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
Trump’s Legal Argument Threatens Constitutional Democracy
Public Citizen today filed an amicus brief in Trump v. United States. Donald Trump is charged in that case with federal crimes allegedly committed to keep himself in power and prevent Joe Biden, the lawful winner of the 2020 Presidential election, from taking office. In the U.S. Supreme Court, Trump is arguing that he is immune from prosecution because, he claims, the acts with which he is charged fall within the scope of a president’s duties.
Public Citizen’s amicus brief explains that the acts cannot reasonably be claimed to fall within a president’s duties. A president has no specific constitutionally assigned role in the conduct of presidential elections. Any assertion that a president’s authority empowers him to conspire to overturn the result of a valid election and retain power beyond his term in office would be absurd.
“Accepting a view of the outer limits of presidential authority that would sweep in a conspiracy to overturn an election and remain in office unlawfully would have exceptionally broad implications and threaten severe damage to our constitutional democracy,” the brief states. “The Constitution does not silently prohibit holding a former president accountable to the law when he is alleged to have engaged in criminal violations aimed at overthrowing our constitutional form of government.”
“Trump’s legal theory defies common sense and would enable an almost limitless tyranny. Nothing in the Constitution – which aims to prevent tyranny – supports Trump’s theory,” stated Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen.
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000LATEST NEWS
House Democrats Back Sanders Senate Effort to Halt Arms Sales to Israel
"The U.S. must use its leverage to safeguard civilian lives, secure a lasting cease-fire, and advance a pathway toward peace."
Nov 20, 2024
A group of progressives in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders' joint resolutions of disapproval that would block sales of American weapons to Israel as its troops continue to lay waste to the Gaza Strip.
Sanders (I-Vt.) introduced the six resolutions in September and plans to force a vote on Wednesday. In a statement led by Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the House members said that "if given the opportunity to do so, we would vote in favor of S.J. Res. 111, S.J. Res. 113, and S.J. Res. 115."
Jayapal was joined by Democratic Reps. Becca Balint (Vt.), Joaquin Castro (Texas), Lloyd Doggett (Texas), Sara Jacobs (Calif.), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Jim McGovern (Mass.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), and Jan Schakowsky (Ill.).
While condemning the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack and backing "defensive systems that are designed to meet Israel's security needs," the nine House members also argued that "the United States must use all available leverage, including the suspension of offensive weapons transfers, to de-escalate the violence and protect the lives of hostages, including Americans, Palestinian civilians, and all those impacted by the ongoing conflict."
"We are and have been deeply alarmed by the Israeli military's conduct in Gaza, where independent human rights monitors have documented the use of U.S.-provided weaponry in violations of international law," they continued. "According to the Biden administration's own report, 'it is reasonable to assess' that Israeli security forces have used U.S. weapons to violate international humanitarian law. The humanitarian aid entering Gaza has also reached historic lows. In October, an average of 28 trucks per day crossed into Gaza, compared to a pre-war daily average of 500."
The coalition also pointed to the Biden administration's mid-October letter, which threatened to cut off U.S. weapons unless the Israeli government took "urgent and sustained actions" to improve humanitarian conditions in Gaza within 30 days.
"On November 4, 2024, State Department Spokesperson Matthew Miller stated Israel had so far 'failed' to implement the recommendations in the letter, and that assessment was substantiated by several humanitarian organizations," the lawmakers noted. "Despite this clear lack of progress, no meaningful action has been taken by the Biden administration to promote Israeli compliance with stated U.S. policy goals."
Sanders announced plans to bring his resolutions to a vote after a U.S. State Department spokesperson last week responded to a question about the Biden administration's deadline by declaring that Israel is not violating federal and international law.
Warning that U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's return to the White House in January "will only embolden" Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right ministers, the House members asserted that a vote for the resolutions "is a vote to politically restrain the Netanyahu government from any forthcoming efforts to formally annex the West Bank and settle parts of Gaza."
"We urge senators to support these joint resolutions of disapproval to block specific offensive arms sales to Israel, upholding U.S. law that prohibits arms transfers to countries that engage in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights or restrict the delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance," the coalition concluded. "The U.S. must use its leverage to safeguard civilian lives, secure a lasting cease-fire, and advance a pathway toward peace."
Some House progressives have separately endorsed Sanders' resolutions. Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.)—who lost her August primary to a Democrat backed by pro-Israel lobbyists—said that since President Joe Biden "won't stop sending bombs, it's up to Congress to uphold the law" and urged "every senator who cares about humanity and the rule of law" to vote yes.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian American in Congress, said on social media Wednesday, "Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act is very clear: The U.S. cannot provide weapons to any country that 'prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance.'"
