More stories

  • in

    US preparing criminal charges over Iranian hack targeting Trump campaign

    The US justice department is preparing criminal charges in connection with an Iranian hack that targeted Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in a bid to shape the outcome of the November election, two people familiar with the matter said on Thursday.It was not immediately clear when the charges might be announced or whom precisely they will target, but they are the result of an FBI investigation into an intrusion that investigators across multiple agencies quickly linked to an Iranian effort to influence American politics.The prospect of criminal charges comes as the justice department has raised alarms about aggressive efforts by countries including Russia and Iran to meddle in the presidential election between Trump and Kamala Harris, including by hacking and covert social media campaigns designed to shape public opinion.Iran “is making a greater effort to influence this year’s election than it has in prior election cycles, and that Iranian activity is growing increasingly aggressive as this election nears”, Matthew Olsen, the assistant attorney general and the justice department’s top national security official, said in a speech on Thursday in New York City.“Iran perceives this year’s elections to be particularly consequential in impacting Iran’s national security interests, increasing Tehran’s inclination to try to shape the outcome,” he added.The Trump campaign disclosed on 10 August that it had been hacked and said Iranian actors had stolen and distributed sensitive internal documents. At least three news outlets – Politico, the New York Times and the Washington Post – were leaked confidential material from inside the Trump campaign. So far, each has refused to reveal any details about what it received.Politico reported that it began receiving emails on 22 July from an anonymous account. The source – an AOL email account identified only as “Robert” – passed along what appeared to be a research dossier that the campaign had apparently done on JD Vance, the Republican vice-presidential nominee. The document was dated 23 February, almost five months before Trump selected Vance as his running mate.The FBI, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency subsequently blamed that hack, as well as an attempted breach of the Biden-Harris campaign, on Iran.Those agencies issued a statement saying that the hacking and similar activities were meant to sow discord, exploit divisions within American society and influence the outcome of elections.The statement did not identify whether Iran has a preferred candidate, though Tehran has long appeared determined to seek retaliation for a 2020 strike Trump ordered as president that killed an Iranian general.The two people who discussed the looming criminal charges spoke on condition of anonymity to the Associated Press because they were not authorized to speak publicly about a case that had not yet been unsealed.The Washington Post first reported that charges were being prepared.Justice department officials have been working to publicly call out and counter election-interference efforts. The response is a contrast to 2016, when Obama administration officials were far more circumspect about Russian interference they were watching that was designed to boost Trump’s campaign.“We have learned that transparency about what we are seeing is critical,” Olsen, the justice department official, said Thursday.“It helps ensure that our citizens are aware of the attempts of foreign government to sow discord and spread falsehoods – all of which promotes resilience within our electorate,” he added. “It provides warnings to our private sector so they can better protect their networks. And it sends an unmistakable message to our adversaries – we’ve gained insight into your networks, we know what you’re doing, and we are determined to hold you accountable.”Last week, in an effort to combat disinformation before the election, the justice department charged two employees of RT, a Russian state media company, with covertly funneling a Tennessee-based content-creation company nearly $10m to publish English-language videos on social media platforms with messages in favor of the Russian government’s interests and agenda. More

  • in

    Judge dismisses two criminal counts against Trump in Georgia election case

    Donald Trump had two counts tossed from his criminal case in Georgia over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, after the presiding judge decided on Thursday they fell under the supremacy clause in the US constitution that bars state prosecutors from charging federal crimes.“The Supremacy Clause declares that state law must yield to federal law when the two conflict,” the Fulton county superior court judge Scott McAfee wrote in his order.The judge decided that two charges against Trump and an additional count against several Trump allies, who were charged as co-defendants, should be struck. But he decided the remainder of the indictment – including the Rico racketeering charge – could remain.Trump now faces eight charges, down from 13 charges. Trump pleaded not guilty to the sprawling 2020 election interference case in Fulton county last year along with 18 other co-defendants. Four have since taken plea deals and agreed to testify against the other defendants.The charges that were dismissed against Trump – the filing of false documents and conspiring to file false documents – related to the Trump campaign’s gambit to submit fake elector certificates declaring Trump as the winner even though he had lost.The fake elector certificates were then sent to the National Archives ahead of the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s election win on 6 January 2021, which the Fulton county district attorney Fani Willis charged as criminal forgery counts.“President Trump and his legal team in Georgia have prevailed once again. The trial court has decided that counts 15 and 27 in the indictment must be quashed/dismissed,” Trump’s lead lawyer, Steve Sadow, said in a statement.The 22-page order issued by McAfee comes as the fate of the case hangs in the balance ahead of the Georgia appeals court deciding whether Willis can continue with the case, following her alleged relationship with her deputy, Nathan Wade.McAfee declined to remove Willis from the case as long as Wade resigned to resolve the conflict of interest allegation, a decision that Trump’s lawyers have appealed.Trump’s attorneys continue to argue that Willis has a conflict of interest, but also argued that she should have been disqualified for comments she made about the case at a speech at Big Bethel AME church in downtown Atlanta. In the wake of revelations about her relationship with Wade, Willis attributed the legal attack to racist motivations.Separately on Thursday, McAfee rejected a motion from the former Trump lawyer John Eastman and Trump fake elector Shawn Still to toss the entire indictment on grounds that it relied on an overly broad interpretation of the Georgia state racketeering statute. More

  • in

    Trial begins in alleged ‘Trump Train’ ambush of Biden-Harris bus in 2020

    A jury trial opening in Austin, Texas, on Monday will seek to hold Trump supporters accountable for allegedly ambushing a Joe Biden-Kamala Harris campaign bus on the state’s main highway in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election.Plaintiffs in the lawsuit allege they were terrorised and intimidated for more than 90 minutes as they took a bus tour canvassing for the Democratic ticket in the final days of the election.At least 40 vehicles flying Make America great again flags formed themselves into a so-called “Trump Train” and encircled the bus, trying to run it off the road and playing what the suit claims was a “madcap game of highway ‘chicken’”.The plaintiffs, who include the bus driver, a Biden campaign staffer and Wendy Davis, the former Texas senator and Democratic gubernatorial candidate, say they were forced to cancel campaign events for fear that the intimidation would be repeated. They are pursuing punitive damages under both Texas law and the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, a federal statute from the Reconstruction period designed to end political violence and voter intimidation.Lawyers for the plaintiffs say the trial is a test of modern democratic safeguards.“The violence and intimidation that our plaintiffs endured on the highway for simply supporting the candidate of their choice is an affront to the democratic values we hold dear as Americans,” said co-counsel John Paredes, a litigator for Protect Democracy, one of the groups bringing the case.Monday’s case, Cervini v Cisneros, is one of the most substantial legal battles arising from acts of alleged political intimidation by Trump supporters in the 2020 election besides the 6 January 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol. Hundreds of criminal prosecutions have been brought around the events of January 6; by contrast, the Texas trial is a civil lawsuit brought in pursuit of damages by the plaintiffs.But it is extensive in scale, with five named defendants and an unknown number of additional unidentified John and Jane Does alleged to have been involved in a conspiracy to terrorise the Biden-Harris campaigners.The suit accuses the defendants of using force to intimidate a political opponent, claims they engaged in civil assault as well as civil conspiracy designed to stifle the political voice of the Biden-Harris campaign, and calls for punitive damages and compensation.Trouble began almost immediately after the Biden-Harris campaign announced it was staging a three-day “soul of the nation” bus tour through Texas on 27 October 2020. The tour was to take Biden surrogates to a number of featured rallies and gatherings.By 28 October, chatter had begun on social media platforms among Trump supporters calling for the formation of “Trump trains” – gatherings of trucks and other vehicles to demonstrate support for the re-election of the then Republican president. One Trump train member in Alamo posted that day that they should “flood the hell out of them”, in a reference to the Biden-Harris bus.That afternoon the then president’s son, Don Trump Jr, posted on Twitter (now X) an invitation to Trump supporters to assemble. He wrote: “It would be great if you guys would all get together and head down to McAllen and give Kamala Harris a nice Trump Train welcome. Get out there. Have some fun. Enjoy it.”Flag-waving trucks driven by Trump supporters began to follow the Biden-Harris bus on 28 and 29 October. One of the vehicles was decked out as a “Trump hearse”, and said on its bodywork that it was “collecting Democratic votes one dead stiff at a time”.Larger numbers of cars convened on Friday 30 October, with some Trump supporters attracted to the melee because they thought, wrongly, that Kamala Harris would be onboard the Democratic bus that day (she was in fact campaigning in McAllen and Fort Worth). The suit claims a group of Trump supporters conspired to ambush the bus on a stretch of Interstate 35 between San Antonio and Austin.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe vehicles in the Trump train swarmed around the tour bus, coming within inches of it and forcing the driver to slow to a crawl. Several of the participants livestreamed their actions on social media, bragging about their aggressive driving, the plaintiffs allege.One of the defendants, Eliazar Cisneros, is accused of side-swiping an SUV being driven by a Biden-Harris campaign staffer behind the bus. The complaint says that Cisneros later boasted about “slamming that fucker”.The occupants of the bus pleaded with police to provide an escort but none appeared. A separate case, Cervini v Stapp, was settled in October with local law enforcement admitting that they had fallen short of their standards and agreeing to pay compensation to those whose safety they failed to protect.The suit claims that the plaintiffs have suffered “ongoing psychological and emotional injury”. The bus driver, Timothy Holloway, was so traumatised that he gave up his tour bus business and has stopped driving buses.Wendy Davis, who is best known for the 11-hour speech she made in the Texas senate in 2013 to filibuster an anti-abortion bill, said she suffered “substantial emotional distress”. She feared speaking publicly about her experiences in the bus as it might put her at risk of physical harm from Trump supporters.At the trial, lawyers for the plaintiffs will make the case that while free speech is protected under the first amendment of the US constitution, intimidation and threats against people with different political beliefs is not. “Where groups are permitted to terrorize those with whom they disagree into forgoing their constitutional rights, the functioning of our democracy demands accountability,” the lawsuit says. More

  • in

    Trump pleads not guilty to revised 2020 election interference charges

    Donald Trump pleaded not guilty on Thursday, via his legal team, to the revised charges in his federal criminal election interference investigation, in the first hearing in the Washington DC case since the US supreme court gave its immunity ruling.The former US president and current Republican nominee for the White House in this November’s election was not present in federal court in the capital.The US district judge, Tanya Chutkan, said she would not set a schedule in the case at this status conference for the prosecution and defense teams, but hopes to do so later on Thursday.The case relates to Trump’s conduct surrounding events after he lost his re-election bid in November 2020 to his Democratic rival Joe Biden, culminating in the insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, by thousands of extreme Trump supporters intent on overturning the election result.Chutkan is hearing arguments about the potential next steps in the election subversion prosecution of Trump for the first time since the supreme court narrowed the case by ruling that former presidents are entitled to broad immunity from criminal charges.As the hearing opened, the judge noted that it has been almost a year since she had seen the lawyers in her courtroom. The case has been frozen since last December as Trump pursued his appeal.The defense lawyer John Lauro joked to the judge: “Life was almost meaningless without seeing you.”Chutkan replied: “Enjoy it while it lasts.”A not guilty plea was entered on Trump’s behalf for a revised indictment that the special counsel Jack Smith’s team filed last week to strip out certain allegations and comply with the supreme court’s ruling in July. Prosecutors have said they can be ready at any time to file a legal brief laying out its position on how to apply the justices’ immunity opinion to the case.Defense lawyers are challenging the legitimacy of the case and said they intend to file multiple motions to dismiss the case, including one that piggybacks off a Florida judge’s ruling that Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional.Neither side envisions a trial happening before the November election. The case is one of two federal prosecutions against Trump, in a host of legal cases. The other, charging him with illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, was dismissed in July by the US district judge Aileen Cannon, who said Smith’s appointment as special counsel was unlawful.Smith’s team has appealed that ruling. Trump’s lawyers say they intend to ask Chutkan to dismiss the election case on the same grounds.Reuters and the Associated Press contributed reporting. More

  • in

    Clarence Thomas’s wife thanks group for efforts to block court ethics reforms

    Ginni Thomas, the far-right activist wife of the supreme court justice Clarence Thomas, has thanked a religious liberties group for its efforts to block reforms of the court aimed at reining in the justices’ ethical breaches, including those of her husband.A new recording obtained by the investigative website ProPublica and the watchdog Documented discloses a July email in which Ginni Thomas thanked First Liberty Institute for fighting to oppose supreme court reforms. She specifically referred to White House proposals from Joe Biden designed to rein in wayward justices on the country’s highest court, of which her husband is the prime example.“I cannot adequately express enough appreciation for you guys pulling into reacting to the Biden effort on the supreme court. Many were so depressed by the lack of response by R[epublican]s and conservatives,” she said.Writing in all caps, she added: “YOU GUYS HAVE FILLED THE SAILS OF MANY JUDGES. CAN I JUST TELL YOU, THANK YOU SO, SO, SO MUCH.”The email was read out by the head of First Liberty Institute, Kelly Shackelford, on a 31 July call with donors to the group. He said the email had been written by Ginni Thomas that same day.Two days previously, Biden had called for sweeping changes to the court, including term limits for the nine justices and a code of ethics that would be enforced by an outside body. Under current arrangements, the justices are liable to a voluntary code which they individually police themselves.In an op-ed piece in the Washington Post, the US president explained why he thought a tougher code of ethics was now necessary. He pointed to “scandals involving several justices” that had damaged public confidence in the court, including “undisclosed gifts to justices” and “conflicts of interest connected with Jan 6 insurrectionists”.Biden did not mention names, but Clarence Thomas has been implicated in both types of ethically questionable behaviour. ProPublica has exposed the lavish international travel that the justice enjoyed courtesy of the Republican mega-donor Harlan Crow.A conflict of interest relating to the 6 January 2021 storming of the US Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump has also been revealed by the House committee investigating the insurrection. It showed that Ginni Thomas was deeply implicated in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in the lead-up to January 6, writing several messages to the then White House chief of staff Mark Meadows as the conspiracy unfolded.When the supreme court was asked to adjudicate on Trump’s request that White House records – which, it was later found, included Ginni Thomas’s messages – should not be disclosed to the House committee, only one justice sided with Trump: Clarence Thomas.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionFirst Liberty Institute is an influential player in rightwing judicial circles. With income of $25m, it has regularly argued cases before the supreme court calling for greater involvement of religion in the public square.The Republican speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, used to work as a lawyer for the group and has called Shackelford a mentor. More

  • in

    Hunter Biden tax trial: less politically fraught, but set to be just as lurid

    Hunter Biden may not be the political football he was when his father, Joe Biden, was still running for re-election as president, but he will be under a bright spotlight as he faces multiple counts of tax fraud and tax evasion in Los Angeles this week and, if found guilty, risks as long as 22 years behind bars.The case is likely to delve into all the lurid details of the younger Biden’s life – the millions he earned from lucrative foreign consultancies, his string of broken relationships and high-living Hollywood lifestyle, his crack cocaine addiction and the tens of thousands he spent on online pornography – that, not so long ago, had partisan Republicans chomping at the opportunity to inflict political damage on the incumbent in the Oval Office.Now, though, the political optics may be quite different since this trial, coming on top of an earlier one in June in which Hunter Biden was found guilty on a federal gun charge, will probably undermine the argument pushed by the former president Donald Trump and others that the Biden administration has politicized and “weaponized” the justice department to go after its enemies.It is even possible that the Hunter Biden trial will coincide with Trump’s sentencing in the first of his criminal trials in New York state, in which the former president was found guilty in May of 34 counts of falsifying records to cover up a sexual encounter he had with the adult film star Stormy Daniels. That sentencing has been set for 18 September, and if that date holds – the overlap with the Hunter Biden trial will only blunt Trump’s habitual rhetoric about being the victim of a rigged system, with Joe Biden as its mastermind.“So much for weaponization,” the former federal prosecutor Michael Zeldin told CNN after Hunter Biden’s last trial. “This is a testament to the fact that the justice department … is trying its very best to steer straight down the middle.”In Los Angeles, Hunter Biden will face nine charges stemming from his failure to file four years’ worth of taxes on time, including two felony counts of filing a false return and an additional felony count of tax evasion.The narrative presented by federal prosecutors in their indictment would make uneasy reading for any defendant, much less the son of a sitting president. Biden, the prosecutors allege, failed to file his taxes on time from 2016 to 2019, despite earning millions of dollars from his consultancy work with the Ukrainian industrial conglomerate Burisma and a Chinese private equity firm.When he did eventually file his 2018 return, the indictment further alleges, he mischaracterized personal expenditures as business deductions, including college tuition fees for his children and more than $27,000 that he spent on online pornography.Biden cannot legitimately plead financial hardship, prosecutors say, because he was earning more than enough to meet his tax obligations and because a well-connected Hollywood entertainment lawyer named Kevin Morris, referred to in the indictment as “personal friend”, spotted him $1.2m, which he spent on a lavish rental property near Venice Beach, a Porsche and other items.“Between 2016 and October 15, 2020,” the indictment goes on, “the Defendant spent [his] money on drugs, escorts and girlfriends, luxury hotels and rental properties, exotic cars, clothing, and other items of a personal nature, in short, everything but his taxes.”In pre-trial hearings, Biden’s defense team has not challenged the facts of what paperwork he filed and what payments he made when. Rather, they appear poised to make an argument about diminished responsibility, pointing to his drug addiction during the years under scrutiny and seeking to explain it as a result of trauma going all the way back to Hunter Biden’s childhood, when his mother and sister were killed in a car crash.“They [the prosecution] are creating a portrait for the jury of someone who was plopped down in West Hollywood and decided to just party and do cocaine as if he didn’t have a care in the world,” Biden’s lead counsel, the celebrity lawyer Mark Geragos, complained in court last month. Out of context, Geragos argued, such a depiction was “a form of character assassination” and a deliberate attempt by the prosecution to make his client “look bad”.The judge, Mark Scarsi, gave such arguments short shrift, denying Geragos’s request to introduce evidence about his client’s childhood and warning him that violating this ruling could lead to “six-figure sanctions”. “I don’t know if there’s any good evidence as to what causes addiction,” Scarsi said. “Why is the cause of Mr Biden’s addiction relevant?”The prosecution made a similar point. “No matter how many drugs you take,” the assistant US attorney Leo Wise said, “you don’t suddenly forget that when you make $11m, you have to pay taxes.”Unlike the gun trial in Delaware in June, this case will probably revive controversy over Hunter Biden’s business connections – since they account for his high salary – and the question, which Republicans have been pushing hard for years, of whether he owed these connections to his family’s name and influence.In a report concluding an abortive attempt to bring impeachment charges against Joe Biden, Republican House representatives claimed once again last week that Hunter Biden had taken advantage of his father’s position as vice-president under Barack Obama to obtain “favorable outcomes in foreign business dealings and legal proceedings”.The allegation about foreign business dealings may still sting, even if it no longer has the same potency now that Biden has stepped aside as the Democratic nominee in favor of Kamala Harris. The allegation about legal proceedings, meanwhile, might be short-lived if the jury returns the second guilty verdict against Hunter Biden in four months.Jury selection begins on Thursday, with opening arguments expected on Monday 9 September. Lawyers for both sides have said the trial is likely to last about two weeks. More

  • in

    Erwin Chemerinsky on the need for a new US constitution: ‘Our democracy is at grave risk’

    Among progressive scholars of the US constitution, Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of Berkeley Law, is widely considered pre-eminent. Now 71, he studied at Northwestern and Harvard and has also taught at DePaul, USC, Duke and UC Irvine. He has argued several cases at the US supreme court and written extensively about it.His last book, Worse Than Nothing, was a broadside against originalism, the doctrine touted by rightwing justices as they take an axe to hard-won rights. In his new book, Chemerinsky goes to the root of the problem with a still starker title: No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States.Less than a hundred days from a presidential election which could see the return of Donald Trump, a candidate widely held to threaten cherished freedoms, Chemerinsky says: “I see an American government that is increasingly dysfunctional and that has lost the confidence of the people, in a society that is increasingly politically polarised. I worry greatly for the future of American democracy.View image in fullscreen“I wrote the book to explain how much of the problem stems from the constitution and suggest how it can be fixed.”In conversation, Chemerinsky patiently outlines the problem. It boils down to this: the US constitution is not fit for purpose.It was created in 1787 by a small group of white men who hashed out a deal in their own interests, chief among them protecting smaller states and owners of enslaved people. Those framers made foundation stones of economic and racial inequality and also erected enduring barriers to political equality including an electoral college that makes minority victory possible in presidential elections and two senators for each state regardless of population.The constitution has been changed, significantly in 1791, with the 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights, and between 1865 and 1870, after the civil war, with amendments to abolish slavery, expand the citizenry and give Black men the vote. There have been other major changes, not least the 19th amendment, which gave women the vote in 1920. A century later, though, change seems harder than ever.Consider the plight of the Equal Rights Amendment, which simply says “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex” and which, as Chemerinsky describes it, “was passed overwhelmingly by Congress in 1972” as “a simple and un-objectionable statement”, but “even though 38 states at some point ratified it … is still not part of the constitution”.The ERA is stymied by pure politics. Pure politics – as practised by Republicans who benefit most from the enshrinement of minority control, as found in the stubborn persistence of Senate rules such as the filibuster that exist to block change – is of course eternal. And so as another election year grinds on, Democrats hoping to fend off Trump, Republicans seeking to tighten their grip on the levers of power, there the constitution sits, physically in the National Archives in Washington, theoretically near-impossible to change.Chemerinsky offers pointers to how change might be achieved – mostly by Democrats winning majorities in statehouses and Congress and working to sway public opinion towards the need for radical change, via a new constitutional convention. But he concludes with striking pessimism.“Our government is broken and our democracy is at grave risk, but I don’t see any easy solutions,” he writes. “A book that describes problems ideally should offer realistic fixes, but none are apparent … I desperately want to be wrong, either about my premise (that American democracy faces a serious crisis), or my conclusion (that fixing the problems will be hugely difficult or even impossible).”In conversation, Chemerinsky strikes a more hopeful note.“The constitution is revered,” he says, referring not just to the document itself but to rhetoric, teaching and even popular entertainment that has made demigods of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and other framers. “That reverence has a cost in that it has kept us from focusing on its flaws and how much they contribute to our crisis of democracy.“I have argued that there should be a progressive interpretation of the constitution. But I also think it is time to begin considering a new constitution. I think people could ratify a new constitution even though this mechanism is not provided for in the constitution.”In short, as in most aspects of politics, it’s all a matter of will.On the page, Chemerinsky also devotes space to the question of free speech, a right guaranteed by the first amendment but forever contested. Among progressives, such contests now rage regarding protests against US support for Israel in its war in Gaza. Last April, that debate burst into Chemerinsky’s backyard – literally. A traditional dinner for students, given with his wife, the law professor Catherine Fisk, was interrupted by protesters.As Chemerinsky wrote, for the Atlantic, he was “stunned to see the leader of Law Students for Justice in Palestine … stand up with a microphone that she had brought … and begin reading a speech about the plight of the Palestinians”.Chemerinsky and Fisk “immediately approached her and asked her to stop speaking and leave the premises. The protester continued. At one point, [Fisk] attempted to take away her microphone. Repeatedly, we said to her: ‘You are a guest in our home. Please leave.’“The student insisted that she had free-speech rights. But our home is not a forum for free speech; it is our own property, and the first amendment – which constrains the government’s power to encroach on speech on public property – does not apply at all to guests in private backyards.”It was one dramatic and traumatic event in an episode that has turned the left against itself. Understandably, Chemerinsky is guarded about what happened in his backyard in April and its implications. But he is happy to explain his approach to free speech issues.“Absolutism rarely makes sense,” he says. “Free speech cannot be absolute. Perjury is speech, but it can be punished. An employer who says to an employee, ‘Sleep with me or you’re fired,’ is engaged in speech, but can be held liable. No one suggests gun rights can be absolute. No one believes that there is a right to have guns in courthouses or airports.”No one in normal society, perhaps. In the age of Trump, extreme beliefs surge.Chemerinsky also grapples with the specter of secession, amid increasing debate over the idea that in an age of deep division, states either right or left, red or blue, might decide to start out anew, perhaps prompting a new civil war.To Chemerinsky, secession by progressive states is just as possible as a rightwing move to secede, particularly if Trump wins the White House and Republicans take full control of Congress.“I do not think secession is likely,” he says, “and I certainly don’t think it is desirable. But I think it is a possible path we could be discussing more in the years ahead if there are not changes.”

