Connect with us

News

DOJ Sues Texas for ‘Open Defiance of the Constitution’

Published

on

The Biden Dept. of Justice on Thursday unveiled a historic 27-page lawsuit filed against the State of Texas for enacting a law that is “in open defiance of the Constitution.” That law, S.B. 8, the DOJ declares, is also in defiance of “settled constitutional law” on abortion.

The legal reasoning is clear enough for non-lawyers to easily understand.

“It is settled constitutional law that ‘a State may not prohibit any woman from making the ultimate decision to terminate her pregnancy before viability,'” the suit begins. “But Texas has done just that. It has enacted a statute banning nearly all abortions in the State after six weeks—months before a pregnancy is viable.”

“Texas enacted S.B. 8 in open defiance of the Constitution,” the lawsuit continues. “The statute prohibits most pre-viability abortions, even in cases of rape, sexual abuse, or incest. It also prohibits any effort to aid—or, indeed, any intent to aid—the doctors who provide pre-viability abortions or the women who exercise their right to seek one.”

“Because S.B. 8 clearly violates the Constitution, Texas adopted an unprecedented scheme ‘to insulate the State from responsibility,’ … by making the statute harder to challenge in court.”

The Washington Post adds: “At a news conference, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the ban ‘is clearly unconstitutional under long-standing Supreme Court precedent.'”

“This kind of scheme to nullify the Constitution of the United States is one that all Americans, whatever their politics or party, should fear,” said Garland, warning that what he called the “bounty hunter” element of the law may become “a model for action in other areas by other states and with respect to other constitutional rights or judicial precedents.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Meadows ‘Will Face Consequences’ for Stonewalling Jan. 6 Committee if He Does Not Comply With Subpoena: Report

Published

on

Could former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows face criminal contempt of Congress charges like Steve Bannon?

The House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack subpoenaed Meadows, a former GOP congressman, on September 23, over a month ago, and he has yet to comply.

“Our patience isn’t unlimited, and engagement needs to become cooperation very soon,” a Select Committee source told CNN. “As we’ve already made clear, anyone who tries to stonewall our effort will face the consequences.”

The committee sees Meadows, who has been by Trump’s side every step of the way even for months before exiting the House to join the Trump administration, as a “key witness.”

Jan. 6 Select Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) is being patient but that appears to be waning thin.

“If and when the staff says to us it’s not going anywhere, there won’t be any hesitation on the part of the committee to make the referrals” for contempt of Congress he tells CNN.

CNN adds multiple sources have “indicated” Meadows has “been ‘engaging’ in negotiations over the terms of his turning over documents and appearing for a deposition.”

Earlier this week a bombshell Rolling Stone report citing two people involved with planning the January 6 pro-Trump rallies mentioned Meadows nine times, including calling him “someone who played a major role in the conversations surrounding the protests on Jan. 6.”

That report also says those sources describe Meadows “as having had an opportunity to prevent the violence” of January 6, and that “Meadows was 100 percent made aware of what was going on.”

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Unemployable’ Jeffrey Clark Can’t Find a Job After Trying to Help Trump Overturn the Election: Report

Published

on

The far-right attorney who sought to take control of the Department of Justice to keep Trump in power despite losing the 2020 election is facing professional consequences for his anti-democratic actions.

“The Trump taint is sticking to Jeffrey Clark,” Business Insider reported Thursday. “In the 10 months since the would-be Justice Department coup, Clark’s name has been scrubbed from the conservative legal group where he’d landed his first post-Trump job. He lawyered up in the face of congressional scrutiny. But, just days before his Friday interview with the House committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol, Clark parted ways with the defense lawyer Robert Driscoll, Politico reported late Wednesday.”

Clark is just the latest attorney to suffer repercussions for their relationship with Trump.

“In the eyes of several former colleagues, Clark has joined the ranks of once respected conservative lawyers — including former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the former prosecutor Sidney Powell, and the constitutional scholar John Eastman — who have been burned flying too close to Trump,” the report noted.

One former official explained the pity felt for Clark.

“Honestly, I feel bad that the guy appears to have been canceled. He made his own bed, but I don’t wish anyone to be unemployable,” the former official said.

Read the full report.

Continue Reading

News

Watch: Cory Booker Flattens GOP Talking Points by Reading List of Violent Threats Made Against School Boards

Published

on

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) on Wednesday delivered an impassioned defense of Attorney General Merrick Garland, who spent much of the afternoon beating back claims from Republican senators who said his Department of Justice was persecuting conservative parents.

During the hearing, Garland defended his decision to have the DOJ investigate violent threats made against school board members, even as Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Tom Cotton (R-AK), and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) all took turns accusing him of unleashing the FBI against innocent parents.

Booker, however, brought receipts with him and started reading them off.

“In Texas, a parent physically assaulted a teacher,” he began. “In Pennsylvania, a person posted threats on social media which required police to station outside of a school district… I can keep going: Ohio, a school board member was threatening a letter with, ‘We are coming for you.'”

Booker then read Garland’s original letter in which he specified that he was only investigating violent threats made against school officials, and not angry remarks made during school board meetings.

“If someone was to read the actual letter, you are literally saying as the leader of the highest law enforcement in the land, that you protect spirited debate!” Booker said.

Watch the video below.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.