More stories

  • in

    Will anti-abortionists use ‘uterus surveillance’ against women in the US? | Arwa Mahdawi

    Will anti-abortionists use ‘uterus surveillance’ against women in the US?Arwa MahdawiIf, as is expected, Roe v Wade is overturned by the US supreme court, 26 states are certain or likely to ban abortion – and data tracking could mean there’s nowhere for women to hide If you are looking for a cheerful column that will make you giggle and distract you from everything that is wrong with the world, click away now. This week I have nothing but doom, gloom and data trackers for you. If you are hoping to sink into a well of existential despair, maybe let out a few screams into the void, then you’ve come to the right place.Here goes: the US supreme court, as you are no doubt aware, is expected to overturn Roe v Wade and the federal right to an abortion very soon. At least 13 Republican-led states have “trigger laws” in place, which means that the moment Roe is overruled, abortion will be fully or partly banned. Other states will follow suit. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-choice research organisation, 26 states are certain or likely to ban abortion when Roe falls.Perhaps you are the glass half-full sort. Perhaps you are thinking: “Well, at least people can travel to a state where abortion is legal.” Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. There are the obvious logistical and financial constraints, for one thing. Then there’s the fact that we live in a world of mass surveillance: pretty much everything we do these days leaves a digital footprint – one that anti-abortion extremists will not hesitate to weaponise. One Democratic senator has described the potential of new technology to track down and punish anyone who might even be thinking of having an abortion as “uterus surveillance”. Expect to see a big rise in this, not least because some anti-abortion states are providing financial incentives to snitch on your fellow citizens. Texas, for example, has passed “bounty hunter” laws promising at least $10,000 to individuals who help enforce the abortion ban by successfully suing an abortion provider.To be fair, there’s nothing new about uterus surveillance. Anti-abortion activists may be stuck in the past when it comes to reproductive rights, but they have always been adept at using modern technology to further their goals. One tactic they’ve used for decades is standing outside clinics and recording the licence plates of anyone who enters. As far back as 1993, extremists were tracing the people connected to those licence plates, obtaining their phone numbers, then calling up to harass them. Years ago tracing someone took a bit of time and effort. Nowadays, you can look up someone’s personal information with the click of a button and a small fee.The wonders of the modern world mean there are a mind-boggling number of ways in which you can now identify anyone who might be thinking about an abortion. To begin with, there’s location data. Vice media recently reported that a data location company is selling information related to Planned Parenthood facilities (many of which provide abortions). The data shows where groups of people visiting the locations came from, how long they stayed and where they went afterwards. That data is aggregated so it doesn’t provide the names of individuals; however, de-anonymising this sort of information is not very difficult. There is plenty of evidence that location data is almost never anonymous.Period-tracking apps, which are used by millions of people, are also a worrying source of potentially incriminating information in a post-Roe world. Experts have warned that rightwing organisations could buy data from these apps and use it to prove that someone was pregnant then had an abortion. Your text messages could also be used against you, as could your browser history. Indeed, authorities in Mississippi have already used a woman’s online search for abortion pills to indict her for second-degree murder after she miscarried. That happened in 2018; imagine what is going to happen in a post-Roe world. Speaking of which, I’ve just realised I Googled the word “abortion” 100 times while researching this. I’m off to scrub my search history.
    Arwa Mahdawi is a Guardian columnist
    TopicsRoe v WadeOpinionAbortionUS politicsWomenHealthUS supreme courtLaw (US)commentReuse this content More

  • in

    Proud Boys leader charged with seditious conspiracy related to Capitol attack – as it happened

