google-site-verification: google6508e39c6ec03602.html The news

google-site-verification: google6508e39c6ec03602.html

Friday 19 May 2023

Supreme Court punts in Title 42 immigration fight


The Supreme Court on Thursday passed up a chance to weigh in on the Biden administration’s decision to declare an end to the coronavirus public health emergency and allow strict pandemic-related limits on asylum-seekers to expire.

A coalition of conservative states sought to enter long-running litigation over the policy known as Title 42, after the Biden administration was ordered to end the immigration restrictions last year and agreed to a wind-down period to do so.

Last December, the justices voted 5-4 to temporarily block a lower court judge’s order requiring an end to the immigration restrictions. The Supreme Court also added the dispute to its docket to be argued earlier this year.

However, after the Biden administration announced plans to unilaterally terminate the public health emergency earlier this month, the justices removed the case from their argument calendar. Last week, the administration formally ended the emergency and the related immigration controls.



On Thursday, the justices effectively declared the legal dispute moot and wiped out an order from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denying the red states’ effort to wade into the long-running legal case brought by lawyers representing asylum-seekers.

Despite their move deep-sixing the Title 42 fight, the justices could soon be confronted by legal issues arising from the Biden administration’s attempt to replace the pandemic-related rules with other policies designed to discourage asylum-seekers from simply showing up at border stations or crossing without being checked by immigration officers.

Acting at the request of the state of Florida, a federal judge in Pensacola has blocked two of the administration’s plans to release some immigrants after processing at the border. The Justice Department has appealed both those decisions and has said it plans to seek emergency relief, raising the possibility the matter could be in front of the Supreme Court within days.


Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, an appointee of President Joe Biden, dissented from the court’s action Thursday. She said would have simply had the Supreme Court drop the matter without directing the appeals court to do anything.

Justice Neil Gorsuch endorsed the high court’s action but authored an eight-page opinion arguing that it was a mistake to use the pandemic-related measure to control a long-standing problem with irregular immigration on the southern border.

“The Court took a serious misstep when it effectively allowed nonparties to this case to manipulate our docket to prolong an emergency decree designed for one crisis in order to address an entirely different one,” Gorsuch wrote. “Today’s dismissal goes some way to correcting that error.”

Gorsuch, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, also used the opportunity to lament what he described as overreach by government officials who seized on the pandemic to wield power they would otherwise have never tried to assert.

“Courts bound to protect our liberties addressed a few — but hardly all — of the intrusions upon them,” Gorsuch wrote. “In some cases, like this one, courts even allowed themselves to be used to perpetuate emergency public-health decrees for collateral purposes, itself a form of emergency-lawmaking-by-litigation. … Rule by indefinite emergency edict risks leaving all of us with a shell of a democracy and civil liberties just as hollow.”



from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/LR0bQ4i
via IFTTT

‘Single biggest threat’: Warren, Tester warn against bank consolidation


Senate Democrats on Thursday warned regulators against allowing big banks to grow even bigger, saying the trend was posing a threat to the financial system.

New regulations to police the industry could backfire by undermining smaller lenders, Sen. Jon Tester of Montana cautioned, pointing to rules developed in the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis.

“In 2008…we railed on regulators, we railed and railed and railed, because they didn’t do their job, and you know what they ended up doing? They ended up regulating the hell out of the banking industry to the point where we made the bigger banks bigger,” Tester said during an oversight hearing the Senate Banking Committee held with top regulators.

“Regulations need to fit the risk,” Tester said. “My concern is that these community banks that don’t have a risky portfolio will end up paying the price.”

Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michael Barr has said he's looking at toughening rules for larger regional banks.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) noted that the nation’s largest bank, JPMorgan Chase, has already gotten bigger as a result of the recent banking crisis after regulators approved a deal this month to let the megabank purchase First Republic Bank’s assets.

Warren scolded Acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael Hsu for permitting the deal.

“Your job, by law, is to determine risk to the system from making big banks even bigger,” she said. “Did you just ignore the fact that a failure at JPMorgan would blow a hole in our banking system…and let them grow by $200 billion?”

Hsu said he had to “take into account a range of factors” other than size when evaluating the deal.

Other potential buyers would have presented less of a threat, Warren said.

“The single biggest threat to the U.S. banking system is concentration,” Warren added. “You chose the one that gives us more concentration in the system. I am very troubled by that decision.”



from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/klqhYzU
via IFTTT

New Mexico governor warns of debt ceiling peril for states


New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham warned Thursday that debt ceiling negotiations could have a “chilling effect” on states’ economic growth and climate change efforts.

But she said she also takes it as a “compliment” that Republicans in Congress are mounting such an effort to undo the clean-energy investments that the Biden administration and her state are trying to make.

“When someone's trying to take the wind out of your sails because you are moving that sail up and clipping along the ocean, you've done something right,” the Democratic governor said at POLITICO’s Energy Summit in D.C.

For now, though, Lujan Grisham said the threat of fiscal chaos in Washington is a problem for the effort to stand up a clean energy economy.

“You have to have predictability with all of your partners, stakeholders, advocates, businesses,” she said. “You can’t move the needle on any event where the full state and credit and consistency of the United States is on the line.”

The governor blamed “narrow-mindedness” in Congress for making life worse for families and imperiling climate change investments.

“These are separate issues,” she said of policy priorities that Republicans are trying to push in exchange for lifting the debt ceiling. “To try to hold hostage or call it a negotiation is really nothing more than not moving on the appropriations work that Congress is elected to do on behalf of the American people.”

On an issue closer to home, Lujan Grisham defended her recent line item vetoes of several climate items in New Mexico’s budget package, including tax credits for electric vehicles, geothermal and energy storage and rebates for heat pumps.

“These were important, but way too small,” she said, arguing that the money would be better directed toward larger, more ambitious projects.

“They don’t move the needle — sometimes when you get something, you don’t get a second bite at it, and I had to do something different,” Lujan Grisham said.



from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/rjEDN6f
via IFTTT

Anti-abortion leaders worry they may have to oppose Trump if he doesn’t back national ban


Top anti-abortion leaders are continuing to lobby Donald Trump on a 15-week ban they believe should be the standard for the Republican Party.

Their efforts come even as Trump has not only refused to embrace a ban but has framed some abortion legislation as electorally toxic. And it is being driven by a desire to avoid the politically uncomfortable spectacle of having to rebuke the man who not only delivered their movement its greatest win, but is likely to be the GOP’s presidential nominee.

"We will oppose any presidential candidate who refuses to embrace at a minimum a 15-week national standard to stop painful late-term abortions while allowing states to enact further protections,” Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of SBA Pro-Life America, has said of the organization’s 2024 strategy.

After a meeting Trump held earlier this month with Dannenfelser, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R- S.C.), Dannenfelser called the conversation “terrific” and described Trump’s presidency as “the most consequential in American history for the pro-life cause.” Two people with knowledge of the meeting said the anti-abortion leaders showed Trump polling on the issue, and they left under the impression that Trump has not ruled out supporting a national law.

But the former president has, so far, taken credit for the overturning of Roe v. Wade while declining to tie himself to any specific prospective future abortion policy — save one that includes exemptions for victims of rape and incest and cases where the health of the mother is at stake. And while leaders of the movement are continuing their push to get him behind federal legislation, some are acknowledging it might not happen this cycle.

“I think we're likely to land at a message somewhere along the lines of: ‘While we support federal legislation, unapologetically, the reality is, most of the action in the near term will take place at the state level, as well as defunding Planned Parenthood, and a comprehensive ban on taxpayer funding, all of which will build momentum for federal legislation, and pivoting to the fact that Democrats are the real extremists,” said Ralph Reed, a longtime Christian conservative activist and chairman of Faith and Freedom Coalition, which supports the 15-week abortion ban.

The effort to bring Trump to a 15-week ban illustrates the larger difficulties the anti-abortion movement has confronted early in the 2024 GOP primary season, with at least one prominent Republican candidate causing headaches as well.

Former Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley on Sunday said pursuing a federal abortion ban was “not realistic,” following previous comments that she would seek “national consensus” before pursuing any federal abortion policies. She has refused to specify at what stage of pregnancy she would support any such ban, despite having signed into law a ban after 20 weeks while governor of South Carolina.

Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) initially tripped over questions about federal abortion restrictions when he announced his exploratory committee last month, but soon after stated he'd support a federal ban on abortion at 20 weeks of pregnancy. Earlier this month, he told the Christian Broadcasting Network he would endorse a 15-week ban, putting him in line with anti-abortion leaders’ current standard. A 15-week ban is also what Graham has introduced in the Senate.

Others, like former Vice President Mike Pence and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, have embraced more aggressive abortion bans as a means of demonstrating their fidelity to the cause, though DeSantis has limited his comments on abortion policy to what he supports in Florida.

But Trump has kept his positions vague. Trump recently suggested he is supportive of a national ban in an interview with Newsmax. “We're in the position now where we can get something that the whole country can agree with, and that's only because I got us out of the Roe v. Wade where the pro-life people had absolutely nothing to say,” Trump said.

But in an interview with the Messenger, he stated that “many people in the pro-life movement” view a six-week ban — like the one recently signed into law by DeSantis — as “too harsh.” And, in a post to his social media site on Wednesday, he notably declined to list any preference on the week after which he’d like to see abortions banned.

His remarks have been met by a mix of frustration and head scratching by some anti-abortion leaders.

“Who would say an abortion prevention act at six weeks, when the heartbeat can be easily detected, is too harsh? Like, I don't know where he would have heard that because it's certainly not coming out of the pro-life movement,” said Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life, a relatively new but influential anti-abortion group.

Students for Life has been in touch with campaigns about a presidential primary survey they would like all the candidates to submit by June. It is considering making an endorsement, is already organizing students for caucuses in Iowa and briefed Republican National Committee members at the organization's last summer meeting on abortion.

“We want to know where the candidates stand, especially if the candidate you know, then becomes elected and then betrays us,” said Hawkins. “We're looking for an unapologetic champion on this issue. I think, at the very least, if you're running for federal office, you should be willing to admit that abortion is a federal issue. And I think that that is like a baseline minimum of anyone who's running for president that we would even consider supporting getting out the vote for. ”

In addition to the Mar-a-Lago meeting with Trump, SBA Pro-Life America has met with other 2024 candidates, including Vivek Ramaswamy, and Haley, who gave a speech at the SBA Pro-Life headquarters in Arlington, Va. During her remarks at the group’s office late last month, Haley declined to pledge her support for their 15-week policy goal, despite SBA leadership saying afterward that she had privately assured them she would. Dannenfelser this week said Haley’s dismissal of the feasibility of such a national law was “not acceptable.”

Advisers to Haley, meanwhile, have maintained she will avoid calling for a specific week ban.

Trump has privately — and publicly — acknowledged that messaging around the issue of abortion is politically challenging for the GOP and may have negatively affected the midterms. And while he has taken credit for the overturning of Roe v. Wade, he has been careful not to go too far on the issue. Trump has felt that Republicans who endorse no exceptions for abortions are extreme. He privately expressed regret over his endorsement of Doug Mastriano, a hard-liner on abortion, in the Pennsylvania gubernatorial primary.

While some Republicans blamed the issue of abortion for the party’s poor 2022 midterm showing, the prescriptions for going forward vary. Party leaders like RNC chair Ronna McDaniel have argued that Republicans should not avoid the issue of abortion but force Democrats to define where they stand. The committee has pushed polling showing that voters are comfortable with a 15-week ban but not some of the more aggressive state laws that have been put into place.

Others have argued that the party needs to be less apologetic and defensive. Pence, who has not yet officially entered the race but has been holding events across the country, has made his opposition to abortion a cornerstone of his preliminary pitch. He praised DeSantis for signing the six-week abortion ban in Florida.

The issue has come to dominate the early primary season and could soon become even more pronounced. A summit in Iowa hosted by the Family Leader, a prominent evangelical Christian policy group in the state, is slated for this July. SBA is a co-sponsor of the event.

“I think if you’re a Republican who’s running for president and you show up for that event, you better be willing to be specific about what kind of federal limit you would endorse,” said Bob Heckman, a veteran Republican strategist who now advises SBA Pro-Life America but was not speaking on behalf of the group.

In Iowa, where the caucuses will be the first test of candidates’ strength with voters, some influential social conservatives are publicly decrying Trump’s recent rhetoric. But rather than waiting on Trump to change his tune, they’ve begun looking to other candidates.

“I don’t see it playing out well,” said Bob Vander Plaats, president of the Family Leader, regarding Trump’s current policy position. For a large number of Republican caucusgoers, “the sanctity of human life is a barometer,” Vander Plaats explained, pointing to past GOP caucus winners Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee — all candidates who took hard-line anti-abortion positions.

“If we can trust you on the life issue, we believe we can trust you on a lot of other issues,” Vander Plaats said.

Vander Plaats recently sat with DeSantis for a 2½-hour lunch in Tallahassee, in what Vander Plaats described as a get-to-know-you exchange. He and other anti-abortion groups appear pleased by the prospect of the governor’s candidacy, particularly after he signed into law the six-week ban. But DeSantis, in recent weeks, has raised eyebrows as well, particularly when he declined to mention the six-week bill when speaking to conservative groups, including a day after signing the legislation while addressing Liberty University students.

And ahead of his soon-to-come campaign announcement, DeSantis has refused to say what type of national abortion policy he would support as president, focusing only on his own decision as governor to approve a restrictive law for Florida. In Iowa last week, DeSantis didn’t respond to a question from POLITICO about whether he would support a national ban. On Saturday, the Florida governor is set to speak to the Florida Family Policy Council’s annual gala in Orlando.

Vander Plaats also met with Haley on Tuesday and recently had Vivek Ramaswamy, the multi-millionaire biotech entrepreneur and anti-woke activist, over to his house for lunch. Since the 2024 primary race has kicked off, Vander Plaats has visited more than once with Pence and he had a meeting with former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson at the Family Leader’s offices. Scott and Vander Plaats have talked by phone, and are still working to set up a meeting. Trump and the Iowa evangelical leader haven’t met since the 2020 campaign, Vander Plaats said, leading to friction between the two sides.

“Trump is basically saying our own governor's abortion bill is too harsh,” said Steve Deace, an Iowa-based conservative commentator, referring to Gov. Kim Reynolds’ support of a law similar to Florida’s.

Deace, who has remained highly critical of Trump’s 2024 bid, called into question whom the former president was hoping to appeal to by bucking the anti-abortion movement’s standards — after previously cementing himself as their savior.

“I promise you there is not a single voter in America — not one carbon-based life form in this country that’s going to vote next November — who is thinking to themselves, ‘You know, I was really on the fence about Donald Trump after everything I've seen about him since 2015, but he currently has this really nuanced abortion position, so I changed my mind.’

“If you are voting on abortion, Donald Trump is either the person who ended your beloved Roe vs. Wade, or ended your dreaded Roe vs. Wade,” Deace said. “Nothing more, nothing less. Some attempt to pivot away from that now is futile.”



from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/OgbUk3J
via IFTTT

Thursday 18 May 2023

Anna Wintour to host Harris fundraiser in New York


Vogue editor Anna Wintour will co-host a fundraiser in Manhattan featuring Vice President Kamala Harris, according to an invite obtained by Politico.

The event marks the start of fundraising appearances by Harris, as the reelection campaign for her and President Joe Biden ramps up. Tickets for the fundraiser, which organizers estimate will have 50 to 75 people, will start at $10,000.

The May 30 event, co-hosted by Lauren Santo Domingo, founder of online fashion retailer Moda Operandi, will take place at Santo Domingo’s home, according to the invite sent by the Democratic National Committee.

Fashion designer Kay Unger and her partner David Rubin will also host the second gentleman Doug Emhoff on May 24 for a more intimate event that will be limited to 20 people. The suggested ticket price is also $10,000.



from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/LAPNovu
via IFTTT

Penguin Random House, others sues Florida school district over book bans


TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A group of a free-speech organization, parents, authors, and the publisher Penguin Random House on Wednesday sued school leaders in Escambia County claiming that they have been too harsh in removing and restricting books from public school libraries.

The federal lawsuit, filed in Pensacola, targets how the West Florida school district is carrying out policies crafted by Republican lawmakers and the DeSantis administration — specifically how parents and others can raise objections about potentially inappropriate books. In the challenge, the group argues that school officials are disproportionally targeting books surrounding race and gender identity, violating First Amendment rights tied to viewpoint discrimination.

“Today, Escambia County seeks to bar books critics view as too 'woke.' In the 1970s, schools sought to bar Slaughterhouse-Five and books edited by Langston Hughes,” attorneys representing the group wrote in the lawsuit. “Tomorrow, it could be books about Christianity, the country’s founders, or war heroes. All of these removals run afoul of the First Amendment, which is rightly disinterested in the cause du jour."

Escambia has removed several Penguin Random House books, including The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison and Push by Sapphire, according to the lawsuit. The school district has reviewed almost 200 titles.

The legal challenge is the latest attempt to undermine policies enacted by Florida’s GOP leaders that in the last two years have restricted how students can be taught about race and gender issues. State Republicans also passed legislation opening the door for local book challenges and recently expanded those rules to require schools to yank contested titles within five days being flagged, a shift opponents equate to “book banning.”

Florida teachers unions previously challenged the Florida Department of Education rules crafted to carry out book objections in administrative court.

In Escambia, the group is pushing for a judge to stop the school district from pulling works off local shelves, arguing that school leaders “are ordering books removed based on ideological objections to their contents or disagreement with their messages or themes.”

They contend that this is part of a larger trend in the country, taking aim at conservative parental rights group Moms for Liberty, which has spearheaded some efforts to review books. The lawsuit also scrutinizes a high school language arts teacher in Escambia who challenged dozens of the 197 books that have been under review in the county.

“Books are being ordered removed from libraries, or subject to restricted access within those libraries, based on an ideologically driven campaign to push certain ideas out of schools,” attorneys for the group wrote in the 59-page lawsuit.

Officials with Escambia County School District declined to comment on the pending legislation.

The confusion over what material is allowed in schools was further highlighted this week after the Florida Department of Education started investigating a fifth-grade teacher in Hernando County after she showed students the Disney movie “Strange World,” which features a gay cartoon character.

The lawsuit was filed the same day DeSantis enacted the law expanding Florida’s rules for book challenges.

Speaking at a private Christian school in Tampa, the Republican governor said there has been “concerted effort to try to do indoctrination” in libraries and books that are targeted at students up to the middle school grades.

“We never did this through all of human history until like what, two weeks ago?” DeSantis said. “Now this is something? They’re having third graders declare pronouns? We’re not doing the pronoun Olympics in Florida, it’s not happening here.”

The full slate of plaintiffs challenging Escambia’s book rules include PEN America, a nonprofit supporting free speech, several authors of challenged books, the publisher of books that have been the subject of book challenges, and parents of local students.



from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/Amgdnqf
via IFTTT

House Intel releases Archives interview transcript as part of classified documents probe

Officials pointed to a larger issue with the mishandling of administrative records and classified documents.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/B293utI
via IFTTT