Biden "has refused to enforce U.S. law and stop sending weapons to the Israeli government as they commit genocide in Gaza and use starvation as a weapon of war," Tlaib added. "Today, every senator will have to decide if they will vote to uphold our own laws and block arms sales to Israel."
So far, only a small number of senators have signaled support for the resolutions—Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine (Va.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Brian Schatz (Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (Md.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), and Peter Welch (Vt.). The measures would also have to get through the Republican-controlled House to hit Biden's desk, and overriding an anticipated veto would require two-thirds support in both chambers.
Although the resolutions are not expected to pass even in the Senate, "the Biden administration is aggressively pushing senators to bless continued U.S. weapons shipments for Israel ahead of a first-of-its-kind vote in Congress on the policy," HuffPostrevealed Wednesday after obtaining a copy of talking points the White House is circulating on Capitol Hill.
"Administration officials are suggesting lawmakers who vote against the arms are empowering American and Israeli foes from Iran to the militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah, which the U.S. treats as terror organizations," HuffPost reported. "Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is also privately pressing senators to endorse the ongoing flow of military equipment to Israel, according to one of the aides."
Responding to the report on social media, Sanders ally and Arab American Institute president James Zogby—who is considering a run for Democratic National Committee chair—said that "this White House effort is disgraceful."
"Senators trying to block offensive weapons to Israel aren't aiding Hamas, they're trying to stop genocide, starvation, and massive violations of U.S. laws," Zogby added. "They're saving Palestinian lives and the last shred of U.S. honor."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dr. Oz Nomination Seen as Potential Boon for Medicare Privatization
"Dr. Oz wants to fully privatize Medicare," warned one advocacy group. "That’s why Donald Trump put him in charge of Medicare."
Nov 20, 2024
Dr. Mehmet Oz, whose unsuccessful 2022 Pennsylvania Senate bid included pitching voters on a plan to expand the privatized Medicare Advantage program, is now in a position to potentially actualize that plan.
President-elect Donald Trump announced Tuesday that Oz, also known by his TV personality name Dr. Oz, is his pick to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
"Dr. Oz—a massive investor in Pharma—told the voters of Pennsylvania his plans to privatize Medicare… and they rejected him. Now Trump is giving him the authority to see his industry-approved plan carried through," wrote the progressive-leaning outlet The Lever, which covered Oz's support for Medicare Advantage back in 2022.
Through Medicare Advantage, which has been promoted by Trump and other congressional Republicans, seniors can opt out of traditional government-run Medicare health plans and instead choose plans administered by private insurers, such as UnitedHealthcare and Cigna.
According to The Lever's 2022 reporting, Oz pushed Medicare Advantage plans on his show The Dr. Oz Show and co-wrote a 2020 column for Forbes with a former healthcare executive in which they argued that a "Medicare Advantage For All" plan can "save" our healthcare system. In the column, Oz and his co-author articulated a plan to expand Medicare Advantage by imposing a 20% payroll tax.
Oz "is not a good pick for a very powerful position in charge of a trillion dollars of healthcare spending," wrote Matt Stoller of the American Economic Liberties Project on X, in reference to The Lever's investigation.
The Lever also reported that Oz's plan to expand private plans under Medicare Advantage could "boost companies in which he invests." For example, Oz and his wife owned up to $550,000 worth of stock in UnitedHealth Group, at the time of reporting. UnitedHealthcare and Humana account for nearly half, or 47%, of Medicare Advantage enrollees nationwide, according to the health policy organization KFF.
Additionally, a 2022 investigation by The New York Timesfound that major health insurers have exploited Medicare Advantage to boost their profits by billions of dollars.
Project 2025, a list of right-wing policy proposals led by the Heritage Foundation that Trump has tried to distance himself from, calls for making Medicare Advantage the default option for Medicare beneficiaries, which, if enacted, "would be a multibillion-dollar annual giveaway to corporations at the expense of Medicare enrollees and taxpayers," according to the liberal research and advocacy organization the Center for American Progress.
Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, offered a related critique of Oz: Americans "need someone who will crack down on insurers who want to deny care to the sick, providers who skimp on quality healthcare, corporations that want to privatize Medicare, and Big Pharma profiteers and ideologues who want to slash Medicaid and refuse care to low-income people. What they do not need is a healthcare huckster, which unfortunately Dr. Mehmet Oz appears to have become, having spent much of his recent career hawking products of dubious medical value."
In addition to the potential boon for private insurers, some researchers, news outlets, and members of Congress have also raised concerns about the quality of care administered under Medicare Advantage.
A 2022 government report found that "[Medicare Advantage Organizations] sometimes delayed or denied Medicare Advantage beneficiaries' access to services, even though the requests met Medicare coverage rules" and also "denied payments to providers for some services that met both Medicare coverage rules and [Medicare Advantage Organization] billing rules."