    Former leader of the Proud Boys far-right nationalist group Enrique Tarrio and four of his closest associates have been charged with seditious conspiracy related to the January 6 attack, according to a Justice Department filing released Monday.The rare charge against Tarrio as well as Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, Charles Donohoe, and Dominic Pezzola builds on conspiracy charges filed by the government earlier this year.In January, the Justice Department leveled seditious conspiracy charges against 11 members of another far-right group, the Oath Keepers militia, over their involvement in the assault on the Capitol as lawmakers were meeting to certify Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.Tarrio, 38, is also facing counts of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and obstruction of an official proceeding, and two counts each of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers and destruction of government property.That’s it from us today. Here’s how another eventful day in Washington unfolded:
    The former leader of the Proud Boys, far-right nationalist group Enrique Tarrio, and four of his closest associates have been charged with seditious conspiracy related to the January 6 attack, according to a Justice Department filing released Monday. The rare charge against Tarrio as well as Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, Charles Donohoe and Dominic Pezzola builds on conspiracy charges filed by the government earlier this year.
    The January 6 committee is preparing to hold its first primetime hearing on Thursday. According to Axios, the committee has enlisted James Goldston, a former ABC News president who ran the shows “Nightline” and “Good Morning America,” to advise the committee on how to televise the hearing. The panel is expected to share never-before-seen photos taken inside the White House as the Capitol attack unfolded.
    A Democratic member of the January 6 committee said the panel’s hearings would demonstrate the extensive planning conducted by those who carried out the attack. “The committee has found evidence of concerted planning and premeditated activity,” Jamie Raskin said in a virtual discussion with the Washington Post today. “The idea that all of this was just a rowdy demonstration that spontaneously got a little out of control is absurd. You don’t almost knock over the US government by accident.”
    The Senate is trying to find a bipartisan compromise on gun-control legislation in the wake of the Uvalde massacre. Democratic senators are trying to find 10 Republicans to join them in supporting tougher gun laws, but that will be a heavy lift in the evenly divided chamber. Joe Manchin, the centrist Democrat who could play a key role in negotiations, said he would support raising the minimum age required to purchase semi-automatic weapons from 18 to 21. Manchin also signaled openness to an assault weapons ban, but that proposal is unlikely to win enough Republican support to be included in the final bill.
    The supreme court released more decisions this morning, but the country is still waiting to hear whether justices will move forward with their initial ruling to overturn Roe v Wade. The abortion case is one of dozens of decisions that the court still needs to release in the coming weeks. The court has announced that its next round of rulings will be released on Wednesday.
    Thanks for following along with our coverage today. The blog will be back tomorrow morning, with more updates on the January 6 committee and the Senate negotiations over gun-control. Back in Congress, a group of 10 “frontline” Democratic House lawmakers, who are considered the most vulnerable to getting ousted in the November midterms, have written a letter to the chamber’s leaders asking for votes on bills that would fight inflation.The letter reported by Punchbowl News comes as the country faces an ongoing wave of price increases for essentials like gasoline, as well as a shortage of baby formula that has rattled the Biden administration.Addressed to House speaker Nancy Pelosi and majority leader Steny Hoyer, the letter doesn’t name specific bills, and acknowledges that many proposals the chamber already passed haven’t been brought up in the Senate. The lawmakers nonetheless call for votes:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} With the time that remains in the 117th Congress after the important upcoming votes on gun violence prevention – and particularly in the few months that remain before the late summer district work period – we urge you to prioritize bills that would lower costs for working families, address rising inflation and resolve supply chain challenges. To be clear, we know that many such bills have already received affirmative votes in the House and now await Senate action. However, we believe that more must be done to ensure that this body remains laser focused on addressing the most urgent challenges that continue to impact our constituents.Consumer prices have been rising over the past year at rates not seen since the 1980s, fueling public discontent with the Biden administration. The Federal Reserve is hiking interest rates to tame the price increases, but much of the inflation has been caused by factors beyond their control such as global supply chain snarls and the war in Ukraine. Some economists fear the combination of higher rates and global supply shocks will put the economy into a recession — perhaps next year, just as campaign season for the 2024 presidential election kicks off.Meanwhile in the UK, members of parliament have spent the day voting on whether to boot Prime Minister Boris Johnson from office, and the verdict is in: Johnson survives his no-confidence vote, 211 to 148.That means he stays as prime minister, leader of the Conservatives and Joe Biden’s counterpart in one of America’s closest allies. The Guardian’s Andrew Sparrow has been keeping a meticulous live blog of the historic day.Former leader of the Proud Boys far-right nationalist group Enrique Tarrio and four of his closest associates have been charged with seditious conspiracy related to the January 6 attack, according to a Justice Department filing released Monday.The rare charge against Tarrio as well as Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, Charles Donohoe, and Dominic Pezzola builds on conspiracy charges filed by the government earlier this year.In January, the Justice Department leveled seditious conspiracy charges against 11 members of another far-right group, the Oath Keepers militia, over their involvement in the assault on the Capitol as lawmakers were meeting to certify Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.Tarrio, 38, is also facing counts of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and obstruction of an official proceeding, and two counts each of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers and destruction of government property.Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has signaled a deal between Democrat and Republican lawmakers on a new gun control bill could be reached this week.MCCONNELL on whether senate negotiators will strike a gun deal by the end of the week: “oh I hope so”— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) June 6, 2022
    More MCCONNELL on guns. “We’re trying to get a bipartisan outcome here that makes a difference. And hopefully, sometime this week, we’ll come together.”— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) June 6, 2022
    Republican Senator John Cornyn and Democratic Senator Chris Murphy have been leading negotiations in the evenly divided chamber to introduce some kind of legislation that could restrict gun purchases following a recent wave of mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, Uvalde, Texas and elsewhere.The January 6 committee will hold its second hearing on Monday, June 13, at 10am ET, the House panel has just announced.The first hearing is happening on Thursday at 8pm ET, and it is expected to attract worldwide news coverage, but the second hearing is not scheduled for the evening.The select committee has reportedly enlisted the help of James Goldston, a former ABC News president, to assist in the planning of the primetime event.Speaking to the Washington Post earlier today, a Democratic member of the committee, Jamie Raskin, said investigators had “found evidence of concerted planning and premeditated activity”.“The idea that all of this was just a rowdy demonstration that spontaneously got a little out of control is absurd,” Raskin said. “You don’t almost knock over the US government by accident.” The supreme court will now issue opinions on Wednesday, June 8, according to its website.The justice have 30 cases to release decisions on, with the workload possible extending into next month. Several of these may be extremely consequential, including an environmental case out of West Virginia, a gun rights case stemming from New York, an immigration case via Texas involving the US-Mexico border and the pivotal Mississippi abortion case that also includes the state authorities asking Scotus to overturn Roe v Wade.Nearly half of Republican voters think the US just has to live with mass shootings, according to a poll released in the aftermath of the Texas elementary school murders last month and as politicians in Washington negotiate for gun reform.The CBS and YouGov poll returned familiar results, including 62% support for a nationwide ban on semi-automatic rifles, the kind of gun used in Uvalde, Texas.Nineteen young children and two adults were killed at Robb elementary school on 24 May by an 18-year-old who bought his weapon legally.But clear national support for a ban on such rifles or changes to purchasing ages and background checks is not mirrored in Congress. Most Republicans, supported financially by the powerful gun lobby, remain implacably opposed to most gun reform.Read the Guardian’s full report:Nearly half of Republicans think US has to live with mass shootings, poll findsRead moreAn end to abortion rights would create yet another crisis for Biden, whose presidency has been increasingly defined by a list problems, annoyances and calamities that seems to only grow longer. From high inflation to the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan to nationwide mass shootings, my colleague Lauren Gambino has an excellent piece on how Biden has become a crisis president — whether he wants to or not:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}In his third run for president, Joe Biden’s pitch to Americans was simple: after half a century in elected office, including eight years as vice-president, he understood the demands of what is arguably the hardest job in the world. It was a point Biden stressed on the campaign trail, in his own folksy way: “Everything landed on the president’s desk but locusts.”
    Nearly a year and a half into his presidency, Biden now appraises his own fortunes differently. “I used to say in Barack’s administration: ‘Everything landed on his desk but locusts,’” he told Democratic donors in Oregon. “Well, they landed on my desk.”
    Successive mass shootings, including a racist attack at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, and a massacre at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, that left 19 elementary school students and their teachers dead, present just the latest test for a president desperate to act but constrained, once again, by the limits of his own power.Biden entered office facing daunting crises – only to be hit with more crises Read moreThe White House has released a statement condemning legislation introduced in Louisiana that would make abortion a crime of murder.“Louisiana’s extreme bill will criminalize abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest and punish reproductive healthcare professionals with up to ten years in prison,” said Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, in a statement.“The president is committed to protecting the constitutional rights of Americans afforded by Roe for nearly 50 years, and ensuring that women can make their own choices about their lives, bodies, and families. An overwhelming majority of the American people agree and reject these kinds of radical measures.”Louisiana Republicans advance bill to make abortion a crime of murderRead moreSupporters of the bill admit it’s unconstitutional, but only as long as the Roe v Wade decision that enshrines abortion rights in the United States remains law. That decision’s days appear to be numbered, according to a draft of a supreme court opinion that was leaked last month.Located just across the street from the Capitol, the supreme court has found itself sucked into the inquiry over January 6 as investigators eye the actions of Ginni Thomas, wife of conservative justice Clarence Thomas.In March, my colleague Ed Pilkington reported on the calls for conflict-of-interest rules that erupted after revelations that Ginni Thomas pressed then-president Donald Trump’s chief of staff to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election:Ginni Thomas texts spark ethical storm about husband’s supreme court roleRead moreThe Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reported later that month that committee members have weighed asking Thomas to cooperate either voluntarily or with a subpoena, but no decision has yet been made.House January 6 panel members weigh seeking cooperation from Ginni ThomasRead moreMore revelations about Thomas’s actions around the time of the insurrection have trickled out since then, including that she pressed Republicans in Arizona to overturn Biden’s victory there, as first reported in The Washington Post last month.January 6 committee member Jamie Raskin hinted to The Washington Post that lawmakers have discovered Donald Trump more than just incited the attack on the Capitol. Raskin did not elaborate on what the House committee found, but the actions of the former president have been at the center of the inquiry from the start.“The select committee has found evidence about a lot more than incitement here, and we’re gonna be laying out the evidence about all of the actors who were pivotal to what took place on Jan 6,” Raskin said.“Donald Trump and the White House were at the center of these events. That’s the only way really of making sense of them all,” the Democratic House representative added.Trump was impeached by the Democrat-controlled House immediately following the insurrection, but the Republican-led Senate decided not to convict and remove him from office, allowing Trump to remain in the White House for the final weeks of his term..@RepRaskin on Jan. 6: “Donald Trump and the White House were at the center of these events. That’s the only way really of making sense of them all.” #PostLive pic.twitter.com/gIJJxqPWsx— Washington Post Live (@PostLive) June 6, 2022
    A Democratic member of the January 6 committee, Jamie Raskin, said the panel’s hearings would demonstrate the extensive planning conducted by those who carried out the attack on the Capitol.“The committee has found evidence of concerted planning and premeditated activity,” Raskin said in a virtual discussion with the Washington Post today.“The idea that all of this was just a rowdy demonstration that spontaneously got a little out of control is absurd. You don’t almost knock over the US government by accident.” Rep. Liz Cheney talks about the GOP’s “cult of personality” around Trump, and what the hearings will reveal about the threat to democracy. https://t.co/kFhs30uzzC pic.twitter.com/TrqMfQ0Qjs— CBS Sunday Morning 🌞 (@CBSSunday) June 6, 2022
    Raskin said the committee would use the hearings to outline all the evidence it has collected and provide recommendations on how to avoid future coups that could threaten the security of the US government.Raskin’s comments echo those of Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the committee, who said yesterday that she considers the January 6 attack to be a conspiracy.“It is extremely broad,” Cheney told CBS News. “It’s extremely well-organized. It’s really chilling.”Warning of the danger of Trump’s hold on the Republican party, Cheney added, “I mean, it is fundamentally antithetical, it is contrary to everything conservatives believe, to embrace a personality cult. And yet, that is what so many in my party are doing today.”The January 6 committee has enlisted James Goldston, a former ABC News president who ran the shows “Nightline” and “Good Morning America,” to advise the committee on how to televise its hearings beginning Thursday, according to Axios.Axios reports:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} I’m told Goldston is busily producing Thursday’s 8 p.m. ET hearing as if it were a blockbuster investigative special.
    He plans to make it raw enough so that skeptical journalists will find the material fresh, and chew over the disclosures in future coverage.
    And he wants it to draw the eyeballs of Americans who haven’t followed the ins and outs of the Capitol riot probe.Goldston will apparently have a lot of material to work with. The committee reportedly plans to show never-before-seen photos from inside the White House on January 6, and new security-camera footage from the Capitol, taken as the insurrection occurred, will also be shared.The committee has already conducted more than 1,000 depositions and interviews as part of its investigation, and clips from those conversations are expected to be played during the hearing.Meanwhile, Republicans are busy planning a counter-messaging program to challenge the committee’s findings. According to Axios, House Republican leaders and outside conservative groups will paint the panel as hyperpartisan to try to discredit their conclusions.Joe Manchin, the centrist Democrat who could play a key role in reaching a Senate compromise on a gun-control bill, outlined what he would like to see in the legislation.The West Virginia senator told CNN that he would support raising the minimum age required to purchase semi-automatic weapons from 18 to 21. The gunman who carried out the Uvalde shooting was 18.Manchin also indicated he would support some version of a red-flag provision, as long as the policy allowed for due process for those blocked from purchasing guns.Manchin told me that a final deal should include two things: Raising the age to 21 for purchasing semi-automatic weapons and standards for state red flag laws. He’s also open to an assault weapons ban. On people needing AR-15s? “I never felt I needed something of that magnitude.” pic.twitter.com/GYUlx1Nhkp— Manu Raju (@mkraju) June 6, 2022
    “We know we can do something that would have prevented this — raising the age,” Manchin said of Uvalde. “And the second thing is that we know that the red-flag laws do work, as long as there’s due process.”On the question of enacting a ban on assault weapons, Manchin said he would be open to the idea, but that proposal faces stiff opposition from Senate Republicans.“I never thought I had a need for that type of high-capacity automatic weapon,” Manchin said. “I like to shoot. I like to go out and hunt. I like to go out sports shooting. I do all that. But I’ve never felt I needed something of that magnitude.”While there were no major decisions made by the supreme court today, the justices did opt not to review legal sanctions against Republican Senate candidate Mark McCloskey and his wife Patricia, who pointed guns at protesters during racial justice protesters in Missouri two years ago.CNN reports that the McCloskeys, both attorneys, pled guilty to misdemeanors over the incident, which were later pardoned by Missouri’s governor. However the state’s supreme court later sanctioned them, calling their actions “moral turpitude.”The McCloskeys contested the penalties, citing the constitution’s second amendment, but CNN reported the argument didn’t have much chance of success.Mark McCloskey is a candidate in the Republican senate primary in Missouri to succeed Roy Blunt, who is retiring, but a SurveyUSA poll released last month did not find him among the race’s frontrunners. As the Senate tries to find compromise on gun control, Joe Biden is using the presidential bully pulpit to urge Congress to take action to prevent more tragedies like Uvalde.“After Columbine, after Sandy Hook, after Charleston, after Orlando, after Las Vegas, after Parkland, nothing has been done,” Biden said on Twitter. “This time, that can’t be true. This time, we must actually do something.”Biden offered the same message to the nation last week, when he delivered a primetime address on the need to enact stricter gun laws.He proposed expanding background checks and banning assault weapons. If Congress cannot approve an assault weapons ban, which seems unlikely given Republicans’ opposition to the idea, then the minimum age required to purchase those guns should be raised from 18 to 21, Biden said.After Columbine,after Sandy Hook,after Charleston,after Orlando,after Las Vegas,after Parkland,nothing has been done.This time, that can’t be true. This time, we must actually do something.— President Biden (@POTUS) June 6, 2022
    The House has already passed several gun-control bills, and Biden called on the Senate to act as well in the wake of the Uvalde massacre. However, that will be difficult when the upper chamber is evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, and the filibuster rules requires 60 votes to advance most legislation.“I support the bipartisan efforts that include a small group of Democrats and Republican senators trying to find a way,” Biden said last Thursday. “But my God, the fact that the majority of the Senate Republicans don’t want any of these proposals even to be debated or come up for a vote, I find unconscionable. We can’t fail the American people again.”This week will provide some key clues as to whether any gun-control bill can pass the Senate. More

  • in

    Bipartisan US lawmakers ramp up gun control talks amid crisis of violence – live

    The US Senate is back in session today after its latest recess and there will be close attention on a bipartisan group of senators that is exuding increased confidence that a package of gun control measures can advance and make it into law.Connecticut Democrat Chris Murphy is fond of the word significant. Just days ago, less than a week after the mass shooting at Robb elementary school in Uvalde, Texas that killed 19 young children and two teachers, he talked of “an opportunity right now to pass something significant”. Murphy yesterday added: “The possibility of success is better than ever before. But I think the consequences of failure for our entire democracy are more significant than ever.”Murphy believes measures passed in Florida following the 2018 high school shooting in Parkland could attract Republican support and provide a workable template for action in Congress.Chris Murphy of Connecticut, speaking on CNN’s State of the Union, said he was optimistic that recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, could finally prompt enough bipartisan support for legislation that has previously proven elusive.Florida, a Republican-controlled state, acted swiftly after the murders of 17 students and staff at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in February 2018, passing red flag laws and raising the age requirement for buying, but not owning, firearms from 18 to 21, among other steps. The Parkland gunman was 19.In his address to the nation last week, Joe Biden called for a federal ban on semi-automatic weapons, and raising the age requirement if that couldn’t be done.Murphy acknowledged the Florida actions and said “there is interest in taking a look at that age range, 18 to 21” during bipartisan discussions about possible legislation, led on the Republican side by Texas senator John Cornyn.Read more here.The founder of the People of Praise, a secretive charismatic Christian group that counts supreme court justice Amy Coney Barrett as a member, was described in a sworn affidavit filed in the 1990s as exerting almost total control over one of the group’s female members, including making all decisions about her finances and dating relationships.The court documents also described alleged instances of a sexualized atmosphere in the home of the founder, Kevin Ranaghan, and his wife, Dorothy Ranaghan.The description of the Ranaghans and accusations involving their intimate behavior were contained in a 1993 proceeding in which a woman, Cynthia Carnick, said that she did not want her five minor children to have visitations with their father, John Roger Carnick, who was then a member of the People of Praise, in the Ranaghan household or in their presence, because she believed it was not in her children’s “best interest”. Cynthia Carnick also described inappropriate incidents involving the couple and the Ranaghan children. The matter was eventually settled between the parties.Read the Guardian’s full report:Legal claims shed light on founder of faith group tied to Amy Coney BarrettRead moreNo more opinions are due today from the US Supreme Court, with all the biggest decisions still awaited. We’ll be keeping an eye on the court’s calendar and on the indispensable Scotusblog for upcoming dates and the rulings issued on those dates. For anyone curious to know a bit more about how this works, the Scotusblog FAQ page is handy, here. The court doesn’t give lots of notice about which will be opinion days in June and, likely, edging into July with such a big caseload. And the public isn’t told what opinions are coming down until they land. However, of course there was the early May bombshell leak of the draft opinion in the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization case out of Mississippi, which explicitly includes a request from the state authorities to the court to overturn the pivotal 1973 Roe v Wade decision that afforded the constitutional right to an abortion in the US.The final opinion is awaited… US shaken to its core by supreme court draft that would overturn Roe v WadeRead moreThis blog is now handing over to the Guardian’s new US politics blogger Chris Stein, based in Washington, and our colleague there Joanie Greve, who was at the helm of the blog but in recent months took on her new role as one of our senior politics reporters. They’ll take you through the rest of today’s politics news. For all the breaking news on UK politics today involving a no-confidence vote in prime minister Boris Johnson, please follow our London team here as they bring you the events as they happen there, in the UK politics live blog.Here’s Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas again, this time putting his name to a decision in the case of Southwest Airlines v Saxon.In an eight to zero opinion (Amy Coney Barrett was recused from this case), Thomas issued the decision that the court essentially said an airline worker is not required to go to arbitration over her pay dispute with Southwest and can fight her case in the courts.The Supreme Court adopts a broad interpretation of an important exception in the Federal Arbitration Act. The upshot of the 8-0 ruling is that an airport worker (and others similarly situated) can bring a claim for overtime pay in court, rather than being forced into arbitration.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 6, 2022
    The Bloomberg Law site notes that the case could have a wide impact on worker arbitration rights. It explained that Latrice Saxon:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Sued the airline in 2019, alleging it failed to pay her and hundreds of current and former ramp supervisors time-and-a-half earned for their overtime work. The Dallas-based carrier countered that its employee was contractually bound to bring the claim in arbitration, rather than in court. While a federal district judge agreed with the airline, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit did not. The supreme court took up the case.The US supreme court has issued three opinions today, moments ago, although they are not the cases the nation is on the edge of its proverbial seat about – abortion and gun rights.The court just ruled that the Florida authorities can recoup $300,000 in medical expenses out of a settlement paid in the case of Gianinna Gallardo, who suffered appalling injuries at 13, in 2008, when she was hit by a truck after getting off a school bus. A 7-2 majority, with the opinion written by Clarence Thomas and joined by liberal-leaning Elena Kagan, opined for the state over the Gallardo family.A few minutes prior, the court ruled in a case, Siegel v Fitzgerald, about the constitutionality of increased US Trustee’s fees charged to companies in chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.Details on the third ruling in a tick.The Supreme Court strikes down Congress’ decision to increase bankruptcy fees in most states while leaving a different system in place in two states. SCOTUS unanimously holds that the two different fee systems violates the Constitution’s requirement of “uniform” bankruptcy laws.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 6, 2022
    The US supreme court is about to issue ruling(s) on cases decided in the current term.We’ll keep you up to date on what happens, when the opinion(s) are handed down at 10am ET.As Scotusblog notes, there’s a lot for the bench to get to:We’re live now:https://t.co/S5A4KeL5nQ https://t.co/ddml8iKgtC— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 6, 2022
    The four big cases we at the Guardian are watching most closely are an environmental case out of West Virginia, a gun rights case stemming from New York, an immigration case via Texas involving the US-Mexico border and the pivotal Mississippi abortion case that also includes the state authorities asking Scotus to overturn Roe v Wade.The US Senate is back in session today after its latest recess and there will be close attention on a bipartisan group of senators that is exuding increased confidence that a package of gun control measures can advance and make it into law.Connecticut Democrat Chris Murphy is fond of the word significant. Just days ago, less than a week after the mass shooting at Robb elementary school in Uvalde, Texas that killed 19 young children and two teachers, he talked of “an opportunity right now to pass something significant”. Murphy yesterday added: “The possibility of success is better than ever before. But I think the consequences of failure for our entire democracy are more significant than ever.”Murphy believes measures passed in Florida following the 2018 high school shooting in Parkland could attract Republican support and provide a workable template for action in Congress.Chris Murphy of Connecticut, speaking on CNN’s State of the Union, said he was optimistic that recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, could finally prompt enough bipartisan support for legislation that has previously proven elusive.Florida, a Republican-controlled state, acted swiftly after the murders of 17 students and staff at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in February 2018, passing red flag laws and raising the age requirement for buying, but not owning, firearms from 18 to 21, among other steps. The Parkland gunman was 19.In his address to the nation last week, Joe Biden called for a federal ban on semi-automatic weapons, and raising the age requirement if that couldn’t be done.Murphy acknowledged the Florida actions and said “there is interest in taking a look at that age range, 18 to 21” during bipartisan discussions about possible legislation, led on the Republican side by Texas senator John Cornyn.Read more here.Good morning, US politics blog readers, it’s going to be an exceptionally busy, high-stakes week in Washington with Americans’ constitutional rights and democracy itself under the spotlight.Here’s what’s on the agenda.
    The US Senate is back in session on the Hill today after its latest recess and a bipartisan group of senators is exuding confidence that a package of gun control measures can make progress, while the leading lawmaker in talks warns of “significant” consequences of failure.
    Talks continue amid another series of deadly shootings at the weekend, following grotesquely on the heels of the school massacre in Uvalde, Texas and the racist killing of Black Americans in a supermarket in Buffalo.
    New measures under discussion do not include the demands of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for a ban on assault weapons, following the recent carnage, but there is more progress being made right now on legislative talks than there has been for years.
    The US Supreme Court is due to issue opinions today and Thursday, June being the crunch month for decisions arising in cases from the current term and with more than 30 decision to be declared. The public (and press) are not party to which cases will be announced until the bench speaks up.
    Last but not least for this briefing note: the special House committee investigating events on and around the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol by extremist supporters of then-president Donald Trump is in final preparations for its first public hearing, this Thursday in prime time – and the right is already revving up its riposte. More

  • in

    A Divided America with Liberty and Justice for None

    The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

  • in

    Austin resolution aims to ‘decriminalize’ abortion if Roe v Wade is overturned

    Austin resolution aims to ‘decriminalize’ abortion if Roe v Wade is overturnedGroup of city council members seeks to protect patients from criminal prosecution if supreme court ends abortion rights A group of Austin, Texas city council members is preparing a resolution to “decriminalize” abortion there in the event the US Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade, a landmark case decided nearly five decades ago that protects the federal right to terminate a pregnancy.An unprecedented leaked supreme court draft decision showed a conservative majority of the nine justices are open to reversing Roe v Wade entirely. If that happened, 26 states would be certain or likely to ban abortion, including in Texas. The state has a “trigger” ban that would almost immediately ban abortion.A final supreme court decision is expected in June.“The resolution does two things – one, [it] restricts city funds from being used to essentially investigate any kind of alleged abortion crimes,” said José “Chito” Vela, an Austin councilman. “The other thing it does is to make the investigation of any abortion-related crime the lowest priority for our police department.”The resolution seeks to protect patients and medical professionals from criminal prosecution and would also advise Austin police not to assist other law enforcement, such as state police, in such investigations.Texas has already proven to be a legal pioneer in restricting abortion. The state banned abortion after six weeks gestation, before most women know they are pregnant, through a novel law that allows citizens to sue anyone, anywhere who “aids or abets” a woman in terminating a pregnancy.“We need them focusing on historically classic criminal activity – not politically disfavored groups that factions in the government want to harass and punish,” said Vela. “That’s the real core of what we’re trying to do.”Mainstream anti-abortion groups have long argued they oppose prosecution of women and cast women as victims of abortion providers. Similarly in Texas, the trigger ban would make the performing of an abortion a first degree felony punishable by up to 99 years in prison, an article likely to heavily impact medical providers.However, a vocal minority of abortion “abolitionists” , a word appropriated from anti-slavery campaigners, have also recently pushed lawmakers to classify abortion as murder.In May, Louisiana lawmakers considered a bill to charge women who have abortions with homicide. “We all know that it is actually very simple – abortion is murder,” one of the bill’s supporters, state representative Danny McCormicktold colleagues, according to CBS News. The bill was pulled after it failed 65-26.Although many anti-abortion groups say they oppose prosecution of women, anti-abortion restrictions and rhetoric have nevertheless resulted in more than 1,600 instances of women since 1973 being, “arrested, prosecuted, convicted, detained, or forced to undergo medical interventions that would not have occurred but for their status as pregnant persons,” National Advocates for Pregnant Women said in a recent brief to the supreme court.At least one recent, high-profile example from Texas, 26-year-old woman Lizelle Herrera was charged with murder via “self-induced abortion”, a criminal statute that does not appear to exist. Charges were dropped after public outcry. The prosecutor apologized.Austin’s Guarding the Right to Abortion Care for Everyone or “Grace” Act is still in draft form, and text is not expected to be immediately released. Vela said the council would likely consider the act after the supreme court releases its final decision in the highly anticipated abortion case.It is a case out of Mississippi, formally called Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, in which the southern state has argued that the court should use the case to overturn Roe.“Whatever your thoughts on abortion, criminal prosecution of women who have abortion is absolutely unacceptable and abuse by the criminal justice system,” said Vela. TopicsTexasAustinAbortionUS supreme courtLaw (US)US politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Supreme court guts lifeline for prisoners who claim wrongful convictions

    Supreme court guts lifeline for prisoners who claim wrongful convictionsDecision bars federal courts from hearing new evidence not presented in a state court as a result of ineffective legal counsel The US supreme court on Monday gutted constitutional protections that for years have provided a federal lifeline to innocent prisoners facing prolonged incarceration or even execution following wrongful convictions stemming from poor legal counsel given to them by the states.In a 6 to 3 ruling, the newly-dominant rightwing majority of the nation’s highest court barred federal courts from hearing new evidence that was not previously presented in a state court as a result of the defendant’s ineffective legal representation.The decision means that prisoners will no longer have recourse to federal judges even when they claim they were wrongfully convicted because their lawyers failed to conduct their cases properly.The decision eviscerated the supreme court’s own precedent in a move that the three liberal justices called “illogical” and “perverse”. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor slammed the decision, warning it would leave “many people … to face incarceration or even execution without any meaningful chance to vindicate their right to counsel”.The ruling in Shinn v Ramirez was written by Clarence Thomas, the rightwing justice who has come to the fore as a result of the court’s sharp shift to the right following Donald Trump’s three appointments. He was supported by all five other conservative justices, including the chief justice, John Roberts.In his opinion, Thomas presented the case as one of states’ rights. He said that federal courts should not be allowed to override the states’ “core power to enforce criminal law”.That continues to be the case, the majority ruled, even where defendants are given bad legal advice by counsel provided for them by the very same states that are condemning them to long prison sentences or even execution.In future, they will have no recourse to a federal court to try and reverse their wrongful conviction.The case before the justices arose after state officials in Arizona petitioned the supreme court to prevent two of the state’s death row inmates – one with a strong case of proclaimed innocence, the other with a history of family abuse – from seeking relief in federal court from capital punishment.The state argued that the condemned men should not be allowed to present new evidence to a federal judge when they had failed to do so previously in state court.Lawyers for the condemned men pointed out that they had only failed to present the evidence in state court because the legal counsel they had been assigned by the state was woefully inadequate.If they were blocked from petitioning a federal court, the men would in effect be sent to the death chamber simply because incompetent lawyers had missed a filing deadline or failed to uncover a glaring truth.Monday’s majority ruling prompted an outpouring of angry and anguished criticism from innocence rights groups and death penalty experts.The Innocence Project said that overturning wrongful convictions was never easy, and that “today’s supreme court decision makes it that much harder to secure justice for wrongly-convicted people”.Thomas’s opinion also overturns previous supreme court rulings, in an abrogation of the court’s own adherence to the principle of stare decisis – that is, being faithful to precedent. In 2012 the supreme court ruled in Martinez v Ryan that prisoners could have access to federal court in cases where they had suffered from ineffective legal counsel in the state courts.“The supreme court seems hell-bent on disrespecting precedent and rolling back rights,” said Janai Nelson, president of LDF, America’s first civil and human rights law organization.In her dissenting opinion, Sotomayor decried the ruling. “This decision is perverse. It is illogical,” she wrote.Sotomayor argued that under the court’s own precedent, prisoners cannot be held accountable – and effectively punished – for “their attorneys’ failures to present claims in state court”.She concluded that as a result of the majority decision from the nine-member supreme court bench, the Sixth Amendment to the US constitution’s guarantee that criminal defendants have the right to effective legal counsel at trial “is now an empty one”.In future, she said, prisoners who have had poor legal assistance would have no relief. “The responsibility for this devastating outcome lies not with Congress, but with this court.”TopicsUS supreme courtUS prisonsLaw (US)US politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Joe Biden says US recession ‘is not inevitable’ despite rampant inflation – as it happened

    Joe Biden is warning Americans that the fight against inflation is “going to be a haul”, and that relief for soaring prices of goods, services and especially gasoline is unlikely to be immediate.But the president, speaking in Tokyo earlier today as he launched a new trade deal with 12 Indo-Pacific nations, told reporters that he doesn’t believe a recession is “inevitable”.Biden is acutely aware that the inflation crisis is uppermost in voters’ minds ahead of November’s midterm elections. There was little comfort for him in a bleak new CBS poll released Monday that finds 69% of the country thinks the economy is bad, and 77% saying they’re “pessimistic” about the cost of goods and services in the coming months.“This is going to be a haul. This is going to take some time,” Biden told reporters in Tokyo. In response to a reporter’s question specifically about a recession, Biden said he did not think it was “inevitable”. With his own approval ratings at the lowest point of his presidency, Biden is under pressure to try to reverse the situation and avoid Democrats losing control of one, or both chambers of Congress ion November’s midterms. That he is focused on the crisis back home while on tour in Asia would appear to back up his assertion last week that inflation was his “top domestic priority”. Critics have been quick to point out that, last summer, Biden and acolytes including treasury secretary Janet Yellen were insistent that high inflation would likely only be temporary.But it has continued to spiral, with the annual inflation rate still close to a 40-year high according to figures earlier this month. My colleague Lauren Gambino has this look at how the president is attempting to tackle inflation as the clock runs down on the midterms. The message for voters seems to be that if you think things are bad now, Republicans at the wheel would be much worse:Biden pitches Democrats as saviors for US economy ahead of midterm electionsRead moreIt’s a wrap on Monday’s US politics blog. Thanks for joining us.Joe Biden sought to allay rising fears of a recession in the US, but admitted during a press conference in Tokyo that the fight against inflation and soaring prices “is going to be a haul”.But it was the president’s comments on Taiwan, and his pledge that the US would defend the island if it was attacked by China, that raised eyebrows and caused some confusion. White House aides were forced to step in and insist nothing had changed in the US approach to China.Here’s what else we followed:
    Florida’s Republican governor Ron DeSantis suffered defeat at the appeals court over his law attempting to ban social media companies from removing politicians, and fining them $250,000 a day if they did.
    The House ethics committee is launching an inquiry into allegations that extremist Republican congressman Madison Cawthorn improperly promoted a cryptocurrency in which he had a financial interest, and engaged in an improper relationship with a staffer.
    The Washington DC attorney general is suing Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg over “data harvesting” related to the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
    A Covid-19 vaccine for children younger than five appears closer after Pfizer-BioNTech said clinical trials showed three low doses generated a strong immune response, and was safe and well-tolerated.
    The House select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol is expected to stage six public hearings in June on how Donald Trump and some allies broke the law as they sought to overturn the 2020 election result.
    Please join us again tomorrow on a big day for US politics, including intriguing midterm primary elections in Georgia, Texas and several other states.Water restrictions are coming to California, the state’s Democratic governor Gavin Newsom warned Monday, if residents do not drastically reduce usage during an ongoing severe drought.“We all have to be more thoughtful about how to make every drop count,” Newson said in a statement about his meeting today with leaders of California’s largest urban water providers.“Californians made significant changes since the last drought but we have seen an uptick in water use, especially as we enter the summer months”.Until now, the agencies have had the power to set rules for water use in the cities and towns they supply, the Associated Press says, even as California enters its third year of severe drought.But Newsom says the lack of significant rain and snow from January to March, this year the driest in at least a century, and Californians not responding to his earlier calls for water conservation, are forcing a rethink. A spokesperson for Newsom’s office said the administration would reassess conservation progress in “a few weeks”. Read more:California water use leaps 19% in March, amid one of the driest months on record Read moreAnother day, another scandal for outgoing North Carolina congressman Madison Cawthorn.The US House ethics committee is investigating allegations that Cawthorn may have improperly promoted a cryptocurrency in which he had a financial interest that he didn’t disclose, and engaged in an improper relationship with a staffer in his office, a statement from the panel said Monday. Democratic Texas congresswoman Veronica Escobar will serve as the chairwoman of the panel leading the investigation, and Republican Mississippi congressman Michael Guest will be its ranking member, the statement added. The committee’s statement contained no other details into the allegations against Cawthorn.A pro-Donald Trump firebrand, Cawthorn has had his seat in the US House for one term but last week conceded defeat in a Republican primary challenge from North Carolina state legislator Chuck Edwards. His term, which began in 2021, is due to expire this upcoming January before giving way to the victor of the midterm election on 8 November. Edwards’ Democratic rival in that race is Jasmine Beach-Ferrara.Several Republican leaders abandoned Cawthorn’s side after he alleged on a podcast that he’d gotten invites to orgies during his time in Washington and had seen leading but unnamed political heavyweights in the nation’s capital abuse cocaine. He also drew ire from some quarters after calling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy a “thug” following Russia’s invasion of his country in February.Furthermore, police stopped Cawthorn, 26, on driving citations three times, and he was caught with guns at airport checkpoints at least twice since last year, including last month. And videos during the primary campaign’s final weeks depicted Cawthorn in sexually suggestive poses.After conceding his loss, Cawthorn went on Instagram and called for “dark forces” of former president Trump’s Make America Great Again movement to take revenge against the Republican establishment. He wrote that he was “on a mission now to expose those who says and promise one thing yet legislate and work towards another, self-profiteering, globalist goal.”“The time for genteel politics as usual has come to an end,” Cawthorn added in his post, which thanked Trump for sticking by him, along with various other Republican congressional figures such as Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz, Paul Gosar and Rand Paul. Cawthorn’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Monday.Florida’s Republican governor Ron DeSantis has been handed a court defeat over his crusade to end what he calls censorship by social media companies.A three-judge appeals panel said key parts of DeSantis’s May 2021 law prohibiting politicians and prominent persons from being “deplatformed” was unconstitutional, the Orlando Sentinel reports.The 11th circuit court of appeal refused to lift an injunction placed earlier by a Donald Trump-appointed district court judge, who disagreed with DeSantis’s assertion that big tech companies had no right to remove content or users. “Put simply, with minor exceptions, the government can’t tell a private person or entity what to say or how to say it,” the court wrote in its 67-page opinion, the Sentinel said.When DeSantis signed it into law last year, free speech experts countered it was a blatant contravention of the first amendment to the US constitution, and predicted it would fall under legal challenge.Like other DeSantis “culture war” legislation, including his controversial “don’t say gay” bill and banning of “woke” math textbooks in classrooms, critics say it ignored real issues facing Floridians and was designed instead to appeal to the Republican base.The ruling strikes down $250,000 a day fines DeSantis wanted imposed on social media companies who banned political candidates. The judges allowed minor parts of the law to stand, including the right to a 60-day review period for those who are removed.Here’s a reminder of what Florida’s big tech law was about:Florida governor signs law against tech firms de-platforming politiciansRead moreLet’s take a quick look at where the day stands:
    Joe Biden caused confusion by stating the US would defend Taiwan if the disputed island was attacked by China. But White House aides are stressing nothing has changed.
    The Washington DC attorney general is suing Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg over “data harvesting” related to the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
    A Covid-19 vaccine for children younger than five appears closer after Pfizer-BioNTech said clinical trials showed three low doses generated a strong immune response, and was safe and well-tolerated.
    The House select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol is expected to stage six public hearings in June on how Donald Trump and some allies broke the law as they sought to overturn the 2020 election result.
    Joe Biden says the fight against inflation is “going to be a haul”, with immediate relief for soaring prices of goods, services and gasoline unlikely. But the president also said he doesn’t believe a recession is “inevitable”.
    My colleague David Smith has taken this look at the confusion created by Joe Biden’s comments at a press conference in Tokyo earlier appearing to undercut the US position of “strategic ambiguity” over Taiwan.At a lunchtime Pentagon briefing, defense secretary Lloyd Austin said Biden’s comments were intended to stress the US commitment was “to help provide Taiwan the means to protect itself” rather than direct military intervention, and there was no change in the US’ “one China” policy.The somewhat routine press conference in Tokyo was winding down when the question came. “Are you willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if it comes to that?”Many past American presidents would have deflected, demurred, declined to give a straight answer. Not Joe Biden. “Yes,” he replied bluntly, adding: “That’s the commitment we made.”Reporters at the scene were taken aback. Sebastian Smith, the White House correspondent for Agence France-Presse, tweeted that Biden’s answer “really raised adrenaline levels in that palace briefing room right now. Next we all get to try and explain what it all actually means.”One possible meaning is that America has abandoned its long-held position of “strategic ambiguity” on Taiwan. But Biden may have delivered not so much strategic clarity as strategic confusion. That would be on brand for a president who has made a habit of speaking without a diplomatic filter.China considers the democratic island of Taiwan its territory under its “one-China” principle, and says it is the most sensitive and important issue in its relationship with Washington.This is where strategic ambiguity comes in. While the US is required by law to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself, it has never directly promised to intervene militarily in a conflict with China – but also never promised to stay out.This deliberate vagueness has – so far – helped deter China from invading Taiwan while also helping deter the self-ruled island from declaring full independence. Either scenario would trigger a major geopolitical crisis.Read the full story:Biden’s Taiwan vow creates confusion not clarity – and raises China tensionsRead moreThe fate of millions of women and American families hangs in the balance next month as we await the final ruling from the US supreme court in a pivotal case out of Mississippi, Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health that includes a request for the historic abortion decision Roe v Wade to be struck down in its entirety.And millions of words have already been written about this, especially since the unprecedented leak in early May, via Politico, of the draft opinion written by hyper-conservative associate justice Samuel Alito and joined by four other right-leaning justices to give a super-majority in favor of overturning the national right to an abortion in the US.Here is the latest, very striking cover of New York Magazine.The Supreme Court will likely overturn Roe v. Wade, and the legal right to abortion will disappear in half the U.S. Abortion itself will not — and never has. In our new issue, we’ve compiled a practical guide to accessing an abortion, today and tomorrow https://t.co/RCi5xrH6T6 pic.twitter.com/8OmdsKUdjc— New York Magazine (@NYMag) May 23, 2022
    In warrior journalism mode, the magazine has an extraordinary article and interactive, noting:“The legal right to abortion is likely to disappear in half the country in a matter of weeks. Abortion itself, and the need for it, will not, and never has. The question is what it will cost medically, financially — and criminally……“…..What we’re offering here is not medical advice but a pathway to understanding your options and liabilities with a comprehensive guide to getting an abortion in the U.S. now. It will be regularly updated online to bring you the information you need.”You can read the magazine article, buy its The Cut section, here.On the subject of coronavirus and especially for all our blog readers who are missing Donald Trump not being on Twitter, here is the former president’s latest splurge on his little platform, Truth Social.Meanwhile on Truth Social this morning, Trump is slamming Dr. Birx and her scarf collection. Birx just came out with a book about the WH Covid response and talks about issues with Trump during the pandemic, like his comment about injecting bleach. pic.twitter.com/PIOOq4MRY9— Meridith McGraw (@meridithmcgraw) May 23, 2022
    This recalls a tragic episode all around. Many look back at the moment they wish then-White House coronavirus response coordinator Deborah Birx had leapt out of her seat in 2020 and, physically if necessary, gagged or hustled Trump off the media briefing stage to stop him suggesting to Americans that perhaps things like sunlight and bleach taken “inside” the body could get rid of Covid-19. Or at least emphatically contradicted him at the podium.Last month Birx told ABC that the whole debacle was “a tragedy on many levels” as she was talking about the book she has out about her role during the pandemic, when she resorted to driving all around the country talking to state and local officials about how to curb the raging virus spread.Here’s the response to Trump’s latest words, from conservative commentator Alyssa Farah Griffin.He’s such a petty, small man. Factcheck: he never fired Dr. Birx. https://t.co/3HgrTzbbYw— Alyssa Farah Griffin 🇺🇸🇺🇦 (@Alyssafarah) May 23, 2022
    US Senator Jeff Merkley has announced he has contracted the coronavirus. The Oregon Democrat attributed the mildness of his current symptoms to the fact that he is fully vaccinated and boosted.He urged everyone in the US to get similarly protected and warned, on Twitter: “Covid is still among us.”pic.twitter.com/r5XmUosx7i— Senator Jeff Merkley (@SenJeffMerkley) May 23, 2022
    The US pushed through the world’s most successful program to develop vaccines against Covid in record time, approving the first safe and effective dose for emergency use in December, 2020, less than a year into the pandemic.Unfortunately, the country also has lost a million people to the virus, more than any other nation on record.The New York Times noted, using Australia as an example, that: “If the United States had the same Covid death rate as Australia, about 900,000 lives would have been saved.” The article noted a number of characteristic that influenced this number, including socio-political factors such as people’s collective trust in institutions and each other.Washington DC’s attorney general has sued Mark Zuckerberg, seeking to hold the Facebook co-founder personally responsible for his alleged role in allowing the political consultancy Cambridge Analytica to harvest the personal data of millions of Americans during the 2016 election cycle.The suit, filed in the capital by the District of Columbia attorney general, Karl Racine, alleges that Zuckerberg directly participated in policies that allowed Cambridge Analytica to unknowingly gather the personal data of US voters in an attempt to help Donald Trump’s election campaign.“This unprecedented security breach exposed tens of millions of Americans’ personal information, and Mr Zuckerberg’s policies enabled a multi-year effort to mislead users about the extent of Facebook’s wrongful conduct,” Racine said in a news release. NEW: We’re suing Mark Zuckerberg for his role in Facebook’s misleading privacy practices and failure to protect millions of users’ data.Our investigation shows extensive evidence that Zuckerberg was personally involved in failures that led to the Cambridge Analytica incident.— AG Karl A. Racine (@AGKarlRacine) May 23, 2022
    Washington DC’s attorney general has sued Mark Zuckerberg, seeking to hold the Facebook co-founder personally responsible for his alleged role in allowing the political consultancy Cambridge Analytica to harvest the personal data of millions of Americans during the 2016 election cycle.The suit, filed in the capital by the District of Columbia attorney general, Karl Racine, alleges that Zuckerberg directly participated in policies that allowed Cambridge Analytica to unknowingly gather the personal data of US voters in an attempt to help Donald Trump’s election campaign.“This unprecedented security breach exposed tens of millions of Americans’ personal information, and Mr Zuckerberg’s policies enabled a multi-year effort to mislead users about the extent of Facebook’s wrongful conduct,” Racine said in a news release.“This lawsuit is not only warranted, but necessary, and sends a message that corporate leaders, including chief executives, will be held accountable for their actions.”Meta declined to comment.Racine has previously sued Facebook’s parent company, Meta, under the District of Columbia’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act. The act makes individuals responsible for violations if they knew about them at the time.The suit against Zuckerberg is based on hundreds of thousands of documents, including depositions from employees and whistleblowers, that have been collected as part of its ongoing litigation against Meta.“Since filing our landmark lawsuit against Facebook, my office has fought tooth and nail against the company’s characteristic efforts to resist producing documents and otherwise thwart our suit. We continue to persist and have followed the evidence right to Mr Zuckerberg,” said Racine.Read the full story:Zuckerberg sued by DC attorney general over Cambridge Analytica data scandalRead moreA firearms “buyback” hosted by California’s Sacramento police department to get weapons off the streets proved so popular that it ran out of money within 45 minutes, The Hill reports.Cops said they recovered 134 firearms during the weekend gas-for-guns buyback that offered a $50 gas gift card per weapon turned in. The event was scheduled to run five hours, but supplies of the gift cards didn’t last even one, and it closed down after four.Among the guns received were at least one assault weapon, numerous components for “ghost guns” and multiple illegally configured firearms, police said in a Facebook statement on Sunday. Police chief Kathy Lester said: “I truly believe violent crime prevention is a shared responsibility and today’s overwhelming community participation is evidence of the success we can achieve together”. Due to overwhelming response, we have exhausted our supply of gift cards for today’s gun exchange. We will still be accepting firearms but unfortunately we will not be providing gift cards from this point on. This event will be ending one hour early and will run until 4 p.m. pic.twitter.com/o9u7EohLXX— Sacramento Police (@SacPolice) May 21, 2022
    Read more about the scourge of California’s “ghost gun” plague here:Ordered online, assembled at home: the deadly toll of California’s ‘ghost guns’Read moreStarbucks is joining the exodus of western companies from Russia following the country’s invasion of Ukraine, Reuters is reporting.The company will exit the Russian market after nearly 15 years as the Seattle-based coffee chain closes its 130 stores operated by its licensee Alshaya Group. It has almost 2,000 employees in the country.Starbucks’ decision to wind down its operation in Russia is different to the approach some other foreign companies have taken, Reuters says.McDonald’s last week said it was selling its restaurants in Russia to local licensee Alexander Govor to be rebranded under a new name, but will retain its trademarks, while French carmaker Renault is selling its majority stake in Russia’s biggest vehicle manufacturer with an option to buy back the stake.Other western companies, including Imperial Brands and Shell, are cutting ties with the Russia market by agreeing to sell their assets in the country or handing them over to local managers.Starbucks to exit Russia after nearly 15 years https://t.co/Y74uo47vti pic.twitter.com/qXoV4Gw073— Reuters (@Reuters) May 23, 2022
