All posts by MPolitics

Cory Booker Offers Plan to Address Environmental Inequality

Democratic presidential candidate Cory Booker says it’s time to overhaul environmental policies that he says unfairly disadvantage minority and impoverished communities.

The New Jersey senator is promoting what he calls his environmental justice agenda during a campaign stop in South Carolina.

He told students at Allen University in Columbia that the government hasn’t done enough to ensure all Americans have equal access to clean, healthy communities.

Booker says addressing environmental inequality is one of today’s civil rights battles.

Booker wants to strengthen Environmental Protection Agency and reverse what he says are Trump administration rollbacks of environmental safeguards. He’s proposing more EPA workers and resources to ensure safe drinking water.

EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler has said unsafe drinking water is the world’s most immediate public health issue.

 

Cory Booker Offers Plan to Address Environmental Inequality

Democratic presidential candidate Cory Booker says it’s time to overhaul environmental policies that he says unfairly disadvantage minority and impoverished communities.

The New Jersey senator is promoting what he calls his environmental justice agenda during a campaign stop in South Carolina.

He told students at Allen University in Columbia that the government hasn’t done enough to ensure all Americans have equal access to clean, healthy communities.

Booker says addressing environmental inequality is one of today’s civil rights battles.

Booker wants to strengthen Environmental Protection Agency and reverse what he says are Trump administration rollbacks of environmental safeguards. He’s proposing more EPA workers and resources to ensure safe drinking water.

EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler has said unsafe drinking water is the world’s most immediate public health issue.

 

Trump Tells NRA He’s Withdrawing from Arms Trade Treaty

With pro-gun legislation largely stalled in Congress, President Donald Trump said Friday he is withdrawing the U.S. from an international agreement on the arms trade, telling the National Rifle Association the treaty is “badly misguided.”

Trump made the announcement as he vowed to fight for gun rights and implored members of the nation’s largest pro-gun group — struggling to maintain its influence — to rally behind his re-election bid. 

“It’s under assault,” he said of the constitutional right to bear arms. “But not while we’re here.” 

Trump said he would be revoking the United States’ status as a signatory of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, which regulates international trade in conventional weapons, from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft and warships. President Barack Obama signed the pact in 2013 but it has never been ratified by U.S. lawmakers. 

It has long been opposed by the NRA. 

“Under my administration, we will never surrender American sovereignty to anyone,” Trump said, before signing a document on stage asking the Senate to halt the ratification process. “We will never allow foreign diplomats to trample on your Second Amendment freedom,” Trump said

“I hope you’re happy,” he told the group, to cheers.

His move against the treaty came as Trump sought to excite an organization that was pivotal to Trump’s victory in 2016 but, three years later, is limping toward the next election divided and diminished. 

“You better get out there and vote,” he said, telling the crowd of thousands that the 2020 election “seems like it’s a long ways away. It’s not.” 

‘Reckless move’

Gun activists denounced the treaty when it was under negotiation as an infringement of civilian firearm ownership, despite the well-enshrined legal principle that says no treaty can override the Constitution or U.S. laws. The treaty is aimed at cracking down on illicit trading in small arms, thereby curbing violence in some of the most troubled corners of the world. 

Advocates of tighter gun restrictions denounced Trump’s decision. Kris Brown, president of the Brady organization, said it was a “reckless move” that will “only embolden terrorists and other dangerous actors around the world.”

In a speech full of grievance, Trump railed against the Russia investigation, which did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Russians and the Trump campaign. Special counsel Robert Mueller outlined potential episodes of obstruction of justice by the president without concluding that he had committed any crime, leaving such questions for Congress to pursue as it saw fit.

“They tried for a coup,” Trump said. “It didn’t work out so well.”

“And I didn’t need a gun for that, did I?” he quipped, adding: “Spying. Surveillance. Trying for an overthrow? And we caught `em.” 

And in a pre-emptive attack against his 2016 Democratic challengers, Trump claimed without evidence that the other party wants “to take away your guns.” 

Influence of mass shooting

An emboldened NRA had high hopes and ambitious plans for easing state and national gun regulations after pouring tens of millions of dollars into the 2016 presidential race, seeing its dark horse candidate win and Republicans in control of both branches of Congress. 

But much of the legislation the group championed has stalled, due, in part, to a series of mass shootings, including the massacre at a Parkland, Florida, high school that left 17 dead and launched a youth movement against gun violence that has had a powerful impact. And Democrats won control of the House in the midterms.

At the same time, the group is grappling with infighting, bleeding money and facing a series of investigations into its operating practices, including allegations that covert Russian agents seeking to influence the 2016 election courted its officials and funneled money through the group. 

As Trump landed in Indianapolis, a judge imposed an 18-month prison term on gun rights activist Maria Butina, an admitted Russian agent who tried to infiltrate American conservative groups. 

The NRA’s shaky fortunes have raised questions about the one-time kingmaker’s clout heading into 2020.

“I’ve never seen the NRA this vulnerable,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, a nonprofit that advocates for gun control measures.

Fear is gone

With Trump in office, gun owners no longer fear the Second Amendment is under attack to the extent it was perceived to be under Democrats.

“Good times are never good for interest groups because it’s much better when Armageddon is at your doorstep,” said Harry Wilson, a Roanoke College professor who has written extensively on gun politics. “Fear is a huge motivator in politics.” 

The NRA, said Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor and expert on gun policy, has also dramatically changed its messaging over the last two years, with its NRATV service advocating a panoply of far-right political views that have turned off some members. 

At the same time, public sentiment has shifted. A March AP-NORC poll found that 67% of Americans overall think gun laws should be made stricter — up from 61% in October 2017. 

And a June 2018 Gallup poll found overall favorable opinions of the NRA down slightly from October 2015, from 58% to 53%. Unfavorable views have grown, from 35% to 42%. 

Against that backdrop, Democratic politicians have become more comfortable assailing — and even actively running against — the NRA and pledging action to curb gun violence. And gun control groups like Everytown, which is largely financed by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and a political action committee formed by Gabby Giffords, the former Arizona congresswoman wounded in a shooting, have become better organized and more visible, especially at the state level. 

That reversal was made clear during the 2018 midterm elections, when those groups vastly outspent the NRA . 

‘Disappearing act’

During the midterms, the NRA “committed almost a disappearing act,” said Everytown’s Feinblatt. 

Winkler, the UCLA law professor, allowed that the group had scored some victories under Trump, including the appointment of two Supreme Court justices who may be open to striking down gun laws. 

But overall, he said, “On the legislative front, the NRA has been frustrated,” with priorities like national reciprocity for conceal carry laws and a repeal of the ban on silencers stalled. 

Instead, Trump introduced a new federal regulation: a ban on bump stocks after a man using the device opened fire on a crowd of concertgoers on the Las Vegas strip, killing 58 people and wounding hundreds. 

 

 

 

Nearing End of His Tenure, Rosenstein Hits Back at Critics

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is taking swipes at his critics as he prepares to leave the Justice Department. In a speech, Rosenstein made barbed remarks in the direction of former FBI Director James Comey, political pundits and the media

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is taking swipes at his critics as he prepares his exit from the Justice Department.

In a speech Thursday night before a lawyers’ group, Rosenstein made barbed remarks in the direction of former FBI Director James Comey, political pundits and the media.

He suggested there were decisions made before he arrived at the Justice Department two years ago that he didn’t agree with, likening himself to a man who lies down in a burning bed but doesn’t know how the fire started.

He also said “there was overwhelming evidence that Russian operatives hacked American computers and defrauded American citizens.”

Rosenstein is expected to leave his position now that special counsel Robert Mueller has submitted his Russia investigation report .

Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration Abortion Rules

A federal judge in Washington state on Thursday blocked new Trump administration rules that could cut off federal funding for health care providers who refer patients for abortions. 

 

The Washington attorney general’s office said Judge Stanley Bastian in Yakima granted the injunction following about three hours of argument in a case brought by the state and abortion rights groups.

The ruling came two days after a federal judge in Oregon said he intended to at least partly block the rules.

The lawsuits said the administration’s new rules were a transparent attack on Planned Parenthood and would curb access to care such as contraception and breast and cervical cancer screening for millions of low-income people.

Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration Abortion Rules

A federal judge in Washington state on Thursday blocked new Trump administration rules that could cut off federal funding for health care providers who refer patients for abortions. 

 

The Washington attorney general’s office said Judge Stanley Bastian in Yakima granted the injunction following about three hours of argument in a case brought by the state and abortion rights groups.

The ruling came two days after a federal judge in Oregon said he intended to at least partly block the rules.

The lawsuits said the administration’s new rules were a transparent attack on Planned Parenthood and would curb access to care such as contraception and breast and cervical cancer screening for millions of low-income people.

US House Democrats Probe Homeland Security Firings 

Democratic lawmakers on Thursday sought documents on Trump administration firings of top officials at the Department of Homeland Security, saying they were concerned the dismissals were prompted by the 

officials’ refusal to break the law. 

Three U.S. House of Representatives committee chairmen sent a letter to DHS asking for documents related to actions by Republican President Donald Trump and top aide Stephen Miller to remove senior leaders at the agency. 

They expressed concern that the firings and forced resignations this month put U.S. national security at risk. 

“We are also concerned that the president may have removed DHS officials because they refused his demands to violate federal immigration law and judicial orders,” the lawmakers said in a statement. 

They said they were troubled by reports that Trump wants to put Miller, who has spearheaded many of his hard-line immigration policies, in charge of all immigration and border affairs. 

The lawmakers — Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings of Maryland, Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler of New York and Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson of Mississippi — cited reports that Miller called several DHS officials to exert pressure on them to follow on “extreme immigration policy decisions.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen resigned under pressure this month, followed by several other leaders at the sprawling department that includes the Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agencies.

US House Democrats Probe Homeland Security Firings 

Democratic lawmakers on Thursday sought documents on Trump administration firings of top officials at the Department of Homeland Security, saying they were concerned the dismissals were prompted by the 

officials’ refusal to break the law. 

Three U.S. House of Representatives committee chairmen sent a letter to DHS asking for documents related to actions by Republican President Donald Trump and top aide Stephen Miller to remove senior leaders at the agency. 

They expressed concern that the firings and forced resignations this month put U.S. national security at risk. 

“We are also concerned that the president may have removed DHS officials because they refused his demands to violate federal immigration law and judicial orders,” the lawmakers said in a statement. 

They said they were troubled by reports that Trump wants to put Miller, who has spearheaded many of his hard-line immigration policies, in charge of all immigration and border affairs. 

The lawmakers — Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings of Maryland, Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler of New York and Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson of Mississippi — cited reports that Miller called several DHS officials to exert pressure on them to follow on “extreme immigration policy decisions.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen resigned under pressure this month, followed by several other leaders at the sprawling department that includes the Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agencies.

Factbox: Trump Stonewalls US House Democrats on Multiple Probes

President Donald Trump is flatly refusing to cooperate in numerous U.S. congressional probes of himself and his administration, taking a defiant stance that could trigger protracted court fights with House of Representatives Democrats.

In an unprecedented step, the Trump administration has filed a lawsuit to try to block one congressional subpoena; some Trump advisers have been told to ignore other subpoenas; and a request for Trump’s tax returns has not been fulfilled.

In most instances, Trump risks trouble with Congress over subpoenas, “contempt of Congress” citations and civil enforcement actions in court.

Trump’s stonewalling has hardened since the release last week of a redacted report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller on the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Trump viewed the report as an exoneration because the special counsel did not charge him with conspiring with Russia or with obstruction of justice. However, the report detailed the Trump campaign’s welcoming of help from the Russians and his later efforts to thwart Mueller’s inquiry.

Like other senior Democrats who are treating the Mueller report as a road map for further investigations by Congress, House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings accused the Trump administration on Wednesday of a “massive, unprecedented, and growing pattern of obstruction.”

The following are ways Trump has defied Congress in recent days:

McGahn

Don McGahn, former White House counsel, was a key witness in the Mueller probe and House Democrats want to hear from him. But the White House plans to assert executive privilege to prevent McGahn and other current and former administration officials from testifying to Congress, the Washington Post has reported.

Unredacted Mueller report

Parts of the Mueller report were redacted, leaving some questions unanswered. Democrats have issued a subpoena in an attempt to obtain the full report without redactions and evidence Mueller relied on. Attorney General William Barr must decide by May 1 whether to comply.

Barr has said he has a legal obligation to keep secret information obtained from grand jury proceedings, and that other redactions were necessary to protect U.S. intelligence sources and avoid harm to ongoing law enforcement matters.

Tax returns

Unlike past presidents in recent decades, Trump has refused to make public his tax returns, raising questions about what is in them. Democrats are probing Trump’s past business dealings and possible conflicts of interest posed by his continued ownership of extensive business interests.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin failed to meet a congressional deadline on Tuesday for turning over Trump’s tax returns to the House tax committee, setting the stage for a possible court battle between Congress and the administration.

Mnuchin said he planned to make “a final decision” on whether to provide Trump’s tax records by May 6.

Legal experts said House Democrats could vote to hold Mnuchin or IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig in contempt of Congress if they ignore a subpoena, as a step toward suing in federal court to obtain the returns.

Mazars

Trump on Monday filed a lawsuit attempting to keep U.S. lawmakers from obtaining his financial records. The unprecedented suit seeks to block a subpoena issued by Cummings, whose panel is looking into Trump’s financial record.

The subpoena sought eight years of documents from Mazars USA, an accounting firm long used by Trump to prepare financial statements. Cummings issued the subpoena after Michael Cohen, formerly Trump’s personal lawyer, testified to Congress in February that Trump had misrepresented his net worth.

Security clearances

Cummings said on Tuesday that his panel will soon vote on whether to cite a former White House official with contempt for failing to appear for questioning on allegations that the Trump administration inappropriately granted security clearances to some of the president’s advisers.

The White House told the Oversight Committee that it had directed Carl Kline, who was White House personnel security chief for the first two years of Trump’s presidency, to ignore the committee’s subpoena to appear.

Census and citizenship

On Wednesday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) rebuffed the Oversight Committee’s request for an interview with John Gore, an official who was involved in the administration’s decision to include a citizenship question in the 2020 census.

The Justice Department said Gore, a lawyer in its Civil Rights Division, would not participate in a deposition set for Thursday if he could not have a department lawyer at his side. The committee had offered to let a lawyer sit in a different room.

A DOJ official said the committee had provided “no legitimate or constitutional basis for excluding a DOJ lawyer from assisting at the deposition.”

Impeachment

Trump on Wednesday vowed to fight any effort by congressional Democrats to launch impeachment proceedings against him, promising to go to the Supreme Court, even though it plays no role in the constitutional impeachment process.

Hotel documents

Congressional Democrats said in March that a U.S. government agency was responding too slowly to their requests for documents about the Trump administration’s abandonment of a plan to move the FBI.

Before he became president in January 2017, Trump supported moving the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to the suburbs of Washington, Democrats looking into the matter said.

They said that after Trump was elected and disqualified from bidding to acquire the site for commercial development, he switched his position. Democrats have subsequently raised questions about a possible Trump conflict of interest.

Immigration aide

The White House refused a request for Trump’s top immigration aide Stephen Miller to testify to Congress in a letter Wednesday to the House Oversight Committee.

Miller, a former Senate aide, has helped shape some of Trump’s most controversial immigration policies, from the first Muslim travel ban shortly after he took office in 2017 to the child separation policy for migrants who illegally crossed the U.S.- Mexico border, both of which were rejected by courts.

Factbox: Trump Stonewalls US House Democrats on Multiple Probes

President Donald Trump is flatly refusing to cooperate in numerous U.S. congressional probes of himself and his administration, taking a defiant stance that could trigger protracted court fights with House of Representatives Democrats.

In an unprecedented step, the Trump administration has filed a lawsuit to try to block one congressional subpoena; some Trump advisers have been told to ignore other subpoenas; and a request for Trump’s tax returns has not been fulfilled.

In most instances, Trump risks trouble with Congress over subpoenas, “contempt of Congress” citations and civil enforcement actions in court.

Trump’s stonewalling has hardened since the release last week of a redacted report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller on the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Trump viewed the report as an exoneration because the special counsel did not charge him with conspiring with Russia or with obstruction of justice. However, the report detailed the Trump campaign’s welcoming of help from the Russians and his later efforts to thwart Mueller’s inquiry.

Like other senior Democrats who are treating the Mueller report as a road map for further investigations by Congress, House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings accused the Trump administration on Wednesday of a “massive, unprecedented, and growing pattern of obstruction.”

The following are ways Trump has defied Congress in recent days:

McGahn

Don McGahn, former White House counsel, was a key witness in the Mueller probe and House Democrats want to hear from him. But the White House plans to assert executive privilege to prevent McGahn and other current and former administration officials from testifying to Congress, the Washington Post has reported.

Unredacted Mueller report

Parts of the Mueller report were redacted, leaving some questions unanswered. Democrats have issued a subpoena in an attempt to obtain the full report without redactions and evidence Mueller relied on. Attorney General William Barr must decide by May 1 whether to comply.

Barr has said he has a legal obligation to keep secret information obtained from grand jury proceedings, and that other redactions were necessary to protect U.S. intelligence sources and avoid harm to ongoing law enforcement matters.

Tax returns

Unlike past presidents in recent decades, Trump has refused to make public his tax returns, raising questions about what is in them. Democrats are probing Trump’s past business dealings and possible conflicts of interest posed by his continued ownership of extensive business interests.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin failed to meet a congressional deadline on Tuesday for turning over Trump’s tax returns to the House tax committee, setting the stage for a possible court battle between Congress and the administration.

Mnuchin said he planned to make “a final decision” on whether to provide Trump’s tax records by May 6.

Legal experts said House Democrats could vote to hold Mnuchin or IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig in contempt of Congress if they ignore a subpoena, as a step toward suing in federal court to obtain the returns.

Mazars

Trump on Monday filed a lawsuit attempting to keep U.S. lawmakers from obtaining his financial records. The unprecedented suit seeks to block a subpoena issued by Cummings, whose panel is looking into Trump’s financial record.

The subpoena sought eight years of documents from Mazars USA, an accounting firm long used by Trump to prepare financial statements. Cummings issued the subpoena after Michael Cohen, formerly Trump’s personal lawyer, testified to Congress in February that Trump had misrepresented his net worth.

Security clearances

Cummings said on Tuesday that his panel will soon vote on whether to cite a former White House official with contempt for failing to appear for questioning on allegations that the Trump administration inappropriately granted security clearances to some of the president’s advisers.

The White House told the Oversight Committee that it had directed Carl Kline, who was White House personnel security chief for the first two years of Trump’s presidency, to ignore the committee’s subpoena to appear.

Census and citizenship

On Wednesday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) rebuffed the Oversight Committee’s request for an interview with John Gore, an official who was involved in the administration’s decision to include a citizenship question in the 2020 census.

The Justice Department said Gore, a lawyer in its Civil Rights Division, would not participate in a deposition set for Thursday if he could not have a department lawyer at his side. The committee had offered to let a lawyer sit in a different room.

A DOJ official said the committee had provided “no legitimate or constitutional basis for excluding a DOJ lawyer from assisting at the deposition.”

Impeachment

Trump on Wednesday vowed to fight any effort by congressional Democrats to launch impeachment proceedings against him, promising to go to the Supreme Court, even though it plays no role in the constitutional impeachment process.

Hotel documents

Congressional Democrats said in March that a U.S. government agency was responding too slowly to their requests for documents about the Trump administration’s abandonment of a plan to move the FBI.

Before he became president in January 2017, Trump supported moving the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to the suburbs of Washington, Democrats looking into the matter said.

They said that after Trump was elected and disqualified from bidding to acquire the site for commercial development, he switched his position. Democrats have subsequently raised questions about a possible Trump conflict of interest.

Immigration aide

The White House refused a request for Trump’s top immigration aide Stephen Miller to testify to Congress in a letter Wednesday to the House Oversight Committee.

Miller, a former Senate aide, has helped shape some of Trump’s most controversial immigration policies, from the first Muslim travel ban shortly after he took office in 2017 to the child separation policy for migrants who illegally crossed the U.S.- Mexico border, both of which were rejected by courts.

Source: Deutsche Bank to Hand Over Trump Loan Documents

Deutsche Bank has begun to provide documents on financing for some of President Donald Trump’s projects to New York State authorities, a source familiar with the matter told AFP on Wednesday.

In mid-March, New York Attorney General Letitia James subpoenaed the German bank, demanding records related to loans and lines of credit granted to the Trump Organization.

The money was intended to finance projects such as Trump hotels in Washington, D.C., Miami and Chicago, another source told AFP last month on the condition of anonymity. 

No comment on CNN report

It was unclear whether Deutsche Bank had provided all the documents requested.

“We remain committed to cooperating with authorized investigations,” a bank spokesman told AFP, while declining to comment on a CNN report that the company was handing over the documents. 

James’ office also declined to comment on the status of the documents regarding financing for the Trump Organization, the holding company that has been run by Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr. since he entered the White House.

New York authorities also wanted records related to the Trump Organization’s failed attempt in 2014 to buy the Buffalo Bills football team, the source said on condition of anonymity. 

James demanded the information from Deutsche Bank after Trump’s former personal attorney Michael Cohen testified before Congress, saying among other things that Trump wildly inflated his net worth in order to secure loans from Deutsche Bank.

Bank a source of funding

Deutsche Bank was one of the few major banks to continue to lend to Trump following the bankruptcies of his casinos and other businesses in the 1990s. The German bank in recent years has loaned Trump more than $300 million.

That put the bank at the center of investigations and congressional scrutiny.

When opposition Democrats took control of the House of Representatives in January, they sought information on interest rates granted to the Trump Organization, as well as details on a huge Russian money laundering case that earned Deutsche Bank a $630 million fine in January 2017.

Source: Deutsche Bank to Hand Over Trump Loan Documents

Deutsche Bank has begun to provide documents on financing for some of President Donald Trump’s projects to New York State authorities, a source familiar with the matter told AFP on Wednesday.

In mid-March, New York Attorney General Letitia James subpoenaed the German bank, demanding records related to loans and lines of credit granted to the Trump Organization.

The money was intended to finance projects such as Trump hotels in Washington, D.C., Miami and Chicago, another source told AFP last month on the condition of anonymity. 

No comment on CNN report

It was unclear whether Deutsche Bank had provided all the documents requested.

“We remain committed to cooperating with authorized investigations,” a bank spokesman told AFP, while declining to comment on a CNN report that the company was handing over the documents. 

James’ office also declined to comment on the status of the documents regarding financing for the Trump Organization, the holding company that has been run by Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr. since he entered the White House.

New York authorities also wanted records related to the Trump Organization’s failed attempt in 2014 to buy the Buffalo Bills football team, the source said on condition of anonymity. 

James demanded the information from Deutsche Bank after Trump’s former personal attorney Michael Cohen testified before Congress, saying among other things that Trump wildly inflated his net worth in order to secure loans from Deutsche Bank.

Bank a source of funding

Deutsche Bank was one of the few major banks to continue to lend to Trump following the bankruptcies of his casinos and other businesses in the 1990s. The German bank in recent years has loaned Trump more than $300 million.

That put the bank at the center of investigations and congressional scrutiny.

When opposition Democrats took control of the House of Representatives in January, they sought information on interest rates granted to the Trump Organization, as well as details on a huge Russian money laundering case that earned Deutsche Bank a $630 million fine in January 2017.

Trump Threatens to Go to Supreme Court on Impeachment

U.S. President Donald Trump, in his latest bucking of constitutional norms, is threatening to proactively take his case to the Supreme Court if the House of Representatives considers impeaching him.

“If the partisan Dems ever try to impeach, I would first head to the Supreme Court,” Trump announced Wednesday on Twitter.

“Not only are there no ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors,’ there are no Crimes by me at all,” the president stated in a pair of tweets in his latest comments about the special counsel’s report on the two-year investigation into whether there was collusion between Trump’s 2016 election campaign and Russia. 

Since the redacted report’s release, Democrats, who control the House, have been debating whether to commence impeachment proceedings against the president.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is urging caution, although some members of her party worry Democrats will pay a political price with liberal voters if they do not begin impeachment.

Roles of House, Senate, Supreme Court

Trump’s threat to approach the Supreme Court puzzles three constitutional scholars, contacted Wednesday by VOA, who do not see the high court intervening.

“Giving the Supreme Court a role in the impeachment process was considered but deliberately discarded by the framers [of the U.S. Constitution] in 1787,” Harvard Law School professor Laurence Tribe told VOA. “The only [Supreme Court] justice who has a role is the chief justice, who presides at the impeachment trial of the president.”

Robert Pushaw, a law professor at Pepperdine University, agrees.

“The Supreme Court has held — correctly, in my view — that impeachment is a political question committed by the Constitution to Congress, not a ‘justiciable’ legal issue for courts. Therefore, any such request by President Trump would almost certainly be rejected,” he said.

“The Constitution says that the House shall have the sole power of impeachment, and has authority to determine its own rules of proceeding. On its face, that appears to shut out the courts,” Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow Thomas Jipping, a former chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told VOA. “That said, House members all have an obligation to ensure that such constitutional responsibilities are not hijacked for partisan political purposes.”

The Supreme Court also ruled in 1993 that courts would have no role in the impeachment process.

After any such proceeding in the House, under the law, the Senate, which is controlled by Trump’s Republican Party, would be responsible for determining whether to convict the president.

Only twice in American history has the Senate voted on whether to convict a president. Both Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1999 were acquitted on all charges.

‘Fighting all the subpoenas’

Trump, since launching his presidential campaign in 2015 as a political novice, has broken with convention, both in rhetoric and action — delighting his supporters and infuriating detractors.

“Whether currently indictable or not, it is clear that the president has, at a minimum, engaged in highly unethical and unscrupulous behavior which does not bring honor to the office he holds,” Pelosi said in a letter to her party colleagues Monday. 

Trump is clearly indicating his administration will defy requests from Democratic lawmakers for information and testimony.

“They want to know every deal I’ve ever done,” Trump told reporters Wednesday on the White House South Lawn, before he boarded the Marine One helicopter. “We’re fighting all the subpoenas.”

The president accused opposition party lawmakers of using their investigations as a strategy for next year’s presidential election.

The House Judiciary Committee has issued a subpoena for former White House counsel Don McGahn, while the House Oversight Committee is moving to hold former White House personnel security director Carl Kline in contempt for failing to appear at a hearing.

Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings said in a statement Tuesday, “it appears that the President believes that the Constitution does not apply to his White House, that he may order officials at will to violate their legal obligation, and that he may obstruct attempts by Congress to conduct oversight.”

A second demand from House Democrats for Trump’s tax returns spanning a six-year period has been defied by the Treasury Department.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin sent a letter Tuesday to the House Ways and Means Committee saying he would give a final response on May 6, noting that the request raises “serious constitutional questions” and his department is continuing to consult with the Justice Department.

House Oversight Chairman Cites ‘Massive’ Obstruction by Trump, Barr 

The Democratic chairman of the House oversight committee accused the Trump administration of a “massive, unprecedented and growing pattern of 

obstruction” for ordering federal employees not to comply with congressional investigations. 

President Donald Trump and Attorney General William Barr “are now openly ordering federal employees to ignore congressional subpoenas and simply not show up — without any assertion of a valid legal privilege,” Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland said in a statement. 

The Justice Department on Wednesday rebuffed the House Oversight and Reform Committee, which had sought to interview an official involved in the Trump administration’s decision to put a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. Census. 

The department said John Gore, a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division, would not participate in a deposition scheduled for Thursday if he could not have a Justice Department lawyer at his side. The committee had offered to allow a lawyer to sit in a different room. 

Cummings said the subpoena issued to Gore was adopted on a bipartisan basis and that there was no privilege asserted by the White House or Justice Department that would preclude him from appearing. 

“This is a massive, unprecedented and growing pattern of obstruction,” Cummings said, warning the federal employees to “think very carefully about their own legal interests” in refusing to comply with the panel’s requests.

Democrats Hope to Press Star Witness of Mueller Report in Congress

Donald McGahn, the former White House counsel described in the Mueller report as repeatedly standing up to President Donald Trump, could become a star witness again if congressional Democrats get their way in their investigation of whether Trump used his office to obstruct justice.

Since the April 18 release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 election and any ties to Republican Trump’s campaign, Democrats have seen McGahn as someone who could be as important as Mueller himself, according to a source familiar with the matter.

But the Democrats are likely to face Trump’s resistance. The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the White House planned to oppose a subpoena by the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee for McGahn to testify.

Mueller’s 448-page partially blacked out report portrayed McGahn as one of the few figures in Trump’s orbit to challenge him when he tried to shut down the investigation that has clouded his more than two years in the White House.

“Mr. McGahn has been touted as a man of integrity and he is a major witness in the Mueller report,” said Sheila Jackson Lee, a member of the judiciary committee.

The White House did not immediately comment on the Washington Post report, which said Trump will claim executive privilege, a legal doctrine allowing the president to withhold information about internal executive branch deliberations from other branches of government.

Trump said in a Tuesday interview with the Washington Post that White House lawyers had not “made a final, final decision” about whether they will cite executive privilege to prevent McGahn and other former and current officials from testifying.

“They testified for so many hours. They have all that information that’s been given,” Trump told the newspaper of the Mueller report and congressional Democrats.

McGahn’s attorney, William Burck, did not respond to requests for comment.

Democrats are particularly interested in hearing McGahn describe in his own words and in Congress an account in the Mueller report in which McGahn refused Trump’s instructions.

In June 2017 Trump called McGahn to say he should tell Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to remove the special counsel because he had conflicts of interest, the report said.

Trump also failed to get McGahn to dispute media reports that the president tried to fire Mueller, the report said.

“That, in itself, could be an obstruction of justice, as Mr. McGahn would be able to testify — that he was asked to do it and then asked not to tell anyone what he’d been asked to do,” Lee said.

Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, who has subpoenaed the U.S. Department of Justice to provide the unredacted Mueller report and underlying evidence, issued a subpoena on Monday for McGahn to provide the committee with documents by May 7 and testify on May 21.

But it was not clear that McGahn would comply, especially if the White House asserts executive privilege. Nor could Democrats predict how much the former White House counsel would be willing to discuss, even if he does testify.

On Tuesday evening, Nadler said, “The moment for the White House to assert some privilege to prevent this testimony from being heard has long since passed.”

The House of Representatives has the sole power under the U.S. Constitution to impeach the president, and any effort would be led by the judiciary panel.

Mueller’s report concluded that there was not enough evidence to establish that Trump’s campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Moscow. However, the report outlined multiple instances where Trump tried to thwart Mueller’s probe.

Mueller stopped short of concluding whether Trump could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, a criminal charge that requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

But such a high standard would not apply to Democrats if they decided to bring impeachment proceedings.

In the days following the Mueller report’s release, McGahn came under attack from Trump’s personal attorney Rudolph Giuliani who called into question the veracity of his statements to Mueller’s team of prosecutors.

“I would ask which of the three versions is McGahn standing by. There are three versions he gives of that account,” Giuliani told CNN over the weekend. “I’m telling you, he’s confused.”

A prominent elections lawyer, McGahn served as Trump’s campaign counsel before being named White House counsel in November 2016.

He played a pivotal role in helping Trump reshape the federal judiciary in a conservative direction and roll back regulations on a range of industries.

Democrats Hope to Press Star Witness of Mueller Report in Congress

Donald McGahn, the former White House counsel described in the Mueller report as repeatedly standing up to President Donald Trump, could become a star witness again if congressional Democrats get their way in their investigation of whether Trump used his office to obstruct justice.

Since the April 18 release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 election and any ties to Republican Trump’s campaign, Democrats have seen McGahn as someone who could be as important as Mueller himself, according to a source familiar with the matter.

But the Democrats are likely to face Trump’s resistance. The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the White House planned to oppose a subpoena by the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee for McGahn to testify.

Mueller’s 448-page partially blacked out report portrayed McGahn as one of the few figures in Trump’s orbit to challenge him when he tried to shut down the investigation that has clouded his more than two years in the White House.

“Mr. McGahn has been touted as a man of integrity and he is a major witness in the Mueller report,” said Sheila Jackson Lee, a member of the judiciary committee.

The White House did not immediately comment on the Washington Post report, which said Trump will claim executive privilege, a legal doctrine allowing the president to withhold information about internal executive branch deliberations from other branches of government.

Trump said in a Tuesday interview with the Washington Post that White House lawyers had not “made a final, final decision” about whether they will cite executive privilege to prevent McGahn and other former and current officials from testifying.

“They testified for so many hours. They have all that information that’s been given,” Trump told the newspaper of the Mueller report and congressional Democrats.

McGahn’s attorney, William Burck, did not respond to requests for comment.

Democrats are particularly interested in hearing McGahn describe in his own words and in Congress an account in the Mueller report in which McGahn refused Trump’s instructions.

In June 2017 Trump called McGahn to say he should tell Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to remove the special counsel because he had conflicts of interest, the report said.

Trump also failed to get McGahn to dispute media reports that the president tried to fire Mueller, the report said.

“That, in itself, could be an obstruction of justice, as Mr. McGahn would be able to testify — that he was asked to do it and then asked not to tell anyone what he’d been asked to do,” Lee said.

Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, who has subpoenaed the U.S. Department of Justice to provide the unredacted Mueller report and underlying evidence, issued a subpoena on Monday for McGahn to provide the committee with documents by May 7 and testify on May 21.

But it was not clear that McGahn would comply, especially if the White House asserts executive privilege. Nor could Democrats predict how much the former White House counsel would be willing to discuss, even if he does testify.

On Tuesday evening, Nadler said, “The moment for the White House to assert some privilege to prevent this testimony from being heard has long since passed.”

The House of Representatives has the sole power under the U.S. Constitution to impeach the president, and any effort would be led by the judiciary panel.

Mueller’s report concluded that there was not enough evidence to establish that Trump’s campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Moscow. However, the report outlined multiple instances where Trump tried to thwart Mueller’s probe.

Mueller stopped short of concluding whether Trump could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, a criminal charge that requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

But such a high standard would not apply to Democrats if they decided to bring impeachment proceedings.

In the days following the Mueller report’s release, McGahn came under attack from Trump’s personal attorney Rudolph Giuliani who called into question the veracity of his statements to Mueller’s team of prosecutors.

“I would ask which of the three versions is McGahn standing by. There are three versions he gives of that account,” Giuliani told CNN over the weekend. “I’m telling you, he’s confused.”

A prominent elections lawyer, McGahn served as Trump’s campaign counsel before being named White House counsel in November 2016.

He played a pivotal role in helping Trump reshape the federal judiciary in a conservative direction and roll back regulations on a range of industries.

Florida Voter Turnout in 2018 Buoyed by Youth, Hispanics

Voter turnout in Florida jumped to more than 52% in last year’s midterm elections from almost 45% in the 2014 midterm races, buoyed by increased ballot-casting by young voters and Hispanics, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures released Tuesday.

 

But even though the swing state had high-profile races for a U.S. Senate seat and for control of the governor’s office — as well as a prominent youth voter-registration drive — turnout actually was actually slightly lower than the national average.

 

Nationwide, more than 53% of voting-age citizens cast ballots, the highest rate in four decades, according to the bureau’s Current Population Survey’s Voting and Registration Supplement. The lowest turnout was in 2014.

 

Turnout by voting-age citizens between ages 18 and 24 in Florida went from 17.6% in 2014 to almost 30% in the 2018 midterms, the biggest jump of any age group, although all age groups saw increases, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

 

After a gunman killed 17 people at their high school in February 2018, students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and others led a statewide voter-registration drive among Florida’s youngest voters. Despite those efforts, Florida’s youth turnout lagged behind the national youth turnout average of 32.4%.

 

Hispanic turnout in Florida jumped from 36% in 2014 to more than 44% in 2018, going from 892,000 voters to almost 1.4 million voters in pure numbers in four years. Florida had an influx of Puerto Rican residents after Hurricane Maria devastated the island in September 2017, but the Census figures don’t break down how many of them voted in the 2018 midterm races.

In Florida, women voted in larger numbers than men, and seniors voted in a higher concentration than any other age group in the midterm elections last year.

 

The bureau’s figures showed that 54% of the female-citizen voting-age population cast ballots in 2018, compared to 51% of men. Both sexes had significant increases over 2014 when only 46% of eligible women and more than 43% of eligible men voted.

 

Almost two-thirds of eligible senior citizens in Florida voted in 2018, compared to 60% in 2014.

 

Non-Hispanic whites in Florida had the highest participation rate at 57% in 2018, followed by blacks with 47%. Asians had a rate of around 40%, a decrease from 43% in 2014.

 

In 2014, the participation rate for non-Hispanic whites was 47.5%, and it was 44% for blacks.

 

In November, Democrats flipped two U.S. congressional seats in South Florida, but Republican Rick Scott defeated Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson for a U.S. Senate seat.

Florida Voter Turnout in 2018 Buoyed by Youth, Hispanics

Voter turnout in Florida jumped to more than 52% in last year’s midterm elections from almost 45% in the 2014 midterm races, buoyed by increased ballot-casting by young voters and Hispanics, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures released Tuesday.

 

But even though the swing state had high-profile races for a U.S. Senate seat and for control of the governor’s office — as well as a prominent youth voter-registration drive — turnout actually was actually slightly lower than the national average.

 

Nationwide, more than 53% of voting-age citizens cast ballots, the highest rate in four decades, according to the bureau’s Current Population Survey’s Voting and Registration Supplement. The lowest turnout was in 2014.

 

Turnout by voting-age citizens between ages 18 and 24 in Florida went from 17.6% in 2014 to almost 30% in the 2018 midterms, the biggest jump of any age group, although all age groups saw increases, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

 

After a gunman killed 17 people at their high school in February 2018, students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and others led a statewide voter-registration drive among Florida’s youngest voters. Despite those efforts, Florida’s youth turnout lagged behind the national youth turnout average of 32.4%.

 

Hispanic turnout in Florida jumped from 36% in 2014 to more than 44% in 2018, going from 892,000 voters to almost 1.4 million voters in pure numbers in four years. Florida had an influx of Puerto Rican residents after Hurricane Maria devastated the island in September 2017, but the Census figures don’t break down how many of them voted in the 2018 midterm races.

In Florida, women voted in larger numbers than men, and seniors voted in a higher concentration than any other age group in the midterm elections last year.

 

The bureau’s figures showed that 54% of the female-citizen voting-age population cast ballots in 2018, compared to 51% of men. Both sexes had significant increases over 2014 when only 46% of eligible women and more than 43% of eligible men voted.

 

Almost two-thirds of eligible senior citizens in Florida voted in 2018, compared to 60% in 2014.

 

Non-Hispanic whites in Florida had the highest participation rate at 57% in 2018, followed by blacks with 47%. Asians had a rate of around 40%, a decrease from 43% in 2014.

 

In 2014, the participation rate for non-Hispanic whites was 47.5%, and it was 44% for blacks.

 

In November, Democrats flipped two U.S. congressional seats in South Florida, but Republican Rick Scott defeated Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson for a U.S. Senate seat.

NBC: Former US VP Biden to Announce Presidential Bid on Thursday

Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden plans to announce he is seeking the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination for the 2020 election on Thursday, NBC news reported.

Biden, who will join a crowded field seeking to win the White House back from Republican President Donald Trump, will then travel to Pittsburgh on Monday, followed by trips to all four early voting states in coming weeks, an NBC news reporter said on MSNBC, citing unnamed sources involved in the planning.

NBC: Former US VP Biden to Announce Presidential Bid on Thursday

Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden plans to announce he is seeking the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination for the 2020 election on Thursday, NBC news reported.

Biden, who will join a crowded field seeking to win the White House back from Republican President Donald Trump, will then travel to Pittsburgh on Monday, followed by trips to all four early voting states in coming weeks, an NBC news reporter said on MSNBC, citing unnamed sources involved in the planning.

Uganda Police Arrest Musician-Opposition Lawmaker ‘Bobi Wine’

Ugandan musician-turned-politician Robert Kyagulanyi, better known by his stage name Bobi Wine, has called for peaceful demonstrations after police on Tuesday refused to allow him to leave his home.  

On a Facebook post Tuesday, Kyagulanyi wrote that his home in Wakiso district, near the capital of Kampala, “is under siege. [Police] have surrounded my fence and installed barricades on all roads leading to my home.”

Kyagulanyi said that he had been headed to police headquarters to give notice of a “planned peaceful demonstration against police brutality, injustice and misuse of authority” but that he and his laywers “were blocked from delivering the letter and were ordered to leave or face arrest.” In response, his post urged defiance: “We shall go ahead and demonstrate peacefully as guaranteed by the constitution. This is our country.”

His post did not specify a time or location for any demonstration.

Kyagulanyi’s movement curbed

On Tuesday, police were heavily deployed on roads around Kyagulanyi’s house and all vehicles leaving his compound were thoroughly checked. 

Police had detained Kyagulanyi on Monday at a beach resort near Kampala, where he addressed supporters and was to hold a concert. Police used teargas and water cannons to disperse his supporters and then took the opposition politician to his home. 

Kyagulanyi had told VOA earlier Tuesday that he was not informed of his house arrest. When he walked to his gate to go to police headquarters, he was stopped by the district police commander.    

This led to an exchange between Kyagulanyi’s lawyer, Benjamin Katana, and police officer Jaffer Magyezi.

“My orders are: Either you go back to your house or you will be under arrest,” the officer said.  

“Is he under arrest now?” Katana asked about his client. “Because for someone’s movement to be restricted, he must be under arrest or quarantined. So is he under quarantine or he’s under house arrest?”

The officer responded to the musician: “Yesterday, you incited violence, of which you know you were charged.”

Kyagulanyi told supporters Monday that he had written to police three months in advance for permission to hold Sunday’s concert. He said Ugandan police have blocked 124 of his concerts since October 2017, acting on orders of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, “because he does not like what I sing. He wanted me to be like some other artists to be singing his praises.”

A show of strength?

Political analyst Muwanga Kivumbi says putting Kyagulanyi under house arrest sends Museveni’s message to Uganda that he controls the state. 

“ ‘I have the guns, am in control of police and prisons and all these things.  I’ll use them to leverage my position,’” Kivumbi said, imagining the president’s thinking. “The people of Uganda are saying, ‘Wait, you made the law.’  Actually, we are being so fair to the president that we are only telling him, be obedient to the law you attested to.”

The U.S. Embassy issued a statement on social media Tuesday questioning why Uganda’s government “has recently blocked musical concerts and radio talk shows, disrupted peaceful demonstrations and rallies, and deployed heavy-handed security forces against peaceful citizens.”

The embassy noted that Uganda’s constitution guarantees freedom of assembly and expression.

Ugandan government spokesman Ofwono Opondo responded in a Facebook post that his government “respects rule of law and constitutionalism which guarantees freedom of assembly, expression and movement.” He said the government “expects all leaders to abide by these standards. …”

Alluding to Kyagulanyi, Opondo continued: “Save for one artiste [sic], all artistes in Uganda enjoy freedom of performance. …”

VOA English to Africa Service’s James Butty contributed to this report.

Uganda Police Arrest Musician-Opposition Lawmaker ‘Bobi Wine’

Ugandan musician-turned-politician Robert Kyagulanyi, better known by his stage name Bobi Wine, has called for peaceful demonstrations after police on Tuesday refused to allow him to leave his home.  

On a Facebook post Tuesday, Kyagulanyi wrote that his home in Wakiso district, near the capital of Kampala, “is under siege. [Police] have surrounded my fence and installed barricades on all roads leading to my home.”

Kyagulanyi said that he had been headed to police headquarters to give notice of a “planned peaceful demonstration against police brutality, injustice and misuse of authority” but that he and his laywers “were blocked from delivering the letter and were ordered to leave or face arrest.” In response, his post urged defiance: “We shall go ahead and demonstrate peacefully as guaranteed by the constitution. This is our country.”

His post did not specify a time or location for any demonstration.

Kyagulanyi’s movement curbed

On Tuesday, police were heavily deployed on roads around Kyagulanyi’s house and all vehicles leaving his compound were thoroughly checked. 

Police had detained Kyagulanyi on Monday at a beach resort near Kampala, where he addressed supporters and was to hold a concert. Police used teargas and water cannons to disperse his supporters and then took the opposition politician to his home. 

Kyagulanyi had told VOA earlier Tuesday that he was not informed of his house arrest. When he walked to his gate to go to police headquarters, he was stopped by the district police commander.    

This led to an exchange between Kyagulanyi’s lawyer, Benjamin Katana, and police officer Jaffer Magyezi.

“My orders are: Either you go back to your house or you will be under arrest,” the officer said.  

“Is he under arrest now?” Katana asked about his client. “Because for someone’s movement to be restricted, he must be under arrest or quarantined. So is he under quarantine or he’s under house arrest?”

The officer responded to the musician: “Yesterday, you incited violence, of which you know you were charged.”

Kyagulanyi told supporters Monday that he had written to police three months in advance for permission to hold Sunday’s concert. He said Ugandan police have blocked 124 of his concerts since October 2017, acting on orders of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, “because he does not like what I sing. He wanted me to be like some other artists to be singing his praises.”

A show of strength?

Political analyst Muwanga Kivumbi says putting Kyagulanyi under house arrest sends Museveni’s message to Uganda that he controls the state. 

“ ‘I have the guns, am in control of police and prisons and all these things.  I’ll use them to leverage my position,’” Kivumbi said, imagining the president’s thinking. “The people of Uganda are saying, ‘Wait, you made the law.’  Actually, we are being so fair to the president that we are only telling him, be obedient to the law you attested to.”

The U.S. Embassy issued a statement on social media Tuesday questioning why Uganda’s government “has recently blocked musical concerts and radio talk shows, disrupted peaceful demonstrations and rallies, and deployed heavy-handed security forces against peaceful citizens.”

The embassy noted that Uganda’s constitution guarantees freedom of assembly and expression.

Ugandan government spokesman Ofwono Opondo responded in a Facebook post that his government “respects rule of law and constitutionalism which guarantees freedom of assembly, expression and movement.” He said the government “expects all leaders to abide by these standards. …”

Alluding to Kyagulanyi, Opondo continued: “Save for one artiste [sic], all artistes in Uganda enjoy freedom of performance. …”

VOA English to Africa Service’s James Butty contributed to this report.

US Supreme Court Conservatives Appear to Favor Census Citizenship Question

The conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court appeared sympathetic Tuesday to Trump administration arguments calling for the addition of a citizenship question in the country’s 2020 census, despite objections from big states and cities that the query would inhibit immigrants from taking part in the once-a-decade population count.

The five-member bloc of conservative justices holds sway on the nine-person court and seemed dismissive during an 80-minute hearing of contentions that the citizenship question could lead to 6.5 million people — many of them Hispanic immigrants — refusing to take part in next April’s survey.

The court’s newest member, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, an appointee of President Donald Trump, suggested that Congress could change the law to block the citizenship question if it felt that the query would affect the accuracy of the census. Chief Justice John Roberts said that citizenship information is critical in enforcing the country’s voting rights law, the contention offered by the Trump administration as the reason to add the question to the census form for the first time since 1950.

Reaching as accurate a total as possible in the census is important in the United States because it determines how many lawmakers each of the 50 states has in the 435-member House of Representatives for the next 10 years and each state’s share of more than $675 billion in federal funding for an array of government programs.

Three lower federal courts have blocked Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who oversees the census, from adding the citizenship question, finding that millions of non-citizens, often Hispanics, might avoid the census-takers for fear of running afoul of immigration authorities. Trump critics contend the citizenship question is an attempt to try to diminish the number of Democratic lawmakers in the House, where Democrats took control in January.

The case against the citizenship question was brought by New York state and other jurisdictions where large numbers of immigrants live.

New York Attorney General Letitia James said after the hearing that the citizenship question “will undermine the count. We must get the census right.”

For the majority of the people filling out the once-a-decade census, the answer to such a question would be easy: They are Americans by birth or naturalized citizens after arriving from other countries.

But Trump, who has embraced a tough stance against illegal immigration and pushed for construction of a wall on the southern border with Mexico to thwart the surge of migrants, also wants to include the citizenship question in an attempt to count the number of undocumented migrants in the country.

The precise figure is not known, but demographers say it could total about 11 million of the 328 million people in the United States.

Despite Ross’s decision to add the question to the survey, Census Bureau experts concluded that excluding the citizenship question would produce a more accurate figure for the U.S. population because undocumented immigrants might be reluctant to admit they are not U.S. citizens and refuse to answer the questions.

The Census Bureau estimated that 6.5 million people would avoid answering the questions if the citizenship query were to be included.

The Trump administration says it has wide discretion in designing the questionnaire and notes that the citizenship question has been asked on smaller annual population surveys. It says the question is needed to aid in the enforcement of the federal Voting Rights Act.

Some of the largest states and cities and rights groups are arguing against inclusion of the question, fearing an undercount in the census would hurt their interests, either in by cutting their congressional representation in as many as six states through the 2020’s or in federal funding.

The Nielsen television ratings company said Monday it also opposes inclusion of the citizenship question, saying an undercount of the U.S. population would adversely affect the U.S. media industry and other businesses that depend on accurate readings of consumer sentiment. Nielsen said its measurements of business trends could be inaccurate for a decade with the question added to the census.

After Tuesday’s hearing, the Supreme Court is expected to reach a decision by the end of June, giving the government enough time to print the census questionnaire before the April 2020 count.

 

US Supreme Court Conservatives Appear to Favor Census Citizenship Question

The conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court appeared sympathetic Tuesday to Trump administration arguments calling for the addition of a citizenship question in the country’s 2020 census, despite objections from big states and cities that the query would inhibit immigrants from taking part in the once-a-decade population count.

The five-member bloc of conservative justices holds sway on the nine-person court and seemed dismissive during an 80-minute hearing of contentions that the citizenship question could lead to 6.5 million people — many of them Hispanic immigrants — refusing to take part in next April’s survey.

The court’s newest member, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, an appointee of President Donald Trump, suggested that Congress could change the law to block the citizenship question if it felt that the query would affect the accuracy of the census. Chief Justice John Roberts said that citizenship information is critical in enforcing the country’s voting rights law, the contention offered by the Trump administration as the reason to add the question to the census form for the first time since 1950.

Reaching as accurate a total as possible in the census is important in the United States because it determines how many lawmakers each of the 50 states has in the 435-member House of Representatives for the next 10 years and each state’s share of more than $675 billion in federal funding for an array of government programs.

Three lower federal courts have blocked Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who oversees the census, from adding the citizenship question, finding that millions of non-citizens, often Hispanics, might avoid the census-takers for fear of running afoul of immigration authorities. Trump critics contend the citizenship question is an attempt to try to diminish the number of Democratic lawmakers in the House, where Democrats took control in January.

The case against the citizenship question was brought by New York state and other jurisdictions where large numbers of immigrants live.

New York Attorney General Letitia James said after the hearing that the citizenship question “will undermine the count. We must get the census right.”

For the majority of the people filling out the once-a-decade census, the answer to such a question would be easy: They are Americans by birth or naturalized citizens after arriving from other countries.

But Trump, who has embraced a tough stance against illegal immigration and pushed for construction of a wall on the southern border with Mexico to thwart the surge of migrants, also wants to include the citizenship question in an attempt to count the number of undocumented migrants in the country.

The precise figure is not known, but demographers say it could total about 11 million of the 328 million people in the United States.

Despite Ross’s decision to add the question to the survey, Census Bureau experts concluded that excluding the citizenship question would produce a more accurate figure for the U.S. population because undocumented immigrants might be reluctant to admit they are not U.S. citizens and refuse to answer the questions.

The Census Bureau estimated that 6.5 million people would avoid answering the questions if the citizenship query were to be included.

The Trump administration says it has wide discretion in designing the questionnaire and notes that the citizenship question has been asked on smaller annual population surveys. It says the question is needed to aid in the enforcement of the federal Voting Rights Act.

Some of the largest states and cities and rights groups are arguing against inclusion of the question, fearing an undercount in the census would hurt their interests, either in by cutting their congressional representation in as many as six states through the 2020’s or in federal funding.

The Nielsen television ratings company said Monday it also opposes inclusion of the citizenship question, saying an undercount of the U.S. population would adversely affect the U.S. media industry and other businesses that depend on accurate readings of consumer sentiment. Nielsen said its measurements of business trends could be inaccurate for a decade with the question added to the census.

After Tuesday’s hearing, the Supreme Court is expected to reach a decision by the end of June, giving the government enough time to print the census questionnaire before the April 2020 count.