Biden wants to speed up backlog of migrant asylum seekers in blue cities as Dem pressure builds
The Biden administration is moving to resolve asylum cases more quickly in five major U.S. cities — as it continues to face heat from mayors and local officials over the effects of the ongoing crisis at the southern border. The Departments of Justice and Homeland Security announced a “Recent Arrivals (RA) Docket process” which it says will allow them to resolve cases of illegal immigrant single adults more quickly. The administration said in a statement that it will allow it to more swiftly deport those without valid asylum claims, or to grant relief and protection to those who do. Currently, the wait time for asylum cases can be up to seven years, due to the enormous backlog for the immigration courts. That backlog has skyrocketed in recent years. REPUBLICANS BLAST BIDEN ADMINISTRATION’S SNUB OF REQUEST FOR INFO ON TERROR WATCHLIST NATIONALS The docket will operate in five cities: Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York City, and the aim will be to prioritize cases and aim to decide cases within six months, although specific circumstances could change that. The administration says the new process will help, but that ultimately it needs funding and fixes for a “broken” system from Congress. MAYORKAS FORCED TO ADMIT MORE MIGRANTS HAVE CROSSED US BORDER UNDER BIDEN THAN TRUMP “Today, we are instituting with the Department of Justice a process to accelerate asylum proceedings so that individuals who do not qualify for relief can be removed more quickly and those who do qualify can achieve protection sooner,” DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement. “This administrative step is no substitute for the sweeping and much-needed changes that the bipartisan Senate bill would deliver, but in the absence of Congressional action we will do what we can to most effectively enforce the law and discourage irregular migration.” An accompanying rule will codify the process and standards, allowing immigration judges to expedite cases more quickly. The Biden administration has been facing continued pressure from cities, including Chicago and New York, where Democratic officials have demanded the federal government do more to help them with the numbers they are seeing. Mayors have demanded $5 billion in funding, in addition to expedited processes to allow migrants to work and a national resettlement strategy. “We are at an untenable situation right now, and it is painful for us. It’s painful for the city,” New York City Mayor Eric Adams said in December. “And I think that you see it being reflected in the polls. It is because our federal government’s actions have taken a toll on the people of this city.” ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARY HIT NEW HIGH AMID NATIONAL SECURITY FEARS “We need the president to extend the same economic opportunities long term for our undocumented brothers and sisters, so they can build a better life here in the city of Chicago or wherever else they decide to live,” Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said in April. CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF THE BORDER SECURITY CRISIS Mayorkas on Friday acknowledged that “several million” migrants had come into the U.S. under the Biden administration, but blamed it on hemispheric conditions and that broken system. Adams, meanwhile, caused controversy last week by calling for migrants to be allowed to work as lifeguards, saying that some are “excellent swimmers.” His office noted that there have been more than 197,000 arrivals since 2022 and said that “there is nothing more un-American than not allowing someone to work.”
Veepstakes verve: Contenders create media boomlets with leaks and manipulation
The leak-fueled orchestration by Republicans who are either openly or quietly running for vice president is a classic cabaret of media and political intrigue. Virtually every significant name on the mythical “short list” – which essentially exists in Donald Trump’s head – has undergone a boomlet in the press, fed by the potential veep or by surrogates. The Trump campaign is bemused by the spectacle, and happy to let the auditions play out. Indeed, in some cases Trump wants these tryouts. They range from joint speaking appearances to network interviews to showing up at the hush money trial to defend the indicted former president (for just about anyone who seeks the prize). FOX NEWS INVITES TRUMP, BIDEN CAMPAIGNS TO VICE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE Journalists, meanwhile, have nothing else to cover (other than indulging in six weeks of speculation until the first debate). So they have created the closest thing to a horse race and are susceptible to whispers about the ostensible fluctuations among the aspirants. The leaks aren’t coming from the Trump team. Its members are well aware that different strategists and allies are promoting certain names. But they don’t really care what the motivation is as long as they fight for Trump. The former president’s camp believes everyone is getting along, as opposed to cutting each other down, producing a team spirit. The outlook is that many of those that don’t get the nod will wind up with Cabinet posts or other administration jobs. TIM SCOTT: THE MEDIA IS NOT SHOWING THE TRUTH OF WHO BIDEN HAS ALWAYS BEEN Tim Scott has been publicly seeking the nomination since his own presidential campaign quickly imploded. But Trump has sounded dismissive, saying the Senate’s only black Republican does a better job advocating for him than for himself but is a “high-quality person.” He’s accusing Joe Biden of pandering to blacks, but his mild-mannered approach may be a detriment. Still, the senator is included near the top of every media list. Doug Burgum is the obscure North Dakota governor and tech entrepreneur whose presidential campaign vanished without a trace. But wait – here comes word that Trump likes him! Washington Post: “Trump’s allies have discussed Burgum as a potential vice-presidential candidate, even as they caution that the list remains long.” Wall Street Journal: “Rich, Loyal and Good Looking: Why Little-Known Doug Burgum Is in Trump’s VP Mix.” Yahoo: “Doug Burgum has emerged unexpectedly as a top choice to serve as former President Trump’s running mate.” NORTH DAKOTA GOV, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE DOUG BURGUM FRONT AND CENTER AT TRUMP NEW JERSEY RALLY Marco Rubio, who lost to Trump in 2016, got his moment after doing well at a donor event. NBC: “Sen. Marco Rubio is moving up the list of former President Donald Trump’s potential vice presidential picks, according to six people familiar with the presumptive Republican nominee’s search for a running mate.” Financial Times: “Marco Rubio has emerged as a favorite of donors to become Donald Trump’s running mate, as the former president looks for candidates who can widen his appeal and help fund his White House campaign and legal bills.” A major complication: The Constitution bars running mates from being from the same state. But the Florida senator has suggested he’d move out of state. J.D. Vance, the Ohio senator drew major media notice when he went to the Trump trial last week and denounced chief accuser Michael Cohen. The Hill: “Vance Challenges Scott for Top Spot on Trump VP Shortlist.” New York Times: “J.D. Vance, in the Mix to Be Trump’s Running Mate, Denounces Witness.” Washington Post: “J.D. Vance, from Never Trumper to Running Mate Contender.” But when Vance was just an author, in 2016, he warned Christian voters about Trump, “When we apologize for this man, Lord help us.” JD VANCE SLAMS NY V. TRUMP TRIAL AS DEM EFFORT TO DISTRACT THAT THE ‘WORLD IS ON FIRE’ UNDER BIDEN Trump has noted that Vance once “said some bad s*** about me.” But he has been known to forgive past critics, such as Ted Cruz and the man he once dubbed “Little Marco.” The height of absurdity came when Axios reported that Nikki Haley, who has not endorsed Trump two months after dropping out as his last opponent, was under active consideration as his running mate. The next day came a Truth Social post: “Nikki Haley is not under consideration for the V.P. slot, but I wish her well!” That lasted long. The Sunday shows this week became a prime battleground for those either competing in the veepstakes or imagining they are contenders. Elise Stefanik was on “Fox News Sunday,” where host Shannon Bream asked about her saying in a 2015 radio interview that Trump was “insulting to women.” STEFANIK DEFENDS SPEECH AT ISRAEL’S KNESSET TORCHING BIDEN, DEMOCRATS: ‘EQUIVOCATION AFTER EQUIVOCATION’ “It’s a disgrace that you would quote The New York Times with nameless, faceless false sources,” the congresswoman shot back. Bream pressed again as things got heated: Did she say those words or not? “I said the statement that the Democrats leaked out in 2016, that that was insulting,” Stefanik said, stressing that she backed Trump in that election. Vance was on “Face the Nation,” where he made the obligatory statement, as they all do, that Trump hasn’t discussed the veepship with him. “It’s all about getting him elected president. I actually don’t care that much who the vice president is because Trump’s ultimately going to govern,” Vance said. Rubio had a heated, high-decibel interview on “Meet the Press,” where host Kristen Welker asked: “Will you accept the election results of 2024, no matter what happens, Senator?” “No matter what happens? No. If it’s an unfair election, I think it’s going to be contested by either side.” MARCO RUBIO SPARS WITH NBC HOST OVER 2024 ELECTION: DEMOCRATS HAVE ‘OPPOSED EVERY REPUBLICAN VICTORY’ When Walker pointed out that the senator had voted to certify the 2020 election, the senator reeled off some unsubstantiated claims: “I think what undermines people’s confidence
‘We love Taiwan’: Domestic workers hope for more from new President Lai
Taipei, Taiwan – As Taiwan’s President William Lai Ching-te begins his four-year term, the democratic island’s legions of Southeast Asian migrant domestic workers are hoping he will push ahead with labour reforms that might improve their working lives. According to Taiwan’s Ministry of Labour, there were more than 760,000 foreign workers on the island as of the end of March, most of them from Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam. Many work in manufacturing and construction, but they also look after the elderly in healthcare facilities as well as in private homes – a key role considering Taiwan’s rapidly ageing society. While Taiwan’s monthly minimum salary was increased to 27,470 New Taiwan dollars ($853) this year, migrant domestic workers, who also have to pay expenses related to their recruitment, were excluded. William Lai officially took over as Taiwan’s new president on Monday [Taiwan Presidential Office via AFP] Bonny Ling, the executive director of Work Better Innovations (WBI) – a social enterprise that advocates for decent working conditions, including for Southeast Asians in Taiwan – says the new government should take steps to address the fees workers pay. This includes fees before they leave – for things such as medical checks, visas, training and flights – and once they are on the island. Ling says recruitment costs should be paid by employers in the same way as for high-wage workers. “We really need to be honest with ourselves and ask: why is this the case, are we saying that low-waged work is less valuable?” she told Al Jazeera. “Are we saying that those who are the least able to bear the cost of recruitment should pay, sometimes several months of their work to years go back into paying these fees and costs – is this just?” Taiwan, with a population of more than 23 million, is expected to become a “super-aged society” by 2025, according to its National Development Council. Ratih Kabinawa, an adjunct research fellow at the University of Western Australia’s School of Social Sciences, said an increasing number of women were also having to go out to work to help boost family incomes. “These Taiwanese families entrust their parents to the care of migrant workers,” she said. Al Jazeera asked three Southeast Asian caregivers in Taiwan about their lives. Anggi Sofiasyah Lacuba, 29 Anggi Sofiasyah Lacuba hopes to one day pursue a master’s degree in Taiwan [Randy Mulyanto/Al Jazeera] Originally from Indonesia’s North Sumatra province, Anggi Sofiasyah Lacuba has worked for several Taiwanese families since moving to the island in 2020. Since mid-2023, the 29-year-old has been taking care of a grandmother, now in her 90s, in eastern Taiwan’s Hualien County. Anggi said she did not entirely support ending the role of recruitment agents in Taiwan because it could disadvantage people unable to speak Mandarin, but she felt that, on balance, it would be a “very good” move. The mother of two paid about 30 million Indonesian rupiah ($1,881) to her agency in Indonesia to secure her job in Taiwan. The fees covered one month of training, language classes and meals in East Java before departure, as well as a flight ticket to the island. They were deducted from her wages during her first seven months of work. A fee for the recruitment agency’s Taiwanese office was also taken from her monthly pay. With the fees paid off, Anggi now takes home some 20,000 New Taiwan dollars ($621) a month. “If agencies are abolished, can employers allow it if we have things outside [work] – whether we arrange our health insurances, passport, visa or whatever?” she told Al Jazeera. These issues are currently handled by agents. Anggi hopes to return home in the next year or two so she can apply for a student visa and go back to Taiwan to pursue a master’s degree on a scholarship. She hopes Lai’s administration will help ease the visa application process. Sandra Suril, 48 Sandra Suril would like the government to remove the monthly broker’s fee that workers need to pay [Randy Mulyanto/Al Jazeera] Sandra Suril, a mother of three, has worked in New Taipei, near the Taiwanese capital, since 2017. She is from Baguio in the northern Philippine island of Luzon. She takes care of a blind man, now in his 20s, accompanying him to university and making sure he takes his medication, among other responsibilities. Suril says she hopes the government will “remove the brokers’ fee because we are always paying [1,500 New Taiwan dollars, or $47, monthly]” even though brokers are “sometimes useless” and fail to help when there is a problem with an employer. The 48-year-old says she could save more money if the payment was stopped since she has already paid off the other fees to her agency. Suril has had only one job since arriving in Taiwan and says she expects to stay for about 12 years – enough time for her children to earn their university degrees. That will be “my big achievement, if it will happen”, she said. Miean Coilan, 58 Miean Coilan says one month’s salary in Taiwan is equivalent to four-months pay back home in the Philippines [Randy Mulyanto/Al Jazeera] Miean Coilan started work in Taiwan the same year as Suril. Like her, she is from Baguio. Coilan has been looking after a grandmother, now in her 90s, and doing household chores throughout her time on the island. She says one month’s salary in Taiwan is equivalent to “four months” pay back home. The 58-year-old said she would like to see the end of the limits on the length of time migrant workers are allowed to stay on the island. Like other migrant workers, those working in care can stay for a maximum of 12 years, but if they meet certain requirements on training and performance, they can remain for an additional two years. “If I [have the chance to] talk to the president, I will say ‘no end contract’,” she told Al Jazeera. “Even [if] we are [over] 50 years old, 60 years old,
‘No equivalence’: Biden defends Israel after ICC requests arrest warrants
US president insists Israel and Hamas cannot be compared after ICC seeks warrants over alleged Israeli war crimes. United States President Joe Biden has defended Israel against war crimes charges in the world’s top courts. Biden’s remarks came after Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), said he was seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Minister of Defence Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes committed during the war in Gaza. “Let me be clear, we reject the ICC’s application for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders,” Biden said at a Jewish American Heritage Month event at the White House on Monday, the same day Khan announced he was applying for the arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, as well as Hamas leaders over alleged war crimes. “There is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas,” Biden added. Hours earlier, he had issued a strongly-worded statement saying that the ICC warrants were “outrageous”. Israel is also facing a separate case on alleged genocide at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which was brought by South Africa. Biden said that Israel is not committing genocide in Gaza. “Contrary to allegations against Israel made by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), what’s happening in Gaza is not genocide. We reject that,” Biden said in his speech. In January, the ICJ ruled there was a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza, ordering Israel to take a series of provisional measures, including preventing any genocidal acts from taking place. While Biden’s defence of Israel was met with warm applause at the White House event, his election campaign has been marred by pro-Palestinian protests across the US, with some antiwar advocates labelling the president “Genocide Joe”. Panel of experts The ICC prosecutor outlined specific charges against Netanyahu and Gallant, including “starvation of civilians as a method of warfare” and “extermination”, although he said his full investigation was ongoing. Khan also applied for arrest warrants for three Hamas leaders – Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al-Masri (also known as Deif) and Ismail Haniyeh – for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including extermination and murder, the taking of captives, torture, rape and other acts of sexual violence. The charges were supported by evidence prepared by a panel of experts that included international human rights lawyer Amal Clooney. In a statement issued on the report prepared by the experts, Clooney wrote, “I do not accept that any conflict should be beyond the reach of the law, nor that any perpetrator should be above the law.” Human rights lawyer Amal Clooney helped prepare an expert report on evidence of suspected war crimes and crimes against humanity in Israel and Gaza for the ICC chief prosecutor [File: Heinz-Peter Bader/Getty Images] Some US Republican lawmakers were even more forceful in their criticism of the ICC prosecuting Israel on Monday. “My colleagues and I look forward to make sure neither Khan, his associates nor their families will ever set foot again in the United States,” Republican Senator Tom Cotton wrote on X. The ICC is the world’s first permanent international war crimes court and its 124 member states are obliged to immediately arrest the wanted person if they are on a member state’s territory. The US is not a member of the ICC and its “biggest leverage” could be to pressure its allies – mostly European nations which are signatories to the ICC – to not act on the warrants, said Al Jazeera’s Heidi Zhou-Castro, reporting from Washington, DC. Israel is not a member of the ICC. Nor are China and Russia. International reactions to the ICC prosecutor’s plan to issue arrest warrants have been mixed. In comments delivered to the United Nations Security Council, Switzerland’s UN envoy Pascale Baeriswyl said his country “fully supports the court and stresses the importance of respecting its independence”. The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin in March 2023 over alleged war crimes in Ukraine, but Monday’s step marked the first time the court has sought to intervene in the conflict in the Middle East. Adblock test (Why?)
‘Lone wolf’ or JI?: Jemaah Islamiyah confusion after Malaysia attack
Medan, Indonesia – Malaysia has been the target of a rare deadly attack after a man armed with a machete struck a police station in southern Johor state, killing two police officers and injuring a third. Initially, Malaysian police said they suspected Friday’s incident was linked to the hardline group Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) and was probably an attempt to steal weapons. Speaking to the media after the attack in the town of Ulu Tiram, Inspector General of Police Razarudin Husain said police raided the suspect’s house and discovered “JI-related paraphernalia”. Five members of his family were arrested, including the suspect’s 62-year-old father, who police said was a “known JI member”. Two other people, who were in the police station making a report at the time of the attack in the early hours of Friday morning, were also detained. But on Saturday, Malaysia’s Minister of Home Affairs Saifuddin Nasution Ismail appeared to backtrack on the JI connection, describing the attacker as a “lone wolf” who was “driven by certain motivations based on his own understanding because he rarely mixed with others”. Former members of JI in Indonesia told Al Jazeera that an attack by the group on Malaysian soil seemed unlikely. Speaking from prison in Indonesia’s capital Jakarta, where he is serving a life sentence for his role in JI’s 2002 Bali bombing, which killed more than 200 people, Ali Imron told Al Jazeera that JI’s profile in Malaysia did not seem to fit the police station attack. “There have never been any JI members in Malaysia who agreed to commit acts of violence like this,” he said. “Before the Bali bombing, there were attacks in Malaysia, but these were committed not by JI but Kumpulan Mujahidin Malaysia [KMM].” KMM, a hardline group linked to JI, carried out small-scale attacks in Malaysia in the early 2000s. Rueben Dass, a senior analyst at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, noted that JI had never previously mounted attacks in Malaysia. “Malaysia was always considered an economic region for JI, not the focus of attacks,” he told Al Jazeera. “The Malaysian authorities were always vigilant and aware, particularly after KMM became active. They have been on their toes and carried out a wave of arrests in the early 2000s of JI members.” Since then, he said, JI had maintained a low profile. “To see them coming up again is a little surprising,” he added. Indonesia, which saw a spate of JI attacks in the late 1990s and early 2000s – including attacks on churches on Christmas Eve 2000, the Bali bombings and the 2003 attack on Jakarta’s JW Marriott Hotel – has also been largely successful in clamping down. In 2003, with funding and training from the United States and Australia, it established the Counterterrorism Special Detachment 88 (Densus 88), and later set up a National Counterterrorism Agency (BNPT). Indonesian authorities have also pioneered a range of deradicalisation programmes, using former members of hardline groups including JI, with recidivism rates at about 11 percent, according to the Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict, a Jakarta-based think tank. History of JI JI was founded by Indonesian Muslim scholar Abu Bakar Bashir and Abdullah Sungkar in 1993, with a mission to establish an Islamic caliphate across Southeast Asia. The group has historically been linked to al-Qaeda, from which it reportedly received funding and training in the 1990s and early 2000s. It has had members in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Cambodia and the Philippines. JI was officially banned in Indonesia in 2007, leading to the group splintering. Some members focused on dakwah or proselytisation, while others continued to plot violent attacks. Arrests have continued across the region with members accused of stockpiling weapons and bomb-making equipment. According to open source data, between 2021 and 2023, out of 610 people arrested In Indonesia, 42 percent were JI and 39 percent were from other hardline groups – including Jamaah Ansharut Daulah (JAD) and other pro-Islamic State groups. The majority of JI senior figures have been either executed, shot dead in police raids or jailed. The 2002 attack in Bali, which killed more than 200 people, shocked Southeast Asia [File: AP] Both Bashir and Sungkar lived in Malaysia in the 1980s and 1990s, in addition to senior members such as Indonesian Encep Nurjaman (alias Hambali) and Malaysians Noordin Mohammed Top and Azahari Husin. Ali Ghufron (alias Mukhlas), Amrozi bin Nurhasyim and Imam Samudra, the masterminds of the Bali bombing, also spent time in Malaysia. Hambali was arrested in Thailand in 2003 and is currently awaiting trial at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, while Samudra, Amrozi and Mukhlas were executed in 2008. The two Malaysians were shot in separate police raids in Indonesia in 2005 and 2009. Before his death, Noordin ran the Luqmanul Hakiem Islamic boarding school in Malaysia, which was founded by Bashir and Sungkar and was in Ulu Tiram, close to the home of the suspect of Friday’s attack. Malaysia closed the school in 2002 amid suspicions it was being used to recruit people to JI. Style of attack While the profile of the suspect’s father, and the proximity to Luqmanul Hakiem, might have suggested a JI connection, Imron cautioned against such an analysis. “If the son followed his father, there is no way he would have committed this act, so there is a strong possibility that he was inspired by ISIS [ISIL],” Imron said, suggesting the Malaysian authorities had “jumped to that conclusion.” Umar Patek, who was released from prison in 2022 after serving 11 years of a 20-year sentence for mixing some of the chemicals used in the Bali Bombing, told Al Jazeera that he “did not believe” that the attacker was a member of JI and agreed that the attack appeared to have the hallmarks of another group. “I am very doubtful,” he said. “I don’t understand it, especially carrying out a violent attack. It is impossible in my view that it was JI, but it is possible that it was ISIS.” The style
2024 showdown: Trump tops Biden in April campaign cash dash
With five and a half months to go until the November election, former President Donald Trump enjoys the edge over President Biden in many national polls and surveys in the key battleground states that will likely decide their 2024 rematch. And in April, for the first time, Trump also enjoyed the lead in monthly fundraising. The president’s campaign announced on Monday evening that they and the Democratic National Committee hauled in over $51 million in fundraising last month. That’s significantly less than the $76 million that the former president and the Republican National Committee raised in April, according to an announcement earlier this month. THE BLUE STATES TRUMP AIMS TO FLIP RED IN HIS 2024 REMATCH WITH BIDEN “@TeamTrump and the RNC outraised Biden by $25 MILLION in April!” the RNC touted in a social media post. The fundraising totals are a switch from March, when Biden and the DNC brought in roughly $90 million compared to $65.6 million for Trump and the RNC. Biden had regularly been outpacing Trump in monthly fundraising, but Trump’s April haul was boosted by a record-setting $50.5 million that the former president’s campaign raked in at a single event early in the month with top dollar GOP donors that was hosted at the Palm Beach, Florida home of billionaire investor John Paulson. WARNING SIGNS FOR TRUMP AND BIDEN AS THEY CAREEN TOWARDS FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE The Biden campaign, in their announcement, spotlighted that they have hauled in $473 million in the year since the president formally launched his re-election bid. They also showcased that they were sitting on a massive $192 million war chest as of the end of April. They touted that Trump “trails badly in cash on hand” and that they have “the highest total of any Democratic candidate in history at this point in the cycle.” The Biden campaign also spotlighted their small dollar donations, saying that “a majority of April’s raise came from grassroots donors, and one million more supporters were added to our email list in the month alone.” They also took aim at Trump, arguing that his campaign “has focused nearly entirely on courting billionaire donors, maxing out early in the cycle instead of building a durable grassroots fundraising program.” In their announcement earlier this month, Trump campaign senior advisers Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles pointed to their grassroots fundraising prowess, saying that “with half of funds raised coming from small dollar donors, it is clear that our base is energized.” And they pledged that “we are raising the resources necessary to deliver a victory in November.” But the Biden campaign said that its fundraising advantage in recent months has allowed it to go up with major ad buys in the key states and to build formidable ground game teams in the battlegrounds. Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said their fundraising “is giving us the resources necessary to invest in opening offices, hiring organizers and communicating across our battleground states in order to mobilize the coalition of voters who will decide this election.” Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.
Statuesque Rev. Graham tribute comes to the Capitol, but shies away from the limelight
One perk of covering Congress is that you get to see the Capitol statues after hours. But not always at their best. Such was the case a week ago Friday. I cut through Statuary Hall of the Capitol around 6:30 pm, et, after my TV piece about a House hearing and public broadcasting aired. I was heading home. That’s where I encountered Billy Graham. Not the pastor, mind you. But a seven-foot bronze statue of Graham. BILLY GRAHAM STATUE SCHEDULED TO BE UNVEILED AT US CAPITOL NEXT WEEK: ‘GREAT HONOR’ Graham was shrouded in plastic wrap from head to toe. A deep blue, padded blanked hugged Graham from his triceps to his shoelaces. You could just barely make out the countenance of Graham through the tight plastic. But his nose and a shock of hair jutted out. The contours of Graham’s face were visible. But almost as though there were no details there. Workers plopped the pedestal where Graham’s statue would later stand a few feet away. It featured Scripture, stamped into the base. “Jesus said to him, I am the way. The truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me,” read the Bible verse, John 14:6, and a simple, Christian cross. Capitol officials erected Graham’s statue at the edge of Statuary Hall, near a main passageway bound for the House chamber. SON OF REV. BILLY GRAHAM REFLECTS ON US CAPITOL STATUE HONORING FATHER The workers would raise the statue, directly next to a resemblance of Marcus Whitman from Washington state. Whitman is adorned in buckskins. Like Graham, Whitman also