    No Democracy Lasts Forever is published in the US by Liveright More

  • in

    Georgia election workers ask court for control of Giuliani’s assets over $148m judgment

    Two Georgia election workers asked a federal judge on Friday to give them control over Rudy Giuliani’s assets as they sought to enforce a $148m defamation judgment the former New York City mayor owes them.According to a court filing on Friday, lawyers for Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss want a court to give them control over Giuliani’s New York City apartment, estimated to be worth more than $5m, as well as his condominium in Palm Beach. They also want him to turn over personal property, including a 1980 Mercedes-Benz SL500, jewelry, luxury watches and sports memorabilia, including Yankees World Series rings and jerseys signed by Joe DiMaggio and Reggie Jackson.They are also seeking the right to $2m in legal fees Giuliani says he is owed by Donald Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee.They also want a separate order from the court allowing them to take control over assets Giuliani does not turn over.The move comes after Giuliani has spent months trying to avoid paying the $148m judgment he owes Freeman and Moss. He is appealing the defamation judgment and tried to declare bankruptcy, but the case was dismissed after a judge said Giuliani had not been transparent about his finances. While Giuliani has insisted he does not have much money, his continued high spending has raised eyebrows.“At every step, Mr. Giuliani has chosen evasion, obstruction, and outright disobedience. That strategy reaches the end of the line here,” lawyers for Freeman and Moss wrote in the filing.“The appeal of the objectively unreasonable $148 million verdict hasn’t even been heard, yet opposing counsel continues to take steps designed to harass and intimidate Mayor Rudy Giuliani,” Ted Goodman, a Giuliani spokesperson said in a text message. “This lawsuit has always been designed to censor and bully the mayor, and to deter others from exercising their right to speak up and to speak out.”Freeman and Moss were both election workers at State Farm Arena in Atlanta during the 2020 election. Giuliani repeatedly spread false information about them as part of his effort to overturn the election on behalf of Trump, circulating a misleading and debunked video of them counting ballots. Both women have been cleared of wrongdoing.Giuliani refused to turn over documents in the defamation case, so a federal judge in Washington DC entered a default judgment against him last year. During a trial on the damages portion of the case, Freeman and Moss both testified extensively about the viscous harassment they continue to face and their fear of appearing in public.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe lawsuit is one of several cases testing whether libel law can be an effective tool for curbing disinformation in the United States. Being able to enforce the judgment against Giuliani is seen as an essential part of ensuring accountability for his lies about the 2020 election.Giuliani faces other defamation suits as well as criminal charges in Georgia and Arizona over his efforts to try and overturn the 2020 election. More