In October, a group of three Democratic lawmakers wrote to the current CMS administrator about increasingly widespread abuses and care denials by for-profit Medicare Advantage insurers.
"We are concerned that in many instances MA plans are failing to deliver, compromising timely access to care, and undermining the ability of seniors and Americans with disabilities to purchase the coverage that’s right for them," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) wrote in a letter.
"We continue to hear alarming reports from seniors and their families, beneficiary advocates, and healthcare providers that MA plans are falling short, and finding a good plan is too difficult," they wrote.
In particular, they pointed to Medicare Advantage plans' growing reliance on prior authorization, a complex, barrier-ridden process whereby doctors must demonstrate a proposed treatment is medically necessary before the insurer will cover it.
"Overuse of prior authorization is not only harmful to patients, it hinders healthcare providers' ability to offer best-in-class service," they added.
Social Security Works, a progressive advocacy group, warned in a social media post Tuesday that "Dr. Oz wants to fully privatize Medicare."
"That's why Donald Trump put him in charge of Medicare," the group added. "We will fight to stop this charlatan from getting anywhere near our Medicare system."
Keep ReadingShow Less
In 14-1 UN Security Council Vote, Lone US Veto Kills Gaza Cease-Fire Resolution
The U.S. government, said one human rights lawyer, "proves once again to the world that it is fully committed to the continuation of the genocide in Palestine."
Nov 20, 2024
The Biden administration faced fierce criticism on Wednesday after using its veto power at the United Nations Security Council to block a resolution demanding an immediate, unconditional, and permanent cease-fire in Israel's assault on the Gaza Strip.
The vetoed measure also called for all parties to implement a U.N. Security Council (UNSC) resolution passed in June—which would lead to the release of all hostages—and to enable Gaza civilians' immediate access to basic services and humanitarian assistance.
Jess Peake, who directs the International and Comparative Law Program at the University of California, Los Angeles, condemned the U.S. decision as "absolutely unforgivable" while Nina Turner, a senior fellow at the Institute on Race, Power, and Political Economy, declared that "this is absurd."
Mai El-Sadany, executive director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy in Washington, D.C., called it "yet another shameful abuse of the UNSC veto by the U.S. to perpetuate a war that violates U.S. law and U.S. international legal commitments."
"Today's message is clear to the Israeli occupying power—you may continue your genocide... with complete impunity."
Human rights attorney Craig Mokhiber, who last year resigned as the New York director for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights over the United Nations' response to Gaza, said Wednesday that "the U.S. has just vetoed another cease-fire resolution in the U.N. Security Council, and, in doing so, proves once again to the world that it is fully committed to the continuation of the genocide in Palestine."
Mokhiber also called for action at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), where there is no U.S. veto power.
"Even as we seek accountability for Israeli perpetrators, we must also seek accountability for complicit U.S. actors," he said. "Israeli/U.S. impunity threatens the entire world. And the U.N. must now move to take concrete action in the UNGA."
The 14-1 vote at the UNSC marked the fourth time the United States has blocked a Gaza resolution since Israel began its retaliation for the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack. All five permanent members of the Security Council—the U.S., the United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China—have veto power. The other seats are filled on a rotating basis and lack that authority.
The 10 nonpermanent members—Algeria, Ecuador, Guyana, Japan, Malta, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, South Korea, and Switzerland—were behind the push to pass this draft resolution. Those who supported it represent "the collective will" of the international community, Algerian Ambassador Amar Bendjama said after the vote, according toU.N. News.
"It is sad day for the Security Council, for the United Nations, and the international community as a whole," Bendjama said, stressing that it has been "five months since the adoption of Resolution 2735, five months during which the Security Council remained idle—remained hand-tied."
"Today's message is clear to the Israeli occupying power—you may continue your genocide... with complete impunity. In this chamber—you enjoy immunity," he added. "To the Palestinian people, another clear message—while the overwhelming majority of the world stands in solidarity with your plight, others remain indifferent to your suffering."
Israel faces a South Africa-led genocide case at the International Court of Justice over its assault on Gaza, which as of Wednesday has killed at least 43,985 Palestinians, according to local officials. Another 104,092 people have been wounded, and most of the enclave's 2.3 million residents have been repeatedly displaced as Israeli forces have devastated civilian infrastructure.
U.S. Ambassador Robert Wood said Wednesday that "we made clear throughout negotiations we could not support an unconditional cease-fire that failed to release the hostages."
"This resolution abandoned that necessity," he argued. "For that reason, the United States could not support it."
The U.S. government has been widely accused of complicity in genocide for arming Israeli forces over the past 13 months—including by progressives in Congress. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Wednesday planned to force a vote on resolutions that would block American weapons sales to Israel on the grounds that they violate federal law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular