July, 16 2024, 01:39pm EDT
Senator Menendez Must Resign to Restore Voters’ Faith
Today, after deliberating for two days, a jury found New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez guilty of all 16 counts in a federal corruption trial, including bribery, obstruction of justice, and acting as a foreign agent. The senator was accused of accepting gifts in exchange for official favors to Egypt and Qatar. The gifts, from New Jersey businessmen, include cash, gold bars, luxury watches, car payments to his wife, and more.
The senator is the first sitting member of Congress to be charged with conspiracy by a public official to act as a foreign agent. He continues to sit on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, charged with shaping the country’s international policy and affairs.
Statement of Common Cause President and CEO Virginia Kase Solomón
“When we choose our elected leaders, we place a high level of trust in them to represent our interests and protect our freedoms. After a guilty verdict from a jury of his peers who heard all the facts of the case, Senator Menendez has broken the trust of New Jersey voters.
When we see our leaders sell their influence, we lose faith that democracy is worth participating and believing in. That’s why Common Cause has long advocated for an independent ethics office, rather than relying on senators to referee themselves, especially in an election year.
It is foundational to our representative democracy that our leaders in Washington put their own personal interests aside in favor of the public interest.
Rather than serve the voters, Senator Menendez sold them out for his own personal profit. He must resign.”
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest, and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process.
(202) 833-1200LATEST NEWS
Biden Belatedly Embraces Supreme Court Reforms as Right-Wing Justices Wreak Havoc
The president is reportedly planning to endorse term limits for Supreme Court justices—but not adding seats to the bench.
Jul 17, 2024
In the wake of rulings that have significantly weakened the regulatory authority of federal agencies, backed the criminalization of homelessness, and granted U.S. presidents sweeping immunity from criminal prosecution, President Joe Biden is reportedly preparing to endorse reforms that would establish term limits and a binding code of ethics for the nation's Supreme Court justices—changes that progressive advocates and many Democratic lawmakers have backed for years.
The Washington Postreported late Tuesday that Biden is "finalizing plans" to embrace the proposals "in the coming weeks" as the November presidential election against GOP nominee Donald Trump looms. Trump appointed half of the Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority during his first four years in the White House, paving the way for the overturning of Roe v. Wade and other hugely consequential decisions.
Biden told members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus—some of the most vocal advocates of substantial court reforms—during a call this past weekend that he was "about to come out with a major initiative on limiting the court," according to a transcript obtained by the Post.
But Biden has been facing and resisting pressure to back transformative changes to the high court for years, and it's far from clear that the reforms he's planning to put forth—which would require congressional approval—will satisfy campaigners or members of his party who are calling for high court expansion and other bold changes.
The president, who is facing calls to drop his reelection campaign, has consistently opposed Supreme Court expansion, which is backed by 75% of Democratic voters. The New York Timesreported Tuesday that Biden's forthcoming proposal will likely not back high court expansion.
Sean Eldridge, founder and president of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, said in a statement late Tuesday that "elected officials are catching up to the growing consensus among the American people that it is time for court reform."
Term limits for Supreme Court justices are broadly popular with the U.S. public, according to new polling from Data for Progress. Nearly 75% of voters across party lines support ending lifetime terms on the high court, the group found.
The specifics of Biden's plan are unclear. Legislation introduced by House Democrats would impose 18-year term limits on Supreme Court justices.
"The Supreme Court should be the gold standard for judicial ethics, but right now, nothing could be further from the truth," Eldridge said Tuesday. "That's why a supermajority of Americans support legislation to enact Supreme Court term limits and a binding code of ethics. It is time for our leaders to listen to the American people and take action to address the growing crisis on our nation's highest court."
"We urge President Biden to support the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act and the TERM Act, which would establish term limits for current and future justices," he added.
Even in the aftermath of rulings that have directly undercut his agenda—such as the high court's decision last year to block his student debt cancellation plan—Biden has dismissed more ambitious proposals to overhaul the Supreme Court, including adding more justices to the bench.
"If we start the process of trying to expand the court, we're going to politicize it maybe forever in a way that is not healthy, that you can't get back," Biden said last June, ignoring the reality that the high court has already been packed by Republicans.
Elie Mystal, The Nation's justice correspondent, argued Tuesday that term limits and other proposed court reforms are doomed to fail "if you don't expand the court."
"The only way to get term limits is to appoint a majority of justices who think term limits are constitutional," Mystal wrote. "And right now, I don't even know if there are three justices who think they're constitutional, much less the necessary five."
"So, again, the constitutional way to bring the Supreme Court to heel," he added, "is to expand it, then pass your ethics bills and term limit bills, which will then be upheld by the newly expanded court."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Stunning Abdication': Appeals Court Dismisses Biden Genocide Complicity Case
"We turned to the law to help stop the horror, and the court chose to do nothing," said one plaintiff in the case. "We are beyond disappointed."
Jul 16, 2024
Palestine defenders on Tuesday decried a U.S. federal appellate panel's dismissal of a case brought by Palestinians accusing senior Biden administration officials of failing to prevent and complicity in Israeli genocide in Gaza.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco affirmed a lower court's dismissal of the lawsuit against President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, which was led by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on behalf of several Palestinian groups and individuals.
During a Tuesday interview on Democracy Now!, CCR attorney Katherine Gallagher—who represented plaintiffs in the case—said its dismissal "essentially gives the blank check to carry out any kind of conduct that the executive wants in times of genocide, in times of war."
Gallagher's interview followed a Monday statement in which she referred to the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling granting the president "absolute immunity" for "official acts."
"On the heels of Trump v. United States, this stunning abdication of the court's role to serve as a check on the executive even in the face of its support for genocide should set off alarm bells for all," she said.
The lawsuit—originally filed in November in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in Oakland—sought to stop the Biden administration from aiding Israel's bombardment of Gaza. U.S. weapons have played a critical role in Israel's war, which Palestinian and international agencies say has killed, wounded, or left missing more than 137,500 Gazans.
While the court found that "the current treatment of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip by the Israeli military may plausibly constitute a genocide in violation of international law," it dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds in late January. The 9th Circuit subsequently granted an expedited appeal in the case, which was heard in June.
"This decision is mind-boggling and, frankly, scary," plaintiff Waeil Elbhassi said in a statement Monday. "It is just unfathomable, while we count our dead, witness the total obliteration of Gaza—aided by our own government."
"As the death toll keeps rising and we see nonstop images of carnage during this livestreamed genocide, the court washes its hands of our case," Elbhassi added. "We turned to the law to help stop the horror, and the court chose to do nothing. We are beyond disappointed. We have no choice but to continue to fight for our people. Our very existence is at stake."
Israel's conduct in Gaza—including alleged forced starvation that has fueled deadly famine in parts of the besieged strip—is under investigation by the International Court of Justice in a genocide case brought by South Africa.
Additionally, International Criminal Court Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan has applied for warrants to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and three Hamas leaders for crimes including extermination allegedly committed on and after October 7.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Greg Casar Says There's an Easy Way to Show Which Party Is More Pro-Worker
"Let's see which politicians are for unions and which ones are all talk," said the Texas Democrat.
Jul 16, 2024
As former U.S. President Donald Trump's new running mate and a union leader's speech spark discussions about the Republican Party and organized labor, one Democratic congressman on Tuesday suggested a test to see who is actually pro-worker.
Rep. Greg Casar, a Texas Democrat with a history of
advocating for workers, called for holding a vote on the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act when his colleagues in Congress return to Capitol Hill next week.
"If Republicans wanna talk like they're pro-worker, then let's have a vote on the PRO Act next week," Casar said on social media. "Let's see which politicians are for unions and which ones are all talk. Dems are ready to vote, how about you guys?"
Introduced by Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the PRO Act "expands various labor protections related to employees' rights to organize and collectively bargain in the workplace." The vast majority of its co-sponsors are Democrats.
"Dems are ready to vote, how about you guys?"
Casar specifically called out House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who on Tuesday wrote for Compact Magazine about International Brotherhood of Teamsters general president Sean O'Brien's Monday night speech at the Republican National Convention (RNC), acknowledging that it "came as something of a shock."
Hawley called the speech "a watershed moment" and said that "Republicans have a chance to turn the corner on labor." He also took the opportunity to highlight some of his own positions, such as more sick days for rail workers. The senator left out that he has backed "right-to-work" laws that ban union security clauses in collective bargaining agreements and opposed the PRO Act.
O'Brien—who responded by saying that Hawley "is 100% on point"—had, as The Washington Post's Lauren Kaori Gurley put it, "showered praise" on the senator during his speech. The Teamsters leader also stressed the need for pro-worker reforms.
"Labor law must be reformed," O'Brien said. "Americans vote for a union but can never get a union contract. Companies fire workers who try to join unions and hide behind toothless laws that are meant to protect working people but are manipulated to benefit corporations. This is economic terrorism at its best. An individual cannot withstand such an assault. A fired worker cannot afford corporate delays and these greedy employers know it. There are no consequences for the company, only the worker."
He declared that "we need corporate welfare reform. Under our current system, massive companies like Amazon, Uber, Lyft, and Walmart take zero responsibilities for the workers they employ. These companies offer no real health insurance, no retirement benefits, no paid leave, relying on underfunded public assistance. And who foots the bill? The individual taxpayer. The biggest recipients of welfare in this country are corporations, and this is real corruption. We must put workers first."
O'Brien was invited to speak at the RNC by Trump, who on Monday secured enough delegates to become the Republican nominee and announced U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate—creating a ticket that Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, called "a corporate CEO's dream and a worker's nightmare."
Teamsters spokesperson Kara Deniz told the Post that the union leader requested to speak at the Democratic National Convention next month but has not yet received an invitation.
Unlike the Teamsters, several major labor groups endorsed Biden for reelection over a year ago. The Democrat describes himself as "the most pro-union President leading the most pro-union administration in American history"—and he has mostly avoided angering organized labor, other than working with Congress to block a national rail strike in December 2022.
Biden became the first sitting president in history to walk a picket line when he rallied with United Auto Workers members in September. The UAW endorsed him in January, when the group's president, Shawn Fain, sharply criticized Trump and warned that "rarely as a union do you get so clear of a choice between two candidates."
O'Brien struck a much different tone on Monday, praising the ex-president and "characterizing both parties as ambivalent about unions with room to improve," as Post reporter Jeff Stein pointed out on social media. In addition to Sanders, Stein highlighted, "there are 48 Senate sponsors of the PRO Act. They all caucus with the Democratic Party. Zero are Republicans."
Only Sens. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)—who ditched the Democratic Party shortly after the 2022 election—have joined with the chamber's Republicans to oppose the PRO Act. In the GOP-controlled House, the bill is backed by every Democrat but just three Republicans: Reps. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (Ore.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), and Christopher Smith (N.J.).
"On June 21, 2023, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions chaired by Sen. Bernie Sanders passed the PRO Act 11-10," Warren Gunnels, the panel's majority staff director, noted Tuesday. "Every Democrat on the committee voted yes. Every Republican on the committee voted no."
Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.) said, "To the Republicans at the RNC who want to appear to support American labor, here's an idea: Come join us to pass the PRO Act."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular