Mediaboss Marketing

In February, 2023, former Vice President Mike Pence invoked the Speech or Debate Clause to challenge a subpoena from the Special Counsel. I explained that, as a matter of text, this argument didn't fly. The Speech or Debate refers to "Senators and Representatives." The Vice President is the President of the Senate, but is not a Senator. However, there are a string of precedents which could support a more functional reading of the Speech of Debate Clause. And, in June 2023, Judge Boasbergfound that Vice President Pence received some protections under the Speech or Debate Clause for his role on January 6. I did not find that decision persuasive as a textual matter, but there is some precedent on point that the court followed.

Part III-B-2 ofTrump v. United Statesreminded me of Pence's case. Here, Chief Justice Roberts discussed whether President Trump's communications with Vice President Pence leading up to, and during, January 6, would be immune from prosecution.

To be sure, the President has an interest in legislation that is being considered in the Senate. And, as President of the Senate, the Vice President plays a unique role in that process. If the Senate is evenly divided, the Vice President can cast a tie-breaking vote. Chief Justice Roberts explains that with respect to legislation, the President has an important role in having communications with the Vice President. These communications would be presumptively immune from any congressional regulations:

[O]ur constitutional system anticipates that the President and Vice President will remain in close contact regarding their official duties over the course of the President's term in office. These two officials are the only ones "elected by the entire Nation." Seila Law; see Art. II, 1. . . . And Article I of course names the Vice President as President of the Senate and gives him a tiebreaking vote. 3, cl. 4. It is thus important for the President to discuss official matters with the Vice President to ensure continuity within the Executive Branch and to advance the President's agenda in Congress and beyond. The Vice President may in practice also serve as one of the President's closest advisers.

I think that argument is correct when discussing legislative sessions. But does it work with regard to the joint session? The Constitution assigns the President of the Senate particular functions during the joint session of Congress. Roberts acknowledges that the President does not have a role in that process:

The question then becomes whether that presumption of immunity is rebutted under the circumstances. When the Vice President presides over the January 6 certification proceeding, he does so in his capacity as President of the Senate. . . . Ibid. Despite the Vice President's expansive role of advising and assisting the President within the Executive Branch, the Vice President's Article I responsibility of "presiding over the Senate" is "not an 'executive branch' function." Memorandum from L. Silberman, Deputy Atty. Gen., to R. Burress, Office of the President, Re: Conflict of Interest Problems Arising Out of the President's Nomination of Nelson A. Rockefeller To Be Vice President Under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the Constitution 2 (Aug. 28, 1974). With respect to the certification proceeding in particular, Congress has legislated extensively to define the Vice President's role in the counting of the electoral votes, see, e.g., 3 U. S. C. 15, and the President plays no direct constitutional or statutory role in that process. So the Government may argue that consideration of the President's communications with the Vice President concerning the certification proceeding does not pose "dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch." Fitzgerald.

Yet Roberts signals that the President's interest in legislation could still extend to the Vice President's role in the joint session:

At the same time, however, the President may frequently rely on the Vice President in his capacity as President of the Senate to advance the President's agenda in Congress. When the Senate is closely divided, for instance, the Vice President's tiebreaking vote may be crucial for confirming the President's nominees and passing laws that align with the President's policies. Applying a criminal prohibition to the President's conversations discussing such matters with the Vice Presidenteven though they concern his role as President of the Senatemay well hinder the President's ability to perform his constitutional functions.

Justice Sotomayor responds in her dissent:

The majority admits that the Vice President's responsibility "'presiding over the Senate' " is "'not an "executive branch" function,'" and it further admits that the President "plays no direct constitutional or statutory role" in the counting of electoral votes. Yet the majority refuses to conclude that Trump lacks immunity for his alleged attempts to "enlist the Vice President to use his ceremonial role at the January 6 certification proceeding to fraudulently alter the election results." Instead, it worries that a prosecution for this conduct might make it harder for the President to use the Vice President "to advance [his] agenda in Congress." Such a prosecution, according to the majority, "may well hinder the President's ability to perform his constitutional functions." Whether a prosecution for this conduct warrants immunity should have been an easy question, but the majority turns it into a debatable one.

If the District Court is correct about the Vice President's role, with regard to the Speech or Debate Clause, I think it would be harder to make the case that the President's discussions with the Vice President about the joint session would not be immune.

Read more here:
Trump v. United States Opines On Whether The Vice President Is a Legislative Officer - Reason

Olivia Troye, formerly a national security adviser to Vice President Mike Pence, criticized former President Donald Trumps efforts to distance himself from Project 2025 as ludicrous, highlighting its extensive ties to his administration.

This is preposterous, Troye said in a CNN interview. If you look at the collaborators and the authors of this plan, a lot of these people came directly from people that served in Trumps Cabinet during this administration.

Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation initiative, aims to institutionalize Trumpism in the federal government by leveraging executive authority and dismantling some federal agencies.

Democrats have raised objections to several proposals within the project, notably the replacement of civil service positions with political appointees.

Last week, Trump said he knows nothing about Project 2025 but also voiced disagreement with several of its pillars, arguing that some of the ideas are ridiculous and abysmal.

Paul Dans, former chief of staff at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under Trump, leads the project.

Troye said former Trump administration officials Ben Carson and Ken Cuccinelli are actively involved in Project 2025.

Ben Carson, come on! Hes been out there on the campaign trail with the president, Troye said. So I think this is just ludicrous.

In addition, Trump campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt appeared in one of Project 2025s videos.

This initiative has also garnered support from allies such as Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)

But I think what this is telling us is that Donald Trump knows that what is written in this plan is so extreme that it is damaging to his possibility of getting elected, Troye said. And thats what hes concerned about.

Troye argued that some of the projects proposals, such as limits to abortion medication and plans to eliminate the Department of Education, are actually harmful to Trumps campaign, which explains his distance from them.

I am a conservative-leaning individual. I am a lifelong Republican. But when I think of the traditional tenets of the GOP, I think of fiscal conservatism, I think of individual liberties, she said.

And quite honestly, if you go through and really read through this plan, this is complete overreach by the federal government on our individual liberties, she said.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Bidens campaign condemned Project 2025 as something that should scare every American.

Hes trying to hide his connections to his allies extreme Project 2025 agenda, Biden said. The only problem? It was written for him by those closest to him.

Continued here:
Former Pence adviser blasts Trump trying to distance himself from Project 2025: Ludicrous - Washington Examiner

Former Vice President Mike Pence slammed the new Republican National Committee platform on abortion as a profound disappointment in a statement Tuesday.

The RNC platform is a profound disappointment to the millions of pro-life Republicans that have always looked to the Republican Party to stand for life, Pence said.

Now is not the time to surrender any ground in the fight for the right to life, he continued. The 2024 platform removed historic pro-life principles that have long been the foundation of the platform. I urge delegates attending next weeks Republican Convention to restore language to our partys platform recognizing the sanctity of human life and affirming that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed.

The RNCs platform committee approved a 2024 GOP platform on Monday that abandoned language advocating federal abortion limits. The updated platform comes a week before the party is expected to confirm as its presidential nominee former President Donald Trump, who says abortion regulations should be left up to the states.

We proudly stand for families and Life, the platform reads. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights.

Pence described the new platform as part of a broader retreat in our party, trying to remain vague for political expedience.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

But beyond the politics of the issue is the immorality of ending an unborn human life. We must never lose the moral clarity to say that abortion is wrong, the former vice president added. The GOP platform may be retreating, but we in the pro-life movement never will.

Pence previously called Trumps softened abortion stance a slap in the face and condemned the former president for leading the Republican Party astray on the issue in an April New York Times guest essay.

See the original post here:
Pence slams RNC platform changes on abortion - Washington Examiner

Former Vice President Mike Pence is calling on delegates to the Republican National Convention to restore pro-life language to the GOP platform to erase any doubt about the partys commitment to the sanctity of life.

The demand came after the RNCs platform committee approved a Trump-inspired proposal this week that dropped the partys previous embrace of a human life amendment to the Constitution and a 20-week federal ban on most abortions.

Now is not the time to surrender any ground in the fight for the right to life, Mr. Pence said in a statement Tuesday. The 2024 platform removed historic pro-life principles that have long been the foundation of the platform. I urge delegates attending next weeks Republican Convention to restore language to our partys platform recognizing the sanctity of human life and affirming that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed.

Mr. Pence finds himself on the outside looking in after serving four years as Mr. Trumps loyal sidekick. The relationship turned cold after Mr. Pence citing Constitutional restraints refused to bow to Mr. Trumps demand that he block the certification of the 2020 election results.

The issue of life, meanwhile, has been a bedrock of Mr. Pences political career. Indeed, Mr. Trump trapped Mr. Trump as his wingman in 2016 in part to reassure social and religious conservatives that his administration could be trusted to fight for the pro-life cause.

Meanwhile, Mr. Trump has touted his nomination of Supreme Court justices who sided with the majority ruling overturning Roe v Wade in 2022. He has said the states, not the federal government, should now hash out the issue.

His stance is reflected in the updated GOP platform, which delegates will vote on next week. President Biden and Democrats are campaigning on the argument that Mr. Trump and the GOP are extremists on abortion and will push for a nationwide ban.

Mr. Pence said the GOPs platform is part of a broader retreat in our party that is being done for political expedience.

The updated platform also cedes this fight to the states, leaving the unborn in California and Illinois to the far lefts extremist abortion policies, he said. The right to life is not only a state issue; it is a moral issue, and our party must continue to speak with moral clarity and compassion about advancing the cause of life at the federal, state and local level.

The platform that the full RNC is set to take up next week says, We proudly stand for families and Life.

We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights, the platform reads. After 51 years, because of us, that power has been given to the States and to a vote of the People.

Original post:
Mike Pence warns against pro-life 'surrender' in revised RNC platform - Washington Times

Serving as vice president in the most pro-life administration in American history was one of the greatest honors of my life. Of all our accomplishments, I am perhaps most proud that the Supreme Court justices we confirmed voted to send Roe v. Wade to the ash heap of history, ending a travesty of jurisprudence that led to the death of more than 63 million unborn Americans.

Since Roe was overturned, I have been inspired by the efforts of pro-life leaders in states across the country, including Indiana, to advance strong protections for the unborn and vulnerable women.

But while nearly half of our states have enacted strong pro-life laws, some Democrats continue to support taxpayer-funded abortions up to the moment of birth in the rest of the country.

Which is why I believe the time has come to adopt a minimum national standard restricting abortion after 15 weeks in order to end late-term abortions nationwide.

The majority of Americans favor some form of restriction on abortions, and passing legislation prohibiting late-term abortions would largely reflect that view. Democrats in Washington have already attempted to legalize abortion up to the moment of birth, and they failed. But they will try again, with similar extremism, if abortion restrictions are not put in place at the federal level.

Contrary to Democrats claims, prohibiting abortions after 15 weeks is entirely reasonable.

While Democrats often hold up Europe as a model for America to emulate, the vast majority of European countries have national limits on elective abortion after 15 weeks. Germany and Belgium have a gestational limit of up to 14 weeks. A majority of European countries are even more restrictive, with Norway, Switzerland, Denmark, Greece, Austria, Italy and Ireland banning abortion on demand after 12 weeks.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

Read more from the original source:
Opinion | Mike Pence: Donald Trump Has Betrayed the Pro-Life Movement - The New York Times