Mediaboss Marketing

A California GOP lawmaker is challenging the hiring of former U.S. Attorney Eric Holder to fight the Trump administration, saying it may violate the California Constitution.

Assemblyman Kevin Kiley has asked the California Attorney Generals office to investigate whether legislative Democrats ran afoul of the law by retaining Mr. Holder and his law firm, Covington & Burling, for $25,000 per month to do a job that can be performed by state employees.

Mr. Holder was hired last week by the California legislature, which is controlled by Democrats, as outside counsel to provide advice on our efforts to resist any attempts to roll back the progress California has made on issues such as climate change to immigration.

But Mr. Kiley cited a court ruling that said the state Constitution forbids hiring outside consultants for roles that can be carried out adequately and competently by those in the civil service, including work defending California against federal actions.

In light of these facts, I respectfully ask your legal opinion as to whether the 1,592 attorneys and legal staff at the State Attorney Generals Office can perform adequately and competently the legal services for which Covington & Burling has been retained by the Legislature, said the Republican Kiley in his letter.

Assembly Republican Leader Chad Mayes said he supports the inquiry, calling it certainly appropriate to request a legal opinion as to whether this contract is consistent with state law.

To say that the move by Capitol Democrats to spend significant taxpayer dollars on yet another lawyer is unusual, when the state already employs thousands of attorneys, is an understatement, Mr. Mayes said. Not to mention the fact that we are currently in the process of confirming a new attorney general for the state.

A spokesman for Mr. Kiley said he has not yet received a response to his Jan. 6 query, but California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon has argued that the attorney generals office is not the legislatures legal counsel.

The Attorney General defends the state. Weve enlisted Covington to provide us with legal advice about what we as a legislature can do and how we can react to the Trump administration, Mr. Rendon said at a press conference. Its different functions.

During President Obamas tenure, a number of red states filed high-profile challenges to policies such as Obamacare and the Clean Power Plan, but those were issued by state attorneys general.

California Republicans have blasted the Holder hiring as a political stunt, while Mr. Rendon said the move was necessary to protect California from the reckless overreach we expect from Donald Trump and the Republican members of Congress who have so cravenly enabled him.

Mr. Holder served as U.S. Attorney General in the Obama administration from 2009-2015.

Were certainly trying to defend ourselves. Were not going to take anything they offer us laying down. If the administration wants to talk to California, Im sure that were willing to do so, Mr. Rendon said. That being said, we need to be prepared for what they might do on day one.

Republicans have countered that Rep. Xavier Becerra, the Democrat nominated to succeed Kamala Harris as California Attorney General, is well-versed in federal issues after spending 12 years in Congress.

At an Assembly committee hearing on the nomination, Mr. Becerra took jabs at the Trump administration while Gov. Jerry Brown described the nominee as a battle-tested candidate seasoned by the polarized political atmosphere in Washington, D.C., the Recorder reported.

The Assembly is scheduled to vote Friday on the Becerra nomination, which was approved by the committee 6-3.

Read more:
Eric Holder hire to fight Donald Trump violates state constitution ... - Washington Times

AmmoLand Shooting Sports News

California-DC Corruption Connection: Disgraced Eric Holder's New Gig AmmoLand Shooting Sports News U.S.A. -(Ammoland.com)- I've often observed that, when it comes to public policy, the Obama Justice Department has been a locus of evil. And therefore it was concerning to see that the man who ran that Obama agency for years, the disgraced Eric Holder ...

Continue reading here:
California-DC Corruption Connection: Disgraced Eric Holder's New Gig - AmmoLand Shooting Sports News

Voting Rights Act

Texas: A federal district court recently tuled that the Houston suburb of Pasadena intentionally discriminated against Latinos in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment when it turned two of its eight single-member city council seats into at-large districts in 2013, ordering the city of 154,000 to revert back to its previous districts for the 2017 elections. As The New York Times Jim Rutenberg covered in a 2015 expos on the systematic attack on Latino voting rights in America that focused on Pasadena, at-large districts have long been an instrumental strategy for white politicians to dilute the power of minority voters.

For Pasadena, this meant replacing two council districts, one of which could have elected the candidate whom Latinos preferred, with two at-large seats, neither of which likely could. Such a move flagrantly diluted the voting strength of the citys growing Latino population in violation of Section 2 of the VRA, which requires mapmakers to draw relatively compact districts that can elect minority voters candidates of choice when voting typically breaks down along racially polarized lines. White officials in Pasadena enacted their new plan precisely because they feared that Latino-favored candidates could have otherwise gained a majority in 2015.

This ruling was a resounding victory for voting rights because it marked the first time that a court had placed any jurisdiction back under preclearance since the Supreme Court gutted a key provision of the VRA in 2013 that had required a large number of predominantly Southern states like Texas with a history of racial discrimination to clear any proposed voting changes with the Justice Department. That decision, Shelby County v. Holder, eliminated the traditional preclearance regime, prompting white Republicans in many states and cities to rush an array of restrictive voting laws into law.

But preclearance isnt entirely dead. In Pasadena, the district court was able to use another provision of the VRA to bail Pasadena back into preclearance by finding officials had intentionally discriminated. These Republican officeholders will almost certainly appeal the ruling and could soon find itself before a Supreme Court with four justices implacably hostile to voting rights after Trump picks Antonin Scalias replacement. Nonetheless, if Justice Anthony Kennedy can be swayed to uphold this decision, the threat of imposing preclearance via this bail-in procedure might become a viable option for deterring some of the most flagrantly discriminatory voting laws.

Unfortunately, Republicans are about to take over the Justice Department, and Trumps attorney general nominee, Jeff Sessions, is an extreme enemy of voting rights, so even if Pasadena is required to clear future changes to voting procedures with the Justice Department, Sessions may just give the city a green light to do whatever it pleases. However, should Democrats regain the presidency and thus the Justice Department, they might one day follow the precedent to partly overcome congressional Republicans opposition to restoring the full Voting Rights Act.

Attorney General: Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions nomination to be President-elect Donald Trumps attorney general proceeded this week as he stumbled through his confirmation hearings apparently unscathed. Many key Democratic senators announced their opposition, but since Democrats would need three Republican votes to block Sessions even if the entire party were unanimous in opposition, his chance of confirmation appeared strong after faux centrist GOP Sen. Susan Collins effusively backed him.

Sessions nomination as the nations top law enforcement officer is the surest sign possible that the incoming Trump administration will take an extremely hostile stance toward voting rights, as The Nations Ari Berman has detailed extensively in his coverage of the senators reactionary record (here and here). During his confirmation hearings, Sessions reiterated that he believes the Voting Rights Act is intrusive of states rights, claimed that voter ID laws are not discriminatory, and feigned ignorance of recent major 2016 court rulings that explicitly found that such voter ID laws were, in fact, discriminatory.

Perhaps most disturbingly, Sessions has expressed no remorse for, back in 1985, becoming the first prosecutor after the Voting Rights Acts passage to charge civil rights activists for bogus voter fraud when they attempted to help minorities to exercise their right to vote. (Sessions at the time was a U.S. attorney.) Now Sessions powers will be far greater. He could use office to switch sides on major voting rights lawsuits, direct U.S. attorneys to prosecute concocted voter fraud cases, and generally turn the Justice Department from a crusader for minority voting rights, as it was under Obama, into the instrument of theirdemise.

Iowa: Republicans gained complete control over Iowas state government last fall, and they swiftly began talking about changes to voting laws, including a new requirement for voter ID. However, Republican Secretary of State Paul Pate is now publicly backpedaling, claiming his voter ID proposal didnt aim to fight supposed fraud but rather was designed streamline election administration. He supposedly wants to require a suitable ID card from every voter but would issue a photo-less one for free to everyone who lacks the appropriate ID and allow provisional ballots from those who lack ID.

It remains to be seen whether legislators will actually implementPates proposal or a stricter one. Regardless, voting rights advocates cant rest easy given the GOPs record of introducing voting restrictions in state after state since winning control over legislatures across the country after 2010.

New York: The Empire State is one of just 13 that does not offer any form of in-person early or absentee voting without an excuse. Although it has long polling hours on Election Day and allows excused absentee ballots, this lack of options can be burdensome for many voters, and New York regularly has one of the nations lower turnout rates. In a surprise move, though, Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo just released a sweeping proposal of reforms that would require 12 days of early voting, same-day voter registration, and automatic voter registration for those who interact with the Department of Motor Vehicles, unless they opt out.

These proposals are a welcome change from Cuomo, who in the past has done little to advance the cause of voting rights. However, they could face stiff opposition from the Republican-led coalition that controls the state Senate along with several turncoat Democrats. And a huge reason this obstacle exists is because Cuomo duplicitously signed one of the nations most aggressive Republican gerrymanders, which is how the GOP has retained control of the chamber in such a blue state.

Notably, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman recently proposed some of these reforms himself, indicating that a possible 2018 gubernatorial primary between him and Cuomo could see both Democrats campaign on voting reforms.

Virginia: Like New York, Virginia is another state that lacks early voting. Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe just unveiled a package of reforms that include allowing voters to cast absentee ballots in-person and without an excuse for three weeks before an election. The governor is also advocating for the repeal the states voter ID law, although Virginias requirement isnt as strict as in other states. The Republican-controlled legislature almost certainly wont let McAuliffe get anywhere, but these proposals demonstrate the Democratic Partys commitment to voting rights ahead of this years crucial gubernatorial election, where a Republican victory could lead to new voting restrictions.

Wyoming: A new Republican bill in Wyoming would streamline the process for those with non-violent felony convictions to regain their voting rights upon the completion of their sentences. Wyoming currently has one of the harshest laws on felony disenfranchisement, with five percent of the population unable to vote, including an enormous 17 percent of the states small African-American population. At present, those who have completed their sentences have to go through a burdensome application process to restore their right to vote. As a result, almost three quarters of the states disenfranchised population have fully served their sentences.

This billwould make the restoration process automaticfor many of those convicted of non-violent felonies. While this reform would be far from perfectfor instance, Maine and Vermont dont disenfranchise anyone with felony convictionsit could dramatically reduce the proportion of disenfranchised voters. Wyomings legislature has an overwhelming Republican majority, but a bipartisan group of legislators has sponsored the bill, meaning its hopes for passage cant be ruled out.

Kentucky: A Republican state senator has proposed a state constitutional amendment that would move statewide elections from odd-numbered years to coincide with presidential elections starting in 2024. If such an amendment passed the legislature, it would go before voters on the 2018 ballot. Republicans gained total control over state government in 2016 for the first time in history, but its uncertain whether this proposal could attain broad support, particularly since Democrats might oppose it if they think it would be harder to win in an election where their partys presidential nominee would likely lose by a landslide.

Any partisan motivations aside, consolidating elections with the presidential cyclewould increase participation more than any other reform short of compulsory voting. Kentuckys 2015 turnout ratewas a paltry 30 percent of eligible voters despite featuring a heavily contested gubernatorial election, while the uncompetitive 2016 presidential election in the state saw approximately 59 percent of eligible voters participate. Only 11 other states hold their gubernatorial elections in presidential years, and doing so in Kentucky could practically double turnout in downballot races.

Go here to read the rest:
Voting Rights Roundup: Eric Holder launches unprecedented ... - Daily Kos

A major league ball club signs an all-star free agent. An NBA team recruits a big-name basketball coach. You really cant be sure how theyll perform.

The ballplayer could become an MVP or a bust. The coach could lead his team to the finals or be a bad fit. But odds are it was a good move.

Thats how to look at the Democratic-controlled Legislatures surprise signing last week of former U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder to help it fight off the looming Trump administration and save many of Californias liberal public programs.

Holder certainly has Washington savvy and national gravitas. He knows his way around the Beltway.

Except for Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Los Angeles), a 12-term congressman chosen by Gov. Jerry Brown to replace new U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris as state attorney general, Sacramento conspicuously lacks Holders knowledge of federal lawmaking and dealing.

Sacramento isnt a small Washington, after all. Its a big Carson City.

That said, does Holder understand California politics and public policy very well? Probably not. And it probably doesnt matter.

A law firm colleague of his, former Los Angeles congressman and state legislator Howard Berman, is a longtime master of California and Washington politics.

Will Holder really hustle for his new Sacramento team? Well find out.

But for now, his signing by state Senate leader Kevin de Len (D-Los Angeles) and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Paramount) seems smart.

It helps protect California public policy enacted by both Democrat Brown and his Republican predecessor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Its a crisp political message: Californias no pushover for Donald Trump. And its good national PR, at least in blue states. State politicians love national attention.

Republicans immediately reacted with knee-jerk, predictable whining about wasteful spending.

Democrats should focus on solving real-world problems instead of wasting taxpayer money to score political points before the president-elect even takes office, declared Assembly Republican Leader Chad Mayes of Yucca Valley.

Fair enough. But that off-the-shelf wasting taxpayer money bit cheapens his argument.

My favorite came from veteran state Sen. Jim Nielsen (R-Gerber): How can the state afford to pay for an out-of-state overpriced lawyer when we could be using those funds to help the poor and those in need?

Guess Ive missed all those Republican efforts to help the needy. Please.

The Legislatures three-month contract with Holder, Berman and a covey of attorneys from the Covington & Burling firm is for $75,000 plus expenses. Thats good for up to 40 billable hours per month. Do the math: Its $625 an hour high by most peoples standards, but a bargain compared with what many high-powered law firms charge.

If the three-month tryout works, theyll negotiate an extension.

Their normal rate is $1,700 per hour, says Dan Reeves, De Lens chief of staff. Were not paying that.

To put the $75,000 in perspective, the Legislatures annual budget is around $300 million.

Updates from Sacramento

Any lawmaker really worried about overspending could cut back on the introduction of frivolous bills. It costs roughly $20,000 an old estimate to run a bill through the Legislature. Last year, 1,059 were sent to the governor. He vetoed 159 and 900 became law. Obviously, were all much better off.

Or legislators could trim their generous expense allowance, their per diem. Its $176 per day, seven days a week while the Legislature is in session, whether members are in Sacramento or not.

But why, Republicans ask, should Democrats pay for any private counsel when theres a state attorney general to handle state legal work?

Heres a civics refresher: The Legislature and the attorney general arent one and the same. They constitute different branches of government, a separation of powers. The attorney general doesnt answer to the Legislature.

Legislative leaders want their own astute lawyer at their beck and call not to sue the Trump administration, but to advise whats legal and whats not.

Can a President Trump cut off federal funds to California sanctuary cities that shield undocumented immigrants from federal deportation? Can a Republican president and Congress gut Californias landmark environmental protections and climate change programs?

What can California do besides spending an extra $20 billion, a political impossibility to save Obamacare, which covers 6.5 million Californians?

Thats not a trumped up number, De Len says.

Can the U.S. labor department eviscerate De Lens recently passed act to provide a retirement plan for low-income, self-employed people?

Trump is a huge threat to California laws, quite honestly, Rendon says. I think hes a threat to democracy, someone who doesnt care much for checks and balances.

And face it, Becerra, although first-rate, hasnt practiced law in more than a quarter-century.

Moreover, he hasnt even publicly committed to seeking election to a full four-year term in 2018. Hes leaving some wiggle room, presumably to possibly run for governor or the U.S. Senate if Dianne Feinstein retires.

Thats making some legislators nervous. And Becerra is sure to be pressed on it when the Assembly holds his first confirmation hearing Tuesday.

He cant show up for a year and just use the office as a springboard for his own political ambitions, one influential Democratic senator told me, requesting anonymity.

Read the original post:
Eric Holder could be California's MVP, or he could be a bust ...

Former Attorney General Eric Holder will back the California Legislature in potential legal clashes with the incoming Trump administration.

Holder, currently a partner at the law firm Covington & Burling, will serve as an adviser and outside counsel to help "resist any attempts to roll back the progress California has made" in particular with climate change, health care, civil rights and immigration issues, legislative leaders said Wednesday.

Democrats control both houses in California's Legislature as well as the governor's office. The left-leaning state, which went overwhelmingly for Trump's opponent Hillary Clinton, is poised to be at the forefront of legal battles with the GOP-led federal government.

"With the upcoming change in administrations, we expect that there will be extraordinary challenges for California in the uncertain times ahead," California Senate leader Kevin de Len and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said in a joint statement.

Related: Eric Holder, Former Attorney General, Returning to Covington & Burling Law Firm

Holder would potentially work with the governor's pick for state attorney general, Congressman Xavier Becerra, who is expected to be confirmed next week.

Holder added that his firm will help look at any changes to federal law and their impact on California. For instance, the state would see the biggest increase in uninsured residents if Obamacare were repealed by Republicans in Washington, CNBC reported.

Some California cities, including Los Angeles and San Francisco, have been vocal about potential changes in federal immigration policy under Trump that could lead to mass deportations.

Holder, who served as attorney general under President Barack Obama from 2009 to 2015, has been an outspoken critic of Trump.

In October, he called out then-candidate Trump's threat to prosecute Clinton over her use of a private email server.

"Be afraid of any candidate who says he will order DOJ/FBI to act on his command," Holder tweeted.

De Len told The New York Times that Holder's compensation was still being worked out, but that it will be publicly disclosed.

Read the original:
Eric Holder Hired by California for Legal Battles Against ...