More stories

  • in

    Trump expected to announce new list of potential supreme court justices

    The White House is expected to announce a new list of potential supreme court justices as soon as Wednesday, a move designed to shore up conservative support for Donald Trump as his race for the White House against Joe Biden enters the final stretch.Trump’s decision to name a list of possible picks during the 2016 election is widely seen to have boosted support among conservatives otherwise queasy about backing him against Hillary Clinton. Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, both now on the court, were included on that list of reliably conservative picks.Last week, the White House press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, flagged the impending announcement, telling reporters: “You will see it soon.” On Tuesday, Politico reported that the list was imminent.Trump signaled he was compiling a new list after a pair of supreme court rulings went against his administration in June.The updated list is expected to include many of the 2016 lineup, including Raymond Kethledge, 53, an appeals court judge on the sixth circuit, and Amy Coney Barrett, 48, a member of the seventh circuit appeals court.Both were reported to have been close to being nominated when Kavanaugh was picked in late 2018, to fill a seat vacated by the retirement of Anthony Kennedy. Kavanaugh, a former White House aide to George W Bush, was confirmed after contentious confirmation hearings featuring allegations of sexual assault, which he vehemently denied.After Trump’s two picks, conservatives hold a 5-4 majority on the supreme court, where seats are vacated by the retirement or death of an incumbent. Over the summer, the liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 87, has announced health problems including treatment for cancer.Trump promotes his judicial appointments as perhaps his most important accomplishment. A Biden presidency, he warns, would mean more liberals on the highest court.But Trump’s appointees have not always performed as anticipated. This summer, for example, Gorsuch sided with the chief justice, John Roberts, and the liberal justices to guarantee protection from discrimination in the workplace for LGBTQ individuals – a disappointment to conservatives.Last month, Vice-President Mike Pence told the Christian Broadcasting Network that Roberts, who was appointed by George W Bush, had been “a disappointment to conservatives”.But Trump’s appointments to lower courts offer plentiful consolation. During his first term, nearly 200 judges have been installed with lifetime appointments.According to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Federal Judicial Center, in July there were 792 active judges across the three main tiers of the federal system.Of those, Trump has appointed 194, or 24% of the total. Barack Obama appointed the largest share of currently active federal judges, 39%. Of judges still sitting, George W Bush appointed 21% and 11% were appointed by Bill Clinton.Much smaller shares were appointed by George HW Bush (2%) and Ronald Reagan (2%). A single federal judge, Puerto Rico’s Carmen Consuelo Cerezo, dates her appointment to Jimmy Carter’s administration. More

  • in

    The supreme court just delivered a huge blow to Trump's belief that he's above the law | Lloyd Green

    Donald Trump’s future may rest with the nation’s voters and a New York grand jury, although not necessarily in that order. On Thursday, the US supreme court upheld a subpoena issued by Manhattan’s district attorney, Cyrus Vance, which demands eight years of Trump’s tax returns. Once again, Trump’s secrets are no longer his own.Voting 7-2, the high court rejected the president’s contention that he was immune from investigation simply because he lives in the White House. Writing for the court’s majority, Chief Justice John Roberts argued: “We cannot conclude that absolute immunity is necessary or appropriate under article II or the supremacy clause.”Trump learned the hard way that the US constitution is neither invisibility cloak nor rag. It is also not whatever the president says it is.As Roberts framed things, “No citizen, not even the president, is categorically above the common duty to produce evidence when called upon in a criminal proceeding.” Significantly, under the court’s ruling, the lower court will continue to exercise oversight of the proceedings.In a separate ruling, issued minutes later and by a 7-2 margin, the court rejected the president’s contention that Congress had no right whatsoever to review his tax returns and financials. Roberts observed: “When Congress seeks information ‘needed for intelligent legislative action’, it ‘unquestionably’ remains ‘the duty of all citizens to cooperate’.”The House of Representatives had cast a particular eye on Trump’s relationship with Deutsche Bank, his de facto lender of choice and last resort. On the other hand, the court denied Congress instant access to the records.The majority held that the lower courts had paid insufficient attention to the issue of separation of powers and the potential for encroachment upon the executive branch. In other words, this battle will continue beyond Trump’s tenure unless a Biden administration weighs in. And even then.The decisions came on the final day of the court’s 2019-20 term, but they could not have arrived at a worse moment for Trump. There are less than four months to the election and once again the president is ensnared in a snare of his own making. A porn star, a Playboy model and alleged hush money are again on stage.Even before the supreme court announced its rulings, Trump had used Twitter to complain of harassment. After the court went on summer vacation, the president kvetched about its lack of deference. Practically speaking, it is unlikely that Trump’s returns will be shared with the public any time soon.Even the tech baron Peter Thiel likens Trump’s re-election effort to a marooned boat skippered by a hapless crewSeparately, Trump’s annual financial disclosure form is on a 45-day extension. It is the sole legally mandated window into the president’s holdings and income.As for New York’s prosecutors, the operative issues appear to be whether the Trump Organization deducted the payments from reported income, the legality of such a move under state law, and who in Trump’s orbit greenlighted the deduction if taken. Lurking in the foreground is the implicit question: what did Trump know and when did he know it?The record currently reflects that Michael Cohen, then an officer of the Trump Organization and Trump’s personal lawyer, orchestrated payments to the former adult film star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal at the behest of his client, Trump. Cohen pleaded guilty to related federal crimes in 2018. At the time, the justice department essentially tagged the chief executive as an unindicted co-conspirator. Government filings expressly tie Trump, AKA “Individual-1”, to Cohen. (As a coda, within hours of the court’s rulings, Cohen was taken back into federal custody for violating the terms of his Covid-19 release from prison.)From here onward, Kayleigh McEnany, the president’s spokeswoman, will be forced to refer questions about Trump’s taxes to his personal lawyers for answers that will never come. McEnany wants us to believe that her boss is “the most informed person on planet Earth when it comes to the threats that we face”.Then there is political reality. Despite Trump’s assurances, the US is not “in great shape”. Trump-Pence 2020 looks a lot like the Grim Reaper’s scythe. Support for Trump is withering where Covid-19’s march goes uninterrupted. The president’s base is not blind.Even the tech baron Peter Thiel, who donated more than $1m to Trump’s 2016 run, likens his re-election effort to a marooned boat skippered by a hapless crew. Loyalty can survive only so much abuse and incompetence.Vance, the Manhattan district attorney, and the Trumps have some history. Less than a decade ago, Vance declined to indict Ivanka and Donald Jr over their role in the Trump Soho project, an undersold condominium-hotel in lower Manhattan. The optics were messy, to say the least. Vance received a $25,000 contribution – which he returned – from Marc Kasowitz, another Trump lawyer.This time around, however, the Trumps may not be so lucky. Four decades ago, Vance’s father served as Jimmy Carter’s secretary of state. But in 1980, the elder Vance resigned over a botched effort to rescue 52 Americans held hostage by Iran. Vance père had opposed the operation from its outset and quit over principle. Ultimately, his nexus to the president did not mean all that much.Against that backdrop, don’t bet on Vance fils being played by Trump a second time. The current president is a wounded politician facing electoral elimination – just like President Carter. There’s no upside to Vance balking at an indictment if he has the goods. The Vances know what roadkill looks like. More

  • in

    Supreme court strikes down abortion restriction in major victory for campaigners – live

    Court ruled Louisiana law is unconstitutional Florida scientist says leadership asked her to change numbers Trump: I wasn’t told about ‘Russian bounties’ plot Global deaths from coronavirus pass half a million Trump retweets video of couple pointing guns at protesters Sign up to our First Thing newsletter LIVE Updated The US supreme court in Washington. […] More

  • in

    Trump administration asks supreme court to axe Obamacare

    Democrats call legal push amid coronavirus crisis an ‘act of unfathomable cruelty’ Coronavirus – latest updates See all our coronavirus coverage The supreme court building in Washington DC. The Affordable Care Act is likely to be a key political battleground in the forthcoming presidential election. Photograph: AFP/Getty The Trump administration has asked the US supreme […] More