United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Why Yes-or-No Questions on Abortion Rights Could Be a Key to 2024

      by

      In states that will help decide control of the White House and Congress, Democrats are campaigning furiously alongside ballot measures to protect abortion rights, putting Republicans on their heels.As Democrats confront a presidential race against a resurgent and resilient Donald J. Trump as well as a brutally challenging Senate map, they believe they have an increasingly powerful political weapon: ballot measures to protect abortion rights.Two crucial presidential and Senate battlegrounds, Arizona and Nevada, are expected to put such measures directly before voters. So are other states with top Senate races, including Maryland and potentially Montana. And abortion rights measures are set or could appear on ballots in states like New York, Florida and Nebraska, where competitive contests could help determine whether Democrats win back the House.Hopeful Democrats — and worried Republicans — are acutely aware that in all seven states where abortion has been put directly to voters since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the abortion rights side has won, in both red states like Ohio and Kansas as well as swing states like Michigan. Those measures have sometimes fueled surges in liberal turnout that have lifted Democratic candidates to victory, as well.So in every state where an abortion measure is already on the 2024 ballot or could yet appear, Democratic candidates, state parties and allied groups are campaigning furiously alongside the ballot initiatives, running ads, helping pour money behind them and bringing up the measures in speech after speech.In Arizona, where Democrats are trying to flip the Legislature, the party’s candidates have gone so far as to collect signatures for the state’s ballot measure as they knock on voters’ doors.“When the abortion petition initiative came out, it was a no-brainer that I would carry it with me,” said Brandy Reese, a Democrat running for the Arizona House who said she had gathered dozens of signatures while campaigning. “I introduce myself as a pro-choice candidate running, and you can instantly tell in people’s body language that they’re excited to hear that.”The wave of abortion referendums — some of which are not officially on the ballot yet but most of which have enough signatures to get there, according to organizers — is adding new unpredictability to an election season already convulsed by Mr. Trump’s criminal cases and wrenching questions about the future of the country’s democracy.With polls showing that a majority of Americans think abortion should be legal in all or most cases, the measures could serve as a political life raft at a time when President Biden faces stubbornly low approval ratings and skepticism within his party. Democrats hope the ballot initiatives will increase turnout among core voters like suburban women, young people and African Americans.“The ballot initiatives are well-funded and well-organized efforts,” said Christina Freundlich, a Democratic strategist. “It’s creating a tremendous sense of energy not only within the Democratic Party but with voters across the board.”Party leaders are echoing that message.“Momentum is on our side,” Vice President Kamala Harris said at an abortion rights event on Wednesday in Jacksonville, Fla. “Just think about it: Since Roe was overturned, every time reproductive freedom has been on the ballot, the people of America voted for freedom.”Beyond electoral politics, the ballot initiatives regarding abortion have driven huge interest and turnout because of their direct impact on voters’ lives. In Florida, for example, a newly enforced ban on nearly all abortions in the state has cut off a critical access point to patients across the Southeast. In Arizona, lawmakers this week repealed a near-total ban on abortions — but the state is now set to enforce a 15-week ban with no exceptions for rape or incest.Medical practitioners have also expressed concerns about facing criminal penalties under the bans.“The fear of that is just devastating,” said Mona Mangat, board chair of the Committee to Protect Health Care, an advocacy group that is supporting ballot initiatives in several states. “It’s going to be devastating for practitioners and devastating for patients.”Ms. Mangat said the restrictions could affect whether doctors wanted to move to those states to practice medicine or attend residency programs.In Nevada, abortion is legal within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy. Organizers there are collecting signatures to place an amendment on the ballot that would establish a right to an abortion in the State Constitution. Key Democrats in the state, including Senator Jacky Rosen, who is facing a close re-election fight, have signed onto the petition.Representative Dina Titus, another Nevada Democrat, said in an interview that the amendment would still motivate voters to turn out, especially young people, even without the driving force of overturning far-reaching restrictions. “We’ll talk about it in terms of how this will really protect women,” Ms. Titus said. “And we’ll use it to attract young women and just young people generally to the polls, because they will suddenly realize something they took for granted is not going to be available.”Representative Dina Titus and other Nevada Democrats believe that the state’s proposed amendment to enshrine abortion rights in its Constitution will drive up liberal turnout.Elizabeth Frantz/ReutersRepublican candidates and their allies have appeared reluctant to directly campaign against ballot measures to protect abortion rights, though some G.O.P. leaders have voiced opposition. In Ohio, Gov. Mike DeWine recorded a video opposing the state’s initiative last year, and in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis has said the current ballot measure is too broad. “To nuke parental consent for minors is totally unacceptable,” he said at an event last month.Some Republicans openly worry that restrictive measures like Florida’s may play into the hands of Democrats, given how abortion referendums in recent cycles have unfolded.“Kansas and Ohio to me is what everyone should be looking at,” said Vicki Lopez, a state representative from Miami who was one of a handful of Republican legislators to vote against Florida’s six-week ban. Voters will now decide in November whether to add a right to an abortion to the State Constitution, with a question known as Amendment Four. “This will be a test.”But Ms. Lopez added that it would be a mistake to assume that “everyone who votes for Amendment Four is actually going to then vote for Biden.”Regardless, Democrats believe they have the advantage. In a memo last month, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee wrote that “reproductive freedom will remain a driving issue for voters this November” and that the group would “ensure that House Republicans’ efforts to ban abortion nationwide are top of mind as voters head to the polls.”The D.C.C.C. said it had identified 18 competitive House seats in states where abortion measures are likely to be on the ballot. Republicans are trying to protect a slim House majority.Money for the ballot measures has cascaded in from both major liberal groups and small donors. Some so-called dark money organizations, whose donors are not disclosed, have contributed millions, including the Open Society Policy Center, the Sixteen Thirty Fund and the Fairness Project. Other advocacy groups, like Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union, have also contributed seven figures.Think Big America, an abortion rights group started by Gov. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois, has spent heavily to support abortion initiatives. After dropping $1 million in Ohio last year, it has already spent $1 million in Arizona and Nevada and has made what it called a “quick investment” of $500,000 in Montana, where the issue is not yet on the November ballot.“This has a power to not only turn out Democrats but also make sure that folks that are on the fence — swing voters, independents, persuadable voters — are coming over to the side that has had a longstanding belief in reproductive freedom,” said Michael Ollen, the executive director of Think Big America.In Arizona, Gov. Katie Hobbs has directed her well-funded state political action committee, Arizona Communities United, to focus heavily on the ballot initiative.Ms. Hobbs, who has navigated slim Republican majorities in the Legislature for the first two years of her term, has made flipping both chambers a main goal for 2024, and she views the ballot measure as a central part of that effort.Gov. Katie Hobbs of Arizona has directed her state political action committee to focus heavily on the state’s ballot measure. Mark Henle/The Republic, via USA Today NetworkIn Nevada, the Biden campaign has invited ballot initiative organizers to collect signatures at events featuring Jill Biden and Ms. Harris.Giving a speech in the state last month, Ms. Harris thanked the signature gatherers in the audience. They responded by holding up their clipboards and cheering.“We’re going to win this ballot initiative,” the vice president said. “And Joe Biden and I are going back to the White House.”Patricia Mazzei More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Refuses to Commit to Accepting Election Outcome in Milwaukee Interview

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump told The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Wednesday that he would not commit to accepting the results of the 2024 election, as he again repeated his lies that the 2020 election was stolen from him.“If everything’s honest, I’ll gladly accept the results. I don’t change on that,” Mr. Trump said, according to The Journal Sentinel. “If it’s not, you have to fight for the right of the country.”In an interview with Time magazine published on Tuesday, he also dismissed questions about political violence in November by suggesting that his victory was inevitable.When pressed about what might happen should he lose, he said, “if we don’t win, you know, it depends. It always depends on the fairness of an election.”Mr. Trump’s insistent and fraudulent claims that the 2020 election was unfair were at the heart of his efforts to overturn his loss to President Biden, and to the violent storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, by a mob of supporters who believed his claims. Mr. Trump now faces dozens of felony charges in connection with those events.Mr. Trump’s vow to “fight for the right of the country” also echoes his speech on the Ellipse on Jan. 6, where he told his supporters that “if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” before urging his supporters to march to the Capitol.As he campaigns in battleground states this year, Mr. Trump has repeatedly tried to sow doubt about the integrity of the fall election, while repeating many of the same lies that he used to assail the integrity of the 2020 election. Months before any voting has taken place, Mr. Trump has regularly made the baseless claim that Democrats are likely to cheat to win.“Democrats rigged the presidential election in 2020, but we’re not going to allow them to rig the presidential election — the most important day of our lives — in 2024,” Mr. Trump said at a rally in Freeland, Mich.The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Mr. Trump has for years promoted the lie that he won Wisconsin in 2020, and he did so again in the Journal Sentinel interview. Even after Jan. 6, 2021, and years after his exit from office, he has repeatedly pressured Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, the top Republican in the State Legislature, to help overturn Mr. Trump’s loss in the state and to impeach the state’s nonpartisan chief of elections.More than 1,250 people have been charged with crimes in connection to the Jan. 6 attack — and hundreds of people have been convicted. Mr. Trump said in a recent interview that he would “absolutely” consider pardoning every person convicted on charges related to the storming of the Capitol. A bipartisan Senate report found that at least seven people died in connection with that attack.The former president and his allies have also installed election deniers in influential positions in his campaign and in Republican Party institutions. In March, Trump allies newly installed to the leadership of the Republican National Committee appointed Christina Bobb, a former host at the far-right One America News Network, as senior counsel for election integrity. A self-described conspiracy theorist, she has relentlessly promoted false claims that the 2020 election was stolen.Ms. Bobb was indicted in Arizona last week, along with all of the fake electors who acted on Mr. Trump’s behalf in that state and others, on charges related to what the authorities say were attempts by the defendants to overturn the 2020 election results in Arizona.The Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee have made an aggressive approach to “election integrity” — a broad term often used by Republicans to cast doubt on elections that the party lost — central to their efforts heading toward November.Last month, the committee announced a plan to train and dispatch more than 100,000 volunteers and lawyers to monitor the electoral process in each battleground state and to mount aggressive challenges.On Wednesday, Mr. Trump said at the rally in Freeland that his campaign and national and state Republican parties would put together “a team of the most highly qualified lawyers and other professionals in the country to ensure that what happened in 2020 will never happen again.”“I will secure our elections because you know what happened in 2020,” Mr. Trump said at a rally in Waukesha, Wis., on Wednesday.Mr. Trump lost Wisconsin by more than 20,000 votes. More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Acknowledges He Wanted to Go to the Capitol on Jan. 6

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump said on Wednesday that he asked his Secret Service detail to take him to the Capitol after his speech at the Ellipse on Jan. 6, 2021, acknowledging a key detail of his actions that were central to the findings of the House committee established to investigate the attack.During a campaign rally in Waukesha, Wis., Mr. Trump brought up a sensational but disputed element of testimony given to the House Jan. 6 committee by a Trump White House aide: that Mr. Trump had lunged for the wheel and physically struggled with Secret Service agents when they refused to take him to join the large crowd of supporters who were marching toward the Capitol.“I sat in the back,” Mr. Trump said, giving his version of events. “And you know what I did say? I said, ‘I’d like to go down there because I see a lot of people walking down.’ They said, ‘Sir, it’s better if you don’t.’ I said, ‘Well, I’d like to.’”“It’s better if you don’t,” Mr. Trump recounted an agent saying. The former president said he replied, “All right, whatever you guys think is fine,” and added, “That was the whole tone of the conversation.”President Biden’s campaign immediately highlighted Mr. Trump’s comments, amplifying that the former president had intended to participate in what would become an attack by his supporters on the Capitol in an effort to overturn Mr. Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.It is not the first time that Mr. Trump has spoken of his effort to go to the Capitol on Jan. 6. He has said in several interviews that he regretted not marching on the Capitol with his supporters that day, and that his Secret Service detail prevented him from doing so.“Secret Service said I couldn’t go,” Mr. Trump said in an interview with The Washington Post in April 2022. “I would have gone there in a minute.”Cassidy Hutchinson, the former White House aide, later testified to Mr. Trump’s conversation with Secret Service agents during televised hearings held by the House Jan. 6 committee. Ms. Hutchinson was not in the car with Mr. Trump, and said that her testimony to those events came secondhand or thirdhand from what other people had told her that day.In an interview with the same committee, Mr. Trump’s driver, whose name was not disclosed, said: “The president was insistent on going to the Capitol. It was clear to me he wanted to go to the Capitol.”Mr. Trump at the rally on Wednesday portrayed his requests to his Secret Service detail as casual ones.In the interview with investigators for the House panel, the driver said that while he did not see Mr. Trump accost agents or reach for the steering wheel, “what stood out was the irritation in his voice, more than his physical presence.”After Mr. Trump was driven back to the White House by his Secret Service detail, the former president sat and watched the ensuing violence play out on television, according to testimony by an array of former administration officials. After Mr. Trump’s speech at the Ellipse where he repeated his false claims that the election was stolen from him and urged attendees to march on the Capitol, a mob of his supporters overran police barricades to storm the building, temporarily disrupting the certification of Mr. Biden’s victory.In a lengthy interview with Time magazine published on Tuesday, Mr. Trump said he would “absolutely” consider pardoning every person who had been convicted on, or pleaded guilty to, charges related to the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6. He also would not rule out the possibility of political violence after this year’s election.“I think we’re going to win,” he said. “And if we don’t win, you know, it depends. It always depends on the fairness of an election.” More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Democrats Reintroduce Legislation to Legalize Marijuana

