Archive for the ‘Republican’ Category

Nebraska Republican: Abortion Ban Needed to Ensure Dominance … – Truthout

The lawmakers remarks make explicit the deep ties between white nationalism and abortion bans.

As lawmakers in the Nebraska legislature debated and advanced a near-total abortion ban last week, one Republican took to the floor and delivered an argument undergirded by a white supremacist conspiracy theory in support of the ban.

In a speech last Wednesday, Republican State Sen. Steve Erdman said that an abortion ban is necessary because there are too many of those foreigners and refugees in the state coded language for non-white people.

Our state population has not grown except by those foreigners who have moved here or refugees who have been placed here, he said, adding his untrue and racist claim about a lack of population growth among white people due to abortion. Video of his arguments was posted online by Heartland Signal.

Erdman also said that the absence of an abortion ban in the state, where the procedure is currently banned after 21 weeks and six days, is part of whats fueling a labor shortage in the state, revealing what Republicans view as the value of their constituents. The aborted fetuses are people that could be working and filling some of those positions that we have vacancies, he said. (Republicans arguments about a labor shortage are also untrue Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that unemployment is lower in Nebraska than it has been in the past decade.)

The Republicans argument invokes white nationalists great replacement theory, a conspiracy theory that global elites are trying to replace white people with people of color. It is a completely debunked idea that has nonetheless gained hold among the right and the Republican Party, especially as it has been used to supposedly justify antisemitic and racist violence.

The highly unusual move is the latest in far right judges current streak of judicial activism.

The great replacement theory was invoked by the shooter who killed 10 people and injured three in a supermarket in a majority-Black neighborhood in Buffalo, and the man who killed Jewish worshippers at a synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018. It has also increasingly been referenced by Republicans opposed to humane immigration regulations.

In his argument, Erdman invoked the theory to justify another type of violence: forced birth. Experts have said that the growth of white supremacist rhetoric on the right and the rise of abortion bans and attacks on trans people are deeply linked.

Bans on trans and abortion rights are both about taking away the publics bodily autonomy specifically, the bodily autonomy of already marginalized populations. Black people already suffer from higher rates of parental mortality than their white counterparts, and experts have said that abortion bans will exacerbate that problem.

Meanwhile, as misogyny becomes more prevalent on the right, and abortion bans aid in far right white supremacist groups missions to increase the population of white people by forcing white women to give birth, some especially abhorrent groups advocate for doing this via sexual assault. Since abortion bans largely affect cis women and since right wingers refuse to acknowledge that some trans people can also become pregnant abortion bans also serve these groups desire to control women.

This is perhaps evidenced by Erdmans own arguments for abortion bans. During the debate on the abortion ban last week, the Republican state senator also openly said that the life of a pregnant person is less important than the bundle of cells growing in their body.

Those who we should care for are the babies. Its not the mother. Its not those who are choosing to have an abortion, he said. Its the babies. Its the babies.

As the world changes at an unprecedented pace, we need ethical, independent news more than ever before. We need journalists who can investigate, report, and analyze complex issues with honesty and integrity. We need journalists who can hold those in power accountable, shine a light on injustices, and give voice to the voiceless.

Truthout relies on reader donations to maintain this sanctuary for honest, justice-driven journalism. We have just 8 days left in our fundraiser and $46,500 still to raise we need all our friends to help us reach this goal. It takes less than 30 seconds to give, so if you value a free and independent press, please make a tax-deductible donation today!

Continued here:
Nebraska Republican: Abortion Ban Needed to Ensure Dominance ... - Truthout

The modern Republican party is hurtling towards fascism – The Guardian

Opinion

We are witnessing the logical culmination of win-at-any-cost politics and Donald Trump has encouraged it

Sat 15 Apr 2023 06.00 EDT

America no longer has two parties devoted to a democratic system of self-government.

We have a Democratic party, which notwithstanding a few glaring counter-examples, such as what the Democratic National Committee did to Bernie Sanders in 2016 is still largely committed to democracy.

And we have a Republican party, which is careening at high velocity toward authoritarianism. OK, fascism.

What occurred in Nashville last week is a frightening reminder of the fragility of American democracy when Republicans obtain supermajorities and no longer need to work with Democratic lawmakers.

The two Tennessee Democrats who Republicans expelled from the Tennessee house have been restored to their seats until special elections are held, but the damage to democracy cannot be easily undone.

The two were not accused of criminal wrongdoing or even immoral conduct. Their putative offense was to protest against Tennessees failure to enact stronger gun controls after a shooting at a Christian school in Nashville left three nine-year-old students and three adults dead.

They were technically in violation of house rules, but the state legislature has never imposed so severe a penalty for rules violations. In fact, over the past few years, several Tennessee legislators have kept their posts even after being charged with serious sexual misconduct. And the two who were expelled last week are Black people, while a third legislator who demonstrated in the same manner but was not expelled is white.

We are witnessing the logical culmination of win-at-any-cost Trump Republican politics scorched-earth tactics used by Republicans to entrench their power, with no justification other than that they can.

Democracy is about means. Under it, citizens dont have to agree on ends (abortion, healthcare, guns or whatever else we disagree about) as long as we agree on democratic means for handling our disagreements.

But for Trump Republicans, the ends justify whatever means they choose including expelling lawmakers, rigging elections through gerrymandering, refusing to raise the debt ceiling and denying the outcome of a legitimate presidential election.

Wisconsin may soon offer an even more chilling example. While liberals celebrated the election last Tuesday of Janet Protasiewicz to the Wisconsin supreme court because she will tip the court against the states extreme gerrymandering (the most extreme in the nation) and its fierce laws against abortion (among the most stringent in America), something else occurred in Wisconsin on election day that may well negate Protasiewiczs victory.

Voters in Wisconsins eighth senatorial district decided (by a small margin) to send Republican Dan Knodl to the state senate. This gives the Wisconsin Republican party a supermajority and with it, the power to remove key state officials, including judges, through impeachment.

Several weeks ago, Knodl said he would certainly consider impeaching Protasiewicz. Although he was then talking about her role as a county judge, his interest in impeaching her presumably has increased now that shes able to tip the states highest court.

As in Tennessee, this could be done without any necessity for a public justification. Under Republican authoritarianism, power is its own justification.

Recall that in 2018, after Wisconsin voters elected a Democratic governor and attorney general, the Republican legislature and the lame duck Republican governor responded by significantly cutting back the power of both offices.

Meanwhile, a newly installed Republican supermajority in Florida has given Ron DeSantis unbridled control with total authority over the board governing Disney, the theme park giant he has fought over his anti-LGBTQ dont say gay law; permission to fly migrants from anywhere in the US to destinations of his own choosing, for political purposes, and then send the bill to Floridas taxpayers; and unprecedented prosecutorial power in the form of his newly created, hand-picked office of election integrity, pursuing supposed cases of voter fraud.

Without two parties committed to democratic means to resolve differences in ends, the party committed to democracy is at a tactical disadvantage. If it is to survive, eventually it, too, will sacrifice democratic means to its own ends.

In these circumstances, partisanship turns to enmity and political divisions morph into hatred. In warfare there are no principles, only wins and losses. America experienced this 160 years ago, when the civil war tore us apart.

Donald Trump is not singularly responsible for this dangerous trend, but he has legitimized and encouraged the ends-justify-the-means viciousness now pushing the GOP toward becoming the American fascist party.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

Read this article:
The modern Republican party is hurtling towards fascism - The Guardian

Texas Legislature debating Republican bills to create new courts – The Texas Tribune

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribunes daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Bills being debated in the Texas Legislature would create two new statewide courts, which supporters say would be more efficient and lead to fairer decisions but opponents deride as unnecessary, politically motivated and potentially unconstitutional.

Senate Bill 1045 would create a 15th state appeals court with jurisdiction specifically in cases brought by or against the state of Texas; agencies, departments or boards of the executive branch; or state universities, including any of these entities officers. It would have five justices, elected statewide.

Senate Bill 27, with its companion, House Bill 19, would create a new state district court to hear business cases involving transactions larger than $10 million. It would have seven judges appointed by the governor every two years, and appeals would be heard by the new appeals court.

Texas has never had a specialized business court, though 26 states have some form of one. The Legislature last created a new appeals court in 1967, when it added a second court to the Houston area to manage caseloads in the states most populous region.

SB 1045 passed the Senate at the end of March, 25-6, and now sits in the House judiciary committee. SB 27 and HB 19 a priority for House Speaker Dade Phelan have not yet passed their respective chambers.

Corporate attorneys who testified in favor of the business courts idea at a Senate hearing March 29 said their clients value consistent, timely rulings. They said a court reserved for complex cases and run by judges with specific expertise in business law would provide both.

Under the existing system of district courts with general jurisdiction, large business cases often languish for years and soak up resources that are better used elsewhere, said lawyer Mike Tankersley of the nonprofit Texas Business Law Foundation.

I think our judges are doing an amazing job, having been given a difficult, almost impossible task of having to manage these battleship-sized cases among the normal cases that the rest of the public has to see their rights adjudicated in, Tankersley said. Only a small fraction of cases will end up in this [new] court.

Samuel Hardy, head of litigation for Dallas-based Energy Transfer, said some of the pipeline companys cases have taken more than six years to resolve in Texas courts. Having a court that exclusively handles specific areas of business law would let judges with expertise make decisions more quickly.

It is important that big commercial cases have a venue and a forum where their unique needs are met, where they dont take away from family court and criminal proceedings, and they can be heard in a forum that will have the case resolved efficiently, Hardy said.

Bryan Blevins of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association, which represents defense and plaintiffs attorneys, said the group opposes a business court because it would create two systems of justice. Because large companies can expect to have cases there frequently, opposing parties who are new to the court would likely be at a disadvantage.

My clients expressed to me a concern predominantly of why is there one set of justice for big companies and big claims versus my claim? Blevins said. How am I going to be treated in a court where the predominant players are large businesses and law firms?

Lawyer Michael Smith of the Texas chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates said the organization opposes the bill in part because members believe it would make cases more complex, not less, as parties fight over which court a case belongs in. And he warned that allowing the governor to appoint judges every two years would leave the system susceptible to political pressure, as parties with cases before the court could seek to influence the governors selections.

This doesnt give us an independent judiciary, Smith said. It gives us employees of the executive branch which are serving two-year terms.

Texas needs a new court of appeals because issues impacting the state deserve to be heard by judges elected statewide, rather than the Austin-based 3rd Court of Appeals, said Sen. Joan Huffman, a Houston Republican and author of SB 1045.

These types of cases, she said, contain complex and nuanced legal issues, and the heavy workload has prompted the 3rd Court to transfer many cases elsewhere. A new court would help alleviate that problem.

Creating a 15th intermediate court of appeals with statewide jurisdiction in civil cases brought by or against the state will allow judges to apply specialized precedent in subject areas important to the entire state, Huffman told the Senate Jurisprudence Committee on March 22. These are not regional issues; they are issues of statewide concern. Judges selected statewide should be deciding them, and they should be experts in these types of cases.

Texans for Lawsuit Reform general counsel Lee Parsley, the only witness at the hearing to testify in favor of the bill, echoed Huffmans argument about how voters statewide should be able to select the judges who vet the constitutionality of state laws.

Four Democratic appeals court justices testified against the bill, arguing that it is a solution in search of a problem.

Justice Gisela Triana of the 3rd Court of Appeals said the Legislature has published no studies justifying why a new court is needed, which has typically been the case with past judicial reforms. Her own research found that only about 10% of cases before the 3rd Court would have been transferred to the proposed court, or about 130 cases annually.

Right now, the 80 (appeals court) justices we have statewide carry a load of about 130 cases each, Triana said. This court of five would basically be doing the work of one justice.

Justice Cory Carlyle of the Dallas-based 5th Court of Appeals said a new statewide appeals court would be contrary to the Texas tradition of allowing citizens to appeal their cases to locally elected judges. He said it would also take power away from rural areas of the state, noting that of the 18 justices on the current statewide courts, the Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeals, 15 are from Dallas or Harris counties.

Its been that way for a long time, and I think we can accurately forecast where it will go from here with this court, Carlyle said.

Several opponents argue that the proposed courts would be illegal.

The Texas Constitution requires appeals courts to have appellate jurisdiction co-extensive with the limits of their respective districts, which has been understood to mean each court must represent a particular geographic area of the state.

For district courts like the proposed statewide business court, it says the State shall be divided into judicial districts.

Amy Befeld, a lawyer with Texans for Lawsuit Reform, which supports the bill, noted the constitution also states the Legislature may establish such other courts as it may deem necessary and prescribe the jurisdiction and organization thereof.

The Texas Supreme Court has repeatedly given deference to state lawmakers in reshaping the courts as they see fit, Befeld said.

In other words, the effect of the language is to place the subject at the complete disposal of the Legislature, she said at the March 29 Senate committee hearing.

Opponents of both bills also see them as another attempt by Republicans to usurp power from Democrats, who have come to dominate elections in the states largest urban areas. Other bills proposed by Republicans this session would limit the ordinance-making power of cities and allow the state to take over local elections offices.

Most Texans recall the 2018 midterm elections as the time Democrat Beto ORourke came within 3 points of unseating U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz. But down the states notoriously long ballot, a Democratic wave swept through the judiciary. Democrats won 31 of the 32 contested elections for state appeals court seats. They became the majority on half of the 14 state appeals courts, when previously they had held seats on only three courts.

Between 2018 and 2022, the 3rd Court of Appeals switched from all Republican to all Democratic justices. Because the judicial district includes Austin, the seat of state government, most cases involving state laws, agencies or officials are filed there..

While the all-Republican Supreme Court can overrule appeals courts and reversed the 3rd Court 10 times between 2016 and 2022, according to Triana the high court hears fewer than 10% of filed appeals.

A new appeals court with justices elected statewide would likely result in an all-Republican bench. Democrats have not won a statewide office since 1994, and the two courts currently with statewide jurisdiction consist solely of Republicans.

Given how adamantly Republicans have opposed court-packing at the federal level in recent years, the hypocrisy is more than a little galling, Steve Vladeck, a University of Texas law professor, wrote of the legislative proposals in a recent op-ed.

Huffman in 2021 authored a bill that would consolidate the 14 appeals courts into seven, a move Democrats said would allow Republicans to take control of at least five. She later withdrew the bill in the face of opposition.

In the March 22 hearing, Dallas Democratic Sen. Nathan Johnson asked Huffman if the new appeals court would result in a dramatic shift in partisan affiliation among the judges hearing cases involving the state. She downplayed the impact.

As of today, but maybe not in five years, Huffman said. I cant predict.

Disclosure: Energy Transfer, Texans for Lawsuit Reform and Texas Trial Lawyers Association have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

We cant wait to welcome you Sept. 21-23 to the 2023 Texas Tribune Festival, our multiday celebration of big, bold ideas about politics, public policy and the days news all taking place just steps away from the Texas Capitol. When tickets go on sale in May, Tribune members will save big. Donate to join or renew today.

Originally posted here:
Texas Legislature debating Republican bills to create new courts - The Texas Tribune

Iowa landowners say Republican leaders are ignoring them in eminent domain fight – WHO TV 13 Des Moines News & Weather

WRIGHT COUNTY, IOWA Residents in Wright County wonder what happened to House File 565 after a second year Iowa Senate Republicans failed to take up the legislation on the chamber floor.

Well it appears that the senate especially at the statehouse and our beloved governor has turned their heads, said Robert Ritter, a Wright County Property Owner. If you dont grease the wheels with a little money you dont get to talk to people.

I am also disappointed in the governor in the fact that she hasnt said to the Senate, hey this needs to be brought to the floor, you have been elected to a position to represent the people so lets do our job, said Dean Kluss, Wright County District 2 Supervisor, (R).

The bill failed to see a subcommittee when the chair, Iowa State Senator Mike Bousselot (R), from Ankeny said it was too late in the second funnel to advance it, with all the differing opinions

Wright County has the most pipeline in the ground for Summit Carbon Solutions. Kluss said that 48% of the county has signed easements for their land, and 52% of those along the route have not signed.

When we got approached the first time he and I had a nice long talk, said Betty Ellis, a Wright County property owner. we felt that the control we would have on it, yes itll be ours, itll just have an easement over it, but the easement is one that will last forever.

Some property owners think 90% voluntary easements before the use of eminent domain is a start. But they also want property owners rights to be respected and they believe that the Summit Carbon Solutions go too far with a permanent easement; and the ability to have access to the owners land whenever the company needs to get to the pipeline.

We do want to continue to fight it. We will go all the way to the eminent domain, we will go all the way to the eminent domain, we are not going to sign an easement. And I think the company is aware of that at this point, said Ellis

See the original post here:
Iowa landowners say Republican leaders are ignoring them in eminent domain fight - WHO TV 13 Des Moines News & Weather

Marjorie Taylor Greene is becoming an increasingly important part of the Republican Party’s fundraising machine – Yahoo News

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene surrounded by other Republican House member at President Joe Bidens State of the Union address on February 7, 2023.Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Marjorie Taylor Greene has become cozier with the GOP establishment and vice versa in recent months.

She's donated to several vulnerable GOP incumbents and sent $275,000 to the party's House campaign arm.

But even as she becomes a key part of the party machinery, her beliefs and positions remain unchanged.

As the institutional Republican Party raises the money necessary to defend the GOP's tenuous House majority, more and more of it is coming from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.

The congresswoman's latest quarterly filings with the Federal Election Commission reveal that Greene has spent a total of $311,000 this year on helping the party win tough House races.

That includes a hefty $275,000 contribution on February 28 to the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) House Republican's main campaign arm as well as $2,000 apiece on March 29 to 18 other House Republicans, many of whom sit in districts that Democrats plan to target during the 2024 campaign.

Here are some of the vulnerable House Republicans that accepted $2,000 from Greene:

Juan Ciscomani of Arizona, who represents a Tuscon-area swing district.

David Schweikert of Arizona, one of the most vulnerable House Republicans who represents a Phoenix-area swing district.

Anthony D'Esposito of New York, whose upset victory on Long Island helped pave the way for the new GOP majority.

Mike Garcia of California, who represents a Los Angeles-area district that Joe Biden won in 2020.

Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon, who narrowly defeated a progressive candidate in a district long held by Democrats.

Jen Kiggans of Virginia, who defeated Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria in November 2022.

Monica De La Cruz of Texas, whose Rio Grande Valley-based districts borders the US-Mexico border.

Greene also gave $2,000 to other more hardline conservatives whose districts aren't as deep-red, including House Freedom Caucus Chair Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, and Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma.

Story continues

It's a stark departure from Greene's first two years in Congress, when 11 of her GOP colleagues joined with Democrats to boot her from her committee assignments over her history of violent online rhetoric and her prior belief in the QAnon conspiracy theory. Greene has since embarked on an attempt to clean up her image.

During that time, Greene donated to just a handful of other GOP candidates who share her hard-right views, some of which did not make it past Republican primary elections. She did contribute a total of $350,000 to the NRCC, which she's now on track to potentially exceed.

Her contributions to the party's most vulnerable lawmakers are likely to raise eyebrows and become a key opportunity for Democrats, given her history of controversial statements.

One of Schweikert's Democratic opponents is already calling on the Arizona congressman to return Greene's contribution.

Greene walks with Arizona Rep. David Schweikert, one of the most vulnerable House Republicans at the Capitol on March 28, 2023.Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images

Greene's increased generosity towards the rest of the party comes amid her emergence as a key ally of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, despite her past criticisms of him.

Additionally, as a newly-minted member of the influential House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, the Georgia congresswoman recently lead a group of her Republican colleagues on a tour of the DC jail, where she has alleged that January 6 rioters are being mistreated.

But even as Greene's relationship with the institutional Republican Party has changed, her views and positions have largely stayed the same.

As recently as two months ago, the Georgia congresswoman floated the idea of a "national divorce," and she has become an outspoken defender of the Massachusetts Air National Guardsman who's now accused of leaking classified Pentagon documents online.

And during a recent interview on 60 Minutes, she defended her incendiary contention that Democrats are a "party of pedophiles."

Read the original article on Business Insider

Go here to see the original:
Marjorie Taylor Greene is becoming an increasingly important part of the Republican Party's fundraising machine - Yahoo News