    The Guardian’s Alexandra Villarreal reports from Texas on the battle between a mainstream Democrat and progressive challenger that could shape the party’s approach to midterm elections in the state:Two nearly identical text boxes appear on the respective campaign websites for Henry Cuellar and Jessica Cisneros, the Democrats locked in a heated primary runoff to represent south Texas in Congress.Cuellar’s text box warns voters that Cisneros “would defund the police and border patrol”, which “would make us less safe and wreck our local economy”. Cisneros, in turn, blasts Cuellar for opposing “women’s right to choose” amid a nationwide crackdown on reproductive care.The parallel advisories read like shorthand for the battle that’s brewing among Democrats in Texas, where centrist incumbents like Cuellar are facing a mushrooming cohort of young and progressive voters frustrated by the status quo. “I want people to take away from what we’re doing … people-power – people – can go toe-to-toe with any kind of corporate special interest,” Cisneros told the Guardian. “And that we still have power over what we want our future and our narrative to be here in Texas, despite all odds.”Texas-28 is a heavily gerrymandered, predominantly Latino congressional district that rides the US-Mexico border, including the city of Laredo, before sprawling across south-central Texas to reach into San Antonio. During the primary election in March, voters there were so split that barely a thousand votes divided Cuellar from Cisneros, while neither candidate received the majority they needed to win.Now, the runoff on 24 May has come to represent not only a race for the coveted congressional seat, but also a referendum on the future of Democratic politics in Texas and nationally.Read the full story:Progressive v anti-abortion Democrat: Texas faces pivotal primary runoffRead moreApproval of a Covid-19 vaccine for children younger than five appears closer after Pfizer-BioNTech said Monday that a clinical trial showed three low doses generated a strong immune response, and was safe and well-tolerated.The companies said they plan to soon ask global regulators to authorize the shot for the age group, children for whom no vaccine is currently approved in most of the world, Reuters reports. Submission of data to the US food and drug administration (FDA) should come later this week.The trial involved giving 1,678 children ages six months to under five years smaller doses of the vaccine than given to older children and adults. “The study suggests that a low 3mg dose of our vaccine, carefully selected based on tolerability data, provides young children with a high level of protection against the recent Covid-19 strains,” BioNTech’s chief executive, Ugur Sahin, said in a statement.We published data indicating that a low dose of 3 µg of our #mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, carefully selected based on tolerability data, is effective and provides children under 5 years of age with a high level of protection against the recent #COVID19 strains. https://t.co/EenuqWzVLt pic.twitter.com/VyDDKqJJg8— BioNTech SE (@BioNTech_Group) May 23, 2022
    Vaccine take up in the US for the five to 11 age group is still at a worryingly low level, officials say, fueling fears of a summer surge of coronavirus cases among children.The FDA and federal centers for disease control and prevention signed off on booster shots for those children earlier this month. It could be seen as proof that Donald Trump’s popularity among Republicans is on the wane, or you could take it as a worthless straw poll of a few hundred already skewed voters. But either way, the former president finished second to Florida governor Ron DeSantis in a survey of Wisconsin Republicans as to who they want as their party’s 2024 presidential nominee.The result, a 122-104 win for DeSantis over Trump in a poll of 325 Republican activists at the Wisconsin state party’s weekend convention, reported by wispolitics.com, is hardly scientific proof of anything.But it does confirm the perception of DeSantis, who has signed into law a raft of “culture war” legislation in his state in recent weeks, as a rising star in Republican circles.The one-time Trump protégé, who faces a reelection fight as Florida’s governor in November, has long been considered a likely 2024 presidential contender. His recent policy “wins”, such as the “don’t say gay” bill outlawing classroom discussions of gender identity and sexual orientation, and the “racist” gerrymandering of Florida’s congressional maps has won him support from deep within Trump’s Maga base.In the Wisconsin poll of 2024 favorites, the only other politician to reach double figures was Nikki Haley, with a distant 24 votes. STRAW POLL NEWS: Wisconsin GOP activists are split on Donald Trump running for president in ’24.Even with him in the mix, @RonDeSantisFL was backed by a plurality of party activists who voted in the @wispolitics straw polls.See the full results:https://t.co/z80adZyizc— JR Ross (@jrrosswrites) May 21, 2022
    The House select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol is expected to stage six public hearings in June on how Donald Trump and some allies broke the law as they sought to overturn the 2020 election results, according to sources familiar with the inquiry.The hearings are set to be a pivotal political moment for the country as the panel aims to publicly outline the potentially unlawful schemes that tried to keep the former president in office despite his defeat at the hands of Joe Biden.According to a draft schedule reviewed by the Guardian, the select committee intends to hold six hearings, with the first and last in prime time, where its lawyers will run through how Trump’s schemes took shape before the election and culminated with the Capitol attack.“We want to paint a picture as clear as possible as to what occurred,” the chairman of the select committee, Congressman Bennie Thompson, recently told reporters. “The public needs to know what to think. We just have to show clearly what happened on January 6.”The select committee has already alleged that Trump violated multiple federal laws to overturn the 2020 election, including obstructing Congress and defrauding the United States. But the hearings are where the panel intends to show how they reached those conclusions.According to the draft schedule, the June public hearings will explore Trump’s efforts to overturn the election, starting and ending with prime-time hearings at 8pm on the 9th and the 23rd. In between, the panel will hold 10am hearings on the 13th, 15th, 16th and 21st.The select committee appears to be planning for the hearings to be extensive affairs. The prime-time hearings are currently scheduled to last between 1.5 and 2 hours and the morning hearings between 2 and 2.5 hours.A select committee member will lead each of the hearings, the sources said, but top investigative lawyers who are intimately familiar with the material will primarily conduct the questioning of witnesses to keep testimony tightly on track.Read the full story:Capitol attack panel to hold six public hearings as it aims to show how Trump broke lawRead moreJoe Biden is warning Americans that the fight against inflation is “going to be a haul”, and that relief for soaring prices of goods, services and especially gasoline is unlikely to be immediate.But the president, speaking in Tokyo earlier today as he launched a new trade deal with 12 Indo-Pacific nations, told reporters that he doesn’t believe a recession is “inevitable”.Biden is acutely aware that the inflation crisis is uppermost in voters’ minds ahead of November’s midterm elections. There was little comfort for him in a bleak new CBS poll released Monday that finds 69% of the country thinks the economy is bad, and 77% saying they’re “pessimistic” about the cost of goods and services in the coming months.“This is going to be a haul. This is going to take some time,” Biden told reporters in Tokyo. In response to a reporter’s question specifically about a recession, Biden said he did not think it was “inevitable”. With his own approval ratings at the lowest point of his presidency, Biden is under pressure to try to reverse the situation and avoid Democrats losing control of one, or both chambers of Congress ion November’s midterms. That he is focused on the crisis back home while on tour in Asia would appear to back up his assertion last week that inflation was his “top domestic priority”. Critics have been quick to point out that, last summer, Biden and acolytes including treasury secretary Janet Yellen were insistent that high inflation would likely only be temporary.But it has continued to spiral, with the annual inflation rate still close to a 40-year high according to figures earlier this month. My colleague Lauren Gambino has this look at how the president is attempting to tackle inflation as the clock runs down on the midterms. The message for voters seems to be that if you think things are bad now, Republicans at the wheel would be much worse:Biden pitches Democrats as saviors for US economy ahead of midterm electionsRead moreGood morning! Welcome to a new week, and Monday’s US politics blog. Joe Biden is in Japan, but has his attention focused on a crisis back home, claiming that a recession in the US “is not inevitable”. That’s despite raging inflation, runaway gas prices and a particularly despondent new CBS poll that finds 69% of the country thinks the economy is bad, and 77% saying they’re “pessimistic” about the cost of goods and services in the coming months.If there’s one thing Biden doesn’t have, of course, it’s time, with November’s midterm elections looming fast and the president’s personal approval ratings below 40%. We’ll take a look at his plans to try to reverse a desperate situation a little later in today’s blog.Here’s what else is happening:
    The 6 January House panel investigating Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn his election defeat to Joe Biden will hold six public hearings next month to lay out the former president’s illegal scheming to remain in power.
    The US Senate convenes later today, and Democrats in the chamber are moving towards a vote on Thursday on the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act approved by the House last week in the aftermath of the massacre of 10 Black people by an alleged white supremacist in Buffalo, New York.
    Today should have seen the end of the Trump-era Title 42 immigration policy halting refugees at the southern border because of Covid-19, but a federal judge blocked the Biden administration on Friday. The justice department is appealing the move.
    Title 42 is also standing in the way of a Covid-19 relief package making any headway in Congress. Republicans won’t budge on approving a deal to fund vaccines, tests and treatments without a vote to keep the immigration policy in place, despite a sharp recent rise in cases.
    We’re expecting one or more more minor rulings from the US supreme court today, ahead of what will be the blockbuster decision of the session in the coming weeks: whether the panel overturns the 1973 Roe v Wade protecting abortion rights.
    It’s the final day of campaigning in Georgia, Alabama and Arkansas ahead of tomorrow’s primaries. Former vice-president Mike Pence will rally in Kennesaw tonight for Republican Georgia governor Brian Kemp, whom Pence’s former boss Donald Trump wants to take down for rejecting his election lies. More

  • in

    Joe Biden says US recession ‘is not inevitable’ despite rampant inflation – live

    Joe Biden is warning Americans that the fight against inflation is “going to be a haul”, and that relief for soaring prices of goods, services and especially gasoline is unlikely to be immediate.But the president, speaking in Tokyo earlier today as he launched a new trade deal with 12 Indo-Pacific nations, told reporters that he doesn’t believe a recession is “inevitable”.Biden is acutely aware that the inflation crisis is uppermost in voters’ minds ahead of November’s midterm elections. There was little comfort for him in a bleak new CBS poll released Monday that finds 69% of the country thinks the economy is bad, and 77% saying they’re “pessimistic” about the cost of goods and services in the coming months.“This is going to be a haul. This is going to take some time,” Biden told reporters in Tokyo. In response to a reporter’s question specifically about a recession, Biden said he did not think it was “inevitable”. With his own approval ratings at the lowest point of his presidency, Biden is under pressure to try to reverse the situation and avoid Democrats losing control of one, or both chambers of Congress ion November’s midterms. That he is focused on the crisis back home while on tour in Asia would appear to back up his assertion last week that inflation was his “top domestic priority”. Critics have been quick to point out that, last summer, Biden and acolytes including treasury secretary Janet Yellen were insistent that high inflation would likely only be temporary.But it has continued to spiral, with the annual inflation rate still close to a 40-year high according to figures earlier this month. My colleague Lauren Gambino has this look at how the president is attempting to tackle inflation as the clock runs down on the midterms. The message for voters seems to be that if you think things are bad now, Republicans at the wheel would be much worse:Biden pitches Democrats as saviors for US economy ahead of midterm electionsRead moreIt could be seen as proof that Donald Trump’s popularity among Republicans is on the wane, or you could take it as a worthless straw poll of a few hundred already skewed voters. But either way, the former president finished second to Florida governor Ron DeSantis in a survey of Wisconsin Republicans as to who they want as their party’s 2024 presidential nominee.The result, a 122-104 win for DeSantis over Trump in a poll of 325 Republican activists at the Wisconsin state party’s weekend convention, reported by wispolitics.com, is hardly scientific proof of anything.But it does confirm the perception of DeSantis, who has signed into law a raft of “culture war” legislation in his state in recent weeks, as a rising star in Republican circles.The one-time Trump protégé, who faces a reelection fight as Florida’s governor in November, has long been considered a likely 2024 presidential contender. His recent policy “wins”, such as the “don’t say gay” bill outlawing classroom discussions of gender identity and sexual orientation, and the “racist” gerrymandering of Florida’s congressional maps has won him support from deep within Trump’s Maga base.In the Wisconsin poll of 2024 favorites, the only other politician to reach double figures was Nikki Haley, with a distant 24 votes. STRAW POLL NEWS: Wisconsin GOP activists are split on Donald Trump running for president in ’24.Even with him in the mix, @RonDeSantisFL was backed by a plurality of party activists who voted in the @wispolitics straw polls.See the full results:https://t.co/z80adZyizc— JR Ross (@jrrosswrites) May 21, 2022
    The House select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol is expected to stage six public hearings in June on how Donald Trump and some allies broke the law as they sought to overturn the 2020 election results, according to sources familiar with the inquiry.The hearings are set to be a pivotal political moment for the country as the panel aims to publicly outline the potentially unlawful schemes that tried to keep the former president in office despite his defeat at the hands of Joe Biden.According to a draft schedule reviewed by the Guardian, the select committee intends to hold six hearings, with the first and last in prime time, where its lawyers will run through how Trump’s schemes took shape before the election and culminated with the Capitol attack.“We want to paint a picture as clear as possible as to what occurred,” the chairman of the select committee, Congressman Bennie Thompson, recently told reporters. “The public needs to know what to think. We just have to show clearly what happened on January 6.”The select committee has already alleged that Trump violated multiple federal laws to overturn the 2020 election, including obstructing Congress and defrauding the United States. But the hearings are where the panel intends to show how they reached those conclusions.According to the draft schedule, the June public hearings will explore Trump’s efforts to overturn the election, starting and ending with prime-time hearings at 8pm on the 9th and the 23rd. In between, the panel will hold 10am hearings on the 13th, 15th, 16th and 21st.The select committee appears to be planning for the hearings to be extensive affairs. The prime-time hearings are currently scheduled to last between 1.5 and 2 hours and the morning hearings between 2 and 2.5 hours.A select committee member will lead each of the hearings, the sources said, but top investigative lawyers who are intimately familiar with the material will primarily conduct the questioning of witnesses to keep testimony tightly on track.Read the full story:Capitol attack panel to hold six public hearings as it aims to show how Trump broke lawRead moreJoe Biden is warning Americans that the fight against inflation is “going to be a haul”, and that relief for soaring prices of goods, services and especially gasoline is unlikely to be immediate.But the president, speaking in Tokyo earlier today as he launched a new trade deal with 12 Indo-Pacific nations, told reporters that he doesn’t believe a recession is “inevitable”.Biden is acutely aware that the inflation crisis is uppermost in voters’ minds ahead of November’s midterm elections. There was little comfort for him in a bleak new CBS poll released Monday that finds 69% of the country thinks the economy is bad, and 77% saying they’re “pessimistic” about the cost of goods and services in the coming months.“This is going to be a haul. This is going to take some time,” Biden told reporters in Tokyo. In response to a reporter’s question specifically about a recession, Biden said he did not think it was “inevitable”. With his own approval ratings at the lowest point of his presidency, Biden is under pressure to try to reverse the situation and avoid Democrats losing control of one, or both chambers of Congress ion November’s midterms. That he is focused on the crisis back home while on tour in Asia would appear to back up his assertion last week that inflation was his “top domestic priority”. Critics have been quick to point out that, last summer, Biden and acolytes including treasury secretary Janet Yellen were insistent that high inflation would likely only be temporary.But it has continued to spiral, with the annual inflation rate still close to a 40-year high according to figures earlier this month. My colleague Lauren Gambino has this look at how the president is attempting to tackle inflation as the clock runs down on the midterms. The message for voters seems to be that if you think things are bad now, Republicans at the wheel would be much worse:Biden pitches Democrats as saviors for US economy ahead of midterm electionsRead moreGood morning! Welcome to a new week, and Monday’s US politics blog. Joe Biden is in Japan, but has his attention focused on a crisis back home, claiming that a recession in the US “is not inevitable”. That’s despite raging inflation, runaway gas prices and a particularly despondent new CBS poll that finds 69% of the country thinks the economy is bad, and 77% saying they’re “pessimistic” about the cost of goods and services in the coming months.If there’s one thing Biden doesn’t have, of course, it’s time, with November’s midterm elections looming fast and the president’s personal approval ratings below 40%. We’ll take a look at his plans to try to reverse a desperate situation a little later in today’s blog.Here’s what else is happening:
    The 6 January House panel investigating Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn his election defeat to Joe Biden will hold six public hearings next month to lay out the former president’s illegal scheming to remain in power.
    The US Senate convenes later today, and Democrats in the chamber are moving towards a vote on Thursday on the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act approved by the House last week in the aftermath of the massacre of 10 Black people by an alleged white supremacist in Buffalo, New York.
    Today should have seen the end of the Trump-era Title 42 immigration policy halting refugees at the southern border because of Covid-19, but a federal judge blocked the Biden administration on Friday. The justice department is appealing the move.
    Title 42 is also standing in the way of a Covid-19 relief package making any headway in Congress. Republicans won’t budge on approving a deal to fund vaccines, tests and treatments without a vote to keep the immigration policy in place, despite a sharp recent rise in cases.
    We’re expecting one or more more minor rulings from the US supreme court today, ahead of what will be the blockbuster decision of the session in the coming weeks: whether the panel overturns the 1973 Roe v Wade protecting abortion rights.
    It’s the final day of campaigning in Georgia, Alabama and Arkansas ahead of tomorrow’s primaries. Former vice-president Mike Pence will rally in Kennesaw tonight for Republican Georgia governor Brian Kemp, whom Pence’s former boss Donald Trump wants to take down for rejecting his election lies. More