usatoday--2020-09-21--Some urge Democrats to expand the Supreme Court if they take power in 2021. Could they do that?

Democrats are furious over the push by President Donald Trump and Senate Republicans to move quickly on a Supreme Court nominee to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
They vowed to consider options for how they might respond if a confirmation vote is held before the presidential election Nov. 3 .
Among the potential measures some advocated is the possibility of Democrats expanding the Supreme Court – an idea often referred to as court packing – if they win the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress .
Supporters of such a move argue additional justices @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offset the conservative majority , which they said was unfairly established .
Sen. Ed Markey , D-Mass.
, said in a tweet that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , set the precedent that justices should not be confirmed in an election year when he denied Merrick Garland a vote in 2016 .
`` If he violates it , when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress , we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court , '' Markey said .
Former Attorney General Eric Holder , who has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's blocked nomination , told MSNBC the conservative majority on the court is `` illegitimate . ''
`` If , in fact , they are successful in placing a justice on the court , '' Holder said , `` we need to think about court reform .
And at a minimum , as part of that reform package , I think additional justices need to be placed on the Supreme Court . ''
John Dean , who served as White House counsel under President Richard Nixon , argued it was Senate Republicans under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservatives and Democrats should add judges and justices to `` depoliticize '' it .
Could Democrats do it ?
In short , yes .
If Congress wanted to change the size of the court , it could , with a president willing to approve it or enough support to override a veto .
`` There 's nothing in the Constitution that limits the size of the Supreme Court , '' Josh Blackman , a professor at the South Texas College of Law , told USA TODAY .
`` It 's fluctuated over time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says , `` The Constitution places the power to determine the number of Justices in the hands of Congress .
The first Judiciary Act , passed in 1789 , set the number of Justices at six , one Chief Justice and five Associates . ''
The number of justices through the Civil War went from a low of five to a high of 10 .
Congress has not changed the size of the court since the Judiciary Act of 1869 , when it was set at nine .
Has it been done ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ TODAY the size of the court was changed for political reasons several times before 1869 .
Tushnet who sits on the advisory board of Take Back the Court – a group that advocates for expanding the number of Supreme Court justices as `` the only strategy that rebalances the court after its 2016 theft . ''
Tushnet said Congress expanded the court during the Civil War `` to make sure that there 'd be a Republican majority on the court .
And then , when Andrew Johnson became president , they reduced the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would n't be able to appoint unsympathetic justices . ''
In 1937 , President Franklin Roosevelt pushed for an expansion of the court , which had ruled many portions of the New Deal unconstitutional .
The political battle over the effort dragged on for months and ultimately failed despite strong Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress .
Tushnet said that since then , people have taken Roosevelt 's failure `` as an indication of the political , and perhaps constitutional , danger of changing the court size for political reasons . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democracies Die , '' Harvard University professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt argue that if Roosevelt had succeeded , `` it would have set a dangerous precedent . ''
`` Had Roosevelt passed his judicial act , a key norm – that presidents should not undermine another coequal branch – would have been demolished , '' they wrote .
Levitsky and Ziblatt cited court packing as one of the tools democratically elected autocrats such as Hungary 's Viktor Orbán or Venezuela 's Hugo Chávez used to weaken their opposition .
They said expanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' making `` its membership , size and selection rules open to constant manipulation , not unlike Argentina under Perón or Venezuela under Chávez . ''
Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe told USA TODAY that if Democrats expand the court for political reasons , they risk `` an unending escalation '' in which each party changes the size of the court when it has the political power to do so .
Tribe denounced Republicans ' handling of Garland 's nomination and Ginsburg 's vacancy as `` hypocrisy '' and `` unprincipled .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ retaliation is an `` understandable impulse , '' but in the long run , it could mean sacrificing `` the idea of the Supreme Court as a stable institution , one of the few that can provide a kind of ballast for the ship of state . ''
`` And the long run matters , '' he said .
Tushnet acknowledged the risks but said Republicans forced Democrats to play `` constitutional hardball . ''
`` If Republicans play hardball , it seems to me perfectly appropriate for Democrats to play hardball in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When one side plays hardball and the other does n't , that can erode democracy , too .
And mostly , that 's what we 've experienced in the United States already . ''
Would Democrats go ahead with it ?
Democratic leaders suggested they are leaving all options on the table but have n't explicitly commented one way or the other on whether they would consider changing the size of the court .
Sunday , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif. , said , `` We have our options .
We have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m not about to discuss right now , '' when asked about the possibility of another impeachment on ABC News ' `` This Week . ''
When asked about the possibility of packing the court if Republicans push through a nominee before the election , Pelosi said , `` Well , let 's just win the election .
Let 's hope that the president will see the light . ''
`` If leader McConnell and Senate Republicans move forward with this , then nothing is off the table for next year , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , declared Saturday , according to Politico .
Before Ginsburg 's death , several 2020 Democratic primary candidates , including Sen. Kamala Harris of California – who is Biden 's running mate – expressed support for the idea of expanding the court .
In July 2019 , he told Iowa Starting Line that if Democrats packed the court , they would `` live to rue that day . ''
In a debate in October , he said , `` I would not get into court packing .
We add three justices .
Next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they add three justices .
We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all . ''
Biden did not directly address expanding the court when he spoke Sunday in Philadelphia about the vacancy created by Ginsburg 's death .
He said that if the nominee was left to him , he would follow a `` process that extends our finest traditions '' and rejects the partisanship that `` has torn the country apart for the last years . ''

Some urge Democrats to expand the Supreme Court if they take power in 2021. Could they do that?
Show Caption Hide Caption RBG: Who are the frontrunners to replace her now? Here's President Trump's shortlist of women that will most likely replace the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. USA TODAY, Wochit
Democrats are furious over the push by President Donald Trump and Senate Republicans to move quickly on a Supreme Court nominee to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. They vowed to consider options for how they might respond if a confirmation vote is held before the presidential election Nov. 3.
Among the potential measures some advocated is the possibility of Democrats expanding the Supreme Court – an idea often referred to as court packing – if they win the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress. Supporters of such a move argue additional justices appointed during a Joe Biden administration would offset the conservative majority, which they said was unfairly established.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said in a tweet that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., set the precedent that justices should not be confirmed in an election year when he denied Merrick Garland a vote in 2016.
"If he violates it, when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court," Markey said.
Mitch McConnell set the precedent. No Supreme Court vacancies filled in an election year. If he violates it, when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court. — Ed Markey (@EdMarkey) September 19, 2020
Former Attorney General Eric Holder, who has advocated for expanding the court since Garland's blocked nomination, told MSNBC the conservative majority on the court is "illegitimate."
"If, in fact, they are successful in placing a justice on the court," Holder said, "we need to think about court reform. And at a minimum, as part of that reform package, I think additional justices need to be placed on the Supreme Court."
John Dean, who served as White House counsel under President Richard Nixon, argued it was Senate Republicans under McConnell who packed the federal judiciary with conservatives and Democrats should add judges and justices to "depoliticize" it.
Could Democrats do it?
In short, yes. If Congress wanted to change the size of the court, it could, with a president willing to approve it or enough support to override a veto.
"There's nothing in the Constitution that limits the size of the Supreme Court," Josh Blackman, a professor at the South Texas College of Law, told USA TODAY. "It's fluctuated over time."
The Supreme Court's website says, "The Constitution places the power to determine the number of Justices in the hands of Congress. The first Judiciary Act, passed in 1789, set the number of Justices at six, one Chief Justice and five Associates."
The number of justices through the Civil War went from a low of five to a high of 10. Congress has not changed the size of the court since the Judiciary Act of 1869, when it was set at nine.
Has it been done?
Harvard Law Professor Mark Tushnet told USA TODAY the size of the court was changed for political reasons several times before 1869. Tushnet who sits on the advisory board of Take Back the Court – a group that advocates for expanding the number of Supreme Court justices as "the only strategy that rebalances the court after its 2016 theft."
Tushnet said Congress expanded the court during the Civil War "to make sure that there'd be a Republican majority on the court. And then, when Andrew Johnson became president, they reduced the size of the court so that he wouldn't be able to appoint unsympathetic justices."
In 1937, President Franklin Roosevelt pushed for an expansion of the court, which had ruled many portions of the New Deal unconstitutional. The political battle over the effort dragged on for months and ultimately failed despite strong Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress.
Tushnet said that since then, people have taken Roosevelt's failure "as an indication of the political, and perhaps constitutional, danger of changing the court size for political reasons."
A danger to democracy?
In their 2018 book, "How Democracies Die," Harvard University professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt argue that if Roosevelt had succeeded, "it would have set a dangerous precedent."
"Had Roosevelt passed his judicial act, a key norm – that presidents should not undermine another coequal branch – would have been demolished," they wrote.
Levitsky and Ziblatt cited court packing as one of the tools democratically elected autocrats such as Hungary's Viktor Orbán or Venezuela's Hugo Chávez used to weaken their opposition.
They said expanding the court would make it "hyperpoliticized," making "its membership, size and selection rules open to constant manipulation, not unlike Argentina under Perón or Venezuela under Chávez."
Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe told USA TODAY that if Democrats expand the court for political reasons, they risk "an unending escalation" in which each party changes the size of the court when it has the political power to do so.
Tribe denounced Republicans' handling of Garland's nomination and Ginsburg's vacancy as "hypocrisy" and "unprincipled." He said changing the court in retaliation is an "understandable impulse," but in the long run, it could mean sacrificing "the idea of the Supreme Court as a stable institution, one of the few that can provide a kind of ballast for the ship of state."
"And the long run matters," he said.
Tushnet acknowledged the risks but said Republicans forced Democrats to play "constitutional hardball."
"If Republicans play hardball, it seems to me perfectly appropriate for Democrats to play hardball in response," Tushnet said. "When one side plays hardball and the other doesn't, that can erode democracy, too. And mostly, that's what we've experienced in the United States already."
Would Democrats go ahead with it ?
Democratic leaders suggested they are leaving all options on the table but haven't explicitly commented one way or the other on whether they would consider changing the size of the court.
Sunday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said, "We have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss right now," when asked about the possibility of another impeachment on ABC News' "This Week."
When asked about the possibility of packing the court if Republicans push through a nominee before the election, Pelosi said, "Well, let's just win the election. Let's hope that the president will see the light."
"If leader McConnell and Senate Republicans move forward with this, then nothing is off the table for next year," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., declared Saturday, according to Politico.
Before Ginsburg's death, several 2020 Democratic primary candidates, including Sen. Kamala Harris of California – who is Biden's running mate – expressed support for the idea of expanding the court.
Biden opposed the idea.
In July 2019, he told Iowa Starting Line that if Democrats packed the court, they would "live to rue that day." In a debate in October, he said, "I would not get into court packing. We add three justices. Next time around, we lose control, they add three justices. We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all."
Biden did not directly address expanding the court when he spoke Sunday in Philadelphia about the vacancy created by Ginsburg's death. He said that if the nominee was left to him, he would follow a "process that extends our finest traditions" and rejects the partisanship that "has torn the country apart for the last years."


