protected" by the First Amendment.

That did not deter Pirro from trying to deliver on her boss's threat. But as in Hutchinson's case, the grand jury apparently was not willing to participate in Trump's vendetta. After it unanimously refused to approve the indictment, Pirro gave up.

That embarrassing experience may have deterred Pirro from getting involved in Hutchinson's case, especially if she thought there was not enough evidence to obtain a conviction. She would have had good reasons for reaching that conclusion.

It is not clear exactly what charges the grand jury rejected this week. But the most obviously relevant statutes are 18 USC 1001, which covers false statements "in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch," and 18 USC 1621, which covers false testimony under oath. Both are felonies punishable by up to five years in prison. But a conviction under Section 1001 requires proving that the defendant "knowingly and willfully" made a "materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement," and the perjury statute applies only when a sworn witness "willfully and contrary to such oath" makes a "material" statement that "he does not believe to be true."

Those elements would have been hard to satisfy in Hutchinson's case. Her testimony about Trump's insouciant attitude toward weapons carried by his supporters was based on what she said she heard him say, an account that pits her word against that of a habitually dishonest politician whose speech that same day was full of misrepresentations. And even if her recollection of Trump's comments was not fully accurate, that does not necessarily mean she intentionally gave false testimony. The same goes for the alleged lunging-and-grabbing incident, an account Hutchinson said was based on a conversation with Ornato that he says he does not recall.

Maybe Hutchinson, who had a lawyer and was surely aware of the potential penalties for lying to Congress, nevertheless fabricated both of those claims. But assuming her testimony was inaccurate, it seems more likely that she misremembered or misconstrued what Trump and Ornato said. In any event, the task of proving the first proposition beyond a reasonable doubt would give pause to any reasonably cautious prosecutor. And the grand jurors, even without the benefit of hearing a rebuttal to the government's case, thought the evidence of deliberate deception was so weak that it fell short of probable cause.

That determination is just the latest in a series of similar rebukes. In addition to the rejection of Pirro's charges against the "Seditious Six," they include the attempt to prosecute New York Attorney General Letitia James for mortgage fraud, which two separate grand juries in two different Virginia cities blocked last December.

Grand jurors also have stood athwart felony prosecutions of protesters in Washington, D.C., including Sean Dunn, the guy who threw a sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection officer, and Sydney Reid, who allegedly interfered with immigration arrests while using her phone to record them. In the latter case, Reason's Joe Lancaster noted, prosecutors unsuccessfully sought a felony assault indictment "not once, not twice, but a staggering three times." Reid was ultimately acquitted of a misdemeanor charge.

In the summer of 2025, federal grand juries approved just seven of 38 proposed felony indictments against protesters in Los Angeles, an amazingly bad track record. A few months later, federal prosecutors dropped assault charges against two Chicago protesters after a grand jury declined to indict them.

"For decades, federal grand juries have almost never said no," Ballard Spahr attorneys Henry E. Hockeimer Jr. and Brad Gershel noted last year. In 2016, for example, grand juries declined to approve federal indictments just 0.004 percent of the time. "That dynamic is now being tested," Hockeimer and Gershel added. "As the DOJ has adopted a more assertive charging posture in politically sensitive cases, grand juries appear to be reasserting their independence."

The post The Failed Indictment of Cassidy Hutchinson Reflects Grand Jury Resistance to Politically Motivated Charges appeared first on Reason Magazine.

French senators have approved legislation that could expose participants in violent demonstrations to compensation claims of up to €10,000, including individuals who did not personally damage property. The proposal has reopened a dispute over public order, collective responsibility and the right to protest.

France’s Senate has approved controversial legislation designed to recover the costs of damage caused during violent demonstrations, extending potential financial liability beyond those who personally committed acts of vandalism.

The bill, adopted in the early hours of 28 October by 229 votes to 105, would allow the authorities to pursue compensation from certain participants in gatherings where destruction or violence occurred.

Its provisions include a potential liability of up to €10,000 per person and mechanisms for recovering compensation through deductions from certain social benefits.

The legislation, widely described in France as the casseurs-payeurs bill, reflects growing political pressure to respond to property destruction accompanying demonstrations and public gatherings.

However, it also raises legal questions about the circumstances in which individuals may be held financially responsible for damage they did not personally cause.

The bill must still be considered by the National Assembly before it can become law.

From individual responsibility to collective liability

Under existing arrangements, the French state can be required to compensate victims for certain damage resulting from gatherings or public disorder.

Authorities may subsequently seek reimbursement from individuals legally responsible for that damage.

The proposed legislation would expand the circumstances in which compensation could be recovered.

According to the French Senate’s official explanation, liability could extend to people who participated in a violent group or remained in a gathering despite police orders to disperse, when they could not reasonably have been unaware that violence or destruction was taking place.

An individual would not necessarily have to be identified as the person who broke a window, damaged a vehicle or destroyed public property.

Instead, participation in a gathering meeting the relevant legal conditions could provide a basis for civil liability.

The distinction is central to the controversy.

The proposed €10,000 ceiling concerns financial compensation rather than a new criminal fine imposed automatically on demonstrators.

Nevertheless, opponents argue that expanding civil responsibility beyond direct perpetrators could undermine the principle that liability should reflect an individual’s own conduct.

A response to repeated unrest

The government introduced the legislation in September against a background of public disorder associated with demonstrations and sporting celebrations.

Violence following Paris Saint-Germain’s Champions League victory in May contributed to demands for stronger mechanisms to recover the costs of destruction.

Subsequent disturbances during demonstrations on 17 October added urgency to the debate.

The Senate’s conservative and centrist majority supported the bill, while left-wing lawmakers opposed important elements of the proposed system.

Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez defended the principle that those involved in destruction should contribute to the cost of repairs.

Supporters maintain that criminal penalties alone do not adequately compensate shopkeepers, residents and public authorities faced with substantial financial losses.

They also argue that taxpayers should not automatically bear the costs of damage attributable to individuals involved in violent gatherings.

The disagreement therefore extends beyond criminal punishment to the distribution of financial responsibility after public disorder.

Social benefits become part of the debate

One of the most disputed provisions concerns the recovery of compensation from people with insufficient resources to pay.

As approved by the Senate, the legislation would permit deductions from certain social benefits, including housing assistance and family allowances.

Senators also extended the proposed mechanism to the revenu de solidarité active, or RSA, the minimum-income benefit available to eligible low-income individuals.

Supporters of the measure argue that financial responsibility should not disappear simply because an individual lacks conventional assets or income.

The proposed arrangements would nevertheless have to leave recipients with a minimum amount for living expenses.

Opposition lawmakers have questioned whether deductions from family-related benefits could impose financial consequences on relatives who had no involvement in the original incident.

This is particularly relevant where parents’ social payments could be affected by damage attributed to their children.

The debate therefore concerns both the enforceability of compensation claims and the possibility that recovery measures could affect entire households.

The constitutional question

France’s legal framework recognises freedom of expression and the right to demonstrate, subject to restrictions established by law.

It also permits the authorities to impose obligations and penalties on individuals involved in unlawful conduct.

The issue raised by the proposed legislation is where the boundary between these principles should be drawn.

A system requiring direct evidence of property destruction presents different legal questions from one imposing liability based on participation in a wider gathering.

The latter arrangement would require careful assessment of the individual’s conduct, awareness of violence and opportunity to leave.

Opponents fear that demonstrators could face substantial financial exposure even without personally committing vandalism.

Supporters respond that the legislation is directed at participation in violent disorder, rather than peaceful protest itself.

Any final legislation could face scrutiny over proportionality, equality before the law and the protection of constitutional freedoms.

An uncertain passage through parliament

The Senate vote represents an important stage, but not the completion of the legislative process.

The National Assembly remains politically divided, making the final form of the proposal uncertain.

Deputies could amend the conditions for civil liability, the compensation ceiling or the provisions concerning social benefits.

The government’s ability to secure sufficient parliamentary support will determine whether the measures survive intact.

The legislation illustrates an increasingly difficult issue in French politics: how to ensure compensation for victims of public disorder without extending legal liability so broadly that participation in demonstrations becomes a substantial financial risk.

The answer will depend on the precise safeguards contained in the final text and how courts would be required to apply them.

An open letter signed by more than 400 lawyers accuses the police of resorting to the disproportionate use of force at housing demonstrations in Porto and Lisbon last weekend.  The

The post More than 400 lawyers challenge PSP actions at housing protests  appeared first on Portugal Resident.

PS Socialists on Lisbon City Council are highly sceptical of the Mayor’s statements that it is costing the city €100,000 to clean graffiti from the iconic statue in Rossio square

The post €100,000 spent on cleaning graffiti from Rossio statue. Really? appeared first on Portugal Resident.

Dozens of injuries and arrests on charges of disobedience were reported.

On Tueday, thousands of people gathered outside Portugal’s parliament in Lisbon to protest a police operation to clear housing rights encampments in the early hours of Sunday.

RELATED:

Portugal Housing Activists Push for Nationwide General Strike

Businesses in the surrounding area closed at the request of municipal authorities, as parliament began debating the 2027 state budget.

The Acampada de Lisboa movement joined the demonstration and called for a popular assembly to be held outside parliament.

Municipal police asked nearby businesses to close for the afternoon, a request that most complied with. Several units of the Public Security Police (PSP), including intervention teams, were deployed to the area, along with emergency medical teams from INEM.

The police operation, carried out in the early hours of Sunday, cleared encampments in both Lisbon and Porto following more than two hours of tension and repeated orders for protesters to vacate the squares. The protesters refused to leave, citing their constitutional right to demonstrate.

Thousands of protesters gathered outside Portugal's parliament in Lisbon demanding affordable housing after police forcefully cleared protest camps, arresting dozens.

Follow: https://t.co/Un53LExogy pic.twitter.com/Bfw4f4st3m

— Highlights (@highlightsnews1) October 28, 2026

Dozens of injuries and arrests on charges of disobedience were reported. Hospitals in Lisbon said they had treated 27 people for injuries, more than double the five cases initially reported by police.

Opening the parliamentary debate on the budget, Prime Minister Luis Montenegro defended the police response, saying the PSP had acted proportionately and had been “particularly careful and competent” in restoring public order.

Montenegro said he wanted to address the issue directly before turning to the details of the budget, as the police operation had come to dominate media coverage.

The debate on the 2027 state budget is scheduled to run through Tuesday and Wednesday. Its passage at the first reading is assured, as the main opposition Socialist Party has pledged to abstain.

teleSUR/ JF

Source: Xinhua

Thousands of demonstrators have gathered outside Portugal’s parliament as rising property prices, disputed eviction legislation and police operations bring the country’s housing problems into direct confrontation with the government.

Thousands of protesters gathered outside Portugal’s parliament in Lisbon on 27 October, demanding action over soaring housing costs and criticising police operations against housing activists, as the country’s long-running property crisis developed into a broader political confrontation.

The demonstration coincided with parliamentary debate on the government’s proposed 2027 budget and followed several days of protests in Lisbon and Porto.

At the centre of the dispute is an increasingly familiar European contradiction: property values continue to rise, while wages and household incomes have failed to keep pace with the cost of obtaining accommodation.

For Portugal, the problem has become particularly pronounced.

House prices have more than doubled since 2017, while rents for newly agreed tenancies have almost doubled over the same period.

According to figures reported during the demonstrations, the cost of housing in Portugal increased by 147 per cent between 2015 and 2025, compared with an EU average of 60.5 per cent.

The result is a growing disparity between earnings and the cost of independent living, particularly among younger adults.

A property market detached from wages

In Lisbon, a one-bedroom flat can routinely command monthly rent of approximately €1,500.

Portugal’s minimum wage stands at €920 per month before tax.

Although these figures do not represent every household or property, they illustrate the scale of the affordability problem for lower-paid workers.

Between the first quarters of 2025 and 2026, Portuguese house prices increased by almost 20 per cent, according to national statistical figures cited in recent reporting.

Rental costs have also continued rising, recording an increase of approximately 68 per cent since 2020.

The country’s attractiveness to foreign investors, retirees and remote workers has contributed to demand, particularly in Lisbon, Porto and coastal areas.

Tourism has introduced additional competition for residential property, with some homes converted into short-term accommodation.

However, investment and tourism are only part of the explanation.

Restrictions on construction, administrative delays, limited affordable housing supply and the geographical concentration of employment have also contributed to pressure on the market.

These conditions have produced a widening gap between those who already own property and those seeking to purchase or rent their first home.

Disputed eviction legislation

The immediate political confrontation concerns government proposals that would accelerate certain eviction procedures and remove restrictions on rents for new tenancy agreements.

The legislation passed its first parliamentary reading, with the right-wing Chega party abstaining.

Housing campaigners argue that removing protections without first increasing affordable supply could leave tenants more exposed to rising rents and displacement.

The minority centre-right government, led by Prime Minister Luís Montenegro, has pursued measures intended to encourage construction and increase the availability of housing.

These include tax reductions for new building projects and a commitment to deliver 145,000 homes.

Such measures, however, require time before additional properties become available, while many households face immediate financial pressures.

Police operations become a second controversy

The housing dispute intensified following police operations to remove protest encampments in Lisbon and Porto during the weekend.

Police used batons during the clearances, while campaigners alleged excessive force.

According to accounts of the subsequent parliamentary demonstration, police reported 11 minor injuries, including three officers. The housing organisation Casa para Viver claimed that 60 people had been injured.

Portugal’s internal affairs watchdog has opened an inquiry, while prosecutors are conducting a separate investigation into officers’ conduct.

Montenegro defended the police response in parliament, arguing that officers had acted according to the principles of necessity, proportionality and adequacy.

President António José Seguro has convened a meeting of the Council of State to consider the growing protests.

The dispute has consequently expanded beyond housing economics to include questions about policing, public demonstrations and political accountability.

A European problem with national consequences

Portugal’s demonstrations follow similar protests in Spain and growing political scrutiny of housing affordability elsewhere in the EU.

The European Commission has begun addressing the issue through initiatives intended to encourage construction, facilitate investment and give authorities greater legal certainty over short-term rental restrictions.

As EU Today recently reported, the proposed European Affordable Housing Act would provide additional regulatory tools for areas facing severe housing pressure.

Yet the principal responsibilities for housing supply, planning and tenancy law remain with national and local governments.

This division creates a political challenge: Brussels can support investment and coordinate legislation, but the most immediate decisions affecting rents, construction and evictions are taken elsewhere.

For Portugal, the next test will be whether the government’s housing measures can deliver sufficient additional supply while responding to demands for immediate tenant protection.

The demonstrations outside parliament show that housing affordability has become more than a question of property prices. It now affects the government’s legislative agenda, the 2027 budget debate and the relationship between the authorities and an increasingly organised protest movement.

France is gearing up for another round of anti-austerity mobilizations on Saturday, October 31. As the weekend approaches, President Emmanuel Macron and Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu have still not substantially addressed the protest demands tabled by the student movement. 

For the past weeks, students and their organizations have taken to the streets in the hundreds of thousands, denouncing the state of the education sector, including overcrowded classrooms, overworked teachers, and dilapidated buildings. Authorities have responded with a full-blown crackdown – police violence, curfews, and protest bans – while avoiding meaningful conversation about the protests’ causes.

“The authorities’ top priority is to strip the movement of the political meaning it carries: the condemnation of the neoliberal policy that has ruined the French education system,” presidential candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon pointed out in a recent interview. “Young people are pulling at the thread of a larger unraveling.”

Government tried to break student unity

Lecornu and his ministers called a meeting with high school and university student groups on Monday, announcing the government was ready to open dialogue on their demands. Yet even before the meetings kicked off, a list of government-proposed measures published by the media only fueled frustration. 

These measures included a transparency-oriented reform of the higher education recruitment platform Parcoursup, the creation of 15,000 additional higher education placements, low-interest loans to regional authorities for renovating school infrastructure, and the indexation of grants to inflation.

Read more: Students in France are fighting for stronger public education

Students criticized the officials for attempting to set a negotiation agenda before even speaking to them. They also called them out for trying to break their unity by organizing separate meetings with different groups instead of a joint discussion. In this process, they emphasized, crucial voices were left out. 

Among others, the Fédération Lycéenne des Quartiers (FLQ), representing high school students from working-class neighborhoods – the demographic group from which the protest wave originated – was not invited to meet Lecornu. Students interpreted this as yet another sign of the government’s failure to grasp what is at stake. “They see us first and foremost as ‘young people from the banlieues,’ rather than young people who, like everyone else, want to make their voices heard,” FLQ’s Soumaya Sarré told Mediapart. 

“Crumbs” instead of solutions

The way meetings were set up was not the only problem. Following the publication of the government’s proposals, the university students’ association Union Étudiante described them as “crumbs” and detailed how they fail to address the movement’s concerns. 

“There are not 15,000 places missing but at least 250,000,” the organization warned. “Where are those 250,000 places needed for young people who have been denied their right to education because of classist and racist selection?” 

Union Étudiante similarly criticized the lack of clarity surrounding proposed financing for infrastructure investment, employment plans, and the promise to “reform” rather than abolish Parcoursup. 

This last demand has become emblematic for the student movement over the past weeks of protest. Young people on the streets have repeatedly explained how the tool allows university selection to maintain racist and classist tones – all while pushing tens of thousands of students without placements toward the private sector. 

“We are not asking for a reform that offers more transparency or clarity; we already know how the selection process works, and it will remain unjust even if the selection criteria are made public,” Union Étudiante wrote. “The problem is selection itself. Why should young people be denied the right to pursue higher education? We must abolish all forms of selection while keeping a centralized platform for enrolling in academic programs.” 

Mobilizations against racism and the far right

Trade unions and progressive organizations continue to support the students ahead of Saturday’s demonstrations, while building toward a general strike on November 5. The networks remain connected over shared austerity-related problems, linking budget cuts in public services, attacks on pensions, and precarious working conditions. 

In between regular nationwide mobilizations, the past few days have also seen significant protests against racism and the far right. After a racist attack in the Trappes working-class suburb of Paris last Friday – where one person was killed and five, including a 12-year-old, were seriously injured – calls are circulating for solidarity assemblies. 

“This crime did not come out of nowhere,” wrote Saint-Denis mayor Bally Bagayoko. “For years, the perpetrator blamed ‘Black people and Arabs’ for all his misfortunes.”

“He claimed he wanted to avenge a looting that never actually happened – a piece of false information broadcast on television,” he added.

“This hatred has its architects: those who, hour after hour on the airwaves, designate our neighborhoods as the problem and ‘the other’ as a threat.”

Read more: Students across the US South demand justice for Nolan Wells

The far-right National Rally – whose program ahead of the 2027 presidential election endorses exactly this vision of “the other” – held its congress in Orléans over the October 24-25 weekend. Approximately 26,000 people joined a local march against the policies endorsed by the party, signaling continuous resistance in the lead-up to the April 2027 presidential election.

Serbia’s longtime leader, President Aleksandar Vucic, conceded defeat Sunday to the student-led opposition in an election that sent shock waves throughout Europe and the Western Balkans.

"We do not have the final results yet, and many people will be surprised. Based on a stratified sample, it is clear that we have lost these elections. The student-led protest list has won," Vucic said in an address to the nation Sunday night.

The Student List victory brings an end to 14 years of Vucic and his Serbian Progressive Party rule, in what many are saying is the biggest political shake-up in the Balkans since the toppling of Yugoslav dictator Slobodan Milosevic in 2000. 

Observers say the Student List party's policies remain vague, which has some worried about Serbia's future.

Ana Brnabic, vice president of the main Board of the Serbian Progressive Party, told Fox News Digital that, "The election victory of the Student List recalls similar electoral triumphs in other countries. The Student List represents a classical anti-establishment movement: it had neither a program nor a coherent political ideology. In an essentially anarchic fashion, it opposed everything, claiming to fight for justice and against corruption."

ANTI‑CORRUPTION PROTESTS HIT EUROPEAN NATION AS CALLS FOR NEW ELECTIONS GROW

She added, "After 14 years of Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) rule, people may have wanted change. That is understandable and logical. But the grim consequences of this movement in power will soon become apparent."

Turnout reached 69 %, the highest this century, with more than 4.4 million people casting their ballots, according to Rasa Nedeljkov, head of the CRTA Election Observation Mission.

"This is by all means a historic victory and indeed a surprise to many. While it was clear from the beginning that the students will have an impressive result, very few expected a landslide," Helena Ivanov, associate fellow at the Henry Jackson Society, told Fox News Digital.

The Election Observation Mission reported that the Student List won 52.45 % of the vote and is projected to hold 138 of 250 seats in the National Assembly, an absolute majority, allowing it to form a government on its own.

Vucic won 39.2 % and is projected to hold 103 seats.

Supporters celebrated throughout Belgrade and across Serbia as it became clear the Student List won by a larger margin that caught many experts and observers by surprise.

Many claimed they were concerned about the possibility of violence escalating as polls began to close. Almost two hours after polling stations closed, Vucic addressed the nation, confirming his defeat and announcing the peaceful transfer of power.

FRANCE ROCKED BY STUDENT RIOTS AS HUNDREDS ARRESTED, VIOLENCE SPREADS NATIONWIDE

"The path to an electoral victory with such a decisive margin will undoubtedly earn its own chapter in the handbooks on how to topple an autocrat. Two years of unprecedented grassroots mobilization, creative organization and impeccable campaigning kept the student list two steps ahead of the regime. Vučić was left playing catch-up, and all his attempts to co-opt, demoralize and fragment the movement failed," Sinisa Vukovic, director of the Global Policy Program at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, told Fox News Digital.

The CRTA Election Observation Mission reported that the campaign was marked by the abuse of state resources, pressure on candidates and voters, attempts to bring the media under total government control, and attacks on independent election observers.

Tens of thousands of Serbians volunteered to run and monitor polling stations across the country, and the vote was mostly peaceful.

SERBIA, CAUGHT BETWEEN EUROPE AND RUSSIA, COULD MOVE ONE STEP CLOSER TO NORMALIZING RELATIONS WITH KOSOVO

Student led protests marched in the streets for two years after the deaths of 16 people following the collapse of a railway station in the town of Novi Sad in November 2024. People had taken to the streets, demanding justice for those killed and accountability for anyone responsible for the disaster.

The momentum of nearly two years of street demonstrations culminated in a nationwide movement ready for change. The political novices were able to rally the nation behind a simple message against corruption and state capture.

Serbs across the country embraced the Student List, who are viewed as fresh faces in politics and are not tied to Serbia’s traditional political opposition, which is perceived as ineffective and corrupt by a lot of the voters.

EXCLUSIVE: SERBIAN PRESIDENT VUČIĆ SAYS SUPPORT FOR US 'SURGED' UNDER TRUMP, INVITES HIM TO VISIT BELGRADE

Milos Jevtic, a 48-year-old professor with the Faculty of Organizational Sciences at the University of Belgrade, was among the many Student List candidates who won a seat in parliament.

Jevtic told Fox News Digital that their victory came from the values that the students have stood for from the very beginning: expertise, professionalism, responsibility, solidarity and unity.

"What is particularly important is that the students have never compromised on these values and principles. Of course, widespread public dissatisfaction also played a major role, along with a lack of trust in both the current regime and the opposition parties," Jevtic explained.

Jevtic said he believes the priorities for the new Student List-run government should be economic stability, fighting corruption, establishing the rule of law and strengthening institutions, much of what carried the student-led protests since 2024.

"The ultimate goal is to build a system in which institutions function in the interests of all citizens," Jevtic said.

On foreign policy, there is an expectation that there will be a certain degree of continuity with the Vucic administration in international relations, including maintaining good relations with neighboring European countries and all major international partners.

But Brnabic warned that "Serbia has lost meaningful political pluralism. After 35 years of a multiparty system, the country is effectively left with one established political party, SNS, while the rest of the political scene is dominated by largely unknown movements without a clear ideology. This is catastrophic for any parliamentary democracy."

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

She added, "Secondly, nobody in Serbia knows where the country is heading. Are we firmly pro-EU? Will we maintain our ties with Russia? What about China? Will we continue to enhance our relations with the United States — which was a priority of Aleksandar Vucic? Will economic policy be more left-liberal or conservative? Are we heading towards a woke liberal society, or will we preserve our traditional Orthodox Christian values? There are no clear answers to any of these questions."

She concluded by noting, "We have also called for Parliament and all state institutions to be constituted as soon as possible, so that the country has functioning institutions on which people can rely. We will be a strong but constructive opposition. We call on the Student List’s representatives to end the intimidation and assume the responsibility entrusted to them by the voters." 

With the PM having broken his silence to praise police actions, Portugal’s PSP (Public Security Police) force has today published a video showing incidents of violence directed towards them during

The post PSP publish video showing violence directed against them during housing protests appeared first on Portugal Resident.

Prime minister Luís Montenegro has finally broken his silence of recent days – but it is unlikely that opposition parties heard what they were hoping for. The leader of the

The post PM praises police actions during housing protests, saying PSP acted with proportionality appeared first on Portugal Resident.

Portugal’s political parties in opposition have reacted quickly to the words today from the president about Sunday’s ‘baton charge’ by police on demonstrators in Lisbon – and none of them

The post Left-wing parties accuse president of being vague on housing protests appeared first on Portugal Resident.

After several days of silence and growing pressure from the opposition, the President of the Republic finally spoke out today about police interventions during the housing protests.  António José Seguro

The post President Seguro breaks silence over police reaction to housing protests appeared first on Portugal Resident.

Police officers are preparing a demonstration for Thursday, in Lisbon, to demand better working conditions and pay – and ironically, the housing crisis is intrinsically involved: unions warn that the

The post Police take to streets for better pay and working conditions  appeared first on Portugal Resident.

Marine Le Pen could scarcely have chosen a more favourable backdrop for her presidential campaign. A weakened president approaches the exit, demonstrations expose deep public frustration, and scenes of disorder reinforce her central argument: France’s governing establishment has lost control. The cards are all falling in her favour. Whether she can play them successfully remains the question.

Launching her campaign in Orléans, Le Pen promised national renewal and tougher policing. Reuters reported a poll placing her at 32–33.5 per cent, against 17 per cent for Jean-Luc Mélenchon. Those numbers are a snapshot, but they suggest something politically consequential: the candidate once treated as an outsider now occupies the strongest starting position.

Emmanuel Macron, meanwhile, increasingly resembles a lame-duck president. Constitutionally unable to seek another consecutive term, he faces a succession contest in which his endorsement may carry limited weight. His admission of failures in anticipating the unrest compounds the damage. A presidency built around authority and personal command is approaching its conclusion with both visibly diminished.

For Le Pen, the advantage is obvious. Every confrontation between police and rioters supplies another opportunity to ask whether the government can perform its most basic duty: protecting the public. Citizens do not need to endorse her entire programme to find that question persuasive. They need only conclude that those already governing have exhausted their answers.

Yet the origins of the demonstrations matter. The Associated Press describes a movement rooted in education funding, rising living costs and inequality. Peaceful protesters cannot reasonably be bundled together with looters. Nor does the reporting establish that these disturbances are an expression of Islamism or Muslim demographic change. Misdiagnosing the crisis would weaken any serious argument for restoring order.

The broader integration debate nevertheless deserves frank treatment. A republic cannot function confidently if its citizens believe that common laws, civic obligations or freedom of expression are negotiable. Governments should confront Islamist intimidation, religious coercion and deliberate separatism wherever evidence establishes them. They should also expect newcomers to learn the language, respect constitutional principles and participate in national life.

Those expectations are legitimate. Treating an entire Muslim population as inherently unintegrated is not. Religious identity alone establishes neither hostility to France nor unwillingness to belong. The useful political distinction is between citizens who uphold democratic rules and individuals or organisations that seek to undermine them. That standard should apply consistently, whatever the religion or ideology involved.

Across Europe, political leaders would be wise to recognise the electoral danger of appearing evasive about integration. Voters seeking enforceable rules should receive practical answers: effective language teaching, access to employment, credible policing and action against extremist networks. When mainstream parties substitute moral lectures for measurable results, they leave an opening for opponents promising clarity and control.

Le Pen’s opportunity is to connect these concerns with a wider sense of abandonment. Disorder, strained services and anxiety about belonging can become parts of one political story: the state demands obedience and taxation but delivers too little security or reassurance. Her opponents will struggle if their response consists principally of explaining why voters should fear her.

But favourable circumstances do not eliminate her weaknesses. Her conviction over European Parliament funds, which she is appealing, sits awkwardly beside a campaign demanding accountability and respect for law. Her promises of spending restraint, lower business taxes and resistance to further retirement-age increases also invite scrutiny. Winning confidence requires explaining how competing commitments can be reconciled.

The challenge for her rivals is therefore substantive. They must demonstrate that public order and legitimate protest can coexist, that integration involves shared duties, and that economic grievances deserve workable remedies. Simply rebuilding an electoral barricade against Le Pen may prove insufficient if voters associate its defenders with the failures that brought France here.

For now, momentum belongs to her. Macron looks depleted; the streets convey insecurity; the establishment struggles to offer a convincing successor or a persuasive account of renewal. None of this guarantees a Le Pen presidency. It does mean that her opponents can no longer rely on her reputation to defeat her. They must recover the public’s confidence in their own capacity to govern. Otherwise, France’s crisis may become her decisive electoral advantage.

Le Pen Sets Out €140bn Spending-Cut Plan as French Debt Dominates 2027 Race

This week, editors Peter Suderman, Nick Gillespie, and Matt Welch are joined by Associate Editor Liz Wolfe to discuss California's proposed 5 percent wealth tax on billionaires, which a Hoover Institution study suggests could ultimately cost the state $39 billion in lost revenue. With wealthy residents already leaving California, the panel examines whether the measure will survive next week's vote, why Gov. Gavin Newsom opposes it, and how public sector unions have helped fuel the state's spending problems.

The panelists then look to France, where mounting unrest and economic stagnation raise questions about the long-term consequences of high taxes, expansive welfare programs, and pension obligations that increasingly burden younger generations. Next, they discuss Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado returning home after 10 months in exile. Then, with the midterm elections next week, the editors examine whether Trump's tariffs, war with Iran, and mounting allegations of corruption will deliver Democrats control of Congress. Finally, a listener asks whether today's democratic socialist movement will ultimately be remembered like the libertarian and Tea Party movements of the early 2010s.

 

0:00—California's wealth tax proposal

13:02—Will France protests influence America?

22:50—Corina Machado returns to Venezuela.

31:19—Listener question on the DSA

44:40—2026 Midterm elections preview

58:34—Weekly cultural recommendations

 

Upcoming Reason Events

Reason Versus - Authoritarianism Is a Right-Wing Problem, November 10

 

Mentioned in the Podcast:

"Will the Wealth Tax Fail?" by Liz Wolfe
"France Is a Warning to California's Tax-the-Rich Crowd," by Veronique de Rugy
"California's 'Wealth Tax' Could Cost the State $39 Billion," by Eric Boehm
"Report: California's Proposed 'Billionaire Tax' Is Based on Bad Research," by J.D. Tuccille
"A Wealth Tax Built on Billionaires Who Aren't Really Billionaires," by Veronique de Rugy
"New Book Says Jared Kushner Funneled Money to Middle East Mercenaries. Kushner Denies It." by Matthew Petti
"Trump's Tariffs Are Politically Toxic," by Eric Boehm
"The Democrats' Socialist Moment," by Matt Welch
"Family Separation Drama Fjord Is a Haunting Depiction of Unchecked State Power," by Peter Suderman

The post California's Wealth Tax Could Cost the State $39 Billion appeared first on Reason Magazine.

💾

© Illustration: Fatima Ruiz

On October 25, an election list formed after two years of student-led protests in Serbia toppled Aleksandar Vučić and the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS). The announcement was met with street celebrations that continued throughout the night, recognizing the outcome as a chance to break with 12 years of the former president’s anti-people policies. 

Election turnout surged to almost 70% of registered voters. The Student List secured roughly 53% of the vote and the SNS came in second with close to 39%. The two options are set to be the only forces in parliament except for minority representatives.

“These results have shown that a genuinely homegrown – even if heterogeneous – movement can articulate social discontent with SNS rule, provided it makes a decisive break with the baggage of the pro-Western opposition,” the Party of the Radical Left (PRL) wrote in a reaction on Monday.

The Students List ran on a platform titled “Serbia or the Mafia,” consisting of anti-corruption promises and plans to tackle the political establishment’s capture of the media sector. It also included a call for more transparency in public procurement and recruitment in the public sector. The platform promised to limit import monopolies, lower drug prices, and make healthcare more accessible.

From the Novi Sad canopy collapse to the ballots

Sunday’s results were made possible by months of demonstrations and public assemblies triggered by the canopy collapse in Novi Sad in November 2024. Sixteen people died in the event. In the aftermath, students across the country threw their energy into a campaign demanding accountability for the tragedy. 

From the beginning, protesters insisted the Novi Sad disaster was a consequence of the SNS’s way of doing politics, marked by widespread corruption, nepotism, and disregard for the public interest. During his tenure as prime minister and president, Vučić attempted to cast himself as a supporter of multilateralism and a political figure critical of the West, yet his actions exposed this as a more rhetorical than anything else.

These actions included supporting extractive deals with British-Australian mining company Rio Tinto – which the European Union included on its strategic projects list despite risks posed to communities in Jadar and mass mobilizations against the project – as well as the launch of a drone factory in cooperation with Israeli arms producer Elbit Systems. In fact, despite the former SNS leader’s efforts to present him as neutral, Serbia’s involvement in arms trade to Israel has been such to warrant notes of particular concern by UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese.

Locally, Vučić’s rule was marked by violent crackdowns on activists and campaigns, from the most recent student campaigns to Palestine solidarity. There was no substantial reaction to these reports from other European countries or the EU.

On the other hand, while very heterogeneous in character, the student movement aligned itself clearly against the Gaza genocide. Some local groups made solidarity with Palestine a central issue in their mobilizations. They also mobilized against projects associated to US interests, including the redevelopment of the former General Staff complex – a Belgrade landmark damaged in the 1999 NATO bombardment of the city – into a luxury hotel by Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of US President Donald Trump. This project was also brokered while the SNS was in power.

Progressives within Student List face difficult task ahead

The student campaign grew in significance through decentralized plenums and consultations across the country. This approach was not abandoned even during the formation of election lists – leading to a roster of new candidates, previously largely unknown to the public. University staff and other education workers who had supported the mobilization from the early days figured prominently on this list.

The success of the Student List represents an extraordinary achievement, especially considering the movement faced obstructions at every turn. These included police violence and institutional intimidation over the past two years, as well as schedule provisions that jeopardized voting rights in the diaspora. 

“The progressive elements within the Student List and the movement now face a difficult task: to resist the forces of the establishment within their own ranks,” the PRL emphasized after the election.

Earlier on, the party and other progressive voices expressed “critical support” for the Student List, recognizing the elements of social justice incorporated in its platform – but also noting aspects belonging to a technocratic vision of governance. 

Read more: Albania’s protests show no signs of backing down

“When it comes to the published program, the measures set out in the ‘Serbia or the Mafia‘ plan are not enough to eradicate the structural injustice that has taken root in Serbia over thirty years of privatization, ‘structural adjustment’ to the Euro-Atlantic regime, and the weakening of public institutions – and their systematic incapacitation from carrying out their mandated functions and protecting the public interest against the arbitrary power of capital,” the PRL stated in September.

Despite such reservations, the hope embedded in the movement surrounding the Student List is clear. The PRL observed: “Beyond the mass politicization of students and the raising of awareness on many key social issues – and despite pressure from ‘opposition’ politicians who would rather keep all these topics quiet […] we consider the following to be progressive developments: the construction of a directly democratic movement that antagonizes both the government and the parliamentary opposition in practice […] open communication and cooperation with trade unions, which gave rise to the first mass protest-based May Day commemoration in many years […] and cooperation with informal labor and professional collectives, which gave rise to a new organization – the Social Front.”

Student representatives dismissed the measures as insufficient and confirmed further protests and blockades.

On Monday morning, French Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu met with some students to brief them on measures he will announce during an afternoon meeting with high school student associations. The meeting, however, turned into a political setback for the administration of President Emmanuel Macron.

RELATED:

Police Violence Escalates During Mass Protests in France

Student representatives said Lecornu was attempting to divide the protest movement by holding a meeting attended by people who lacked legitimacy and did not represent the movement.

The prime minister announced a reform of the university admissions system, with partial implementation in 2027 and more far-reaching changes in 2028. However, implementation of the proposal will depend on the government that emerges from the April-May presidential election.

Lecornu pledged to create 15,000 places in higher education, establish a 1-billion-euro investment plan to renovate high schools, and provide 4 billion euros in loans.

🔴️️ À Bordeaux, des manifestants lèvent les mains pour montrer leur caractère inoffensif, la police les charge et les gaze sauvagement

Partout en France, le mouvement populaire s'est amplifié. Les mêmes foules massives ont défilé pour exiger le blocage des prix, l'abrogation… pic.twitter.com/C9Cvuy2MB5

— L'insoumission (@L_insoumission) October 24, 2026

The text reads, “In Bordeaux, protesters raise their hands to show they pose no threat; the police charge at them and brutally gas them. Across France, the grassroots movement has gained further momentum. Massive crowds have taken to the streets to demand a price freeze, the repeal of the Parcoursup system, wage increases, and the inclusion in the budget of the 10 billion euros requested by high school and university students to address their demands.”

These measures come against the backdrop of a government seeking to gradually reduce the maximum number of students in high school classrooms to 28 and implement an emergency plan that will affect students in the country’s most disadvantaged areas.

Student representatives who questioned the legitimacy of the morning meeting stressed that their demands were more ambitious and dismissed the announcements made in advance as “crumbs.”

They are calling for the repeal of the current university admissions system, which they describe as opaque, and the creation of 250,000 places in higher education. “Our demand is clear: We want 10 billion euros and 10 measures that we have been calling for in various ministerial meetings,” they also emphasized.

Student representatives confirmed plans for protests on Oct. 31. Later, on Nov. 2, when classes resume after the school holidays, students will continue their high school blockades. On Nov. 5, student organizations will also join the general strike called by France’s main labor unions.

🔴 🗣 "10 milliards, 10 mesures, ni plus ni moins", clame Sabrine Kharbach, porte-parole de l'Union Étudiante. Les représentants de lycéens et étudiants s'expriment lors d'une conférence de presse en amont d'une réunion à Matignon #canal16 pic.twitter.com/nmkMNERhZ3

— franceinfo (@franceinfo) October 26, 2026

The text reads, “’10 billion, 10 measures—no more, no less,’ declares Sabrine Kharbach, spokesperson for the Student Union. Representatives of high school and university students speak during a press conference held ahead of a meeting at Matignon.”

What French Students Are Demanding

In recent weeks, the High School Union (USL), the Student Solidarity collective, the National Union of Students of France (UNEF) and the Federation of General Student Associations (FAGE) have been the most determined groups in organizing mobilizations across France. They are demanding that the Macron administration implement the following 10 emergency measures:

1. An Emergency Plan to Renovate Schools and Universities

Launch an emergency plan to renovate dilapidated and unsanitary school and university buildings. Adapt educational institutions to the effects of climate change by installing air conditioning and cooling systems to cope with heat waves, as well as appropriate insulation and heating systems to withstand cold spells.

Ensure that every institution has the human and material resources necessary to maintain its facilities and provide clean, functional restrooms.

2. Mass Hiring of Education, Health, Support and Guidance Staff

Launch a large-scale recruitment plan for National Education personnel to guarantee, at a minimum, the following staffing levels at every institution: One nurse for every 500 students. One psychologist for every 500 students. One guidance counselor for every 500 students.

Create additional teaching positions rather than relying on contract workers, so that every class has a teacher and inequalities between institutions are eliminated. Also establish a formal employment status for support staff for students with disabilities (AESH) and create 800 additional positions.

3. Rethink School and University Schedules

Undertake a comprehensive overhaul of school schedules, building on the work of the Citizens’ Convention on Children’s Schedules for the National Education system, and launch a similar process for higher education to better respect students’ needs and well-being.

In particular, guarantee a lunch break of at least 1 1/2 hours so that every student can eat under appropriate conditions. Reverse the reforms of the baccalaureate and high school system.

4. End Selection Through Parcoursup and Mon Master. Create 250,000 Higher Education Places.

Eliminate selection through the Parcoursup and Mon Master platforms and create 250,000 additional places in higher education starting with the next academic year. This would allow high school students to access programs in their chosen fields without being subject to algorithmic selection and enable all students who wish to do so to continue their studies at the master’s level.

Retain centralized national application platforms to make available programs easier to identify, but eliminate selection. A high school diploma must guarantee access to a bachelor’s degree program, and a bachelor’s degree must guarantee access to a master’s program.

5. Overhaul High School Student Democracy to Ensure Genuine Participation in Decision-Making

Introduce list-based elections for the High School Student Council (CVL) and the Academic High School Student Council (CAVL) to ensure union representation, with representatives elected directly by all high school students in the relevant area. Increase the number of high school student seats on school boards. All high school students must be able to vote in CSE elections.

6. Increase Scholarships and Reinstate and Raise Housing Assistance for Everyone

Increase student scholarships by 200 euros per month, distribute them over 12 months and allow an additional 300,000 students to qualify for the scholarship system. Ultimately, establish a student autonomy income of 1,337 euros per month to guarantee every student the material resources necessary to pursue their studies. Abandon budgetary measures that reduce housing assistance for young people. Reinstate housing assistance (APL) for international students. Increase APL benefits and abandon changes to the calculation method that would deprive 147,000 students of this assistance.

7. Guarantee Effective Access to 1-Euro Meals for All Students

Guarantee effective access to 1-euro meals for students and provide the university services network with the resources necessary to meet demand.

8. Repeal the Welcome to France Plan, Which Introduces Differential Tuition Fees for International Students, and Eliminate the CVEC

Abolish the Welcome to France plan and its differential tuition fees for non-European students, which introduce a national-preference policy and a racist approach to higher education. Eliminate the Student and Campus Life Contribution (CVEC).

9. Freeze CROUS Rents, Make Rent Controls Permanent, and Massively Renovate and Build CROUS Housing

Reinstate the freeze on CROUS rents based on the rents frozen before 2023. Renovate unsanitary CROUS residences. Begin construction of 15,000 CROUS housing units starting in 2027. As an emergency measure, 10% of students must be able to obtain accommodation through CROUS.

10. End Repression and Police Violence Against the High School and Student Movement

End all forms of repression related to the high school and student movement. Ensure that law enforcement officers responsible for violence are prosecuted. Guarantee that absences related to mobilization are neither counted nor penalized.

More broadly, abandon all forms of repression in educational institutions and guarantee young people freedom of expression and freedom to organize, in direct contrast to the repression carried out in the struggle against the genocide in Palestine.

teleSUR/ JF

Source: EFE – Union Etudiante

As the Left unites with Islamists to march against Israel, what it forgets is that Zionism was always a progressive movement – and the Irish forget that they originally identified with the Jews, says Andres Roth.

The post The Left Forgets That Zionism is a Progressive Movement appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

Portugal’s Attorney General has called on parliament today to review the 1974 legislation governing the right to demonstrate, declining to refer the law to the Constitutional Court (TC) for review.

The post Attorney General challenges parliament to change law on demonstrations appeared first on Portugal Resident.

The president of Portugal’s Bar Association believes an inquiry must be carried out into the security forces’ actions at the protest camps in Lisbon and Porto on Sunday, as the

The post Bar association demands inquiry into police actions at housing protest appeared first on Portugal Resident.