      by

      The bill, which reflects growing support for legalization, would end the federal prohibition on cannabis. But it is unlikely to pass in an election year and a divided government.Senate Democrats reintroduced broad legislation on Wednesday to legalize cannabis on the federal level, a major policy shift with wide public support, but it is unlikely to be enacted this year ahead of November’s elections and in a divided government.The bill, which amounts to a Democratic wish list for federal cannabis policy, would end the federal prohibition on marijuana by removing it from a controlled substances list. The government currently classifies the drug as among the most dangerous and addictive substances.The legislation would create a new framework regulating cannabis and taxing the burgeoning cannabis industry, expunge certain federal marijuana-related offenses from criminal records, expand research into marijuana’s health impacts and devote federal money to helping communities and individuals affected by the war on drugs.The measure, which was first introduced in 2022, was led by Senators Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader; Ron Wyden of Oregon, the chairman of the Finance Committee, and Cory Booker of New Jersey. Fifteen other Senate Democrats have signed on as co-sponsors.“Over the decades, millions of Americans, most often Americans of color, have had their lives derailed and destroyed by our country’s failed war on drugs,” Mr. Schumer, the first majority leader to call for federal legalization, said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. “In place of the war on drugs, our bill would lay the foundation for something very different: a just and responsible and common-sense approach to cannabis regulation.”He reintroduced the measure one day after the Justice Department recommended easing restrictions on cannabis and downgrading it to a lower classification on the controlled substances list. That move did not go as far as some advocates and many Democrats have urged, but it was a significant shift reflecting the Biden administration’s efforts to liberalize marijuana policy.“Reclassifying cannabis is a necessary and long-overdue step, but it is not at all the end of the story,” Mr. Schumer said. “It’s time for Congress to wake up to the times and do its part by passing the cannabis reform that most Americans have long called for. It’s past time for Congress to catch up with public opinion and to catch up with the science.”But despite support from top Democrats, the legislation is highly unlikely to move in Congress during this election year. Republicans, many of whom have opposed federal cannabis legalization, control the House, and none have signed on to the bill. Congress has also labored to perform even the most basic duties of governance amid deep divisions within the Republican majority in the House. And few must-pass bills remain, leaving proponents without many opportunities to slip it into a bigger legislative package.Kevin Sabet, who served as a drug policy adviser during the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations, warned about the dangers of legalization and argued that such a bill would “commercialize” the marijuana industry and create “Big Tobacco 2.0.”“Let’s not commercialize marijuana in the name of social justice,” said Mr. Sabet, now the president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, an anti-legalization advocacy group. While he supported certain elements of the bill, such as expunging criminal records and removing criminal penalties for marijuana use, he said legalization was ultimately about “supersizing a commercial industry.”“And we really have to think long and hard after our horrible experience with Big Tobacco in our country,” he said, “whether that’s going to be good for us or not.”Still, the legislation reflects growing support among Democrats and across the country in both Republican- and Democratic-leaning states for legalizing access to marijuana, in addition to the issue’s potential political value ahead of an expected election rematch between President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump.Legalization, in some form, is broadly popular across the country, with 88 percent of Americans saying marijuana should be legal for medical or recreational use, according to a January survey by the Pew Research Center. Twenty-four states have legalized small amounts of marijuana for adult recreational use, and 38 states have approved it for medicinal purposes. And where marijuana legalization has appeared on state ballots, it has won easily, often outperforming candidates in either party.Advocates of legalization have emphasized the issue’s political potency in trying to convince elected officials.“If anybody was looking at the political tea leaves, they would have to realize that obstructing cannabis policy reform — it is a losing proposition as a politician,” said Morgan Fox, the political director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, an advocacy group. “This is really a rallying point for people that care about cannabis policy reform.”At least one Democrat, Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, a leading cannabis advocate in Congress, has urged the Biden administration to embrace full legalization and make it a more prominent part of Mr. Biden’s re-election campaign. He has argued that the issue could help the president engage young people, whose support for him has faltered, but who could be crucial to victory in November.The Biden administration’s move to downgrade cannabis on the controlled substances list also reflects the president’s evolution on the issue. Mr. Biden has pardoned thousands of people convicted of nonviolent drug offenses in an effort to remedy racial disparities in the justice system. And Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, has emphasized that Mr. Biden had been “very, very clear he doesn’t believe that anyone should be in jail or be prosecuted just for using or possessing marijuana.”Mr. Trump’s record on legalization is more mixed. In 2018, his administration freed prosecutors to aggressively enforce federal marijuana restrictions in states that had eased prohibitions on the drug. Mr. Trump later appeared to break with his administration, saying he was likely to support a legislative proposal to leave legalization to states, and he pardoned several nonviolent drug offenders.“This has not been an issue that is really coming up in conversation, at rallies or in media appearances and whatnot,” Mr. Fox said. “It’s kind of an unknown, how a future Trump administration would deal with cannabis.”Congress is considering more incremental bills that would ease restrictions on marijuana — such as by allowing legal cannabis businesses to access financial services — several of which have bipartisan support. But most are not expected to move during this Congress, given Republican opposition. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Republicans Call on NPR’s Chief, Katherine Maher, to Testify on Bias

      by

      Katherine Maher, the radio network’s new chief executive, has been in the spotlight since an editor published an essay accusing the organization of leftward-leaning bias.Congressional Republicans on Wednesday said they had asked NPR’s new chief executive, Katherine Maher, to address accusations of political bias in the radio network’s journalism during a hearing next week.A trio of Republican lawmakers — Representatives Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, Bob Latta of Ohio and Morgan Griffith of Virginia — sent a six-page letter to Ms. Maher that notified her of an investigation into the network and requested her appearance on May 8. “As a taxpayer funded, public radio organization, NPR should focus on fair and objective news reporting that both considers and reflects the views of the larger U.S. population and not just a niche audience,” the letter said.The lawmakers, all members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said the hearing would be held by the panel’s oversight subcommittee. NPR declined to comment, but Ms. Maher may have a scheduling conflict. According to an agenda of NPR’s upcoming board of directors meeting, Ms. Maher is scheduled to convene with NPR’s board all day on May 8.NPR has been scrutinized by conservatives in recent weeks after the publication of an essay by Uri Berliner, a former senior editor at the network, who said that the network had allowed progressive politics to affect its coverage of major stories. Mr. Berliner, who has since resigned, cited the network’s coverage of the Covid-19 pandemic, the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and Hunter Biden’s laptop as examples of bias.Mr. Berliner’s essay has generated vociferous pushback from many employees at NPR, who say that many of his points were factually inaccurate. Tony Cavin, NPR’s managing editor for standards, has said the network’s coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop, the Covid-19 pandemic and the investigation into Russian collusion by Robert S. Mueller III, a special counsel, hewed closely to responsible coverage by other mainstream news organizations. Ms. Maher, who joined the network this year, has personally been targeted by conservative activists who have combed through her social media history and resurfaced posts that promoted progressive causes and critiqued former President Donald J. Trump. In one post, from 2018, Ms. Maher called Mr. Trump a “racist”; another from 2020 showed her wearing a hat with the logo of the Biden campaign.NPR has said that Ms. Maher, the former chief executive of Wikimedia, wasn’t working in news at the time she made the posts, and added that she was exercising her First Amendment right to free expression.Over the years, Republicans have occasionally threatened to pull government money from NPR, which comes from the taxpayer-funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting. But those threats haven’t resulted in any significant funding reduction for the organization, which generates much of its revenue by selling radio programming to its member stations across the United States. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      New Progressive PAC Targets 8 Key House Races in California

      by

      Democrats nearly pulled off the impossible in the 2022 midterms.In the final weeks of the campaign, with an unpopular president in his first term, polls forecast a red wave that would sweep the country and flip control of the House and the Senate — prompting alarm from Democrats and predictions from Republicans of a decisive victory.But that wave never materialized, a mirage of bad polling and inflated expectations. Democrats came close to maintaining a national trifecta, but Republicans eked out a thin majority in the House — prevailing in a handful of seats in New York and California, each by just a few thousand votes.Now, a new coalition of progressive groups in California has formed a super PAC aiming to bolster Democratic candidates in a state that the party sees as crucial to winning control of the House this fall.The super PAC, Battleground California, says it aims to spend $15 million this year on eight competitive House races, seven with Republican incumbents — in Northern California, Orange County, the Inland Empire east of Los Angeles, the Central Valley and Los Angeles — as well as the seat left open by Representative Katie Porter, a Democrat who is not running for re-election after a failed Senate campaign.It is an ambitious effort, one that seeks to establish a durable progressive machine in California — advised and supported by local activists and community organizations — to lift swing district Democratic candidates through an extensive field operation, including marathon door-knocking campaigns aimed at driving turnout among minority groups.“Trusted messengers from the community are a very critical element,” said Steve Phillips, a co-founder of the California Donor Table, the group leading the Battleground California PAC, adding that those residents are not only more trusted by voters but are better able to provide feedback on what messages work and what messages don’t.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Greene Says She Will Demand Vote Next Week on Removing Johnson

      by

      Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the right-wing Republican from Georgia, excoriated the House speaker for working with Democrats to push through major bills. She said she would move ahead despite all but certain defeat.Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia said on Wednesday that she would demand a vote next week on a motion to remove Speaker Mike Johnson, moving forward in the face of all but certain defeat with a second attempt during this Congress to depose a Republican speaker.In a morning news conference at the Capitol, Ms. Greene excoriated Mr. Johnson for working with Democrats to push through major legislation and said it was time for lawmakers to go on the record about where they stood on his speakership.“I think every member of Congress needs to take that vote and let the chips fall where they may,” Ms. Greene said. “And so next week, I am going to be calling this motion to vacate.”The move comes just over a week after Mr. Johnson pushed through a long-stalled $95 billion package to aid Israel, Ukraine and other U.S. allies over the objections of Ms. Greene and other right-wing Republicans who staunchly opposed sending additional aid to Kyiv.And it came one day after House Democratic leaders said they would vote to block the effort to remove Mr. Johnson, which would give Republicans more than enough backing to kill Ms. Greene’s motion before it could be considered.Still, House rules allow any one lawmaker to raise the challenge and force a vote on it within two legislative days, the same mechanism that right-wing Republicans used last fall to make Kevin McCarthy of California the first speaker in history to be removed from the post.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Law Firm Defending Trump Seeks to Withdraw From a Long-Running Case

      by

      The firm, LaRocca Hornik, has represented Donald Trump’s political operation in numerous suits dating to his first presidential run, including a pregnancy discrimination case in New York.A law firm that has long defended Donald J. Trump’s campaign and businesses from employment lawsuits has abruptly asked to withdraw from a yearslong case over what it calls an “irreparable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.”The firm — LaRocca, Hornik, Greenberg, Rosen, Kittridge, Carlin and McPartland — has represented Mr. Trump’s political operation in numerous suits dating to his first presidential run, helping secure several settlements and dismissals and billing nearly $3 million in the process.But late on Friday, it asked a federal magistrate judge to allow it to withdraw from a suit filed by a former campaign surrogate, A.J. Delgado, who says she was sidelined by the campaign in 2016 after revealing she was pregnant. The timing of the motion was notable, just two days after the same federal court had ordered the campaign to turn over in discovery all complaints of sexual harassment and gender or pregnancy discrimination from the 2016 and 2020 campaigns — materials that the defendants have long resisted handing over.A.J. Delgado in 2016.via YouTubeIn the request, filed in federal court in Manhattan, the lead lawyer, Jared Blumetti, did not provide any details about the dispute, asking permission to “explain” the matter privately with the judge. Mr. Blumetti did not respond to a request for comment.The apparent rupture with a long-trusted firm comes at a busy time, legally speaking, for the former president.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More