SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
January, 03 2019, 11:00pm EDT
Contact:
Email:,press@lawyerscommittee.org
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Issues Statement Following Supreme Court's Decision to Rehear Gerrymandering Cases
Cases Were Remanded Back To The District Court For Further Development Of The Facts
WASHINGTON
Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law issued the following statemen regarding the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to rehear two gerrymandering cases, Rucho, et al. v. Common Cause and Lamone, et al. v. Benisek, et al.
"We are pleased that the Supreme Court will rehear two important cases concerning gerrymandering on the eve of the upcoming 2020 redistricting cycle. The public and officials across the country have sought long-awaited resolution and clarity on what constitutes unlawful gerrymandering. Unlawful partisan gerrymandering is inimical to our democracy. Elected officials must be chosen by the voters, not --as is the case with partisan gerrymanders --choose who should vote for them.
"One new development since these cases were last heard is that Justice Kavanaugh has now been confirmed to the Supreme Court. An important question that must be asked is whether the stark partisan attacks made by now-Justice Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing inhibits the appearance of impartiality in the eyes of the public in these important cases that raise questions of improper partisan motive."
The Lawyers' Committee is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, formed in 1963 at the request of President John F. Kennedy to enlist the private bar's leadership and resources in combating racial discrimination and the resulting inequality of opportunity - work that continues to be vital today.
(202) 662-8600LATEST NEWS
Trump Corruption in Spotlight as Top Aide Implicated in Alleged 'Shakedown Scheme'
"When the person at the top is as corrupt as Trump, everyone else becomes corrupt, because otherwise you're a sucker," wrote one journalist.
Nov 26, 2024
Boris Epshteyn, a leading adviser to President-elect Donald Trump, allegedly sought payments in the tens of thousands of dollars in exchange for promoting candidates for top positions in the incoming administration, a scheme that observers saw as further evidence of the corruption pervading the Republican leader's inner circle.
Multiple news outlets reported Monday that the top attorney on Trump's transition team investigated Epshteyn—who helped represent the former president during his effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election—over accusations that he requested payments from people seeking roles in the incoming administration.
Scott Bessent, Trump's pick to lead the Treasury Department, was among those Epshteyn pushed for payments , according toThe Associated Press.
The Washington Postreported Monday that Epshteyn asked Bessent for "a monthly stipend of at least $30,000" in exchange for promoting him for the Treasury role, an offer Bessent declined. Epshteyn "later asked Bessent to invest $10 million in a three-on-three basketball league," according to the Post, which cited an internal legal review.
Epshteyn called the accusations "fake" and "defamatory."
Reports of Epshteyn's scheme came amid broader concerns about glaring conflicts of interest within Trump's transition team and incoming administration, both of which are teeming with lobbyists and executives who stand to benefit from the president-elect's second term.
"In any organization, when the person at the top is as corrupt as Trump, everyone else becomes corrupt, because otherwise you're a sucker," journalist Jon Schwarz wrote Monday.
In what one watchdog group called "a highly unprecedented move," Trump has thus far refused to sign a legally required ethics pledge and other documents necessary to formally set the transition in motion. By not signing the ethics pledge, Trump has been able to conceal the names of individuals and corporations financing his return to power, allowing them to contribute unlimited sums.
"This resistance to commit to ethical conduct while serving as president is a red flag pointing to nothing so much as greed and corruption and an intention to enrich himself and/or his family through the extensive powers of his office," Virginia Kase Solomón, president and CEO of Common Cause, said in a statement Monday. "Americans expect and deserve a president who prioritizes the nation's well-being over personal gain. They will not tolerate a president who abuses the powers of his office to line his own pockets."
During his first term, according to a recent analysis by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Trump "likely benefited from $13.6 million in payments from foreign governments" to his companies.
Trump, granted sweeping immunity by the conservative-dominated Supreme Court, is poised to enrich himself further during his second term. As the Postnoted last week, the president-elect "has made no promises to divest from any of his financial interests, which have now soared to include a cryptocurrency business and a stake valued at $3.76 billionin a social media company, in addition to his family firm's growing number of foreign deals."
"The unprecedented scenario of a president holding a single company's shares worth billions of dollars—as Trump does in Trump Media & Technology Group Corp., the parent company of Truth Social—is unanticipated by existing law," the Post added.
Delaney Marsco and Maha Quadri of Campaign Legal Center wrote earlier this month that "in the absence of swift, concrete action by the president-elect to signal his dedication to ethics standards, all signs point to a second term that will prioritize personal interest over public good, and a declining trust in public institutions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Jack Smith Drops Trump Case
The president-elect's "ability to escape prosecution does not retroactively validate his illegal, unconstitutional and democracy-destroying activities," said one critic.
Nov 25, 2024
Special Counsel Jack Smith's announcement on Monday that he was dropping his case regarding President-elect Donald Trump's alleged handling of classified documents and election subversion was not unexpected, as U.S. Justice Department policy dictates that a sitting president can't be prosecuted while in office.
But government watchdogs said the developing was no less "troubling," and vowed that Trump must ultimately face accountability.
"At least for now, Trump may escape justice for his role in trying to overturn the 2020 election, fomenting the January 6 insurrection, and improperly handling classified documents," said Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen. "But his ability to escape prosecution does not retroactively validate his illegal, unconstitutional and democracy-destroying activities. They were heinous and unconscionable acts that literally cost lives and threatened the peaceful transfer of power."
"If not the courts, history will judge them appropriately," said Gilbert.
In his motion to dismiss the case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Smith wrote that "the government's position on the merits of the defendant's prosecution has not changed. But the circumstances have."
" Donald Trump aims not just to excuse but to normalize all this behavior. Permitting him to succeed would enable a slide into authoritarianism. The American people must not let that happen."
Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote in his Substack newsletter that regardless of DOJ policy, the filing was "a grave mistake," because Smith did not specify that the prosecution of Trump would be restarted after the president-elect leaves office.
"Smith says he had no choice," wrote Reich. "But he did have a choice. He could have asked the courts to put the cases on hold until Trump is no longer president... To be sure, Smith's requests were for dismissals 'without prejudice,' which technically leaves open the possibility that charges could be refiled after Trump leaves office. But refiling charges is vastly more cumbersome than simply ending a stay."
While Smith left the door open to once again bring charges against Trump in 2029, he "should have put the responsibility for avoiding the rule of law squarely on Trump," wrote Reich.
Legal analyst Barb McQuade added that Smith's tactic leaves the possibility that "there may be no appetite" to refile charges regarding eight-year-old allegations after Trump leaves office.
At Slate, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern wrote that Attorney General Merrick Garland's "institutionalist instincts paralyzed the Justice Department for nearly two years, giving Trump a chance to run out the clock by the time Smith finally indicted him."
The attorney general is "partly at fault for waiting so long to commence the investigation into Jan. 6," they wrote, while right-wing federal Judge Aileen Cannon "is guilty of sabotaging" the case regarding Trump's retention of classified documents after he left office in 2021, which Cannon dismissed in July, claiming Smith's appointment as special counsel violated the Constitution.
"In a simplistic sense, the voting public also bears culpability for putting Trump back in the Oval Office despite his egregious attempts to steal the previous election. But that victory could not have happened without the Supreme Court, which essentially nullified the constitutional bar against insurrectionists returning to office, then awarded Trump sweeping immunity in Smith's Jan. 6 case. The court's immunity decision guaranteed that the former president would not face trial before the election, which in turn prevented the public from hearing the full range of evidence against him."
Gilbert emphasized that "at Public Citizen we believe that no one should be above the law, that criminality by the powerful must be punished, and that attempting to overturn the nation's election and fomenting political violence should be harshly sanctioned."
"Donald Trump aims not just to excuse but to normalize all this behavior," said Gilbert. "Permitting him to succeed would enable a slide into authoritarianism. The American people must not let that happen."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israeli Siege Leaves 130,000 Kids Trapped and at Risk of Starvation in Northern Gaza
"With no food, no clean water, and constant fear, both my children have developed rashes, and my daughter is passing blood, but there is no medicine, no help, and absolutely nothing I can do," said one mother trapped in the area.
Nov 25, 2024
An estimated 130,000 children under the age of 10 have been trapped in areas of northern Gaza almost entirely cut off from aid assistance, food and medical supplies for 50 days, a major humanitarian group said Monday.
According to Save the Children, life-sustaining aid has largely failed to make it through to any of the people besieged by Israeli forces in northern Gaza since early October, when the IDF declared the territory a "dangerous combat zone" and ordered civilians to evacuate.
Earlier this month, Joyce Msuya, Acting Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator for the United Nations, warned that the Israeli offensive in the area that began in early October was "an intensified, extreme, and accelerated version of the horrors of the past year." Local health officials in Gaza say that the death toll for the entire enclave has surpassed 44,000 since October 7 of 2023.
"Save the Children has been unable to access northern Gaza to deliver food parcels for 5,000 families, along with 725 hygiene kits and other aid supplies, for over seven weeks," said the group in its Monday statement. "Before the area was closed off, Save the Children worked through local partners to reach thousands of children in need, distributing over 1,000 food parcels and 600 hygiene kits, and reaching around 15,000 children and families in northern Gaza with psychosocial support, recreational activities, and case management."
Save the Children's warning comes not long after the Famine Review Committee released an alert stating that "there is a strong likelihood that famine is imminent in areas within the northern Gaza Strip."
"The situation in northern Gaza is not fit for human survival and yet we know there are about 130,000 children under 10 trapped in those conditions, not to mention the thousands of older children and their families," said regional director Jeremy Stoner.
A mother of two trapped in northern Gaza, identified by Save the Children as Ruba, testified through the group that she was trapped with her children "under relentless bombs, rockets, and bullets, with nowhere to run. My mother is paralyzed, and I cannot leave her behind. My brother has been killed, my husband was taken, and I don't know if he's alive."
"With no food, no clean water, and constant fear, both my children have developed rashes, and my daughter is passing blood, but there is no medicine, no help, and absolutely nothing I can do. They cry and ask me why we can’t just leave, why their father isn’t with us, why we can’t go back to a normal life," she said.
Save the Children is not the only entity reporting that aid is being blocked. According to an update from the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs issued last week regarding northern Gaza, "between 1 and 18 November, 27 out of 31 coordination requests by the U.N. to access the besieged areas were denied and the remaining four were initially approved but then impeded on the ground. No fuel was let in for water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) facilities."
Following Save the Children's statement, Ibrahim Hooper, the national communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, called for bolder action by nations besides the U.S.: "Because the Biden administration steadfastly refuses to apply any real pressure on the genocidal Israeli government to allow food to be delivered to those being intentionally starved in northern Gaza, including some 130,000 children under age 10, it is up to the international community to take concrete action."
“While our nation's government has abdicated any role in alleviating the suffering of the Palestinian people under a systematic campaign of mass destruction, slaughter, ethnic cleansing, and forced starvation, other nations can take actions such as economic sanctions, arms embargoes and arrests of Israeli war criminals," he said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular