thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--Border Agents Turned Away 6-Year-Old With Down Syndrome And Heart Condition: Lawyers

U.S. border agents turned away a 6-year-old child with Down syndrome and a heart condition seeking to enter the U.S. for medical treatment and court proceedings , according to an immigration lawyer and doctor who accompanied her from Matamoros , Mexico , on Thursday morning .
The child , who was first sent back to Mexico more than three months ago to await U.S. court proceedings under a controversial Trump administration program , now risks catching an infection that the doctor fears could turn lethal .
The girl , who is not being named , traveled from Central America with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. border , where they sought asylum .
But like more than 54,000 other asylum-seekers , they were told to wait in Mexico for their court date under a controversial program known as Migrant Protection Protocols , or MPP .
She risks ending up in a camp near the border in Matamoros , Mexico , with more than 2,500 other immigrants , where diseases spread quickly .
Human rights activists , lawyers and medical professionals have warned that sending vulnerable individuals to parts of Mexico where violence and kidnappings are rife puts them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with disabilities or serious medical conditions are supposed to be exempt from MPP , lawyers told HuffPost that is rarely the case .
The girl is pale and has poor blood circulation , according to Kim Hunter , an immigration lawyer volunteering with Lawyers for Good Government .
She gets tired when she plays and can only speak in two- or three-word sentences , according to Marie DeLuca , a doctor who is volunteering at a clinic in Matamoros .
On Thursday , Hunter and DeLuca brought a medical letter to border agents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be evaluated by a specialist in the U.S. and potentially needs surgery to treat her heart condition ― a level of care she does not have access to in Mexico .
A Customs and Border Patrol spokesperson said the agency can not discuss individual cases for privacy reasons , but that “ all claims are handled on a case-by-case basis.
” The spokesperson said migrants who are “ not otherwise amenable to MPP are turned over ” to either Immigration and Customs Enforcement , which handles adults and families , or the Office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minors .
“ Those who are amenable to MPP are returned to Mexico pending their next hearing , ” the CBP spokesperson said .
“ That sounds like we ’ re just waiting for the kids to start dying before we take action , ” she said .
“ If [ CBP ] continues to refuse to allow these sick children to get the care they need , we could potentially see more deaths.
” Five immigrant minors have died in federal custody since December 2018 , prompting a public outcry over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experts told HuffPost that these deaths could have been prevented with the proper care , especially in cases where children suffered from the flu or respiratory issues .
While CBP has told lawyers that every child is screened for medical clearance before being sent to wait in Mexico , DeLuca said the evaluations are not thorough enough and not necessarily done by pediatricians , even though symptoms look much different in adults than in children .
She said she ’ s asked multiple times to speak with the doctors who do these evaluations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Border agents are sending immigrants who should be exempt from MPP to Mexico , said Charlene D ’ Cruz , another attorney with Lawyers for Good Government trying to help the girl .
CBP agents won ’ t let MPP immigrants across the border unless they are “ almost dying , ” she said .
In the past three months , D ’ Cruz says , she ’ s had to wait more than 10 hours , make multiple visits and use pressure from politicians and multiple lawyers to get people with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across the border .
The only person a border agent accepted without question was a 20-year-old woman who ’ d had three epileptic seizures that day , according to D ’ Cruz .
The 6-year-old girl and her family have stayed in at least three apartments since being sent to Mexico but were kicked out of one because of the child ’ s violent outbursts , according to Hunter .
The lawyer worries the family could end up in a large , unsanitary tent camp where it ’ s easy to catch infections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
UPDATE: Jan. 17 ― A 6-year-old girl with Down syndrome who was turned away at the U.S. border was allowed into the country on Friday with her family. Five representatives from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus accompanied her, along with two lawyers and a doctor.
PREVIOUSLY:
U.S. border agents turned away a 6-year-old child with Down syndrome and a heart condition seeking to enter the U.S. for medical treatment and court proceedings, according to an immigration lawyer and doctor who accompanied her from Matamoros, Mexico, on Thursday morning.
Advertisement
The child, who was first sent back to Mexico more than three months ago to await U.S. court proceedings under a controversial Trump administration program, now risks catching an infection that the doctor fears could turn lethal.
The girl, who is not being named, traveled from Central America with her mother and 8-year-old brother to the U.S. border, where they sought asylum. But like more than 54,000 other asylum-seekers, they were told to wait in Mexico for their court date under a controversial program known as Migrant Protection Protocols, or MPP. She risks ending up in a camp near the border in Matamoros, Mexico, with more than 2,500 other immigrants, where diseases spread quickly.
Human rights activists, lawyers and medical professionals have warned that sending vulnerable individuals to parts of Mexico where violence and kidnappings are rife puts them at serious risk. And though people with disabilities or serious medical conditions are supposed to be exempt from MPP, lawyers told HuffPost that is rarely the case.
The girl is pale and has poor blood circulation, according to Kim Hunter, an immigration lawyer volunteering with Lawyers for Good Government. She gets tired when she plays and can only speak in two- or three-word sentences, according to Marie DeLuca, a doctor who is volunteering at a clinic in Matamoros.
Advertisement
A specialist in Philadelphia has agreed to evaluate and treat the girl, lawyers said, but border agents would have to allow her into the U.S. first.
On Thursday, Hunter and DeLuca brought a medical letter to border agents, explaining that the girl should immediately be evaluated by a specialist in the U.S. and potentially needs surgery to treat her heart condition ― a level of care she does not have access to in Mexico.
But they say the border agent denied the girl’s request to enter the U.S. on the grounds that she was not facing a medical emergency.
“That sounds like we’re just waiting for the kids to start dying before we take action.” - Marie DeLuca, doctor volunteering at a clinic in Matamoros, Mexico
A Customs and Border Patrol spokesperson said the agency cannot discuss individual cases for privacy reasons, but that “all claims are handled on a case-by-case basis.” The spokesperson said migrants who are “not otherwise amenable to MPP are turned over” to either Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which handles adults and families, or the Office of Refugee Resettlement, which handles unaccompanied minors. “Those who are amenable to MPP are returned to Mexico pending their next hearing,” the CBP spokesperson said.
Advertisement
It’s unacceptable for the U.S. government to have a policy of waiting until a child is in a medical emergency to allow them proper access to medical care, said DeLuca.
“That sounds like we’re just waiting for the kids to start dying before we take action,” she said. “If [CBP] continues to refuse to allow these sick children to get the care they need, we could potentially see more deaths.”
Five immigrant minors have died in federal custody since December 2018, prompting a public outcry over the way the U.S. treats migrants. Medical experts told HuffPost that these deaths could have been prevented with the proper care, especially in cases where children suffered from the flu or respiratory issues.
A cross memorializing a child who died while in custody of U.S. Customs and Border Protection sits across from the Marriott Marquis hotel as protestors demonstrate on July 23, 2019, in Chicago. Scott Olson via Getty Images
While CBP has told lawyers that every child is screened for medical clearance before being sent to wait in Mexico, DeLuca said the evaluations are not thorough enough and not necessarily done by pediatricians, even though symptoms look much different in adults than in children. She said she’s asked multiple times to speak with the doctors who do these evaluations but that CBP has denied her request.
Advertisement
Border agents are sending immigrants who should be exempt from MPP to Mexico, said Charlene D’Cruz, another attorney with Lawyers for Good Government trying to help the girl. CBP agents won’t let MPP immigrants across the border unless they are “almost dying,” she said.
In the past three months, D’Cruz says, she’s had to wait more than 10 hours, make multiple visits and use pressure from politicians and multiple lawyers to get people with sepsis, a ruptured appendix and pneumonia across the border. The only person a border agent accepted without question was a 20-year-old woman who’d had three epileptic seizures that day, according to D’Cruz.
The 6-year-old girl and her family have stayed in at least three apartments since being sent to Mexico but were kicked out of one because of the child’s violent outbursts, according to Hunter. The lawyer worries the family could end up in a large, unsanitary tent camp where it’s easy to catch infections and where violence and kidnappings are rampant.
“Any of the kids who are being held in this area are at risk,” said DeLuca. “A kid with a heart condition and Down syndrome is even more vulnerable.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-17--Interior Dept. Lawyer Told Congress He Had No Contact With Koch Network. Not True.

YouTube/Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Daniel Jorjani appears before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee for his confirmation hearing on May 2 , 2019 .
The question that Sen. Angus King ( I-Maine ) asked Daniel Jorjani , then the nominee to serve as the Interior Department ’ s top lawyer , in his confirmation hearing last year was direct : “ Since you ’ ve been in the Department of the Interior , have you had any oral or written contact with any of the personnel associated with Freedom Partners or the Koch brothers ’ various business @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the department in January 2017 , Jorjani worked as a high-paid operative at several organizations connected to fossil fuel moguls Charles and David Koch .
He held a senior policy position at the Charles Koch Foundation and Charles Koch Institute from 2010 to 2012 and served as general counsel at the Koch-backed Freedom Partners from 2012 to 2017 .
“ To the best of my recollection , ” Jorjani replied at the May 2019 hearing , “ I ’ ve never had a meeting nor any official communications with them.
” He subsequently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it in writing .
It turns out the Interior official did in fact have contact with the Koch network , as Yahoo News ’ Alexander Nazaryan reported on Wednesday .
In April 2017 , a few months after joining the Trump administration , Jorjani emailed Brian Hooks , president of the Charles Koch Foundation , to ask if he knew anyone who might want to serve on the board of the National Park Service ’ s official charity .
“ Would any of the stakeholders ’ families or key network participants be interested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Park Foundation ?
” Jorjani wrote , according to documents that the Western Values Project , a public lands advocacy group , obtained through a public records request and provided to Yahoo News .
“ It is one of our top-tier boards.
” The inquiry ultimately didn ’ t amount to much .
An official in the Koch network told Yahoo there was no communication beyond Hooks ’ initial response , in which he told Jorjani he would “ have a look and let you know if there ’ s an opportunity to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have misrepresented the facts to Congress , ” Virginia Canter , chief ethics counsel at the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington , told HuffPost in an email .
That raises the question of whether he knowingly gave a false statement under oath ― in other words , committed perjury .
Jorjani did qualify his statement with the phrase “ to the best of my recollection.
” As for potential violations of ethics rules , Canter said there do not appear to be any .
The Trump administration ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in certain matters involving former employers or clients for two years , but defines “ former employer ” as someone for whom the official worked within two years of their appointment .
Jorjani left the Charles Koch Foundation and Charles Koch Institute in January 2012 .
Along with serving as president of the Koch outfits , Hooks was on the board of the now-defunct Freedom Partners .
However , he became a member in late 2017 , months after his communication with Jorjani about the National Park Foundation .
This isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of perjury .
In July last year , Sen. Ron Wyden ( D-Ore. ) placed a hold on his confirmation to the top solicitor post over concerns that Jorjani lied to lawmakers about his role in reviewing public information requests submitted to the department .
Wyden also requested that the Justice Department investigate whether Jorjani perjured himself during his May confirmation hearing .
Jorjani not only knew about the department ’ s “ awareness review ” policy ― under which political appointees were told if their names showed up in documents about to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before their release , according to documents made public by the environmental group Earthjustice last month .
CQ Roll Call reported in June that Interior political appointees “ regularly delayed ” and in some cases withheld records .
But ethics probes have plagued the department under President Donald Trump .
Zinke resigned in January 2019 under a cloud of scandal and federal investigations .
David Bernhardt became the subject of a probe four days after being confirmed as the new secretary , shortly after The New York Times reported that he intervened to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certain pesticides pose to endangered species .
In December , the agency ’ s inspector general concluded there was “ no evidence that Bernhardt exceeded or abused his authority or that his actions influenced or altered the findings of career [ Fish and Wildlife Service ] scientists .
”

Daniel Jorjani appears before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee for his confirmation hearing on May 2, 2019. YouTube/Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
The question that Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) asked Daniel Jorjani, then the nominee to serve as the Interior Department’s top lawyer, in his confirmation hearing last year was direct: “Since you’ve been in the Department of the Interior, have you had any oral or written contact with any of the personnel associated with Freedom Partners or the Koch brothers’ various business or political interests?”
Before joining the department in January 2017, Jorjani worked as a high-paid operative at several organizations connected to fossil fuel moguls Charles and David Koch. He held a senior policy position at the Charles Koch Foundation and Charles Koch Institute from 2010 to 2012 and served as general counsel at the Koch-backed Freedom Partners from 2012 to 2017.
Advertisement
“To the best of my recollection,” Jorjani replied at the May 2019 hearing, “I’ve never had a meeting nor any official communications with them.” He subsequently dodged the same question when King asked it in writing.
It turns out the Interior official did in fact have contact with the Koch network.
In April 2017, a few months after joining the Trump administration, Jorjani emailed Brian Hooks, president of the Charles Koch Foundation, to ask if he knew anyone who might want to serve on the board of the National Park Service’s official charity, as Yahoo News’ Alexander Nazaryan reported Jan. 15.
“Would any of the stakeholders’ families or key network participants be interested in joining the board of the National Park Foundation?” Jorjani wrote, according to documents that the Western Values Project, a public lands advocacy group, obtained through a public records request and provided to Yahoo News. “It is one of our top-tier boards.”
The inquiry ultimately didn’t amount to much. An official in the Koch network told Yahoo there was no communication beyond Hooks’ initial response, in which he told Jorjani he would “have a look and let you know if there’s an opportunity to learn more.”
Advertisement
In addition to not noting the communication with Hooks, Jorjani didn’t mention that he’d had breakfast as many as four times with his former longtime colleague and Koch operative Richard Ribbentrop ― get-togethers that appear on Jorjani’s official agency calendars. Ribbentrop was with now-defunct Freedom Partners until at least mid-2016, serving as executive director and senior vice president.
Jorjani’s first meeting with Ribbentrop was on May 3, 2017, a few months after he joined the Interior Department, as freelance journalist Jimmy Tobias noted in a tweet last year. A new batch of calendars that the Western Values Project obtained this month through a public records request and shared with HuffPost show that Jorjani and Ribbentrop had as many as three other scheduled breakfasts between September 2018 and March 2019 ― all of them at the same diner in Arlington, Virginia.
Jorjani’s failure to disclose his contacts with Hooks and Ribbentrop could land him, yet again, in hot water ― not because the man who is now Interior’s solicitor violated federal ethics rules, but because he possibly perjured himself.
“He appears to have misrepresented the facts to Congress,” Virginia Canter, chief ethics counsel at the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told HuffPost in an email. That raises the question of whether he knowingly gave a false statement under oath ― in other words, committed perjury. Jorjani did qualify his statement with the phrase “to the best of my recollection.”
Interior Department spokeswoman Carol Danko told HuffPost via email that Jorjani “did not recall sending an email [to Hooks] almost 2 years prior, in part at the request of the National [Park] Foundation, that led to no action of any kind.”
Advertisement
“Any suggestion that his answer is somehow controversial is absurd,” she said.
Interior notified Sen. King’s office once Jorjani became aware of the email “thanks to a FOIA request,” Danko said.
Danko did not initially respond to HuffPost’s question about whether Jorjani had any other contact with the Koch network. Presented with Jorjani’s calendars showing his meetings with Ribbentrop, she said the question posed by King “seemed reasonably focused” on whether he’d had contact with current employees of Freedom Partners.
“Since the meeting with Mr. Ribbentrop was clearly posted on Mr. Jorjani’s calendar, it was obvious these meetings were publicly disclosed,” Danko said.
But only one of the scheduled meetings with Ribbentrop appears on Jorjani’s publicly available calendars. The others only surfaced through the Western Values Project’s public records request and have not been posted to the agency’s website.
Danko did not respond to a question about whether the meetings with Ribbentrop were official Interior business but said that “it seems silly to spend so much time on this topic.”
Advertisement
King’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
As for potential violations of ethics rules, Canter said there do not appear to be any. The Trump administration’s ethics pledge bars political appointees from participating in certain matters involving former employers or clients for two years, but defines “former employer” as someone for whom the official worked within two years of their appointment. Jorjani left the Charles Koch Foundation and Charles Koch Institute, where he’d worked with Hooks, in January 2012. (Hooks was also on the board of Freedom Partners, but he became a member in late 2017, months after his communication with Jorjani about the National Park Foundation.)
As for the Ribbentrop meetings, ethics experts suggest ethics rules likely didn’t prohibit those because it appears Ribbentrop was no longer employed at Freedom Partners by the time Jorjani met with him.
Brian Hooks (left), now CEO and chairman of the Koch network Stand Together, and Charles Koch attend an organizational gathering in Colorado Springs, Colorado, on June 29, 2019. Daniel Boczarski via Getty Images
This isn’t the first time Jorjani has faced accusations of perjury. In July last year, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) placed a hold on his confirmation to the top solicitor post over concerns that Jorjani lied to lawmakers about his role in reviewing public information requests submitted to the department. Wyden also requested that the Justice Department investigate whether Jorjani perjured himself during his May confirmation hearing.
At that hearing, Jorjani, by then Interior’s principal deputy solicitor, told lawmakers that “I myself don’t review FOIAs or make determinations.” It was a baffling statement from the person who oversaw the department’s Freedom of Information Act program as the designated “chief FOIA officer,” per a 2018 order from then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke.
Advertisement
Jorjani not only knew about the department’s “awareness review” policy ― under which political appointees were told if their names showed up in documents about to be released ― but often examined records before their release, according to documents made public by the environmental group Earthjustice. CQ Roll Call reported in June that Interior political appointees “regularly delayed” and in some cases withheld records.
Interior’s FOIA policy is the subject of an ongoing inspector general investigation.
Top Interior officials have repeatedly stressed that improving the agency’s ethics program is a top priority. “The role of ethics is incredibly important to the U.S. Department of the Interior,” Jorjani told lawmakers last May.
But ethics probes have plagued the department under President Donald Trump. Zinke resigned in January 2019 under a cloud of scandal and federal investigations. David Bernhardt became the subject of a probe four days after being confirmed as the new secretary, shortly after The New York Times reported that he intervened to block a scientific report on the threat certain pesticides pose to endangered species. In December, the agency’s inspector general concluded there was “no evidence that Bernhardt exceeded or abused his authority or that his actions influenced or altered the findings of career [Fish and Wildlife Service] scientists.”
Another ongoing inspector general investigation targets six current and former officials who maintained close ties to former employers while at Interior. That probe stems from a complaint by the D.C.-based nonprofit Campaign Legal Center that cites HuffPost’s reporting and alleges a “disturbing pattern of misconduct” across the department.
In a March 2017 email to colleagues, Jorjani boasted that he had “successfully protected” Interior political appointees facing investigations and that “at the end of the day, our job is to protect the Secretary” from ethics probes and bad press ― comments that Wyden called “particularly troubling” in May.
Advertisement
The revelation of Jorjani’s exchange with Hooks reaffirms that the Trump administration “was dead set on politicizing a board that should have been solely focused on supporting America’s national parks,” Jayson O’Neill, deputy director of the Western Values Project, said in a statement earlier this month, before the Ribbentrop news.
“The Trump administration and Interior Secretary David Bernhardt’s cast of corrupt characters are up to more of the same crooked diablerie threatening the future of America’s public lands and national parks,” O’Neill said.
The Interior Department called the Western Values Project statement “another example of the group’s incessant, unjustified attacks on Interior Department officials.”
The story has been updated with information about Jorjani’s multiple scheduled meetings with Ribbentrop.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-17--Trump's Golf Trips To Mar-a-Lago Cost County $13.8 Million For Local Security

President Donald Trump ’ s 27 trips to play golf at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida have cost Palm Beach County $ 13.8 million for local security as of spring 2019 , according to county documents .
U.S. taxpayers have already reimbursed the country $ 10 million for expenditures through September 2018 , according to The Palm Beach Post .
The country is still awaiting an additional $ 3.8 million for expenses racked up through October 2019 .
The local figure is on top of $ 118 million in travel and federal security costs Trump has saddled U.S. taxpayers with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during his presidency at his various golf resorts , according to a HuffPost analysis as of his winter vacation in December .
That ’ s the equivalent of a 296 years of a presidential salary .
A chunk of those costs flows into Trump ’ s own pockets , as Secret Service agents and presidential support staff pay to stay and eat at his resorts while accompanying the president .
The White House refuses to disclose records that would reveal how much the president is profiting from his own trips .
Local governments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump travels to his golf resorts .
He often spends warm-weather weekends and his summer vacation at his club in Bedminster , New Jersey .
Most of the Palm Beach County money has paid for overtime for sheriff ’ s deputies .
Local law enforcement officers escort Trump ’ s motorcade , man checkpoints , direct traffic , guard Mar-a-Lago and handle bomb-sniffing dogs .
From the time of Trump ’ s election in November 2016 to his inauguration in January 2017 , local agencies spent nearly $ 1 million on his Mar-a-Lago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is attempting to hide total Secret Service costs for Trump ’ s frequent getaways until after the presidential election , The Washington Post reported .
Trump often complained before and during his 2016 campaign about the time former President Barack Obama spent golfing .
But Trump has spent three times the total number of days as Obama did at golf resorts at comparable times in their administrations .
In addition , Obama ’ s far fewer trips were cheaper for the public because he often played at military bases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House .
Unlike previous presidents , Trump has refused to divest from his businesses .
He continues to promote and profit from his golf resorts on the taxpayer ’ s dime .
Critics complain he is violating the Constitution ’ s domestic emoluments clause , which prohibits presidents from accepting benefits beyond salary from the federal or any state government .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump’s 27 trips to play golf at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida have cost Palm Beach County $13.8 million for local security as of spring 2019, according to county documents.
U.S. taxpayers have already reimbursed the country $10 million for expenditures through September 2018, according to The Palm Beach Post. The country is still awaiting an additional $3.8 million for expenses racked up through October 2019.
Advertisement
The local figure is on top of $118 million in travel and federal security costs Trump has saddled U.S. taxpayers with for the 227-plus days he has spent during his presidency at his various golf resorts, according to a HuffPost analysis as of his winter vacation in December. That’s the equivalent of a 296 years of a presidential salary.
A chunk of those costs flows into Trump’s own pockets, as Secret Service agents and presidential support staff pay to stay and eat at his resorts while accompanying the president. The White House refuses to disclose records that would reveal how much the president is profiting from his own trips.
Local governments rack up their own separate costs when Trump travels to his golf resorts. He often spends warm-weather weekends and his summer vacation at his club in Bedminster, New Jersey.
Most of the Palm Beach County money has paid for overtime for sheriff’s deputies. Local law enforcement officers escort Trump’s motorcade, man checkpoints, direct traffic, guard Mar-a-Lago and handle bomb-sniffing dogs.
Advertisement
From the time of Trump’s election in November 2016 to his inauguration in January 2017, local agencies spent nearly $1 million on his Mar-a-Lago visits, according to the newspaper.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is attempting to hide total Secret Service costs for Trump’s frequent getaways until after the presidential election, The Washington Post reported.
Trump often complained before and during his 2016 campaign about the time former President Barack Obama spent golfing. But Trump has spent three times the total number of days as Obama did at golf resorts at comparable times in their administrations. In addition, Obama’s far fewer trips were cheaper for the public because he often played at military bases within a short drive from the White House.
Unlike previous presidents, Trump has refused to divest from his businesses. He continues to promote and profit from his golf resorts on the taxpayer’s dime. Critics complain he is violating the Constitution’s domestic emoluments clause, which prohibits presidents from accepting benefits beyond salary from the federal or any state government.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--GOP Senator Dodges Impeachment Questions, Calls Reporter A 'Liberal Hack'

Sen. Martha McSally ( R-Ariz. ) apparently didn ’ t feel like answering questions about President Donald Trump ’ s impeachment trial on Thursday .
But she did feel like flinging insults at CNN reporter Manu Raju .
Raju tweeted footage of himself asking the Republican lawmaker if she thought the Senate should consider new evidence in Trump ’ s upcoming impeachment trial .
Raju continued : “ You ’ re not to going to comment about this ?
” Q : Senator McSally , should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial ?
McSally : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m not talking to you Manu- You ’ re not going to comment about this ?
McSally : You 're a liberal hack .
pic.twitter.com/IW5pCfZ6Oa — Manu Raju ( @ mkraju ) January 16 , 2020 As a result of the encounter , Raju started trending on Twitter .
Fellow media professionals pointed out that he was doing his job .
I 've never see a senator treat a reporter like this .
Manu Raju is one of the best Congressional reporters I 've ever seen , including my years working in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hint of liberalism or partisanship from @ mkraju https : //t.co/SARp2pPPMt — Lawrence O'Donnell ( @ Lawrence ) January 16 , 2020 Remember when Martha McSally was hailed as a bipartisan hero when she curled up with her adorable golden retriever to concede in 2018 ?
Now she is a snarling Trumpist .
@ manuraju is incredibly fair .
She had no business insulting him that way .
https : //t.co/VA6undzbEK — Joan Walsh ( @ joanwalsh ) January 16 , 2020 McSally responded to Raju ’ s tweet by tweeting out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ angle , but it still shows Raju politely but firmly asking a question that all senators , regardless of party , were being asked .
Raju ’ s fellow CNN journalists chimed in to defend him .
The question was perfectly reasonable and topical , politely asked , and Manu is respected on the Hill by Democrats and Republicans .
https : //t.co/efAawOfneO — Jake Tapper ( @ jaketapper ) January 16 , 2020 Instead of answering a serious question about impeachment , Republican Senator Martha McSally calls Manu Raju “ a liberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your side , pound the law .
If the facts are on your side , pound the facts .
If neither is on your side , pound the reporter ?
https : //t.co/18R9vmoiAJ — Keith Boykin ( @ keithboykin ) January 16 , 2020 McSally ’ s reaction to a simple and fair question may have unintended consequences for her reelection campaign .
A few hours after the tweet , the name of her Democratic opponent , former NASA astronaut Mark Kelly , became a trending term on Twitter , with many users @ @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) apparently didn’t feel like answering questions about President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial on Thursday.
But she did feel like flinging insults at CNN reporter Manu Raju.
Raju tweeted footage of himself asking the Republican lawmaker if she thought the Senate should consider new evidence in Trump’s upcoming impeachment trial.
Advertisement
McSally retorted: “You’re a liberal hack. I’m not talking to you.”
Raju continued: “You’re not to going to comment about this?”
“You’re a liberal hack,” McSally sneered.
Q: Senator McSally, should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial?
McSally: You’re a liberal hack I’m not talking to you
Manu- You’re not going to comment about this?
McSally: You're a liberal hack. pic.twitter.com/IW5pCfZ6Oa — Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 16, 2020
As a result of the encounter, Raju started trending on Twitter. Fellow media professionals pointed out that he was doing his job.
I've never see a senator treat a reporter like this. Manu Raju is one of the best Congressional reporters I've ever seen, including my years working in the Senate. I've never detected a hint of liberalism or partisanship from @mkraju https://t.co/SARp2pPPMt — Lawrence O'Donnell (@Lawrence) January 16, 2020
Remember when Martha McSally was hailed as a bipartisan hero when she curled up with her adorable golden retriever to concede in 2018? Now she is a snarling Trumpist. @manuraju is incredibly fair. She had no business insulting him that way. https://t.co/VA6undzbEK — Joan Walsh (@joanwalsh) January 16, 2020
Advertisement
McSally responded to Raju’s tweet by tweeting out a video of the encounter from her angle, but it still shows Raju politely but firmly asking a question that all senators, regardless of party, were being asked.
Raju’s fellow CNN journalists chimed in to defend him.
The question was perfectly reasonable and topical, politely asked, and Manu is respected on the Hill by Democrats and Republicans. https://t.co/efAawOfneO — Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) January 16, 2020
Instead of answering a serious question about impeachment, Republican Senator Martha McSally calls Manu Raju “a liberal hack.”
If the law is on your side, pound the law.
If the facts are on your side, pound the facts.
If neither is on your side, pound the reporter? https://t.co/18R9vmoiAJ — Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) January 16, 2020
McSally’s reaction to a simple and fair question may have unintended consequences for her reelection campaign.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--Republicans Shrug Off Damning Developments In Ukraine Scandal

It ’ s the same thing Republicans have been saying for months , even though the White House only released the Ukraine aid after learning that someone from within the administration had filed a formal whistleblower complaint about the illegal holdup .
The GAO is a nonpartisan investigative agency that works for Congress .
It examined whether it was legal for Trump to withhold the aid , which the president and his defenders said ( after the fact ) had been done to make sure Ukrainians cleaned up corruption in their government .
“ Faithful execution of the law does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law , ” the GAO said .
( The watchdog ’ s decisions are authoritative but they can ’ t force executive branch agencies to take action . )
Rep. Doug Collins ( Ga. ) , the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee , said Thursday morning that although he hadn ’ t read the GAO report , he was skeptical of the conclusion .
“ How can money that does not need to be appropriated until Sept. 30 — and it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are they saying that ’ s illegal ?
” Collins said .
“ This happened about seven other times , ” Sen. John Cornyn ( R-Texas ) said Thursday , referring to other instances of the Office of Management and Budget withholding appropriated funds .
“ It ’ s a civil matter , not a criminal matter .
Obviously it ’ s not directed at the president ― it ’ s the Office of Management and Budget , with whom I ’ ve had a few disagreements.
” Lev Parnas is an associate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rudy Giuliani , who served as a go-between for Giuliani and various officials in the Ukrainian government .
In the interview with MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow that aired Wednesday evening , Parnas said Trump was fully aware of the efforts to pressure Ukraine into announcing an investigation into Biden .
“ President Trump knew exactly what was going on , ” Parnas said .
“ He was aware of all of my movements .
I wouldn ’ t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president .
I have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speak to any of these officials .
They have no reason to speak to me.
” In the course of its impeachment inquiry , the House interviewed several diplomats who testified that the president had perverted U.S. foreign policy for his own personal benefit .
Republicans seized on the fact that few of those State Department officials had spoken to the president directly .
Parnas ’ statements have corroborated the diplomats ’ accounts .
“ What I don ’ t think we should be doing is going different avenues to do this .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ I don ’ t think it ’ s the Senate ’ s job to open up different avenues of inquiry , ” Johnson added .
Other GOP senators refused to answer questions about the trial at all .
The Senate has even instituted new rules restricting reporter access to senators .
When a CNN reporter asked Sen. Martha McSally ( R-Ariz. ) whether the Senate should hear new evidence , she called him “ a liberal hack ” and kept walking .
“ Everything he has said is consistent with what we have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems like an open-and-shut case to me that the president directed this scheme and Parnas ’ testimony fits neatly with what we ’ ve already heard , ” Sen. Chris Murphy ( D-Conn. ) said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― Republican lawmakers shrugged off a pair of bombshell stories that broke in the past 24 hours and bolstered Democrats’ argument that President Donald Trump abused his power and should be removed from office.
On Wednesday evening, an associate of Trump’s private lawyer said on national television that Trump knew all about their schemes to push the president of Ukraine into announcing a sham investigation of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
Advertisement
And on Thursday morning, the Government Accountability Office announced that the White House broke the law when it withheld security assistance for Ukraine in that effort to pressure Ukraine into doing Trump’s bidding.
Rep. Steve Scalise (La.), the number two Republican in the House, dismissed the news.
“Ultimately, Ukraine got the money,” he told HuffPost, adding that the U.S. assistance package included lethal weapons to fight off a Russian siege.
“This administration’s done more to help Ukraine stand up to Russia than President Obama did in his whole eight years,” Scalise claimed.
It’s the same thing Republicans have been saying for months, even though the White House only released the Ukraine aid after learning that someone from within the administration had filed a formal whistleblower complaint about the illegal holdup.
Advertisement
The GAO is a nonpartisan investigative agency that works for Congress. It examined whether it was legal for Trump to withhold the aid, which the president and his defenders said (after the fact) had been done to make sure Ukrainians cleaned up corruption in their government.
“Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law,” the GAO said. (The watchdog’s decisions are authoritative but they can’t force executive branch agencies to take action.)
Rep. Doug Collins (Ga.), the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said Thursday morning that although he hadn’t read the GAO report, he was skeptical of the conclusion. “How can money that does not need to be appropriated until Sept. 30 — and it was appropriated before Sept. 30 — how are they saying that’s illegal?” Collins said.
Senate Republicans were similarly dismissive of the developments.
“This happened about seven other times,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Thursday, referring to other instances of the Office of Management and Budget withholding appropriated funds. “It’s a civil matter, not a criminal matter. Obviously it’s not directed at the president ― it’s the Office of Management and Budget, with whom I’ve had a few disagreements.”
Lev Parnas is an associate of Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, who served as a go-between for Giuliani and various officials in the Ukrainian government. In the interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that aired Wednesday evening, Parnas said Trump was fully aware of the efforts to pressure Ukraine into announcing an investigation into Biden.
Advertisement
“President Trump knew exactly what was going on,” Parnas said. “He was aware of all of my movements. I wouldn’t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president. I have no intent, I have reason to speak to any of these officials. They have no reason to speak to me.”
Trump has said he didn’t know Parnas.
“He lied,” said Parnas, who has also handed over to the House documents reflecting the Ukraine work he said he did for the president. “He knew exactly who I was.”
As for the idea that Trump cared about corruption in Ukraine: “It was all about Joe Biden, Hunter Biden,” Parnas said. “It was never about corruption.”
In the course of its impeachment inquiry, the House interviewed several diplomats who testified that the president had perverted U.S. foreign policy for his own personal benefit. Republicans seized on the fact that few of those State Department officials had spoken to the president directly. Parnas’ statements have corroborated the diplomats’ accounts.
But several Republicans brushed aside Parnas’ words on Thursday. Cornyn said Parnas “seems like a seedy, shady character to me.”
Advertisement
“Is that the indicted guy?” said Sen. Roy Blunt (Mo.), the number four Senate Republican, referring to the fact that Parnas has been indicted for violating campaign finance law in a scheme to funnel foreign money into U.S. elections.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) also expressed skepticism about Parnas’ allegations, telling reporters that he takes “anything I hear from anybody who’s involved with this with a huge grain of salt.”
“What I don’t think we should be doing is going different avenues to do this. We have two articles of impeachment. I don’t think it’s the Senate’s job to open up different avenues of inquiry,” Johnson added.
Other GOP senators refused to answer questions about the trial at all. The Senate has even instituted new rules restricting reporter access to senators. When a CNN reporter asked Sen. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) whether the Senate should hear new evidence, she called him “a liberal hack” and kept walking.
Democrats, for their part, argued that Parnas’ allegations ought to be investigated regardless of his background and considered as part of the Senate trial.
Advertisement
“Everything he has said is consistent with what we have heard in the past. It just seems like an open-and-shut case to me that the president directed this scheme and Parnas’ testimony fits neatly with what we’ve already heard,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said.
The Senate trial is due to begin Tuesday, and Democrats say the Senate ought to call witnesses like Parnas who could shed additional light on the Ukraine scheme. Republicans have resisted on the grounds that the new material wasn’t included in the impeachment articles that the House approved back in December.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, which drafted the impeachment articles, said it would be ridiculous to ignore things like the GAO report or the documents that Parnas has now provided.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--Already Shut Out Of GOP Primaries, Joe Walsh Gets Shut Out At The RNC, Too

WASHINGTON ― Joe Walsh has already been shut out of a dozen upcoming Republican primaries in his 2020 challenge to President Donald Trump , and on Thursday he found a closed door at the national party ’ s headquarters as well .
“ Right now , this party , my party , is disenfranchising millions of Republican voters all over the country , ” he said , standing in front of the Republican National Committee headquarters in Washington and across the street from the Cannon House Office Building , where he once had an office .
Walsh is a former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ host .
He and former Massachusetts Gov .
Bill Weld are both mounting long-shot bids to take the GOP nomination away from Trump , who was impeached last month for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress and now faces a Senate trial .
“ The Trump team is bragging , publicly bragging , about canceling the primaries , ” Walsh said .
“ If you ’ re as strong , as popular as Donald Trump says he is , then why cancel the primaries ?
” The RNC did not respond to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Technically , each individual state party sets its own rules on how to award its delegates ’ votes at the GOP nominating convention .
But those rules must be approved by the RNC , effectively giving the national party veto power .
So far , the state parties in Alaska , Arizona , Hawaii , Kansas , Nevada , South Carolina and Virginia have canceled delegate-awarding primaries and caucuses .
A handful of others have effectively canceled them by imposing high signature requirements or just plain deciding that no one other than Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example , are producing a ballot reminiscent of the old Soviet Union , with only one candidate ― Trump ― listed .
Georgia Republicans demanded that Walsh promise to support the eventual nominee , which he was unwilling to do , and wanted to see a list of his Georgia supporters , Walsh ’ s campaign said .
They , too , produced a ballot with just Trump ’ s name on it .
Walsh said he is on the ballot in about 35 states , including the Iowa caucuses and the New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategy is to try to win higher-than-expected shares of the votes there in hopes of boosting interest in his campaign in subsequent states .
On Thursday , the security guards at the RNC building let Walsh into the lobby , which is normally kept locked , but that was as far as he got .
His campaign asked to speak with Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel or other top officials , but no one responded to Walsh ’ s requests .
He said it was ironic that after having spent hundreds of hours in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phone calls ― members are not allowed to make those calls from their congressional offices – he can not get past the reception desk now to see McDaniel .
“ She won ’ t give a lifelong Republican , former Republican congressman , Republican candidate for president five minutes of her time to talk about the disenfranchisement of millions of Republican voters , ” Walsh said .
“ It ’ s not a party ― it is a cult , run by these party bosses who are scared to death of Trump , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do .
”

GOP presidential candidate Joe Walsh brings his complaint about canceled primaries and caucuses to Republican National Committee headquarters on Jan. 16. S.V. Date/HuffPost
WASHINGTON ― Joe Walsh has already been shut out of a dozen upcoming Republican primaries in his 2020 challenge to President Donald Trump, and on Thursday he found a closed door at the national party’s headquarters as well.
“Right now, this party, my party, is disenfranchising millions of Republican voters all over the country,” he said, standing in front of the Republican National Committee headquarters in Washington and across the street from the Cannon House Office Building, where he once had an office.
Advertisement
Walsh is a former Illinois congressman and conservative radio talk show host. He and former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld are both mounting long-shot bids to take the GOP nomination away from Trump, who was impeached last month for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress and now faces a Senate trial.
Both Walsh and Weld have criticized state Republican parties that have canceled their presidential nominating contests to protect Trump from challengers.
“The Trump team is bragging, publicly bragging, about canceling the primaries,” Walsh said. “If you’re as strong, as popular as Donald Trump says he is, then why cancel the primaries?”
The RNC did not respond to queries regarding Walsh’s complaints. Technically, each individual state party sets its own rules on how to award its delegates’ votes at the GOP nominating convention. But those rules must be approved by the RNC, effectively giving the national party veto power.
Advertisement
So far, the state parties in Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Kansas, Nevada, South Carolina and Virginia have canceled delegate-awarding primaries and caucuses. A handful of others have effectively canceled them by imposing high signature requirements or just plain deciding that no one other than Trump can participate.
Minnesota Republicans, for example, are producing a ballot reminiscent of the old Soviet Union, with only one candidate ― Trump ― listed. Georgia Republicans demanded that Walsh promise to support the eventual nominee, which he was unwilling to do, and wanted to see a list of his Georgia supporters, Walsh’s campaign said. They, too, produced a ballot with just Trump’s name on it.
Walsh said he is on the ballot in about 35 states, including the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary early next month. His strategy is to try to win higher-than-expected shares of the votes there in hopes of boosting interest in his campaign in subsequent states.
Walsh waits in vain to visit top RNC officials beneath a wall of photos devoted to President Donald Trump. S.V. Date/HuffPost
On Thursday, the security guards at the RNC building let Walsh into the lobby, which is normally kept locked, but that was as far as he got. His campaign asked to speak with Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel or other top officials, but no one responded to Walsh’s requests.
Advertisement
He said it was ironic that after having spent hundreds of hours in the building as a congressman to make fundraising phone calls ― members are not allowed to make those calls from their congressional offices – he cannot get past the reception desk now to see McDaniel.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--Trump Says He Got 'Impeached For Making A Perfect Phone Call'

That is false .
For one , the House of Representatives impeached the president in December of last year , so it didn ’ t “ just ” happen .
Additionally , the July 25 , 2019 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky could be described in multiple ways , but “ perfect ” is not one of them .
Trump asked Zelensky to “ do us a favor ” — in other words , investigate his political rival Joe Biden , Biden ’ s son Hunter , and a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukrainian interference in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his associates held up military aid and a visit to the White House as incentives for Zelensky to comply .
Because of Trump ’ s asks during that phone call , the two articles of impeachment against him claim that he “ abused the powers of the presidency by ignoring and injuring national security and other vital national interests to obtain an improper personal political benefit.
” The articles declare that Trump “ also betrayed the nation by abusing his office to enlist a foreign power in corrupting democratic elections ” and “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indiscriminate defiance ’ that harmed the House ’ s constitutional rights.
” So , yeah , not a “ perfect ” call .
Trump ’ s tweet obviously sent social media into a tailspin .
Here ’ s a smattering of the commentary :

That is false. For one, the House of Representatives impeached the president in December of last year, so it didn’t “just” happen.
Additionally, the July 25, 2019 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky could be described in multiple ways, but “perfect” is not one of them. Trump asked Zelensky to “do us a favor” — in other words, investigate his political rival Joe Biden, Biden’s son Hunter, and a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election — while his associates held up military aid and a visit to the White House as incentives for Zelensky to comply.
Because of Trump’s asks during that phone call, the two articles of impeachment against him claim that he “abused the powers of the presidency by ignoring and injuring national security and other vital national interests to obtain an improper personal political benefit.”
The articles declare that Trump “also betrayed the nation by abusing his office to enlist a foreign power in corrupting democratic elections” and “engaged in ‘unprecedented, categorical and indiscriminate defiance’ that harmed the House’s constitutional rights.”
So, yeah, not a “perfect” call. Trump’s tweet obviously sent social media into a tailspin. Here’s a smattering of the commentary:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--Anglican Bishop's Son Faces Deportation To El Salvador

The son of El Salvador ’ s top Anglican leader is facing deportation from the U.S. back to his home country , where his father says gang members have threatened to murder him .
Bishop David Alvarado ’ s son , 34-year-old Josue Alvarado , is currently in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at a detention center in Ohio , Reuters reports .
The bishop told the Episcopal News Service that his son sought refuge in the U.S. in 2016 after being kidnapped and receiving death threats from gangs in El Salvador .
“ We are sad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he is in great danger here in the country , ” Alvarado told ENS on Friday .
Gang members forced the bishop ’ s son , who worked as a taxi driver , to drive them around and distribute weapons and drugs , his father told Reuters .
When the younger Alvarado refused to continue , he received death threats , the bishop said .
His son eventually filed a complaint with the police , Reuters reports .
Gang violence in El Salvador , a legacy of the country ’ s U.S.-backed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 1990s , is pervasive .
While the country ’ s homicide rate has dropped sharply in recent months , it is still among the highest on the planet , according to The Associated Press .
It ’ s also hard for migrants ― especially poor migrants ― from El Salvador and other Central American countries to obtain visas allowing them to come to the U.S. legally , the AP reports .
Rev .
Irma de Alvarado and Bishop David Alvarado , of the Anglican Episcopal Church in El Salvador , show a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who was apprehended by U.S. authorities in November 2019 .
He got a flat tire while driving near Cleveland in late November .
Police arrived while he waited for a tow truck and detained him when he was unable to provide documentation that he was in the country legally .
Alvarado ’ s request for asylum in the U.S. was denied on Jan. 8 , according to ENS .
He will reportedly be deported unless that decision is reversed in an appeals court .
“ If he returns , the gangs will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elder Alvarado told Reuters of his son .
“ He fled because of the threats.
” David Alvarado leads the Diocese of El Salvador , which is part of the Anglican Church of Central America .
The U.S.-based Episcopal Church is a sibling to this church , under the umbrella of the worldwide Anglican Communion .
Members of the Episcopal Diocese of Ohio have been visiting Josue Alvarado at the detention center and facilitating phone calls between him and his loved ones .
Rev .
Aaron Gerlach , rector of Old Trinity Episcopal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ HuffPost that the possibility of being deported back to El Salvador “ weighs heavily ” on the 34-year-old .
“ My hope is that a way is found for Josue to have what most of us take for granted―a safe place to live and work without our lives being threatened , ” he added .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The son of El Salvador’s top Anglican leader is facing deportation from the U.S. back to his home country, where his father says gang members have threatened to murder him.
Bishop David Alvarado’s son, 34-year-old Josue Alvarado, is currently in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at a detention center in Ohio, Reuters reports. The bishop told the Episcopal News Service that his son sought refuge in the U.S. in 2016 after being kidnapped and receiving death threats from gangs in El Salvador.
Advertisement
“We are sad and worried because he can be deported and he is in great danger here in the country,” Alvarado told ENS on Friday.
Gang members forced the bishop’s son, who worked as a taxi driver, to drive them around and distribute weapons and drugs, his father told Reuters. When the younger Alvarado refused to continue, he received death threats, the bishop said. His son eventually filed a complaint with the police, Reuters reports.
Gang violence in El Salvador, a legacy of the country’s U.S.-backed civil war and U.S. deportation policies in the 1990s, is pervasive. While the country’s homicide rate has dropped sharply in recent months, it is still among the highest on the planet, according to The Associated Press.
“We live here under a structure of violence going back many years because of the gangs,” the elder Alvarado told Reuters.
Advertisement
It’s also hard for migrants ― especially poor migrants ― from El Salvador and other Central American countries to obtain visas allowing them to come to the U.S. legally, the AP reports.
Rev. Irma de Alvarado and Bishop David Alvarado, of the Anglican Episcopal Church in El Salvador, show a picture of their son Josue Alvarado Guerra, who was apprehended by U.S. authorities in November 2019. Jose Cabezas/Reuters
Josue Alvarado fled to the U.S. in October 2016, and traveled around the country looking for work, ENS reports.
He got a flat tire while driving near Cleveland in late November. Police arrived while he waited for a tow truck and detained him when he was unable to provide documentation that he was in the country legally.
Alvarado’s request for asylum in the U.S. was denied on Jan. 8, according to ENS. He will reportedly be deported unless that decision is reversed in an appeals court.
Advertisement
ICE has not responded to HuffPost’s request for confirmation.
“If he returns, the gangs will go after him again,” the elder Alvarado told Reuters of his son. “He fled because of the threats.”
A number of deported asylum-seekers have been murdered or harmed upon their return to their countries of origin.
David Alvarado leads the Diocese of El Salvador, which is part of the Anglican Church of Central America. The U.S.-based Episcopal Church is a sibling to this church, under the umbrella of the worldwide Anglican Communion.
Bishop David Alvarado, of the Anglican Episcolpal Church in El Salvador, checks messages on his cellphone after an interview with Reuters in La Libertad, El Salvador, on Jan. 11, 2020. Jose Cabezas / Reuters
Members of the Episcopal Diocese of Ohio have been visiting Josue Alvarado at the detention center and facilitating phone calls between him and his loved ones. Rev. Aaron Gerlach, rector of Old Trinity Episcopal Church in Tiffin, Ohio, told HuffPost that the possibility of being deported back to El Salvador “weighs heavily” on the 34-year-old.
Advertisement
“Josue’s prayers continue to be that there may be, with God’s assistance, a positive outcome to his situation,” Gerlach wrote in an email.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--Nancy Pelosi Lays Into 'Shameful' Facebook In Blistering Remarks

At the end of her weekly press conference on Thursday , a reporter asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) if she thinks Facebook and its CEO Mark Zuckerberg wield too much power .
Facebook makes a fortune knowingly and intentionally disseminating political lies and misinformation , and that was clearly on Pelosi ’ s mind as she delivered a frank and damning response .
“ The Facebook business model is strictly to make money , ” she said .
“ They don ’ t care about the impact on children , they don ’ t care about truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where this is all coming from .
And they have said even if they know it ’ s not true they will print it.
” Pelosi on Facebook : '' They do n't care about the impact on children , they don ’ t care about truth … I think what they have said very blatantly , very clearly that they intend to be accomplices for misleading the American people … I think their behavior is shameful . ''
pic.twitter.com/FN6YytX34e — JM Rieger ( @ RiegerReport ) January 16 , 2020 “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the great opportunity that technology has given them , ” Pelosi continued .
“ All they want are their tax cuts and no anti-trust action against them .
And they schmooze this administration in that regard because so far that ’ s what they have received.
” Pelosi then alluded to the role Facebook played in the last presidential election , and warned that this time around , the company will knowingly play a similar role .
“ They have said very blatantly , very clearly , that they intend to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with money from God knows where .
They didn ’ t even check on the money from Russia in the last election .
They never even thought they should.
” Fact check : Also true .
As part of Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election , a Kremlin-backed troll farm that called itself the “ Internet Research Agency ” paid for at least 3,000 divisive political ads on Facebook .
The company accepted payment for the spots in Russian rubles .
Those ads were in addition to other Russian efforts to sway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Donald Trump .
A 2018 Senate Intelligence Committee report found thousands of covert Russian accounts on platforms like Facebook , Twitter , Instagram , Reddit and Pinterest amassed millions of followers and hundreds of millions of social engagements .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
At the end of her weekly press conference on Thursday, a reporter asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) if she thinks Facebook and its CEO Mark Zuckerberg wield too much power.
Facebook makes a fortune knowingly and intentionally disseminating political lies and misinformation, and that was clearly on Pelosi’s mind as she delivered a frank and damning response.
Advertisement
“The Facebook business model is strictly to make money,” she said. “They don’t care about the impact on children, they don’t care about truth, they don’t care about where this is all coming from. And they have said even if they know it’s not true they will print it.”
Fact check: True.
Pelosi on Facebook:
"They don't care about the impact on children, they don’t care about truth … I think what they have said very blatantly, very clearly that they intend to be accomplices for misleading the American people … I think their behavior is shameful." pic.twitter.com/FN6YytX34e — JM Rieger (@RiegerReport) January 16, 2020
“I think that they have been very abusive of the great opportunity that technology has given them,” Pelosi continued.
“All they want are their tax cuts and no anti-trust action against them. And they schmooze this administration in that regard because so far that’s what they have received.”
Advertisement
Pelosi then alluded to the role Facebook played in the last presidential election, and warned that this time around, the company will knowingly play a similar role.
“They have said very blatantly, very clearly, that they intend to be accomplices for misleading the American people, with money from God knows where. They didn’t even check on the money from Russia in the last election. They never even thought they should.”
Fact check: Also true. As part of Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election, a Kremlin-backed troll farm that called itself the “Internet Research Agency” paid for at least 3,000 divisive political ads on Facebook. The company accepted payment for the spots in Russian rubles.
Those ads were in addition to other Russian efforts to sway public opinion on social media in favor of Donald Trump. A 2018 Senate Intelligence Committee report found thousands of covert Russian accounts on platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit and Pinterest amassed millions of followers and hundreds of millions of social engagements.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--FBI Arrests 3 Alleged Neo-Nazis Anticipating Race War At Virginia Pro-Gun Rally

“ We have received credible intelligence from our law enforcement agencies of threats of violence surrounding the demonstration planned for @ @ @ @ @ ” Northam said in a tweet .
“ This includes extremist rhetoric similar to what @ @ @ @ @ incidents , such as Charlottesville in 2017.
” Northam was referring to the deadly violence @ @ @ @ @ 2017 in Charlottesville when white supremacists and neo-Nazis flocked to a rally protesting the push @ @ @ @ @ A white supremacist drove a car into a group of counterprotesters , killing 32-year-old Heather @ @ @ @ @ .
Militia groups including The Oath Keepers have expressed their intention to join Monday ’ @ @ @ @ @ Keepers operate under a false premise that the federal government is actively working to destroy @ @ @ @ @ groups have also chatted online about Monday ’ s rally being the “ boogaloo , @ @ @ @ @ term for an upcoming race war they hope to start .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Three suspected neo-Nazis were arrested after allegedly discussing plans to show up to a pro-gun rally in Virginia next week where they anticipated a race war might ensue, according to The New York Times.
The men were arrested Thursday morning following a long-running investigation by the FBI into a white supremacist organization, the Times reported. That group, called The Base, describes itself as an “international survivalist and self-defense network” preparing for a race war.
Advertisement
One of the men, 27-year-old Patrik Mathews, is a suspected neo-Nazi and former reservist in the Canadian Army. Mathews fled Canada and entered the U.S. illegally last August after he was fast-tracked out of the military following his alleged ties to the white supremacist movement and The Base. Mathews, who trained as a combat engineer, is suspected by authorities of being a top recruiter for The Base.
Also arrested were Brian M. Lemley Jr., 33, and William G. Bilbrough IV, 19, according to the Times. The latter two suspects were charged with transporting and harboring aliens along with conspiracy. Mathews and Lemley were charged with transporting a firearm with intent to commit a felony. Mathews was also charged with being an alien in possession of a firearm and ammo.
Patrik Mathews, one of the three men arrested by the FBI, is a Canadian suspected of being a top recruiter for a white supremacist group. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Bernie Farber, chairman of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, told CTV News in October that authorities had not been treating Mathews disappearance seriously enough.
Advertisement
“He seemed to slip right through their fingers and he’s ― poof ― gone,” Farber told the station. If Mathews had been a suspected member of the Islamic State, he would have been found “in the space of 15 minutes,” Farber added.
In a statement to HuffPost, Farber said called The Base “one of the most dangerous and violent extremist groups” along with Atomwoffen.
“The arrest of Patrik Mathews leaves more questions than answers,” Farber said. “He has been charged with no crimes in Canada so what happens when he is returned here?”
Monday’s pro-gun rally in Richmond is expected to draw thousands of people in protest over recent gun control bills introduced in the state Legislature, including one that would require universal background checks for firearm purchase and another that would limit people from buying no more than one handgun per month.
Gov. Ralph Northam (D) declared a temporary state of emergency on Wednesday banning all guns from the state capitol grounds amid threats of violence from far-right extremists.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--Trump Signs Puerto Rico Emergency Declaration Following Earthquake

U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday declared a major disaster in quake-hit Puerto Rico , a day after his administration placed tougher restrictions on the island for billions of dollars in delayed hurricane aid .
Puerto Rico ’ s governor , Wanda Vazquez , in a tweet thanked Trump for the disaster declaration , which she requested after a Jan. 7 earthquake and aftershocks collapsed or damaged hundreds of homes on the island and sent nearly 8,000 residents fleeing to shelters .
U.S. legislators welcomed the declaration , which will give Puerto Rico additional federal disaster funds , but called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billions more in delayed aid for 2017 hurricanes .
Trump has called Puerto Rico ’ s leaders “ incompetent or corrupt , ” and the Department of Housing and Urban Development on Wednesday said hurricane relief had been held up by concerns it would be mismanaged .
U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said it was unacceptable the administration had withheld much of the $ 44 billion in federal aid granted Puerto Rico following 2017′s Hurricanes Maria and Irma , which killed around 3,000 people .
To date , only $ 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Thursday ’ s disaster declaration comes after Puerto Rico ’ s non-voting representative to the U.S. Congress , Jenniffer Gonzalez , on Wednesday said Puerto Rico would be given an additional $ 8.2 billion in delayed disaster-aid by HUD .
Trump has described Puerto Rico as “ one of the most corrupt place on Earth , ” and HUD officials told Reuters the $ 8.2 billion payout could go ahead as a team was now in place to monitor how it was spent .
Pelosi expressed concern Puerto Rico was being held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the United States .
The Trump administration on Wednesday imposed tighter restrictions on disaster aid to the island , requiring Puerto Rico to submit budget plans to its federally mandated fiscal control board to track where money goes , the White House Office of Management and Budget told the New York Times .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday declared a major disaster in quake-hit Puerto Rico, a day after his administration placed tougher restrictions on the island for billions of dollars in delayed hurricane aid.
Puerto Rico’s governor, Wanda Vazquez, in a tweet thanked Trump for the disaster declaration, which she requested after a Jan. 7 earthquake and aftershocks collapsed or damaged hundreds of homes on the island and sent nearly 8,000 residents fleeing to shelters.
Advertisement
U.S. legislators welcomed the declaration, which will give Puerto Rico additional federal disaster funds, but called on the administration to release tens of billions more in delayed aid for 2017 hurricanes.
Trump has called Puerto Rico’s leaders “incompetent or corrupt,” and the Department of Housing and Urban Development on Wednesday said hurricane relief had been held up by concerns it would be mismanaged.
U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said it was unacceptable the administration had withheld much of the $44 billion in federal aid granted Puerto Rico following 2017′s Hurricanes Maria and Irma, which killed around 3,000 people. To date, only $15 billion of that money has been distributed.
Thursday’s disaster declaration comes after Puerto Rico’s non-voting representative to the U.S. Congress, Jenniffer Gonzalez, on Wednesday said Puerto Rico would be given an additional $8.2 billion in delayed disaster-aid by HUD.
Advertisement
Trump has described Puerto Rico as “one of the most corrupt place on Earth,” and HUD officials told Reuters the $8.2 billion payout could go ahead as a team was now in place to monitor how it was spent.
Pelosi expressed concern Puerto Rico was being held to a higher standard than other parts of the United States.
The Trump administration on Wednesday imposed tighter restrictions on disaster aid to the island, requiring Puerto Rico to submit budget plans to its federally mandated fiscal control board to track where money goes, the White House Office of Management and Budget told the New York Times.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--Democrat-Led States Sue To Block Trump Food Benefit Cut

The cuts target unemployed adults who don ’ t have children or disabilities , who would be eligible for only three months of benefits unless they prove to the government they ’ re working or training at least part-time .
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program serves about 18 million households ; the administration proposal would trim projected program spending by 1.8 % , ending benefits for nearly 700,000 if it ’ s in full effect come 2021 .
The planned reduction is a small part of Trump ’ s anti-welfare agenda , along with several other regulations targeting food , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ food cut that hasn ’ t been finalized would cancel benefits for fully 9 % of households .
The administration announced it would pursue the cut through a regulation shortly after the president signed a bill reauthorizing the food assistance program .
In that legislation , lawmakers had considered including an almost identical cut in 2018 , but conservative House Republicans couldn ’ t muster enough support in the Senate .
So the U.S. Department of Agriculture , which oversees the program , went around Congress .
“ A Republican-led Congress rejected these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , recognizing they do not encourage work ― they just punish vulnerable people struggling to find jobs , ” said Karl Racine , attorney general for the District of Columbia and leader of the 15-state coalition suing the U.S. Department of Agriculture over the cut .
The regulation reduces state flexibility to waive so-called “ work requirements ” that impose the three-month limit on benefits for unemployed non-elderly adults without dependents , who represent a small share of the overall SNAP population .
Most states waived the requirements during the Great Recession , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unemployment rates have fallen .
Republicans say able-bodied adults should get jobs , but the administration has estimated that most people targeted by the rule either can ’ t or won ’ t .
Many may have disabilities or family obligations that make it difficult to hold jobs .
The lawsuit , filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia , says the administration ignored the will of Congress and failed to follow proper administrative procedures in drafting the rule .
It asks the court for a preliminary injunction to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ellen Vollinger , legal director of the Food Research & Action Center , applauded the state attorneys general for trying to stop the USDA from “ sidestepping Congress , ignoring the great weight of public opinion , and taking food away from people who are struggling with unemployment and underemployment .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A coalition of Democratic-led states filed a major lawsuit Thursday to stop a food benefit cut the Trump administration has scheduled for April.
The cuts target unemployed adults who don’t have children or disabilities, who would be eligible for only three months of benefits unless they prove to the government they’re working or training at least part-time.
Advertisement
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program serves about 18 million households; the administration proposal would trim projected program spending by 1.8%, ending benefits for nearly 700,000 if it’s in full effect come 2021.
The planned reduction is a small part of Trump’s anti-welfare agenda, along with several other regulations targeting food, health and disability benefits. Another pending food cut that hasn’t been finalized would cancel benefits for fully 9% of households.
The administration announced it would pursue the cut through a regulation shortly after the president signed a bill reauthorizing the food assistance program. In that legislation, lawmakers had considered including an almost identical cut in 2018, but conservative House Republicans couldn’t muster enough support in the Senate. So the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program, went around Congress.
“A Republican-led Congress rejected these changes on a bipartisan basis in 2018, recognizing they do not encourage work ― they just punish vulnerable people struggling to find jobs,” said Karl Racine, attorney general for the District of Columbia and leader of the 15-state coalition suing the U.S. Department of Agriculture over the cut.
Advertisement
The regulation reduces state flexibility to waive so-called “work requirements” that impose the three-month limit on benefits for unemployed non-elderly adults without dependents, who represent a small share of the overall SNAP population. Most states waived the requirements during the Great Recession, but several have already reimposed them as unemployment rates have fallen.
Republicans say able-bodied adults should get jobs, but the administration has estimated that most people targeted by the rule either can’t or won’t. Many may have disabilities or family obligations that make it difficult to hold jobs.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, says the administration ignored the will of Congress and failed to follow proper administrative procedures in drafting the rule. It asks the court for a preliminary injunction to stop the cut from taking effect.
Ellen Vollinger, legal director of the Food Research & Action Center, applauded the state attorneys general for trying to stop the USDA from “sidestepping Congress, ignoring the great weight of public opinion, and taking food away from people who are struggling with unemployment and underemployment.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-16--An Under-The-Radar SCOTUS Case Could Obliterate The Line Between Church And State

pabradyphoto via Getty Images The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the case against the Montana program .
The program at the center of Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue , which the Supreme Court is hearing later this month , provided tax credits to individuals and corporations that donated to private school scholarship groups .
However , because Montana has a constitutional provision barring public dollars for religious schools ― and nearly all of the schools participating in the program were religious ― the Montana Supreme Court found the program unconstitutional and shut the program down in 2018 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case is before the Supreme Court , with public school advocates worrying the conservative-leaning court could call into question whether states are allowed to bar public funding for religious entities .
But the issue isn ’ t just one of church and state or education funding , it is also about public dollars going to institutions with discriminatory practices , they say .
A previous HuffPost investigation found that at least 14 % of private religious schools around the country that receive public funding through programs like the one in Montana actively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the Montana tax credit program , these numbers were even higher .
Of the 13 schools that had signed up to participate in the Montana tax credit program as of 2018 , when the program was shut down , four have anti-LGBTQ policies .
One of these schools , Stillwater Christian School , is attended by the children of the plaintiffs in the case , who say they would benefit from the program .
Three of the schools that participated in the program also advertise using curriculum from the Christian textbook companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ previous HuffPost analysis of these textbooks found that their social studies textbooks consistently teach distorted , whitewashed versions of history , and their science textbooks sometimes flout widely accepted facts .
One Abeka history textbook previously analyzed by HuffPost , for example , says that Satan hatched “ the ideas of evolution , socialism , Marxist-socialism ( communism ) , progressive education , and modern psychology.
” A Bob Jones University history textbook calls science a “ false religion ” and portrays Islam as a violent religion , including a section titled “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ textbooks dismiss evolution in favor of creationism .
In general , the case has the ability to greatly expand private school choice and the amount of tax dollars flowing to private religious schools .
Currently , more than half the states have some form of private school choice program , including voucher or tax credit schemes .
Proponents of private school choice argue that these programs are a way to help lower-income students gain the same options as more affluent ones , by helping them to attend a private school if they choose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ options outside of their zoned public school .
The plaintiff this case is named for , Kendra Espinoza , struggled to send her children to Stillwater Christian School and looked forward to some financial help .
“ Ultimately , Montana residents with extremely limited educational options are being denied the ability to provide a better education for their children due to this perhaps well-meaning but misguided interpretation of the First Amendment , ” argues EdChoice , a group that pushes school choice , in a friend-of-the-court brief .
On the other side of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these programs blur the separation of church and state , drain resources from public schools and contribute to the privatization of public education .
“ This has the potential to nullify three-fourths of states ’ religious freedoms protections .
It could force taxpayers to fund discrimination , ” said Rachel Laser , executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State .
“ It ’ s very concerning to divert public funds to private religious schools .
We all know our public schools are already hurting across the country.
” This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court case in 2017 that also concerned public funding for religious entities , Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer .
In that case , the Supreme Court ruled that Missouri could not exclude churches from a general state program that provided funds to fix up playgrounds solely because they are religious institutions .
In Montana , though , the state did not single out religious schools in the program but rather chose to shut down the entire program .
If the Supreme Court does rule in Espinoza ’ s favor , it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Education Betsy DeVos .
DeVos has spent her career fighting for expanded access to tax credit and voucher programs .
In February 2019 , she helped legislators introduce a bill that would create a federal school choice program , though it has yet to gain any momentum .
Religious schools , in general , are not subject to the same anti-discrimination policies as public schools and are thus allowed to exclude students and employees based on sexual orientation or on religious grounds .
Only one school voucher program in the country , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discriminating based on sexual orientation .

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the case against the Montana program. pabradyphoto via Getty Images
Nearly a third of the schools that participated in a Montana education tax credit program at the center of a controversial Supreme Court case maintain explicitly anti-LGBTQ policies, according to a HuffPost analysis.
The program at the center of Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, which the Supreme Court is hearing later this month, provided tax credits to individuals and corporations that donated to private school scholarship groups. However, because Montana has a constitutional provision barring public dollars for religious schools ― and nearly all of the schools participating in the program were religious ― the Montana Supreme Court found the program unconstitutional and shut the program down in 2018.
Advertisement
Now, after the plaintiffs appealed, the case is before the Supreme Court, with public school advocates worrying the conservative-leaning court could call into question whether states are allowed to bar public funding for religious entities. But the issue isn’t just one of church and state or education funding, it is also about public dollars going to institutions with discriminatory practices, they say.
A previous HuffPost investigation found that at least 14% of private religious schools around the country that receive public funding through programs like the one in Montana actively discriminate against LGBTQ staff and employees. In the Montana tax credit program, these numbers were even higher.
Anti-LGBTQ Policies On The Books
Of the 13 schools that had signed up to participate in the Montana tax credit program as of 2018, when the program was shut down, four have anti-LGBTQ policies. One of these schools, Stillwater Christian School, is attended by the children of the plaintiffs in the case, who say they would benefit from the program.
Stillwater Christian School in Kalispell, Montana, says in its handbook that “God wonderfully and immutably creates each person as male or female” and “God created marriage to be exclusively the union of one man and one woman.” It also says that “students and campus visitors must use restrooms, locker rooms, and changing facilities conforming with their biological sex.”
Foothills Community Christian School in Great Falls, Montana, puts “homosexual and lesbian behavior” and “bisexual conduct” in the same category as “incest” and “bestiality,” saying it is “sinful and offensive to God” in its handbook. It also says that “there is no room for a non-Christian or an uncommitted Christian” to teach at the school and encourages employees to become “a born-again Christian” not only for their sake but “for the sake of your children.”
Helena Christian School in East Helena, Montana, says on its statement of faith it believes that “God intends sexual intimacy to occur only between a man and a woman who are married to each other” and “immutably created each person as either male or female in conformity with their biological sex.”
Heritage Christian School in Bozeman, Montana, says in its handbook it reserves the right to reject students based on “sexual conduct (including but not limited to sexual activity outside of marriage, lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender conduct).” In its employment application, applicants also have to affirm that they have not and will not engage in such behaviors.
Three of the schools that participated in the program also advertise using curriculum from the Christian textbook companies Abeka or Bob Jones University. A previous HuffPost analysis of these textbooks found that their social studies textbooks consistently teach distorted, whitewashed versions of history, and their science textbooks sometimes flout widely accepted facts. One Abeka history textbook previously analyzed by HuffPost, for example, says that Satan hatched “the ideas of evolution, socialism, Marxist-socialism (communism), progressive education, and modern psychology.” A Bob Jones University history textbook calls science a “false religion” and portrays Islam as a violent religion, including a section titled “Islam and Murder.” Both companies’ textbooks dismiss evolution in favor of creationism.
A world history textbook published by Abeka disparages evolution "fable." Damon Dahlen/HuffPost
Advertisement
Blurring The Line Between Church And State
In general, the case has the ability to greatly expand private school choice and the amount of tax dollars flowing to private religious schools. Currently, more than half the states have some form of private school choice program, including voucher or tax credit schemes.
Proponents of private school choice argue that these programs are a way to help lower-income students gain the same options as more affluent ones, by helping them to attend a private school if they choose to, or to at least offer options outside of their zoned public school. The plaintiff this case is named for, Kendra Espinoza, struggled to send her children to Stillwater Christian School and looked forward to some financial help.
“Ultimately, Montana residents with extremely limited educational options are being denied the ability to provide a better education for their children due to this perhaps well-meaning but misguided interpretation of the First Amendment,” argues EdChoice, a group that pushes school choice, in a friend-of-the-court brief.
On the other side of the aisle, public school advocates say these programs blur the separation of church and state, drain resources from public schools and contribute to the privatization of public education.
“This has the potential to nullify three-fourths of states’ religious freedoms protections. It could force taxpayers to fund discrimination,” said Rachel Laser, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “It’s very concerning to divert public funds to private religious schools. We all know our public schools are already hurting across the country.”
Advertisement
This case comes on the heels of another Supreme Court case in 2017 that also concerned public funding for religious entities, Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that Missouri could not exclude churches from a general state program that provided funds to fix up playgrounds solely because they are religious institutions. In Montana, though, the state did not single out religious schools in the program but rather chose to shut down the entire program.
If the Supreme Court does rule in Espinoza’s favor, it would constitute a major win for U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. DeVos has spent her career fighting for expanded access to tax credit and voucher programs. In February 2019, she helped legislators introduce a bill that would create a federal school choice program, though it has yet to gain any momentum.
Religious schools, in general, are not subject to the same anti-discrimination policies as public schools and are thus allowed to exclude students and employees based on sexual orientation or on religious grounds. Only one school voucher program in the country, in Maryland, forbids participating schools from discriminating based on sexual orientation.
Public school groups have not been shy about sounding the alarm on this case, predicting that it could have a devastating effect on education and play a major role in disintegrating the U.S. doctrine of the separation of church and state.
“It would turn [the separation of church and state] on its head,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, on a conference call with reporters. “It will basically change over 200 years of practice in the United States.”