usatoday--2020-09-21--Efforts to lift economy out of recession pose risk of sparking a financial crisis,  economists worry

The economy may be stabilizing faster than expected amid the COVID-19 pandemic , but efforts to preserve it could tip off a financial crisis , economists said in a new report .
Deutsche Bank economists led by Peter Hooper , the bank 's global head of economic research , said the global economic recovery `` has proceeded significantly faster than we envisioned in the gloomy days of early May . ''
They estimated that the world 's economy has already recovered about half of the GDP it lost and that it would get back to pre-pandemic levels by the middle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of quarters sooner than the bank 's previous forecast .
But the price of short-term stability could be steep in the long run .
`` Massive fiscal and monetary policy stimulus '' that came together to prop up the economy has caused debt to balloon and stocks to become potentially overvalued , posing `` the serious risk of a looming global financial crisis as central banks begin to shift away from easy ( monetary ) policy at some point in the years to come . ''
Economic concerns : U.S. could slip into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new stimulus '' Financial crises have often been touched off in the past under such conditions by the inevitable shift from policy ease to policy tightening , which is likely still at least several years away , but could surprise sooner , '' the Deutsche Bank economists wrote .
From a global health perspective , Deutsche Bank projected that `` widespread vaccination '' will begin by summer 2021 and will continue for the next year or more , leading to `` a significant move toward herd immunity in the global population over that @ @ @ @ @ @

Efforts to lift economy out of recession pose risk of sparking a financial crisis, economists worry
Show Caption Hide Caption How the Federal Reserve's interest rates affect the economy and you The Federal Reserve has lowered interest rates over the past few months. Here's how their actions affect you. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY
The economy may be stabilizing faster than expected amid the COVID-19 pandemic, but efforts to preserve it could tip off a financial crisis, economists said in a new report.
Deutsche Bank economists led by Peter Hooper, the bank's global head of economic research, said the global economic recovery "has proceeded significantly faster than we envisioned in the gloomy days of early May."
They estimated that the world's economy has already recovered about half of the GDP it lost and that it would get back to pre-pandemic levels by the middle of 2021, which is a couple of quarters sooner than the bank's previous forecast.
But the price of short-term stability could be steep in the long run.
"Massive fiscal and monetary policy stimulus" that came together to prop up the economy has caused debt to balloon and stocks to become potentially overvalued, posing "the serious risk of a looming global financial crisis as central banks begin to shift away from easy (monetary) policy at some point in the years to come."
COVID-19: Restaurants are taking biggest hits due to the pandemic The restaurant industry is taking a big hit during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some big chains are filing for bankruptcy or facing challenges paying debts. USA TODAY
Stock market battered: Dow Jones down as banks suffer, economic concerns grip investors
Economic concerns: U.S. could slip into double-dip recession if Congress doesn't pass new stimulus
"Financial crises have often been touched off in the past under such conditions by the inevitable shift from policy ease to policy tightening, which is likely still at least several years away, but could surprise sooner," the Deutsche Bank economists wrote.
From a global health perspective, Deutsche Bank projected that "widespread vaccination" will begin by summer 2021 and will continue for the next year or more, leading to "a significant move toward herd immunity in the global population over that period and into 2023."
Follow USA TODAY reporter Nathan Bomey on Twitter @NathanBomey.


usatoday--2020-09-21--How your appliances can reduce your eco-footprint

How your appliances can reduce your eco-footprint Your appliance usage can help reduce your eco footprint .

How eco-friendly are your appliances?
Your appliance usage can help reduce your eco footprint.
ProblemSolved, USA TODAY


usatoday--2020-09-21--Daughter earns secret doctorate for hardworking mom

Loida Guillén Strong worked toward her doctorate degree in nursing at the University of Central Florida for 3 years in @ @ @ @ @ on graduation day .

Daughter earns secret doctorate for hardworking mom
Loida Guillén Strong worked toward her doctorate degree in nursing at the University of Central Florida for 3 years in secret to surprise her mom on graduation day.
Humankind, USA TODAY


usatoday--2020-09-21--Sen. Chuck Grassley indicates he won't break rank with Republicans on Supreme Court hearings

DES MOINES – U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley indicated Monday that he will not oppose holding hearings or taking a vote on President Donald Trump 's Supreme Court nomination if the proceeding move forward .
“ Over the years , and as recently as July , I ’ ve consistently said that taking up and evaluating a nominee in 2020 would be a decision for the current chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the Senate Majority Leader , '' he said in a statement provided to the Des Moines Register .
`` Both have confirmed their intentions to move forward , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Once the hearings are underway , it ’ s my responsibility to evaluate the nominee on the merits , just as I always have . ''
It 's a reversal for Grassley , who in 2016 was the face of Republican efforts to block Democratic President Barack Obama 's Supreme Court nominee , Merrick Garland .
He said at the time the Senate should not confirm a nominee in a presidential election year .
He has since reiterated that stance , saying in a July 2018 taping of Iowa Press that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nominee in an election year .
`` It was very legitimate that you ca n't have one rule for Democrat presidents and another rule for Republican presidents , '' he said at the time .
But Grassley said the circumstances today are different .
`` While there was ambiguity about the American people ’ s will for the direction of the Supreme Court in 2016 under a divided government , there is no such ambiguity in 2020 , '' he said in the statement .
He cited a 2016 letter that senators authored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Not since 1932 has the Senate confirmed in a presidential election year a Supreme Court nominee to a vacancy arising in that year .
And it is necessary to go even further back — to 1888 — in order to find an election year nominee who was nominated and confirmed under divided government , as we have now . ''
So far , only two Republican senators have come out in opposition to holding hearings before the election : Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska .
U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last week after multiple bouts of cancer , setting off a wave of public mourning and launching an immediate political battle over her replacement on the court .
President Donald Trump said Monday he will announce his nomination later this week after memorial services can be held for the late justice .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said Trump 's nominee `` will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate . ''
Grassley said in July that U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham , a Republican and current head of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one to decide on hearings .
`` I would have to tell him that I would n't have a hearing , '' Grassley said .
`` But if he decides to have a hearing , that 's his decision .
And then whether or not the nominee would come up on the floor before the election would be ( Majority Leader ) McConnell 's decision , and you would have to ask him what he 's going to do in that regard . ''
Grassley drew Democrats ' condemnation in 2016 when , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he blocked confirmation hearings for President Barack Obama 's Supreme Court nominee , Merrick Garland .
That seat became vacant when Justice Antonin Scalia died unexpectedly in February 2016 .
Obama made his appointment shortly after , but Grassley led the effort to block Garland 's confirmation .
At the time , Grassley said the decision to fill the vacancy should be made by whoever was elected president in November 2016 — nine months after the seat became vacant .
Grassley quickly became the face of Senate Republicans ’ refusal to consider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ halls across the state became heated as some Iowans pushed him to back down and others cheered him on .
Grassley and other prominent Republicans like McConnell said repeatedly and clearly that the Senate should not confirm a Supreme Court justice in an election year because it would be unfair to voters .
The spot was held open , Trump won the presidency in November and appointed Neil Gorsuch to the seat after he took office .
The Senate confirmed Gorsuch to the court in April 2016 .
Two years later in June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was often the court 's swing vote , announced he would retire .
That set off a confirmation battle over Brett Kavanaugh — proceedings that Grassley again oversaw as chairman of the Judiciary Committee .
He said at the time that although it was a midterm election year , he was comfortable moving forward with those proceedings because it was not a presidential election year .
Iowa 's junior Republican Sen. Joni Ernst is among the Republicans this year saying the Senate should move forward with the confirmation process despite opposing it in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Register 's editorial board in a July 2018 interview that a sitting president should not nominate justices to the Supreme Court in an election year .
Asked explicitly whether that should hold true for President Trump , Ernst said Trump should wait to be re-elected .
`` It ’ s precedent set , '' she said .
`` So come 2020 , if there ’ s an opening , I ’ m sure you ’ ll remind me of that . ''
But more recently , in a July taping of Iowa Press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` different '' from past precedent .
`` It ’ s very different than what we have seen in the past , '' she said .
`` We have seen … a president of a different party and a Senate of a different party in previous scenarios .
But in this scenario , we have the same party that is the majority in the Senate and the same party that is in the White House . ''
In a statement issued Monday , Ernst said `` we have much to consider over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court plays a fundamental role in the defense of our Constitution and in the protection of our rights and liberties , '' she said .
`` Once the president puts forward his nominee for the Supreme Court , I will carry out my duty — as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee — to evaluate the nominee for our nation ’ s highest court.
” Brianne Pfannenstiel is the chief politics reporter for the Register .
Reach her at bpfann @ dmreg.com or 515-284-8244 .
Follow her on Twitter at @ brianneDMR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by becoming a subscriber .
Sign up at DesMoinesRegister.com/Deal .

Brianne Pfannenstiel, Des Moines Register

Sen. Chuck Grassley indicates he won't break rank with Republicans on Supreme Court hearings
Show Caption Hide Caption Sen. Grassley on second Kavanaugh accuser: Dems 'sat on her story' Senator Chuck Grassley condemned Democrats for how he believe they handled sensitive information involving Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and his second accuser, Deborah Ramirez. USA TODAY
DES MOINES – U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley indicated Monday that he will not oppose holding hearings or taking a vote on President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nomination if the proceeding move forward.
“Over the years, and as recently as July, I’ve consistently said that taking up and evaluating a nominee in 2020 would be a decision for the current chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the Senate Majority Leader," he said in a statement provided to the Des Moines Register. "Both have confirmed their intentions to move forward, so that’s what will happen. Once the hearings are underway, it’s my responsibility to evaluate the nominee on the merits, just as I always have."
It's a reversal for Grassley, who in 2016 was the face of Republican efforts to block Democratic President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland. He said at the time the Senate should not confirm a nominee in a presidential election year. He has since reiterated that stance, saying in a July 2018 taping of Iowa Press that he would not support confirming a Supreme Court nominee in an election year.
"It was very legitimate that you can't have one rule for Democrat presidents and another rule for Republican presidents," he said at the time.
But Grassley said the circumstances today are different.
"While there was ambiguity about the American people’s will for the direction of the Supreme Court in 2016 under a divided government, there is no such ambiguity in 2020," he said in the statement.
He cited a 2016 letter that senators authored to McConnell in which they wrote:
“Not since 1932 has the Senate confirmed in a presidential election year a Supreme Court nominee to a vacancy arising in that year. And it is necessary to go even further back — to 1888 — in order to find an election year nominee who was nominated and confirmed under divided government, as we have now."
Grassley emphasized "divided government in his statement."
So far, only two Republican senators have come out in opposition to holding hearings before the election: Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died last week after multiple bouts of cancer, setting off a wave of public mourning and launching an immediate political battle over her replacement on the court.
President Donald Trump said Monday he will announce his nomination later this week after memorial services can be held for the late justice. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said Trump's nominee "will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate."
More: McConnell: Senate could confirm Ruth Bader Ginsburg's court replacement before election
Grassley said in July that U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican and current head of the Judiciary Committee, will be the one to decide on hearings.
"I would have to tell him that I wouldn't have a hearing," Grassley said. "But if he decides to have a hearing, that's his decision. And then whether or not the nominee would come up on the floor before the election would be (Majority Leader) McConnell's decision, and you would have to ask him what he's going to do in that regard."
Grassley drew Democrats' condemnation in 2016 when, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he blocked confirmation hearings for President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland.
That seat became vacant when Justice Antonin Scalia died unexpectedly in February 2016. Obama made his appointment shortly after, but Grassley led the effort to block Garland's confirmation.
At the time, Grassley said the decision to fill the vacancy should be made by whoever was elected president in November 2016 — nine months after the seat became vacant.
Grassley quickly became the face of Senate Republicans’ refusal to consider a nominee, and his public town halls across the state became heated as some Iowans pushed him to back down and others cheered him on.
Grassley and other prominent Republicans like McConnell said repeatedly and clearly that the Senate should not confirm a Supreme Court justice in an election year because it would be unfair to voters.
The spot was held open, Trump won the presidency in November and appointed Neil Gorsuch to the seat after he took office. The Senate confirmed Gorsuch to the court in April 2016.
Two years later in June 2018, Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was often the court's swing vote, announced he would retire. That set off a confirmation battle over Brett Kavanaugh — proceedings that Grassley again oversaw as chairman of the Judiciary Committee. He said at the time that although it was a midterm election year, he was comfortable moving forward with those proceedings because it was not a presidential election year.
Iowa's junior Republican Sen. Joni Ernst is among the Republicans this year saying the Senate should move forward with the confirmation process despite opposing it in 2016.
Ernst told the Des Moines Register's editorial board in a July 2018 interview that a sitting president should not nominate justices to the Supreme Court in an election year. Asked explicitly whether that should hold true for President Trump, Ernst said Trump should wait to be re-elected.
"It’s precedent set," she said. "So come 2020, if there’s an opening, I’m sure you’ll remind me of that."
But more recently, in a July taping of Iowa Press, Ernst said that this year is "different" from past precedent.
"It’s very different than what we have seen in the past," she said. "We have seen … a president of a different party and a Senate of a different party in previous scenarios. But in this scenario, we have the same party that is the majority in the Senate and the same party that is in the White House."
In a statement issued Monday, Ernst said "we have much to consider over the coming days."
“The Supreme Court plays a fundamental role in the defense of our Constitution and in the protection of our rights and liberties," she said. "Once the president puts forward his nominee for the Supreme Court, I will carry out my duty — as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee — to evaluate the nominee for our nation’s highest court.”
Brianne Pfannenstiel is the chief politics reporter for the Register. Reach her at bpfann@dmreg.com or 515-284-8244. Follow her on Twitter at @brianneDMR.
Support reporters who follow your government by becoming a subscriber. Sign up at DesMoinesRegister.com/Deal.


usatoday--2020-09-21--Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to become 1st woman to 'lie in state' at U.S. Capitol

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to become 1st woman to 'lie in state ' at U.S. Capitol Supreme Court Justice Ruth @ @ @ @ @ state at the U.S. Capitol , becoming the 1st woman to have such an honor @

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg will lie in state at the U.S. Capitol
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will lie in state at the U.S. Capitol, becoming the 1st woman to have such an honor.
USA TODAY


usatoday--2020-09-21--Donald Trump says he'll 'probably' announce Supreme Court pick by Saturday

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump said Monday he will announce his Supreme Court pick at the end of this week because he wants to wait until after memorial services for the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
`` We 'll make a decision probably Saturday – but Friday or Saturday , '' Trump told reporters at the White House , and he would like to see the Republican-run Senate vote on his nominee by Election Day on Nov. 3 .
`` We have plenty of time to do it , '' Trump said as he left the White House for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also said he may meet with one of the finalists – appeals court Judge Barbara Lagoa – when he stays overnight in Miami on Thursday on a two-day trip ; Lagoa is from Florida , a key battleground state .
The decision will probably trigger a political firestorm in the heat of Trump 's election battle with Democrat Joe Biden , and both parties pledged to make the future of the high court a major campaign issue .
Trump said five women are being vetted for the high court slot .
Aides and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top of the list as Lagoa and appeals court Judge Amy Coney Barrett .
Politics updates , once a day : Get the news distilled , explained and delivered straight to your inbox .
Sign up here Asked if he is leaning toward one candidate or another , Trump said : `` I have one or two that I have in mind . ''
During a morning interview on `` Fox & Friends , '' Trump said of Lagoa : `` She 's excellent .
She 's Hispanic ...
I do n't know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So she 's got a lot of things .
Very smart . ''
Trump said Barrett 's home state of Indiana is `` represented very well '' in the selection process .
Vice President Mike Pence hails from Indiana .
Trump told reporters he has spoken with some of the candidates , but not others ; he was not specific .
Senate Democrats said they will try to block the nominee , arguing that the winner of the election should have the right to make the lifetime appointment – an argument Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the 2016 presidential election .
It 's uncertain whether Senate Republican leaders have enough votes to move forward with any nomination .
In his Fox interview , Trump said , `` I 'm looking at five – probably four , but I 'm looking at five very seriously . ''
In addition to Barrett and Lagoa , other possibilities include Allison Rushing , a North Carolina-based judge on the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals , and Kate Todd , who works in the White House counsel 's office .
Trump told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one from Michigan , '' where appeals court Judge Joan Larsen served on the state Supreme Court .
The president said the Supreme Court issue would be good for Republican senators facing tough reelection battles .
He specifically cited Sen. Cory Gardner , R-Colo. , though Gardner has not said whether the Senate should vote on a Supreme Court nomination in the midst of an election .
Republican Sens .
Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said there should not be a nomination vote before the election .
There will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the week , delaying Trump 's announcement of a nominee .
Trump and some Republicans see the opening as a historic opportunity for conservatives to consolidate control of the Supreme Court .
There are five conservatives on the nine-member court .
If Republicans follow through , Democrats have vowed retaliation should they win control of the Senate in November .
Some lawmakers have talked about increasing the size of the Supreme Court and ending the right of the minority to filibuster legislation .
If there were more seats on the court , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to tilt the court in a more liberal direction .
Biden weighed in on the Supreme Court dispute Sunday , delivering a speech in Philadelphia accusing Republicans of hypocrisy in trying to fill the seat this election year even though they blocked Obama 's nominee in 2016 .
Trying to `` jam '' through a nominee under these circumstances , Biden said , would represent only `` raw political power . ''
The issue of the court pick has energized Trump 's supporters .
At a rally Saturday in North Carolina , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ! ''
That phrase adorns a T-shirt the Trump campaign sells on its website .

Donald Trump says he'll 'probably' announce Supreme Court pick by Saturday
Show Caption Hide Caption RBG: Who are the frontrunners to replace her now? Here's President Trump's shortlist of women that will most likely replace the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. USA TODAY, Wochit
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump said Monday he will announce his Supreme Court pick at the end of this week because he wants to wait until after memorial services for the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
"We'll make a decision probably Saturday – but Friday or Saturday," Trump told reporters at the White House, and he would like to see the Republican-run Senate vote on his nominee by Election Day on Nov. 3.
"We have plenty of time to do it," Trump said as he left the White House for a campaign trip to Ohio.
Trump also said he may meet with one of the finalists – appeals court Judge Barbara Lagoa – when he stays overnight in Miami on Thursday on a two-day trip; Lagoa is from Florida, a key battleground state.
The decision will probably trigger a political firestorm in the heat of Trump's election battle with Democrat Joe Biden, and both parties pledged to make the future of the high court a major campaign issue.
Trump said five women are being vetted for the high court slot. Aides and advisers have identified two finalists at the top of the list as Lagoa and appeals court Judge Amy Coney Barrett.
Politics updates, once a day: Get the news distilled, explained and delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up here
Asked if he is leaning toward one candidate or another, Trump said: "I have one or two that I have in mind."
During a morning interview on "Fox & Friends," Trump said of Lagoa: "She's excellent. She's Hispanic ... I don't know her. Florida, we love Florida. So she's got a lot of things. Very smart."
Trump said Barrett's home state of Indiana is "represented very well" in the selection process. Vice President Mike Pence hails from Indiana.
Trump told reporters he has spoken with some of the candidates, but not others; he was not specific.
Senate Democrats said they will try to block the nominee, arguing that the winner of the election should have the right to make the lifetime appointment – an argument Republicans used when a high court vacancy happened before the 2016 presidential election.
It's uncertain whether Senate Republican leaders have enough votes to move forward with any nomination.
In his Fox interview, Trump said, "I'm looking at five – probably four, but I'm looking at five very seriously."
In addition to Barrett and Lagoa, other possibilities include Allison Rushing, a North Carolina-based judge on the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Kate Todd, who works in the White House counsel's office.
Trump told Fox he is considering "a great one from Michigan," where appeals court Judge Joan Larsen served on the state Supreme Court.
The president said the Supreme Court issue would be good for Republican senators facing tough reelection battles. He specifically cited Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., though Gardner has not said whether the Senate should vote on a Supreme Court nomination in the midst of an election.
Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said there should not be a nomination vote before the election.
There will be memorials and services for Ginsburg early in the week, delaying Trump's announcement of a nominee.
Trump and some Republicans see the opening as a historic opportunity for conservatives to consolidate control of the Supreme Court. There are five conservatives on the nine-member court.
If Republicans follow through, Democrats have vowed retaliation should they win control of the Senate in November. Some lawmakers have talked about increasing the size of the Supreme Court and ending the right of the minority to filibuster legislation. If there were more seats on the court, a Democratic president could have a chance to tilt the court in a more liberal direction.
Biden weighed in on the Supreme Court dispute Sunday, delivering a speech in Philadelphia accusing Republicans of hypocrisy in trying to fill the seat this election year even though they blocked Obama's nominee in 2016.
Trying to "jam" through a nominee under these circumstances, Biden said, would represent only "raw political power."
The issue of the court pick has energized Trump's supporters. At a rally Saturday in North Carolina, his supporters chanted, "Fill that seat!" That phrase adorns a T-shirt the Trump campaign sells on its website.


usatoday--2020-09-21--New York, Portland and Seattle named 'anarchist jurisdictions', could lose federal funding

New York , Portland and Seattle named 'anarchist jurisdictions ' , could lose federal funding Portland , New York and @ @ @ @ @ '' by the Justice Department , after a Trump executive order will review federal funding @

New York City, Portland, Seattle named 'anarchist jurisdictions'
Portland, New York and Seattle named "anarchist jurisdictions" by the Justice Department, after a Trump executive order will review federal funding.
USA TODAY


usatoday--2020-09-21--Here are the senators to watch in the fight over filling Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat on the Supreme C

WASHINGTON – The race is on for Republicans to quickly fill the Supreme Court vacancy left after Ruth Bader Ginsburg 's death , though some GOP senators are on board with the idea of holding a confirmation vote before the Nov. 3 election .
President Donald Trump has expressed a preference for getting a candidate confirmed before Election Day .
Democrats argue that the Senate should allow the winner of the presidential election , whether it is Joe Biden or Trump , to put forth the nominee for Ginsburg 's seat .
Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the chamber @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their positions on Monday , Republicans likely have the votes to confirm a nominee .
Several Republicans , including some facing tough elections , have lined up behind Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell 's pledge to hold a vote on Trump ’ s nominee .
That includes Sens .
Martha McSally , R-Ariz. ; Thom Tillis , R-N.C. ; and Joni Ernst , R-Iowa .
Sen. Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee – the panel charged with examining judicial nominees – backtracked on his previous remarks vowing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to an election .
Graham faces a competitive election of his own this year .
Sens .
Susan Collins , R-Maine , and Lisa Murkowski , R-Alaska , have said they do not think a confirmation vote should take place before the election .
Sen. Mitt Romney , R-Utah , said he would not be making any comments until he had the chance to talk with his fellow Republicans Tuesday at their weekly lunch .
Here is what key senators have said about the issue : Trump : I 'll probably announce Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we know : How will Ruth Bader Ginsburg be replaced on Supreme Court ?
Murkowski , a moderate Republican , reiterated her previous comments about filling a vacancy in a Sept. 20 statement : `` For weeks , I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election .
Sadly , what was then a hypothetical is now our reality , but my position has not changed . ''
Murkowski voted for Trump ’ s first Supreme Court nominee , Neil Gorsuch , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his second nominee , Brett Kavanaugh .
Murkowski voted “ present ” on the final vote for Kavanaugh to allow a Senate colleague to attend his daughter ’ s wedding but said she opposed the nomination .
Democrats weigh options : Pelosi says Democrats 'have our options ' when asked about impeaching Trump if he replaces Ginsburg Romney , a moderate who is sometimes critical of Trump , has not yet commented on a replacement .
Elected in 2018 , he was not yet in office when the Senate voted on Kavanaugh @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on other issues in the past , though .
Romney voted to impeach Trump on one of the two counts in February and has frequently criticized the president , drawing his ire on Twitter .
Romney declined to comment on the issue when asked by reporters in the Capitol Monday and said he would speak with his Senate colleagues first before making a decision .
`` I ’ m not going to speak to this until I get to speak with my colleagues , '' he said .
Romney spokesperson Liz Johnson shot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had committed to not confirming a nominee until after Inauguration Day in January 2021 , calling it “ grossly false .
# fakenews.
” The senator ’ s statement on Ginsburg ’ s death released Friday evening hailed her “ record of distinguished service ” but did not reference filling the vacancy .
'Appalling abuse : ' Sen. Mitt Romney votes to convict President Trump on abuse of power charge More : Mitt Romney : a solitary GOP voice battling Trump for the soul of the Republican Party Collins , a moderate Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said after Ginsburg 's death she did not think the Senate should vote on a Supreme Court nominee before the election , though she left the door open to voting on one after the election .
`` Given the proximity of the presidential election , however , I do not believe that the Senate should vote on the nominee prior to the election , '' she said .
`` In fairness to the American people , who will either be reelecting the president or selecting a new one , the decision on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be made by the President who is elected on November 3rd . ''
Gardner , who is facing a tight reelection race in Colorado , said in a Monday evening statement he would support moving forward to fill the vacancy .
`` When a President exercises constitutional authority to nominate a judge for the Supreme Court vacancy , the Senate must decide how to best fulfill its constitutional duty of advice and consent , '' Gardner said .
`` I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and uphold the law .
Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward , I will vote to confirm . ''
More : McConnell says Senate will vote on Trump 's nominee to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg 's Supreme Court seat Jones , the Democrat facing the toughest race in November , has yet to weigh in publicly on how the Senate should handle the vacancy left by Ginsburg .
He has said previously that he would fight to block such an appointment .
But Jones accused McConnell and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focusing so quickly on the battle to replace her .
“ I ’ m saddened – though not surprised – by how quickly this has turned into a political power play by Trump and McConnell , ” he said in a campaign email on Saturday .
“ It not only dishonors the legacy of an American icon , it distorts the Constitutional process – a deliberate process that the Senate has always used to uphold the independence of our judicial branch.
” Jones voted against Kavanaugh .
He was not in the Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a red-state Democrat , was originally thought to be a swing vote on the nomination .
But in a statement released on Monday , he said the Senate should not act on a Supreme Court nomination before the election .
`` For the sake of the integrity of our courts and legal system , I do not believe the U.S. Senate should vote on a U.S. Supreme Court nominee before the November 3rd election , '' he said .
Grassley , one of the most senior members of the Senate , issued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oppose moving forward on a nomination .
`` I ’ ve consistently said that taking up and evaluating a nominee in 2020 would be a decision for the current chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the Senate Majority Leader , '' he said .
`` Both have confirmed their intentions to move forward , so that ’ s what will happen .
Once the hearings are underway , it ’ s my responsibility to evaluate the nominee on the merits , just as I always have . ''
He told Iowa reporters in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but said the decision was ultimately up to Graham or McConnell .
“ I would have to tell him that I would n't have a hearing , '' Grassley said .
`` But if he decides to have a hearing , that 's his decision .
And then whether or not the nominee would come up on the floor before the election would be Chairman ( sic ) McConnell 's decision , and you would have to ask him what he 's going to do in that regard . ''
Roberts , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ posted on Twitter Monday he would support filling the vacancy .
`` It is the U.S. Senate ’ s constitutional duty to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court of the United States , and I support the decision to do so , '' he said .
The Kansas Republican was viewed as one of the chamber ’ s institutionalists who could be wary of how filling this vacancy could impact the Senate long-term after Senate Republicans also blocked President Barack Obama ’ s Supreme Court nominee , Merrick Garland , in 2016 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not have to worry about his re-election and the electoral implications of a decision on a nominee .
He had been eyed as a potential swing vote on some of the Senate 's most consequential matters , such as earlier this year during Trump ’ s impeachment trial , though he ultimately voted to acquit Trump .

Nicholas Wu and Christal Hayes, USA TODAY

Here are the senators to watch in the fight over filling Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat on the Supreme Court
Show Caption Hide Caption Democrats: Don't fill Ginsburg's seat yet Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Supreme Court seat not to be filled until after the presidential election. (Sept. 21) AP
WASHINGTON – The race is on for Republicans to quickly fill the Supreme Court vacancy left after Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death, though some GOP senators are on board with the idea of holding a confirmation vote before the Nov. 3 election.
President Donald Trump has expressed a preference for getting a candidate confirmed before Election Day. Democrats argue that the Senate should allow the winner of the presidential election, whether it is Joe Biden or Trump, to put forth the nominee for Ginsburg's seat.
Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the chamber, and after several key senators announced their positions on Monday, Republicans likely have the votes to confirm a nominee.
Several Republicans, including some facing tough elections, have lined up behind Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's pledge to hold a vote on Trump’s nominee. That includes Sens. Martha McSally, R-Ariz.; Thom Tillis, R-N.C.; and Joni Ernst, R-Iowa. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee – the panel charged with examining judicial nominees – backtracked on his previous remarks vowing to oppose a Supreme Court nomination so close to an election. Graham faces a competitive election of his own this year.
Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, have said they do not think a confirmation vote should take place before the election. Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said he would not be making any comments until he had the chance to talk with his fellow Republicans Tuesday at their weekly lunch.
Here is what key senators have said about the issue:
Trump: I'll probably announce Supreme Court pick on Friday or Saturday
What we know: How will Ruth Bader Ginsburg be replaced on Supreme Court?
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska
Murkowski, a moderate Republican, reiterated her previous comments about filling a vacancy in a Sept. 20 statement: "For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election. Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed."
Murkowski voted for Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, but she voted against advancing the nomination of his second nominee, Brett Kavanaugh. Murkowski voted “present” on the final vote for Kavanaugh to allow a Senate colleague to attend his daughter’s wedding but said she opposed the nomination.
Democrats weigh options: Pelosi says Democrats 'have our options' when asked about impeaching Trump if he replaces Ginsburg
More: Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins oppose vote on Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement before election
Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah
Romney, a moderate who is sometimes critical of Trump, has not yet commented on a replacement. Elected in 2018, he was not yet in office when the Senate voted on Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.
He has bucked Trump on other issues in the past, though. Romney voted to impeach Trump on one of the two counts in February and has frequently criticized the president, drawing his ire on Twitter.
Romney declined to comment on the issue when asked by reporters in the Capitol Monday and said he would speak with his Senate colleagues first before making a decision.
"I’m not going to speak to this until I get to speak with my colleagues," he said.
Romney spokesperson Liz Johnson shot down a viral Twitter post alleging Romney had committed to not confirming a nominee until after Inauguration Day in January 2021, calling it “grossly false. #fakenews.”
The senator’s statement on Ginsburg’s death released Friday evening hailed her “record of distinguished service” but did not reference filling the vacancy.
'Appalling abuse:' Sen. Mitt Romney votes to convict President Trump on abuse of power charge
More: Mitt Romney: a solitary GOP voice battling Trump for the soul of the Republican Party
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine
Collins, a moderate Republican facing a tough reelection race in Maine, said after Ginsburg's death she did not think the Senate should vote on a Supreme Court nominee before the election, though she left the door open to voting on one after the election.
Collins voted for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.
"Given the proximity of the presidential election, however, I do not believe that the Senate should vote on the nominee prior to the election," she said. "In fairness to the American people, who will either be reelecting the president or selecting a new one, the decision on a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court should be made by the President who is elected on November 3rd."
Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo.
Gardner, who is facing a tight reelection race in Colorado, said in a Monday evening statement he would support moving forward to fill the vacancy.
"When a President exercises constitutional authority to nominate a judge for the Supreme Court vacancy, the Senate must decide how to best fulfill its constitutional duty of advice and consent," Gardner said. "I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution, not legislate from the bench, and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm."
Gardner voted for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.
More: McConnell says Senate will vote on Trump's nominee to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Supreme Court seat
Sen. Doug Jones, D-Ala.
Jones, the Democrat facing the toughest race in November, has yet to weigh in publicly on how the Senate should handle the vacancy left by Ginsburg. He has said previously that he would fight to block such an appointment.
But Jones accused McConnell and Trump of dishonoring Ginsburg's legacy by focusing so quickly on the battle to replace her.
“I’m saddened – though not surprised – by how quickly this has turned into a political power play by Trump and McConnell,” he said in a campaign email on Saturday. “It not only dishonors the legacy of an American icon, it distorts the Constitutional process – a deliberate process that the Senate has always used to uphold the independence of our judicial branch.”
Jones voted against Kavanaugh. He was not in the Senate for Gorsuch’s nomination.
Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V.
Manchin, a red-state Democrat, was originally thought to be a swing vote on the nomination. But in a statement released on Monday, he said the Senate should not act on a Supreme Court nomination before the election.
"For the sake of the integrity of our courts and legal system, I do not believe the U.S. Senate should vote on a U.S. Supreme Court nominee before the November 3rd election," he said.
Manchin voted for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa
Grassley, one of the most senior members of the Senate, issued a statement Monday saying he would not oppose moving forward on a nomination.
"I’ve consistently said that taking up and evaluating a nominee in 2020 would be a decision for the current chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the Senate Majority Leader," he said. "Both have confirmed their intentions to move forward, so that’s what will happen. Once the hearings are underway, it’s my responsibility to evaluate the nominee on the merits, just as I always have."
He told Iowa reporters in July he would not favor moving forward but said the decision was ultimately up to Graham or McConnell.
“I would have to tell him that I wouldn't have a hearing," Grassley said. "But if he decides to have a hearing, that's his decision. And then whether or not the nominee would come up on the floor before the election would be Chairman (sic) McConnell's decision, and you would have to ask him what he's going to do in that regard."
Grassley voted for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.
Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas
Roberts, a retiring Republican, said in a statement posted on Twitter Monday he would support filling the vacancy.
"It is the U.S. Senate’s constitutional duty to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court of the United States, and I support the decision to do so," he said.
The Kansas Republican was viewed as one of the chamber’s institutionalists who could be wary of how filling this vacancy could impact the Senate long-term after Senate Republicans also blocked President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, in 2016. As a retiring senator, he did not have to worry about his re-election and the electoral implications of a decision on a nominee.
He had been eyed as a potential swing vote on some of the Senate's most consequential matters, such as earlier this year during Trump’s impeachment trial, though he ultimately voted to acquit Trump.
Roberts voted for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.


usatoday--2020-09-21--Mail-ballots lawsuit filed by Trump, GOP against Nevada dismissed by federal judge

LAS VEGAS – A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump 's reelection campaign that challenges a new state law sending ballots to all active voters amid the coronavirus pandemic .
The lawsuit lacks standing , according to U.S. District Judge James C. Mahan in a Sept. 18 order dismissing the lawsuit .
Nevada 's Democratic Gov .
Steve Sisolak in August signed the law passed by the Democratically controlled Legislature that made the state among several that plan to automatically mail ballots to active voters this November .
Trump 's campaign filed the lawsuit within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit in August .
Though Cegavske – a Republican – opposed the new law and said her department did not have the budget for the changes , she serves as the state 's top elections official and was named in the lawsuit by the Trump campaign and Republicans and is now defending the new law in court .
More : Where you can vote by mail , absentee ballot in the 2020 election Trump 's campaign and national and state Republicans filed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop the new law , contending it would undermine the election 's integrity .
Cegavske 's attorneys asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit and contended that the lawsuit addresses a policy debate that should occur outside of a courtroom .
The filing also said the Trump campaign and Republicans who filed the suit do n't have legal standing to make their argument and do n't explain how they 'd be harmed by changes in the law .
More : When early voting and mail voting for president begins in every state The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans who filed the suit do n't have legal standing to make their argument and do n't explain how they 'd be harmed by changes in the law .
Trump 's lawsuit alleged the law 's `` three-day , post-election receipt deadline for non- postmarked ballots—coupled with its deeming rule , the faster average mailing time in urban districts such as Clark County , and the postal service ’ s practice of not postmarking prepaid mail '' — would result in more untimely ballots being counted from urban areas .
`` These injuries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Mahan wrote .
`` Plaintiffs offer a patchwork theory of harm that does not rely on [ the law ] , but on the speed of the United States Postal Service , an entity out of defendant ’ s control . ''
`` Active '' voters are generally voters with a current address on file with local elections officials .
Ed Komenda writes about Las Vegas for the Reno Gazette Journal and USA Today Network .
Do you care about democracy ?
Then support local journalism by subscribing to the Reno Gazette @ @ @ @

Mail-ballots lawsuit filed by Trump, GOP against Nevada dismissed by federal judge
Show Caption Hide Caption Elections 2020: Mail-in voting could decide next president Many states are planning on drastically different elections this year and mail-in ballots could be a big game changer. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY
LAS VEGAS – A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump's reelection campaign that challenges a new state law sending ballots to all active voters amid the coronavirus pandemic.
The lawsuit lacks standing, according to U.S. District Judge James C. Mahan in a Sept. 18 order dismissing the lawsuit.
Nevada's Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak in August signed the law passed by the Democratically controlled Legislature that made the state among several that plan to automatically mail ballots to active voters this November. Trump's campaign filed the lawsuit within days of Sisolak's signing.
Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit in August. Though Cegavske – a Republican – opposed the new law and said her department did not have the budget for the changes, she serves as the state's top elections official and was named in the lawsuit by the Trump campaign and Republicans and is now defending the new law in court.
More: Where you can vote by mail, absentee ballot in the 2020 election
Trump's campaign and national and state Republicans filed the lawsuit in Nevada to try to stop the new law, contending it would undermine the election's integrity.
Cegavske's attorneys asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit and contended that the lawsuit addresses a policy debate that should occur outside of a courtroom. The filing also said the Trump campaign and Republicans who filed the suit don't have legal standing to make their argument and don't explain how they'd be harmed by changes in the law.
More: When early voting and mail voting for president begins in every state
The filing also said the Trump campaign and Republicans who filed the suit don't have legal standing to make their argument and don't explain how they'd be harmed by changes in the law.
Trump's lawsuit alleged the law's "three-day, post-election receipt deadline for non- postmarked ballots—coupled with its deeming rule, the faster average mailing time in urban districts such as Clark County, and the postal service’s practice of not postmarking prepaid mail" — would result in more untimely ballots being counted from urban areas.
"These injuries are too speculative to establish standing," Mahan wrote. "Plaintiffs offer a patchwork theory of harm that does not rely on [the law], but on the speed of the United States Postal Service, an entity out of defendant’s control."
"Active" voters are generally voters with a current address on file with local elections officials.
Contributing: Associated Press.


usatoday--2020-09-21--Gen. H.R. McMaster thinks Trump's deal freeing Taliban fighters could lead to another 9/11

Gen. H.R .
McMaster thinks Trump 's deal freeing Taliban fighters could lead to another 9/11 Former national security adviser @ @ @ @ @ 's a mistake to think the Taliban could be a partner for peace , and @ @ @ @ @

H.R. McMaster: Trump freed Taliban fighters may lead to another 9/11
Former national security adviser H.R. McMaster believes it's a mistake to think the Taliban could be a partner for peace, and could mean another 9/11.
USA TODAY


usatoday--2020-09-21--Bill and Hillary Clinton bash McConnell for pushing forward with Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement

Former President Bill Clinton , who nominated Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court during his first year in office , remembered her as a `` force for equality for men , as well as women , '' and said he was not surprised by the celebrity Ginsburg gained later in life because she `` symbolizes everything that 's best about America '' and was `` always on the level . ''
Clinton was far less complimentary of Republicans who have indicated since her death Friday that they wish to replace the liberal-leaning Ginsburg with a Trump appointee , regardless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential election .
In three television interviews Sunday , Clinton accused McConnell of hypocrisy because he argued in 2016 that voters should weigh in before then-President Barack Obama tried to fill a Supreme Court vacancy in an election year .
`` He said we had to trust the American people and give the voters a voice in the last Supreme Court selection when President Obama nominated Merrick Garland , '' Clinton told ABC News , referring to the judge who was blocked by McConnell after being nominated nearly eight months before the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McConnell has lost his faith in the judgment of the American people and wants to hurry up and put somebody on the court . ''
GOP senators and SCOTUS vote : Lisa Murkowski , Susan Collins oppose vote on Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement before election On CNN 's `` State of the Union , '' Clinton said McConnell had a point about giving voters a say in 2016 .
But he said it was `` superficially hypocritical '' to change his argument `` when the shoe 's on the other foot , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton , who would have picked the nominee to fill the vacant seat if she had won in 2016 , said McConnell set the precedent and should now follow it .
`` And that new precedent , which they all defended incredibly passionately , is to wait for the next president , whoever that is , to make the nomination .
But as you clearly heard , that is not what they are intending , '' she said on NBC News ' `` Meet the Press . ''
The former first lady said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blow to our institutions . ''
`` Our institutions are being basically undermined by the lust for power : power for personal gain in the case of the president , or power for institutional gain in the case of Mitch McConnell . ''
Then and now : What McConnell , others said about Merrick Garland in 2016 vs. after Ginsburg 's death Tim Murtaugh , communications director for the Trump campaign said in a statement Sunday , `` When there ’ s a Supreme Court vacancy , the President selects a nominee and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s what the Constitution says and those are the only rules . ''
Sen. Ted Cruz , R-Texas , argued on ABC News ' `` This Week '' that Democrats were also being inconsistent because in 2016 , they were crying for the nominee to be confirmed .
George Stephanopoulos had played a clip of Cruz from 2016 in which Cruz argued against Garland 's nomination , saying `` it has been 80 years since a Supreme Court vacancy was nominated and confirmed in an election year .
There is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this in an election year . ''
'You just played a quote from me in 2016 .
We can play that game all day long where you can play a quote from Chuck Schumer saying you 've got to confirm the nominee , '' Cruz said .
In contrast with his argument four years ago , Cruz , who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee , cited the numerous times Supreme Court justices had been confirmed in election years , though he did not mention that the only vacancy to occur closer to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice Roger Taney died .
In that instance , President Abraham Lincoln waited until after the election before naming Salmon P. Chase as his nominee .
Cruz said his position was not about partisan power , but `` a question of checks and balances '' and the will of the voters , as expressed in the previous election .
`` In order for Supreme Court nomination to go forward , you have to have the president and the Senate – in this instance , the American people voted , '' Cruz said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do this and the Senate was elected to confirm this nomination . ''
Cruz also argued it was important to fill the seat ahead of the election because if there were legal challenges similar to those between Al Gore and George W. Bush in 2000 , a tied court `` could make this presidential election drag on weeks and months and well into next year . ''
`` That is an intolerable situation for the country .
We need a full court on Election Day , given the very high likelihood that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goes to the court , '' he said .
Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey , a Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee , said Garland 's nomination was not comparable because Scalia 's death occurred more than six months earlier than Ginsburg 's .
He said for the Republicans who opposed Garland in 2016 to change their position now would do a `` tremendous amount of damage to the institution of the Senate as well as to the legitimacy of the court . ''
`` This is one of those moments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and take a beat and understand what we 're doing and the consequences and how they could radiate throughout time , '' Booker said .

Bill and Hillary Clinton bash McConnell for pushing forward with Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement
Show Caption Hide Caption U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg remembered nationwide Vigils, murals and memorials were dedicated to Ruth Bader Ginsburg across the country in the aftermath of her passing at age 87 on Friday, Sept. 18. USA TODAY, Wochit
Former President Bill Clinton, who nominated Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court during his first year in office, remembered her as a "force for equality for men, as well as women," and said he was not surprised by the celebrity Ginsburg gained later in life because she "symbolizes everything that's best about America" and was "always on the level."
Clinton was far less complimentary of Republicans who have indicated since her death Friday that they wish to replace the liberal-leaning Ginsburg with a Trump appointee, regardless of the outcome of the Nov. 3 presidential election.
In three television interviews Sunday, Clinton accused McConnell of hypocrisy because he argued in 2016 that voters should weigh in before then-President Barack Obama tried to fill a Supreme Court vacancy in an election year.
"He said we had to trust the American people and give the voters a voice in the last Supreme Court selection when President Obama nominated Merrick Garland," Clinton told ABC News, referring to the judge who was blocked by McConnell after being nominated nearly eight months before the election. "Today it seems that Senator McConnell has lost his faith in the judgment of the American people and wants to hurry up and put somebody on the court."
GOP senators and SCOTUS vote: Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins oppose vote on Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement before election
On CNN's "State of the Union," Clinton said McConnell had a point about giving voters a say in 2016. But he said it was "superficially hypocritical" to change his argument "when the shoe's on the other foot, and he wants the judge."
Hillary Clinton, who would have picked the nominee to fill the vacant seat if she had won in 2016, said McConnell set the precedent and should now follow it.
"And that new precedent, which they all defended incredibly passionately, is to wait for the next president, whoever that is, to make the nomination. But as you clearly heard, that is not what they are intending," she said on NBC News' "Meet the Press."
The former first lady said such a reversal would be "another blow to our institutions."
"Our institutions are being basically undermined by the lust for power: power for personal gain in the case of the president, or power for institutional gain in the case of Mitch McConnell."
Then and now: What McConnell, others said about Merrick Garland in 2016 vs. after Ginsburg's death
Tim Murtaugh, communications director for the Trump campaign said in a statement Sunday, "When there’s a Supreme Court vacancy, the President selects a nominee and the Senate provides advice and consent. That’s what the Constitution says and those are the only rules."
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, argued on ABC News' "This Week" that Democrats were also being inconsistent because in 2016, they were crying for the nominee to be confirmed.
George Stephanopoulos had played a clip of Cruz from 2016 in which Cruz argued against Garland's nomination, saying "it has been 80 years since a Supreme Court vacancy was nominated and confirmed in an election year. There is a long tradition that you don't do this in an election year."
'You just played a quote from me in 2016. We can play that game all day long where you can play a quote from Chuck Schumer saying you've got to confirm the nominee," Cruz said.
In contrast with his argument four years ago, Cruz, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, cited the numerous times Supreme Court justices had been confirmed in election years, though he did not mention that the only vacancy to occur closer to an election was in 1864 when Chief Justice Roger Taney died. In that instance, President Abraham Lincoln waited until after the election before naming Salmon P. Chase as his nominee.
Cruz said his position was not about partisan power, but "a question of checks and balances" and the will of the voters, as expressed in the previous election.
"In order for Supreme Court nomination to go forward, you have to have the president and the Senate – in this instance, the American people voted," Cruz said. "And so the president was elected to do this and the Senate was elected to confirm this nomination."
Cruz also argued it was important to fill the seat ahead of the election because if there were legal challenges similar to those between Al Gore and George W. Bush in 2000, a tied court "could make this presidential election drag on weeks and months and well into next year."
"That is an intolerable situation for the country. We need a full court on Election Day, given the very high likelihood that we're going to see litigation that goes to the court," he said.
Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, a Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Garland's nomination was not comparable because Scalia's death occurred more than six months earlier than Ginsburg's.
He said for the Republicans who opposed Garland in 2016 to change their position now would do a "tremendous amount of damage to the institution of the Senate as well as to the legitimacy of the court."
"This is one of those moments where I wish we would step back and take a beat and understand what we're doing and the consequences and how they could radiate throughout time," Booker said.


usatoday--2020-09-21--Colts star Darius Leonard accidentally gives young fan his wedding ring after game

Indianapolis Colts linebacker Darius Leonard left one young fan with a special gift after Sunday 's 28-11 victory over the @ @ @ @ @ Stadium .
Leonard took off his white gloves after the game and handed to them @ @ @ @ @ as he headed to the locker room .
However , an even bigger surprise was @ @ @ @ @ and Leonard .
A tweet from Tyler Brooke , who said the fan is his @ @ @ @ @ Monday morning , looking for a way to return Leonard 's ring .
Leonard responded @ @ @ @ @ I need that , '' adding four laughing emojis .
Brooke replied , `` Keep @ @ @ @ @ we got it taken care of . ''
Leonard was a Pro Bowl selection in @ @ @ @ @ in 2018 as a rookie .
He had six tackles against the Vikings on Sunday @

Colts star Darius Leonard accidentally gives young fan his wedding ring after game
Show Caption Hide Caption NFL overreactions: Cowboys miracle, Chiefs comeback, injuries define Week 2 SportsPulse: Crazy comebacks and devastating injuries defined a jam-packed Sunday. USA TODAY Sports' Mackenzie Salmon reacts to all the biggest story lines from Week 2 around the NFL. USA TODAY
Indianapolis Colts linebacker Darius Leonard left one young fan with a special gift after Sunday's 28-11 victory over the Minnesota Vikings at Lucas Oil Stadium.
Leonard took off his white gloves after the game and handed to them the fan in the stands as he headed to the locker room.
However, an even bigger surprise was in store for the fan and Leonard.
Inside the glove, the fan found Leonard's wedding ring.
A tweet from Tyler Brooke, who said the fan is his step-nephew, mentioned the incident Monday morning, looking for a way to return Leonard's ring.
My step-nephew got @dsleon45’s game gloves yesterday.
Plot twist: Leonard’s wedding ring was accidentally in the gloves.
Someone help us get his ring back to him 😂#Colts pic.twitter.com/Lhat6PDK4A — Tyler Brooke (@TylerDBrooke) September 21, 2020
Leonard responded to the tweet, "I need that," adding four laughing emojis.
Brooke replied, "Keep me posted! Sounds like we got it taken care of."
Leonard was a Pro Bowl selection in 2019 and an All-Pro pick in 2018 as a rookie. He had six tackles against the Vikings on Sunday.


usatoday--2020-09-20--Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins oppose vote on Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement before election

Sen. Lisa Murkowski definitively said Sunday she does not support voting on a nominee to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court before the Nov. 3 election , repeating a belief she had expressed previously when the question was theoretical .
`` For weeks , I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election .
Sadly , what was then a hypothetical is now our reality , but my position has not changed , '' the Alaska Republican said in a statement .
Hours before Ginsburg 's death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Media on Friday she would not vote on a nominee so close to an election .
She cited the decision in 2016 not to move forward with a vote on Merrick Garland , who was nominated by then-President Barack Obama in March , because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell thought it should be left up to the voters in November .
`` The closer you get to an election , that argument becomes even more important , '' she said .
`` I did not support taking up a nomination eight months before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ created by the passing of Justice Scalia , '' Murkowski said Sunday .
`` We are now even closer to the 2020 election – less than two months out – and I believe the same standard must apply . ''
McConnell , R-Ky. , has said the Senate would hold a full vote on President Donald Trump 's nominee .
Trump has said he plans to offer up a nominee soon .
Murkowski joins Sen. Susan Collins of Maine as the only two Senate Republicans to explicitly reject the idea of voting on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more GOP senators would have to join them to give Democrats the 51 votes needed to block a potential nominee .
Sen. Lamar Alexander , R-Tenn. , made it clear Sunday he would not be joining Murkowski and Collins in their dissent .
Some had speculated that Alexander , who is retiring , might also call his colleagues to wait for the election .
`` No one should be surprised that a Republican Senate majority would vote on a Republican President ’ s Supreme Court nomination , even during a presidential election year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution gives senators the power to do it .
The voters who elected them expect it .
`` Going back to George Washington , the Senate has confirmed many nominees to the Supreme Court during a presidential election year .
It has refused to confirm several when the President and Senate majority were of different parties .
Senator McConnell is only doing what Democrat leaders have said they would do if the shoe were on the other foot . ''
On Saturday , Collins – a moderate from Maine who is locked in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` in order for the American people to have faith in their elected officials , we must act fairly and consistently – no matter which political party is in power . ''
She said Trump has the constitutional authority to put forward a nominee and she would have no problem with the Senate Judiciary Committee beginning the review process .
`` Given the proximity of the presidential election , however , I do not believe that the Senate should vote on the nominee prior to the election , '' she said .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who will either be re-electing the president or selecting a new one , the decision on a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court should be made by the President who is elected on November 3rd . ''
Who might succeed Justice Ginsburg ?
: Trump 's short list begins with these five women ( and one man ) Pelosi : Democrats 'have our options ' when asked about impeaching Trump if he replaces Ginsburg

Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins oppose vote on Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement before election
Show Caption Hide Caption Remembering the life and accomplishments of Ruth Bader Ginsburg Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died at age 87. Ginsburg is most noted for her lifelong fight for equality for women. USA TODAY
Sen. Lisa Murkowski definitively said Sunday she does not support voting on a nominee to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court before the Nov. 3 election, repeating a belief she had expressed previously when the question was theoretical.
"For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election. Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed," the Alaska Republican said in a statement.
Hours before Ginsburg's death was announced, Murkowski told Alaska Public Media on Friday she would not vote on a nominee so close to an election. She cited the decision in 2016 not to move forward with a vote on Merrick Garland, who was nominated by then-President Barack Obama in March, because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell thought it should be left up to the voters in November.
"The closer you get to an election, that argument becomes even more important," she said.
November election: Trump, Democrats thrust Supreme Court fight forward as a central issue
"I did not support taking up a nomination eight months before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia," Murkowski said Sunday. "We are now even closer to the 2020 election – less than two months out – and I believe the same standard must apply."
McConnell, R-Ky., has said the Senate would hold a full vote on President Donald Trump's nominee. Trump has said he plans to offer up a nominee soon.
Murkowski joins Sen. Susan Collins of Maine as the only two Senate Republicans to explicitly reject the idea of voting on a nominee before the election. Two more GOP senators would have to join them to give Democrats the 51 votes needed to block a potential nominee.
Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., made it clear Sunday he would not be joining Murkowski and Collins in their dissent. Some had speculated that Alexander, who is retiring, might also call his colleagues to wait for the election.
"No one should be surprised that a Republican Senate majority would vote on a Republican President’s Supreme Court nomination, even during a presidential election year," Alexander said. "The Constitution gives senators the power to do it. The voters who elected them expect it.
"Going back to George Washington, the Senate has confirmed many nominees to the Supreme Court during a presidential election year. It has refused to confirm several when the President and Senate majority were of different parties. Senator McConnell is only doing what Democrat leaders have said they would do if the shoe were on the other foot."
On Saturday, Collins – a moderate from Maine who is locked in a tight battle for reelection – said "in order for the American people to have faith in their elected officials, we must act fairly and consistently – no matter which political party is in power."
She said Trump has the constitutional authority to put forward a nominee and she would have no problem with the Senate Judiciary Committee beginning the review process.
"Given the proximity of the presidential election, however, I do not believe that the Senate should vote on the nominee prior to the election," she said. "In fairness to the American people, who will either be re-electing the president or selecting a new one, the decision on a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court should be made by the President who is elected on November 3rd."
Who might succeed Justice Ginsburg?: Trump's short list begins with these five women (and one man)
Pelosi: Democrats 'have our options' when asked about impeaching Trump if he replaces Ginsburg


usatoday--2020-09-22--President Donald Trump welcomes high school football players on stage at rally who carried thin blue

The two Little Miami High School ( Ohio ) football players who carried thin blue line and thin red line flags onto a field supporting police and firefighters were brought on stage at President Donald Trump 's Monday night rally near Toledo .
Trump introduced the two students , cornerback Brady Williams and linebacker Jared Bentley , by talking about the need to support police officers , according to a C-SPAN video of the Monday rally .
`` We have to give them back their dignity , '' Trump said of law enforcement .
`` We have to let them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said the two high school football players were `` good looking kids . ''
`` They became more famous than President Trump , '' said the president .
`` They were beautiful , I watched them running through the crowds with those flags . ''
Before Little Miami 's game on Sept. 11 , two players ran onto the field carrying those flags .
According to thinbluelineusa.com , the thin blue line flag shows support for the nation ’ s law enforcement officers .
Similarly , the red thin line flag shows support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Williams and Bentley were initially suspended from the team for carrying the flags after being told not to do so .
They are the sons of a police officer and firefighter .
The suspension was lifted the next day , after backlash that included a petition signed by thousands and a tweet from the president 's son Donald Trump Jr. On Monday night , Trump introduced Bentley and Williams by name at a rally outside of Toledo .
He waved his hands and told them to come up on stage .
`` I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
`` You 've become famous .
They 're going to go to Hollywood , they 're going to become movie actors right now . ''
Trump asked how their football team was going .
One of the young men answered , `` could be better . ''
Trump said `` good luck '' as they walked off the stage and called them `` good guys '' twice as the crowd at the rally erupted into chants of `` USA . ''
`` So Jared and Brady , thank you for supporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Trump said .

Chris Mayhew and Jackie Borchardt, Cincinnati Enquirer

President Donald Trump welcomes high school football players on stage at rally who carried thin blue/red flags
The two Little Miami High School (Ohio) football players who carried thin blue line and thin red line flags onto a field supporting police and firefighters were brought on stage at President Donald Trump's Monday night rally near Toledo.
Trump introduced the two students, cornerback Brady Williams and linebacker Jared Bentley, by talking about the need to support police officers, according to a C-SPAN video of the Monday rally.
"We have to give them back their dignity," Trump said of law enforcement. "We have to let them do their job."
The president said the two high school football players were "good looking kids."
"They became more famous than President Trump," said the president. "They were beautiful, I watched them running through the crowds with those flags."
Before Little Miami's game on Sept. 11, two players ran onto the field carrying those flags.
According to thinbluelineusa.com, the thin blue line flag shows support for the nation’s law enforcement officers. Similarly, the red thin line flag shows support for the nation’s firefighters.
Williams and Bentley were initially suspended from the team for carrying the flags after being told not to do so. They are the sons of a police officer and firefighter. The suspension was lifted the next day, after backlash that included a petition signed by thousands and a tweet from the president's son Donald Trump Jr.
On Monday night, Trump introduced Bentley and Williams by name at a rally outside of Toledo. He waved his hands and told them to come up on stage.
"I want to congratulate you," Trump said. "You've become famous. They're going to go to Hollywood, they're going to become movie actors right now."
Trump asked how their football team was going.
One of the young men answered, "could be better."
Trump said "good luck" as they walked off the stage and called them "good guys" twice as the crowd at the rally erupted into chants of "USA."
"So Jared and Brady, thank you for supporting the heroes in our law enforcement," Trump said.