clutches a Bible – but also saddlebags. Whitman is known for his work as a 19th Century doctor and missionary, guiding people from the east across the Oregon Trail. The Cayuse Indians killed Whitman near Walla Walla, Wash., after he tried to convert them to Christianity. Each state gets two statues in the Capitol collection. Graham’s statue is one of the two from North Carolina. It replaces one of the late North Carolina Gov. Charles Aycock (D) who had ties to racists. Lawmakers formally unveiled Graham’s statue in an elaborate ceremony about a week after I first spotted it. “This the main corridor through the Congress and the Capitol. Literally millions of people will walk by,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., at the statue dedication. “I think it’s providential that it’s right here. I’m just saying I think it is the perfect placement.” “I hope when Members Congress walk by his statue, they’ll reflect on the standards of faith, ethics and decency that he exemplified throughout his extraordinary life,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. But here’s the problem. Last Thursday night, I finished a live shot on progressive House staffers demonstrating about Israel and headed out the door around 6:30 pm. Again, workers toiled around the Graham statue. Workers hoisted the likeness of Graham from the base. It now stood in the middle of Statuary Hall. But Graham’s vestments were different. A wrap of cushioning swaddled the minister’s body. See-through plastic sheathed the rest of the statue – winding up from the knees and ensconcing the head. A thick tan, industrial belt held the plastic tight like a parcel ready to ship at UPS. For whatever reason, a brown piece of bent carboard protruded from the torso. REV. BILLY GRAHAM HONORED WITH STATUE UNVEILED AT US CAPITOL The packaging cloak was so enveloping there was no way to tell that the outline of the figure was Graham. I presumed they were just adjusting the statue after the ceremony. By the next night – around 6:45 pm – I again got off the air and headed home. This time, I produced a TV piece about the raucous House Oversight Committee meeting and GOP efforts to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress. I cut through Statuary Hall. Graham was nowhere to be seen. As fate would have it, Graham would not permanently occupy such a heavily, trafficked spot to the House chamber. Both Johnson and Tillis were wrong in their hopes that lawmakers might take note of Graham’s presence or Scripture as they walked to the House chamber for votes. It turns out that Graham’s residency in Statuary Hall was just temporary. He was only there for the ceremony. Workers had moved Graham downstairs to the spot where Aycock stood. This is the Crypt of the Capitol, directly below the Rotunda. Lawmakers don’t stroll by there as often. But visitors certainly circulate through the Crypt if they are part of a formal Capitol tour. Graham now stands on the north side of the Capitol, barely on the Senate side of the building. To Graham’s right is a statue of Roger Sherman of Connecticut. Sherman served as a Congressman and senator. But Sherman is best known for engineering what’s called the “Connecticut Compromise.” That’s where the Founders settled on a bicameral legislature. States would receive representatives, commensurate with their population. But each state would have equal representation in the Senate. To Graham’s immediate left is a passageway leading toward the Senate wing of the Capitol – but not the Senate chamber. Across the entryway is a statue of John C. Calhoun, representing South Carolina. Calhoun served in the House and was Vice President under Presidents John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson. Statues in the Capitol collection may have their feet cast in bronze. But a lot of statues have been on the move lately. The Capitol just dedicated a new statue from Arkansas two weeks ago: Daisy Bates. Bates was a civil rights leader and advisor to the Little Rock Nine. She succeeds Uriah Rose. Rose is known as a partner in Little Rock’s fabled Rose Law Firm. That’s where Hillary Clinton later became the firm’s first female partner. Deputy Clinton White House Counsel Vince Foster also worked there. His body was later found in Fort Marcy Park, near Washington. Officials and a bicameral Congressional investigation later ruled Foster’s death a suicide. Arkansas scores
Bashing governor in publicly funded campaign ads is OK in Connecticut legislative races, court rules
Connecticut’s Supreme Court on Monday ruled that state elections officials violated the constitutional free speech rights of two Republicans running for the state legislature when it fined them thousands of dollars for criticizing the Democratic governor in ads paid for by their publicly funded campaigns in 2014. In a 5-0 decision, the justices overturned the $5,000 civil fine against now-Sen. Rob Sampson and the $2,000 penalty against former Sen. Joe Markley imposed by the State Elections Enforcement Commission — a ruling their lawyer said could have influence in other states. CONNECTICUT BECOMES ONE OF LAST STATES TO ALLOW IN-PERSON EARLY VOTING The commission had determined that Sampson and Markley violated the rules of the state’s Citizens’ Election Program, which provides public funds to campaigns for statewide office and the legislature, when they sent out campaign materials touting how they would fight what they called the bad policies of then-Gov. Dannel Malloy. While the program bars a candidate from spending their public funds on the campaigns of others not in their race, the Supreme Court said the commission went too far when it interpreted the law to mean Sampson and Markley couldn’t criticize Malloy, who was running for reelection. “None of the communications at issue in this appeal could reasonably be construed as anything more than a rhetorical device intended to communicate the merits of the plaintiffs’ candidacies as bulwarks against the policies endorsed by Governor Malloy and the Democratic Party,” Chief Justice Richard Robinson wrote in the opinion. Robinson added the commission “imposed an unconstitutional condition in violation of the first amendment to the extent that it penalized the mention of Governor Malloy’s name in a manner that was not the functional equivalent of speech squarely directed at his reelection campaign.” The ruling cited several decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and other courts on what limits can be placed on free speech in publicly funded campaigns. Thirteen states provide some form of public funding to candidates for state offices, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Charles “Chip” Miller, a senior attorney at the Institute for Free Speech who represented to the two lawmakers, said the Connecticut case appears to be the first of its kind and could have ramifications in other states if they seek outside guidance on the issue. “To the extent that you can tie someone to an opposing candidate, you know, I think is extremely relevant now,” he said. “You can talk about somebody being a Trump supporter, or a Biden supporter, be it yourself or someone else. Someone can run and they could say, ‘Hey, I’m a Sanders Democrat,’ and that means something. Right?” he said, referring to U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who caucuses with the Democrats. Other states that provide public funding for state campaigns, such as Arizona and New York, limit use of the money to the candidate’s own campaign. New York has specific language that bans spending that money to support another candidate. The commission was reviewing the decision and consulting with the Attorney General’s Office to determine what to do next, said Michael J. Brandi, executive director and general counsel at Connecticut’s Elections Enforcement Commission. “As the court wrote, it’s an issue of first impression and a notoriously tricky application of the law,” he said in a statement. “Connecticut is in the vanguard of campaign finance reform, so that’s to be expected.” The state attorney general’s office, which represented the commission in the case, said it was reviewing the court ruling before deciding its next steps. Markley, of Southington, won reelection as a senator in 2014 and left the legislature in 2019 after losing his bid for lieutenant governor. He said the commission’s interpretation of the law was “ludicrous” and he had believed it would be overturned by the courts. “I think that what they were trying to do here in Connecticut was sufficiently outrageous that I doubt that such actions have even been contemplated in other states, because who would push for bans on what I think is such reasonable political communication?” he said. Sampson, from Wolcott, won reelection to the House in 2014 and won the Senate seat vacated by Markley four years later. He said he felt “vindicated” by the court’s unanimous decision and pleased that future candidates can now exercise their free speech rights. “In our case, it should have been perfectly reasonable for me to inform my constituents — and voters — that I did not support the policies of the former governor,” Sampson said in a statement posted on social media. During the 2014 campaign, Sampson and Markley sent out postcards and flyers touting their fiscally conservative positions and saying they were key players in the legislature in fighting what they called Malloy’s “reckless” tax and spending policies. That year, Markley received about $57,000 in public funds for his campaign and Sampson got about $28,000. Sampson’s Democratic opponent that year, John Mazurek, filed a complaint with the commission over the two Republicans’ campaign materials and their references to Malloy. In 2018, the commission found that Sampson and Markley had violated the public campaign funding law by attacking Malloy, saying they were essentially spending the public funds on another 2014 campaign — Republican Tom Foley’s challenge against Malloy, who won reelection and later did not seek another term in 2018. Sampson and Markley appealed to Superior Court, which upheld the commission’s decision in 2022. Judge Joseph Shortall said that Sampson and Markley did not prove that their constitutional rights were violated by the commission, and that they had voluntarily agreed to accept public funding for their campaigns and the conditions that came along with the money. They next appealed to the Supreme Court, which overturned the lower court on Monday.
‘Expect coming years to be…’: Jaishankar amid conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza
He said that no one expected the Russia-Ukraine conflict to continue for over three years, or an attack on Israel of such a massive scale taking place on October 7
At five hour hearing, no one is happy with Texas Medical Board’s proposed abortion guidance
Doctors, lawyers and advocates say the state board’s new guidance still doesn’t clarify when doctors can legally perform abortions.