Mediaboss Marketing

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signs a law to include the rights of LGBTQ people in Michigan's Civil Rights law on Thursday, March 16, 2023, in Lansing, Mich. Rick Pluta/Michigan Public Radio Network hide caption

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signs a law to include the rights of LGBTQ people in Michigan's Civil Rights law on Thursday, March 16, 2023, in Lansing, Mich.

LANSING, Mich. In her State of the State address this year, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer had something no other Democratic governor has had since the early 1980s a legislature willing to pass her agenda, even if with only a two-seat majority in both chambers.

"We spoke with a clear voice in November," Whitmer said. "We want the ability to raise a family without breaking the bank, strong protections for our fundamental rights to vote and control our own bodies."

And Democrats have wasted no time getting their top priorities to the governor's desk. Within the first two months of the many-months long legislative session, Democrats passed their centerpiece tax plan, a bill to repeal the state's defunct 1931 abortion ban and legislation to create civil rights protections for LGBTQ people.

Some items, like the civil rights expansion, came with a few Republican votes while the abortion ban repeal fell closer to party lines.

"I am grateful that we are finally, finally addressing it and repealing this archaic and punitive law once and for all," said Democratic Rep. Laurie Pohutsky, who sponsored the abortion repeal. Pohutsky physically tore a page containing the old law from a book of Michigan statutes as she spoke.

But it hasn't all been easy. Democratic leadership learned a tough lesson when votes over the big tax cut got messy.

The plan started as two separate proposals to roll back taxes on pension income and increase the earned income tax credit, but funding for business incentives and other spending got roped in.

When the House vote did come up, after hours of waiting, no one was allowed to speak. Republican anger was palpable as they shouted down leadership.

This moxy comes after years of Democrats feeling powerless in the minority, often being gaveled down. Now, they're finding themselves using some of the same tactics they once criticized Republicans for.

"Voters exercised their power in terms of what they wanted us to do," said Democratic House Speaker Joe Tate. "They want us to be effective and I think we've shown that."

Now, Democrats are rushing to pass the last of their early goals before going on spring break.

That means getting labor priorities, like repealing the state's 2012 right-to-work law and a requirement for construction contracts to pay prevailing wage to the governor. Also, a deadly mass shooting at Michigan State University pushed gun control bills up on the priority list.

A large crowd attends a rally to demand action on gun safety at the Michigan State Capitol on March 15, 2023, in Lansing, Mich. The rally comes as gun safety bills are making their way through the Michigan legislature. Chris duMond/Getty Images hide caption

A large crowd attends a rally to demand action on gun safety at the Michigan State Capitol on March 15, 2023, in Lansing, Mich. The rally comes as gun safety bills are making their way through the Michigan legislature.

Meanwhile, Republicans are hoping that speed backfires. While their colleagues are selling the labor proposals as pro-worker, Republicans argue they're unpopular and expensive.

"This is the beginning of the Democrat overreach that's going to lead to their demise and the Republicans taking back the House," Republican House Minority Leader Matt Hall told reporters ahead of his chamber passing right-to-work repeal legislation.

"They shouldn't gulp, they should sip," says Associated Builders and Contractors of Michigan President and CEO Jimmy Greene who has been a longtime supporter of right-to-work.

He says he understands why Democrats are moving so fast this time around but warns against them overplaying their hand.

"They should show that they're responsible with power. Right now, it looks like they're power hungry," Greene says.

It's hard to tell how strong the Democratic majority truly is, Greene says. Arguably, Democrats won control of the legislature with the help of a massive turnout spurred on by an abortion rights ballot measure. Not to mention newly independently drawn voting districts that ended up competitive anyway.

One factor in Democrats' favor, though infighting within the state Republican Party.

"I think the Republican party is the best gift Democrats have. The idea that they're doing all this right now with [an] absolutely dysfunctional, inoperative, broke party apparatus?" Greene says. "Let's be honest. They're not afraid of Republicans. I wouldn't be."

There could be a long road ahead. The legislature still has all year to meet.

Colin Jackson is the capitol reporter at the Michigan Public Radio Network.

See the original post here:
Michigan works to pass LGBTQ protections, repeal abortion, right-to ... - NPR

Its so much in Donald Trumps character to violate the entire regime governing gifts from foreign states, Mr. Raskin said. He added that Trump is exactly someone who the framers had in mind when they included the emoluments clauses in the Constitution, which bars any federal office holder from accepting any type of gift from a foreign state without Congresss consent to prevent American policy from being dictated by foreigners.

The report also raised issues involving a domestic gift. It cited an email exchange from Jan. 15, 2021, in which the Trump White Houses top ethics lawyer, Scott Gast, expressed concerns that a Mac Pro computer from Mr. Cook, which was valued at $5,999, had been intended as a gift to the U.S. government, not Mr. Trump. Gifts that are given to the government are considered government property and cannot be taken by officials.

In response, a Trump aide, Desiree Thompson Sayle, said, Well, we cant find it.

A year later, in Mr. Trumps financial disclosure forms, he listed the computer among the gifts he had received and kept. The episode in some ways echoed a dispute involving former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton after they left the White House in 2001. They were accused of taking a sofa, a rug and chairs from the White House that had been given to the government, not them. The Clintons ultimately returned the furnishings.

A spreadsheet compiled by White House aides in the final days of the Trump administration listed gifts that Mr. Trump needed to decide whether he wanted to keep. Among the items that he had already decided to accept and publicly disclose was a gold pendant necklace that he had received during a trip to Saudi Arabia in 2017.

The necklace, which was valued at $6,400, was on moving truck to Mar-a-Lago, according to the spreadsheet. There is no evidence Mr. Trump paid for the necklace. In response to questions from the committee, the National Archives said it believed it was in possession of the necklace but had not gone through its warehouse to find it.

Matthew Cullen contributed reporting.

Follow this link:
Trump Failed to Follow Law on Foreign Gifts, House Democrats Say - The New York Times

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is leading a group of Republican senators in introducing a constitutional amendment that would rebuff any attempt by a future president or Congress to pack the United States Supreme Court.

Cruz's proposed amendment simply states, "the Supreme Court of the United States shall be composed of nine justices." The amendment is co-sponsored by Sens. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., Mike Lee, R-Utah, Tom Cotton, R-Ark., Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, Josh Hawley, R-Mo., Thom Tillis, R-N.C., John Kennedy, R-La., Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss., and Mike Braun, R-Ind.

"The Democrats answer to a Supreme Court that is dedicated to upholding the rule of law and the Constitution is to pack it with liberals who will rule the way they want. The Supreme Court should be independent, not inflated by every new administration. Thats why Ive introduced a constitutional amendment to permanently keep the number of justices at nine," Cruz said in a statement.

If passed by Congress, his amendment would head to the states for ratification. Cruz originally introduced the amendment in 2021, in response to statements from Democrats suggesting that they might seek to add more justices to the Supreme Court to reduce the influence of the three conservative justices appointed by former President Donald Trump.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ASKS SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GUN RULING

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, on Wednesday will introduce an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would set the number of Supreme Court justices at nine.

In October 2020, just before the presidential election, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said "everything is on the table" during an appearance on MSNBC when asked what Democrats could do about the court if they regained control of the Senate that year.

READ ON THE FOX NEWS APP

Calls then intensified after the Court overturned Roe v. Wade in a landmark decision last year. "Right-wing extremists have hijacked the Supreme Court of the United States," progressive Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., tweeted last year after a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito was leaked. "We must #ExpandTheCourt to rebalance it and defend our basic rights, including the constitutional right to an abortion."

Story continues

TEXAS UNIVERSITY DEFENDS DEI, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AS A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY ADMID SCOTUS CASE

The U.S. Supreme Court has had nine justices since 1869.

"For years the left has been desperate to pack the court to promote their radical agenda. We must ensure that we stay true to the courts founding principles, maintain the precedent of nine justices, and keep the Democrats from their brazen attempts to rig our democracy," said Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo.

House Republicans introduced a companion amendment in January, waring that Democratic lawmakers will "weaponize" the high court if they gain control of Congress.

POOP AND PARODY TO BE ARGUED AT SUPREME COURT IN HIGH-STAKES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY DISPUTE

A constitutional amendment passed by Congress must be ratified by 38 of 50 states.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed back in June 2022 that President Biden does not support court-packing during an Air Force One press gaggle.

"That is something that the president does not agree with,,"Jean-Pierre told reporters during the gaggle. "That is not something that he wants to do."

Fox News' Haley Chi-Sing contributed to this report.

See the original post here:
Cruz to introduce constitutional amendment to prevent Democrats from packing Supreme Court - Yahoo News

TOPEKA The dustup in the Senate over a bill delivering voucher-like funding to Kansas private schools featured zinger one-liners, rival interpretations of an obscure parliamentary rule and allegations Republican leadership engaged in abuse of power.

Senate Minority Leader Dinah Sykes, a Democrat from Lenexa, got the ball rolling Thursday with a motion to call a vote on Senate Bill 83, which was transformed by the House to include a mandate to raise teacher raises, increase funding of special education and establish the Sunflower Education Equity Act. The equity act would create state funded $5,000 savings accounts for low- and middle-income students attending homeschools and private schools.

The bill barely cleared the Kansas House 64-61, despite an 85-40 GOP majority in the chamber. Gov. Laura Kelly equated the bundled bill to a political form of blackmail, suggesting it could be vetoed with little threat of two-thirds majorities required of an override by the Senate and House.

Sykes pressed her case by pointing to Rule 3B, which she said provided leverage to compel a snap vote in the Senate on the education bill.

I do think we should vote, she said. I do think this bill was gutted and significantly altered from the way it came out of this chamber.

Senate President Ty Masterson, an Andover Republican, disagreed and urged his colleagues to steer the bill into a House-Senate conference committee. His substitute motion would place the bill in hands of six Senate and House negotiators. If compromise was reached by a bipartisan three-senator, three-representative negotiating committee, the deal could be voted on in both chambers without opportunity for amendment.

Im in support of this, said Sen. Renee Erickson, a Wichita Republican. A bill of this magnitude, the importance of this subject matter, we need more time to look at it through the conference process.

Sen. Jeff Longbine, R-Emporia, said he was perplexed by the conference-committee approach outlined by Masterson that apparently would bypass the Senates education committee. He suggested the Senate committee, with its subject-matter expertise, ought to evaluate details of the voucher-like initiative and consider other parts of the K-12 package.

If this bill is of such magnitude, why is the Senate Education Committee not taking a look at it? Longbine said.

At that point, Sen. Molly Baumgardner, the Louisburg Republican and chairwoman of the committee, revealed she requested from legislative staff comparative analysis of the Senates original Senate Bill 83, which offered low-income scholarships and tax credits to help students enroll in private schools, and the revamped Senate Bill 83 adopted by the House launching the voucher-like system.

For example, Baumgardner said, the Legislature didnt have a solid grasp on the actual cost to taxpayers of the Houses version of the bill.

We want to make sure we have as much data as possible, Baumgardner said. We make decisions based on real data, not just assumptions.

Finally, Masterson got his vote to drop the bill into a conference committee. His motion prevailed 21-12, potentially another sign of underwhelming support for the education legislation.

That opened the door for Sykes to renew her call for a Senate vote on merits of the House substitute of Senate Bill 83. Masterson said the only point of such a vote would be to kind of disrupt the process and slow things down, because a way would be found to move ahead with the legislation.

McPherson Republican Sen. Rick Wilborn, the Senates vice president, said Sykes was too late. The Senates request for a conference with the House on the bill was already on its way across the Capitol rotunda, he said.

However, Sykes responded that her motion was still in order because the House hadnt formally appointed its three members to the negotiating committee.

The motion to concur is out of order, Wilborn said.

This motion is in order, Sykes said.

We are going to convene the rules committee, Wilborn replied.

A lengthy huddle of senators on the rules committee led to a determination Sykes motion was out of bounds. Sykes said the situation illustrated reliance by Senate Republicans on interpreting rules for partisan advantage.

Theres a loophole and they didnt like it, Sykes said. So, theyre going to err on the side of what they want, which happens in this building all the time.

Her formal challenge of that rules committees decision prompted a vote of the full Senate. The Senate upheld the rules committee 22-14, meaning the Senate wouldnt proceed to an up-or-down vote on the bill.

Masterson objected to Sykes characterization of the way Republican senators handled disputes on procedural matters. In this case, he said, the rules committee sought advice of the Senate clerk and the Legislatures bill-writing office of the revisor.

Its offensive, the contention that was made, Masterson said. Thats why we have a parliamentarian to determine any rule thats in limbo. The majority party even went to the next extent and brought up the revisor of statutes, who concurred with the parliamentarian.

That rousted Sen. Dennis Pyle, the Hiawatha independent who ran for governor in 2022 and was stripped of committee assignments by Masterson.

He asked Wilborn to order the Senate parliamentarian to identify the text in Roberts Rules of Order relied upon to declare Sykes motion out of order. Wilborn didnt do so.

The parliamentarian is not the Senate, Pyle said. We have an opportunity to act on our own right now as a Senate body in the interest of what is right and true. Right and true. We should all stand against an abuse of power.

Read the original here:
Senate Republicans, Democrats plunge into weeds for rules scuffle ... - Kansas Reflector

The Tennessee Democratic Caucus demanded the Department of Children's Services release five young children taken from their parents, who are Black, after a traffic stop in Manchester, Tennessee, last month.

The children -- ages 7, 5, 3, 2 and a 4-month-old infant who was still nursing -- were removed from their parents Feb. 17 after a traffic stop initiated by the Tennessee Highway Patrol because of "dark tint and traveling in the left lane while not actively passing." The children have been in the custody of Children's Services since.

Deonte Williams, the children's father, was arrested and charged with possessing 5 grams of marijuana, a misdemeanor in Tennessee. Bianca Clayborne was cited and released. Court records, Children's Services emails and Highway Patrols citations cited in a story about the family by the Tennessee Lookout published Wednesday raised a series of questions about why the child welfare agency pursued removal of the children after a misdemeanor arrest of one parent and another parent who was free to leave.

(READ MORE: Pulled over for tinted windows, a Georgia family fights to get their children back from Tennessee DCS)

Democrats on Thursday demanded the children be returned to their parents.

Sen. London Lamar, a Memphis Democrat, called the actions "ridiculous" and an "overuse of power."

"DCS, Coffee County, y'all need to do the right thing before the situation gets worse, and we have a nation of people coming to the rescue of this Black family," she said.

"Give them their children back. It's borderline discrimination, because if this was any other family, as their attorney said, we don't even think this would be the outcome," she said.

Sen. Raumesh Akbari, also a Memphis Democrat, said the goal should be to keep families together because babies and young children belong with their parents.

"It is outrageous that the state forcefully separated Bianca Clayborne, a breastfeeding mother, and Deonte Williams from their kids and have allowed this to continue for nearly a month," she said. "The state exercised extreme and flawed judgment in taking their children and it seems they've doubled down on this poor decision."

"No family is perfect, but an imperfection, like a simple marijuana charge, is no excuse for tearing a family apart. The state is supposed to support reunification. If they don't have a better reason, they must immediately return these five children to their parents."

A spokesperson for Children's Services could not be immediately reached for comment.

(READ MORE: Audit finds Tennessee children in state custody in jeopardy)

Also on Thursday, the Tennessee Highway Patrol denied a request by the Lookout for body- and dash-cam video of the traffic stop and interactions with the family.

The Lookout's request, submitted last week, was denied because videos are "part of an ongoing criminal investigation and prosecution, and the district attorney's office serving Coffee County has asserted its privilege to not release the documents at this time pursuant to Rule 16 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure," a letter from an agency attorney said.

The Highway Patrol also said state law prevents the agency from releasing documents or information that directly or indirectly identifies a child or a family member receiving services from Children's Services.

Courtney Teasley, the family's attorney, on Thursday said "we echo the response of the Democratic Caucus."

(READ MORE: Tennessee Children's Services chief says agency is experiencing 'horrific' turnover rate)

An instant hair follicle test performed on the parents at their first court appearance, about a week after the children were taken into custody, was a key element in Children's Services' arguments for why the children should remain in the agency's custody. However, a Coffee County court administrator, speaking to the Lookout broadly about the county's instant hair follicle testing, said the tests are inadmissible in court. An expert told the Lookout rapid follicle tests are unreliable because they often yield false positives.

Lawyers for the family have challenged the test; an attorney for Children's Services has told them the test no longer exists, thought the custody case is still ongoing.

"This is even more reprehensible when the drug test used to justify keeping these children in foster care is known to be inadmissible by the county's own court administrator," Teasley said.

Read more at TennesseeLookout.com.

More here:
Tennessee Democrats demand release of children removed from ... - Chattanooga Times Free Press