Headline USA

They execute Lisa Montgomery, the only woman on death row convicted of murdering a pregnant woman and taking her baby | The State

Lisa Montgomery was sentenced to the federal death penalty in 2004.

Wyandotte County Sheriff / EFE

WASHINGTON – The state of Indiana today executed Lisa montgomery, the only woman on death row in the United States, and the first to be executed in more than six decades.

The execution by lethal injection occurred at the Terre Haute prison complex, after the Supreme court lift the suspension that a federal court had ordered just hours before.

Lawyer alleges constitutional violation

“Our Constitution prohibits the execution of a person who cannot rationally understand his execution (…). The current administration knows this. And they killed her anyway, “denounced her lawyer Kelley Henry in a statement released by the media.

“Everyone who participated in the execution of Lisa Montgomery should be ashamed,” he added.

Lisa Montgomery, 52, was convicted in 2007 of killing a 23-year-old woman who was eight months pregnant in 2004 and extracting her baby, which was later recovered safe and sound by authorities.


Headline USA New York Politics

Clarence Thomas, Justice of the Supreme, in trouble for support of his wife to supporters of Trump | The State

Clarence Thomas, Justice of the Supreme.

Tasos Katopodis / Getty Images

Donald Trump supporters’ assault on Capitol Hill has one of the most conservative justices on the US Supreme Court in trouble.

Ginni thomas, wife of Judge Clarence Thomas, the only African-American in the Supreme Court, posted on Facebook messages of support for the people who gathered in Washington on January 6.

Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Justice Clarence Thomas.
Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Justice Clarence Thomas. Getty Images

I love MAGA peopleGinni Thomas wrote on her profile. “God bless you go out to defend or pray.”

The messages were written before the outgoing president gave a speech to the crowd and the mob stormed the building that houses the nation’s Congress. The posts were later deleted and the magistrate’s wife has not posted anything since.


Ginni Thomas’ messages on January 6 are not the first to show her sympathy for Trump. According to Slate, women often publish conspiracy theories about a coup against Trump financed by magnate George Soros.

The magistrate’s wife has also reproduced false information about the role of Bill gates, founder of Microsoft, on the coronavirus vaccine. According to the New York Times, Ginni Thomas made lists of federal officials who were not loyal enough to Trump. It has also condemned to the Black Lives Matter movement.

Personalities in social networks have requested the resignation of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme for open support for Trump and his supporters.


Georgia Headline USA Politics

Trump insists and files a new lawsuit in the Supreme Court | The State

Outgoing President Donald Trump at a press conference the day after the election.

Chris Kleponis / EFE

Donald Trump will go down in history as the most persistent president of the United States.

The outgoing president’s campaign led this Sunday to the Supreme Court your dispute over the election results in the key state of Pennsylvania, a matter on which the highest court of that state has already been positioned against.

In its lawsuit, the Trump campaign considers that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court he went too far by ruling against him and considers that “the result of the elections for the US Presidency is hanging by a thread”, something that is not true because Democrat Joe Biden won the November 3 elections.

This action is part of the president’s strategy to reverse the results of the November elections in the courts, attempts that have not been successful and have only served to fuel divisions and mistrust in the democratic system in the country.

In addition, it has little chance of success, since on November 14, the U.S. Electoral College confirmed Biden as the next president and ratified what the media had predicted more than a month ago: that Trump lost the election and will have to leave the White House on January 20.

The objective of Trump’s campaign is overriding in Pennsylvania hundreds of thousands of votes cast by mail, a method used by billions of Americans because of the pandemic.

The president has not recognized his defeat in the elections by alleging, without proof, that there was electoral fraud and has promised that he will continue to litigate the results of the elections in different courts, although for the moment he has not been successful with any of his demands.

The Supreme Court has already ruled against Trump in a major lawsuit brought by Texas Republican leaders to invalidate the election result in the key states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, which the current president won in 2016 but is now They did for Biden.

The Supreme Court is composed of three progressive judges and six talkersThe latter figure that includes three magistrates appointed by Trump.


Georgia Headline USA Politics

Trump lashes out at the Supreme Court after motion to reverse Biden’s triumph | The State

Outgoing US President Donald Trump in a file photo.

Chris Kleponis / EFE

Outgoing US President Donald Trump branded the US Supreme Court of being an entity without wisdom and without value after the highest judicial forum rejected the motion of the state of Texas who sought to reverse the victory of his rival Joe biden in the past elections.

Following the rejection of the US Supreme Court of the motion of the state of Texas on an alleged fraud in the elections, the outgoing president considered that the Court defrauded the country.

“The Supreme Court has let us down. Without wisdom, without value! ”, The president tweeted this Friday after knowing the decision.

The chain of attacks on the judicial body continued this Saturday with the following message: “So you are the president of the United States and you have just gone through an election in which you obtained more votes than any other incumbent president in history, with difference, and supposedly you lost ”, added the president in one of the messages that was classified as misleading by the administrators of the social network.

“Many others also join the lawsuit but, in an instant, they drop it and disappear, without even looking at the many reasons it was brought. A rigged election, let’s fight! ”, He continued.

“The Supreme Court has ZERO interest in the merits of the largest electoral fraud perpetrated in the United States of America. All they were interested in was “position,” which makes it very difficult for the President to present a case on its merits. 75,000,000 votes! ”Added the Republican in another message that was also marked as unreliable by Twitter operators.

In passing, Trump took the opportunity to once again attack the son of his opponent Joe Biden, Hunter, with allusions to the federal investigation against him for tax crimes and the actions of Attorney General William Barr.

Why did Bill Bar not reveal the truth publicly before the Election, about Hunter Biden. Joe was lying on the stage of the debate that there was nothing wrong or nothing was happening – the Press confirmed. A great disadvantage for republicans in the polls, “said the outgoing president.

The decision of the highest court yesterday ruled out annulling the results in four disputed states in which the current president lost, in an attempt to reverse the trend in favor of the Democrat.
In their resolution, the magistrates noted: “Texas has not shown a judicially recognizable interest in the way another state conducts its elections.” The judges also determined that all other pending motions are dismissed as inadmissible.

The motion filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton stated that the states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin used the coronavirus pandemic to justify the omission of federal and state electoral laws and the illegal approval of last minute changes to thereby alter the results of the general elections.

The legal recourse sought that the Supreme Court prevent the respective representatives from voting in the electoral college this coming December 14 to make Biden’s victory official.


California Georgia Headline USA Ohio Politics

Texas Goes to Supreme Court in Favor of Trump to Try to Delay Electoral College Vote | The State

The Supreme Court has not decided whether it will discuss the issue of the presidential election.

SAUL LOEB / AFP / Getty Images

President Donald trump and his allies reinforced their crusade against the Supreme Court to try to change the electoral results in four states and request the delay of the Electoral College decision.

The Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton, filed a lawsuit accusing “bias” in the process in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania Y Wisconsin, a similar argument from President Trump’s defense team, led by Rudy giuliani.

For this reason, it asks the judges of the highest court to decide on these cases to “make a difference” before the Electoral College, which will have meetings on December 14. It should be remembered that this December 8, the states had the “deadline” to certify the results.

“State courts … under the circumstances of contested elections in various states, cannot – offer an adequate remedy to resolve electoral disputes within the time frame established by the Constitution.”, argues the lawsuit. “No court, other than this court (the Supreme Court), can repair constitutional injuries that span multiple states with enough americans as defendants or defendants to make a difference in the Electoral College.”

Prosecutor Paxton argues that voters in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin should not be allowed to cast their votes to rate the comprehensive process, as those entities changed their voting procedures during the California pandemic. coronavirus, in order to allow an increase in mail ballots. The president-elect Joe biden he won in the four states that add 62 electoral votes.

Texas argues that all four states violated the Election Clause of the Constitution with their expansion of vote-by-mail ballots amid the coronavirus pandemic, a strategy that President Trump rejected, leading a campaign on alleged “voter fraud.”

“Well intentioned or not, these unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effect: they made the 2020 elections less safe in the accused states.”the lawsuit states.

Paxton’s 154-page complaint adds to the battle in other courts that the president’s defenders have lost, as the judges consider that insufficient evidence has been presented about the “systemic fraud” that the president accuses.

The Tea Party celebrated the lawsuit, highlighting the “violation of the Constitution with state electoral processes.”

President Trump has not spoken directly about the lawsuit, but has retweeted several messages about it, including that of the Ivan Raiklin, an expert lawyer in electoral processes, who indicates that other prosecutors could join the lawsuit and lists the states governed by Republicans.

Raiklin believes that if more states challenge the electoral changes in four entities that would strengthen the demand, so he believes that Florida, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucly Y Iowa could be added.

So far, President-elect Biden has 306 Electoral College votes to President Trump’s 232. In the remote case of a change of 62 votes, the Democrat would drop to 244, far from the 270 minimum to win the election.

It should be noted that experts in electoral processes celebrated the expansion of voting by mail, due to the increase in cases of coronavirus in the United States.



Up Next for Obamacare: 1 of 4 Court Rulings Likely

At issue is a complex legal concept known as “severability” — that is, whether a specific provision can be “severed” from a larger law, without overturning the entire thing.

In two recent rulings, Miller notes, the Supreme Court has tended to narrowly focus on “severable” provisions without overturning entire laws, which the court regards primarily as the role of Congress.

So, what is the Supreme Court likely to do with this case? Health policy experts and legal scholars — including Keith, Miller, and Musumeci — suggest four likely scenarios:

No. 1: Case is dismissed. The court could simply reject the suit, ruling that the plaintiffs have no standing to sue, preserving the status quo. “They could say, ‘Get out of court you’re not injured, so you have no reason to be here suing in the first place’ — essentially saying this lawsuit should never have been allowed to move forward in the first place,” Keith says.

No. 2: Kill the individual mandate but keep the Affordable Care Act. The justices could rule the individual mandate is unconstitutional, but it doesn’t mean the rest of Obamacare should be struck down.

No. 3: Kill the mandate and tweak some parts of Obamacare. The court could also decide the individual mandate is unconstitutional and that some, but not all, parts of the law that it is designed to fund — such as protections for people with preexisting conditions — might also be in question. But experts say they don’t expect the justices to go this way.

“You could, in theory, have an outcome where the individual mandate and the preexisting conditions fall and the rest of the law survives,” Musumeci says. “But Roberts and Kavanaugh clearly said they don’t think the 2017 Congress intended to get rid of the preexisting conditions protections. So this tells me they are going to look at the issue in the most narrow way.”

Keith agreed: “From the hearing, that possibility seems a lot less likely than it even was before. I was a lot more concerned about that possibility before the oral arguments.”

No. 4: Overturn all of Obamacare. It’s also possible the court will rule the individual mandate is unconstitutional and therefore the entire Affordable Care Act should be scrapped. But Keith, echoing other experts, says this option is “at the far end of the spectrum” and very unlikely, based on the comments of Roberts, Kavanaugh, and the other justices.

Source link


Biden Victory: What It Means for COVID, Health Care

Nov. 7, 2020 — Joe Biden’s victory sets the stage for health care to become a high-profile priority of his presidency.

The former vice president has sketched out a big health agenda: ramping up the federal response to COVID-19, boosting the Affordable Care Act, creating a new “public option” to cover uninsured Americans, and expanding Medicare and Medicaid.

But the president-elect’s long to-do list on health is likely to face significant roadblocks in Congress and the courts, experts say.

For instance, Biden’s ambitious proposals on COVID-19 — including his recent call for a national mask mandate — could be waylaid by legal challenges and run into political hurdles on Capitol Hill, where he may face a divided Congress.

Joseph Antos, PhD, a health policy expert with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, predicts Biden will encounter the same type of congressional “gridlock situation” that President Barack Obama ran into during his second term.

“We have a situation that has been like this for a very, very long time — lack of cooperation, lack of recognition that either party is capable of rising above their own electoral views to deal with problems that the country actually has.”

Antos also suggests that Biden may also face enormous political pressure to address the economic fallout from the coronavirus, including record unemployment and business closures, before anything else.

“I think it’s really going to be efforts that are intended to promote economic development and promote the economy,” he says.

In addition, Biden’s plans to expand Obamacare might face a new challenge from the Supreme Court in the year ahead. This month, the high court will take up a new case seeking to overturn the law.

Even so, experts say Biden’s plans on COVID-19 and expanding health care are likely to define his tenure in the White House as a central focus of his presidency.

“Health care will be at the very top of the list of the president’s priorities,” says Sabrina Corlette, JD, co-director of the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy. “I do think, however, that the administration is going to be very preoccupied with the response to COVID-19 and the economic fallout … particularly in the first year.”

Here’s a closer look at what we can expect from a Biden presidency.

Source link

Headline USA Politics

Amy Coney Barret is Officially a Justice of the Supreme Court… and Raises Concerns | The NY Journal

Judge Barrett was sworn in before Chief Justice John Roberts.

Fred Schilling / Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States / Getty Images

With the judicial oath before the President of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, The judge Amy coney barrett It is officially a member of the highest court in the United States, although concerns about its performance in civil rights, immigration and electoral cases are mounting among activists and experts.

Judge Barrett, 48, is 115th on the court and, after being sworn in, she was greeted with a request to rule on an election decision in Pennsylvania, a key state this year.

Luzerne County attorneys asked the highest court to prevent Judge Barrett from participating in a Republican petition to block a state Supreme Court decision that allowed the counting of ballots received three days after the election. The defenders consider that the position of the judge during the hearings in the Senate are worrisome for her to hear this case.

The swearing-in photo was shared by the Supreme Court, which indicated that all attendees followed the rules of social distancing and wore masks to avoid coronavirus infections.

The conservative judge, who tips the balance that way in court 6-3, achieves the position after the death of the judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who had a practically opposite profile.

The first disputes you will face will be the Affordable Care Act (ACA), known as Obamacare, and possibly the decision on the presidential election, if there is a dispute in courts before a close contest between the former vice president Joe biden and the president Donald trump.

The appointment of Judge Barrett has been the most expeditious prior to the elections, just nine days away, unlike 2016, when the process was stopped more than 70 days after the death of the judge Antonin Scalia, giving President Trump the opportunity to appoint the judge Neil gorsuch.

The vote in the Senate came after several hours of opposition by Democrats. In the end the Republicans won 52-48. The next step was a ceremony at the White House, where the judge Clarence thomas administered the constitutional oath to Barrett.

Impartiality in rights

Before and during their hearings in the Judicial Committee, defenders of civil rights and experts in health, immigration, electoral rights, among others, expressed their concern over the appointment of Judge Barrett, due to its negative record in opinions and decisions on – for example – immigration and the legal interruption of pregnancy.

The plight of the Republicans and President Trump unleashed more alerts, considering that they were seeking to impose a court “as”, before a closed electoral process.

“President Donald Trump and the Republican Senate believe they can use the US Supreme Court as a political tool to override the will of the American people on health care, Roe versus Wade, and democracy itself ”, he accused Neera tanden, executive director of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. “Appointing a new judge eight days before the elections – after more than 60 million people have already voted – is a serious threat to the legitimacy of the court and an insult to the voters. The American people will spend the next week giving their verdict on this hostile takeover of the Supreme Court. “

The group Voto Latino criticized the plight of the majority leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell (Kentucky) to endorse Judge Barrett, while delaying the approval of financial aid in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“There is absolutely no justice whatsoever with this confirmation”, He said Maria Teresa Kumar, President and CEO of Voto Latino. “Judge Coney Barrett’s hearing was a sham, leaving the American people with little or no idea of ​​her beliefs and intentions when she is in court. Rather than helping the country through a global pandemic, Senate Republicans have chosen to distort the high court for decades to come. “

The organization Climate Power 2020 also criticized the hasty decision to fill the position left by the death of Judge Bader Ginsburg.

“The rush to confirm Barrett, even after early voting for the 2020 presidential election began, shows how eager Senate Republicans are to impose Donald Trump’s anti-environmental agenda in court,” he warned. Lori Loders, executive director of that group.

The troubling issues

The opinions as an academic and her decisions in court call into question the impartiality of Judge Barrett on several issues:

  • Electoral rights
  • Legal termination of pregnancy (Roe v. Wade)
  • Immigration, such as separation of children from their parents
  • Low cost health insurance (ACA), known as Obamacare
  • Decisions on public policies to face climate change


Source link

Headline USA Politics

Barrett is Confirmed by Senate as New Supreme Court Justice | The NY Journal

Barrett is confirmed by the Senate as the new Supreme Court Justice.


The Senate confirmed Amy coney barrett as a new judge of the Supreme Court. The Republican majority validated the candidate proposed by the president, Donald Trump, with what thus reinforced the conservative bias of the highest court since there are currently six magistrates of this ideology compared to three progressives.

It is an unprecedented decision due to its proximity to the elections.

Barrett was confirmed with 52 votes in favor, almost all of Republican senators, and 48 against, all the democrats and a republican legislatorSusan Collins, who confirmed her disagreement against Barrett as unfair so shortly before the presidential election.

Soon more information …


Source link

California Headline USA Los Angeles Politics

Thousands of women protest against the judge nominated by Trump for the Supreme Court | The opinion

Women who marched in cities across the country were joined by many men

A Women’s March in defense of their rights, on October 17, 2020 in Los Angeles, California.

Mario Tama / Getty Images

WASHINGTON – Thousands of women, and some other men, protested this Saturday in several cities of the country against the nomination of the ultra-conservative judge Amy coney barrett, openly opposed to abortion, to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court that President Donald Trump made, before the elections.

Such is his indignation that Women’s March, which has normally been held in January since Trump’s inauguration on the 20th of that month in 2017, has decided to organize a special edition just 17 days before the general elections, in which the president is up for re-election, and in the middle of Barrett’s confirmation process in the Senate, which will almost certainly be endorsed on October 26 in the plenary session of the chamber.

The main demonstration took place in Washington DC, where the participants concentrated in Freedom Plaza to march shortly after around the Capitol and finish in the Mall, the monumental esplanade that connects the headquarters of Congress with the White House.

Trump and the Senate Republicans, where they have the majority, have accelerated the process to confirm Barrett before the election, following the death in September of the progressive judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, pioneer of feminism and reproductive rights.

In the march there were many people with posters of the campaign of Biden and his running mate, Kamala Harris, running for Vice President.

In parallel to the march in Washington, the organizers called this Saturday similar protests in some 400 points throughout the country, with instructions such as wear a face mask and maintain social distance to protect yourself from COVID-19.

In parallel to this protest, the organization Voice of Independent Women gathered in front of the Supreme Court, in the capital, a rally in support of Barrett, under the slogan “I’m with her.”

By Susana Samhan


Source link