courthousenews--2020-07-21--Predicting Pandemic to Worsen, Trump Calls on Americans to Wear Masks

WASHINGTON ( CN ) — With over 140,000 people in the U.S. dead from Covid-19 , President Donald Trump encouraged Americans to wear face masks Tuesday during his first White House coronavirus briefing in 85 days .
“ It will probably unfortunately get worse before it gets better , ” Trump told masked reporters gathered at the White House on Tuesday evening , suggesting people “ put on the mask ” if they ’ re close together .
“ In theory you don ’ t need the mask .
I ’ m used to the mask .
The reason is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helps .
It helps .
We have experts that have said in the recent past that masks aren ’ t exactly good to wear , you know that .
But now they ’ ve changed their mind , ” the president said .
When the pandemic began to unfold in America at a rapid pace in March , Dr. Anthony Fauci , a leading member of the White House coronavirus taskforce , suggested uniform mask wearing was not necessary .
The Trump administration ’ s own Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Health Organization said the same thing at the time as the world ’ s understanding of how the virus spread was still being formulated .
The CDC did not issue its direction to wear face coverings or masks in public until April , right around the time the agency finally issued return-to-work guidelines that were widely panned by health experts as inadequate .
Tuesday ’ s short briefing featured a solo Trump without taskforce members like Fauci or Dr. Deborah Birx accompanying him .
The president began with his prepared remarks advocating mask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in previous briefings .
“ We ’ re asking everybody that when you are not able to socially distance , wear a mask .
Get a mask .
Whether you like the mask or not , they have an impact .
They ’ ll have an effect and we need everything we can get , ” he said .
Trump also said he is tested for the virus every two to three days , contradicting a claim from White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany earlier Tuesday that the president is tested every day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about why he has not donned a face mask in public more often , Trump fished one with a presidential seal from his pocket and said that he wears it when he is in a group or on an elevator .
“ I want to protect them also .
I put on a mask .
I have no problem with a mask .
I view it this way : anything that potentially can help and certainly can potentially help is a good thing .
I have no problem .
I carry it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wearing it a number of times and I ’ ll continue , ” he said .
The president also praised the current national testing capacity .
Testing has been an uphill slog since the pandemic began with access to tests and results being delayed .
The U.S. only hit a range of about 500,000 to 700,000 tests administered per day in June , according to the Covid Tracking Project .
Johns Hopkins University reports that 3.8 million Americans have been infected with Covid-19 and 141,000 have died as of Tuesday afternoon .
With @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and California gradually reining in infections , capacity is improving .
But in states like Arizona , Texas and Florida – where social distancing restrictions were lifted early by state officials and mask mandates narrowly enforced at best – testing capacity is floundering .
Trump said he will receive a presentation soon on whether the federal government will fork over billions more to assist states with testing .
With the November election just 105 days away , reporters also asked the president whether he felt voters would judge him on the ballot for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The American people will judge us on this and on the economy I created .
I am already creating and setting record job numbers .
And we ’ ll have a very strong year next year and a very strong third and fourth quarter , ” Trump said .
Thirty-two million Americans are currently jobless .
At a hearing last month , Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell told Congress he expected the economy to continue to struggle in the third and fourth quarters so long as the pandemic recovery is slow .

Over 140,000 people in the U.S. have died from Covid-19 and President Donald Trump encouraged Americans to wear masks Tuesday during his first White House coronavirus briefing in 85 days.
WASHINGTON (CN) — With over 140,000 people in the U.S. dead from Covid-19, President Donald Trump encouraged Americans to wear face masks Tuesday during his first White House coronavirus briefing in 85 days.
“It will probably unfortunately get worse before it gets better," Trump told masked reporters gathered at the White House on Tuesday evening, suggesting people “put on the mask” if they’re close together.
“In theory you don’t need the mask. I’m used to the mask. The reason is, think about patriotism. Maybe it helps. It helps. We have experts that have said in the recent past that masks aren’t exactly good to wear, you know that. But now they’ve changed their mind,” the president said.
When the pandemic began to unfold in America at a rapid pace in March, Dr. Anthony Fauci, a leading member of the White House coronavirus taskforce, suggested uniform mask wearing was not necessary.
The Trump administration’s own Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. surgeon general and the World Health Organization said the same thing at the time as the world’s understanding of how the virus spread was still being formulated.
The CDC did not issue its direction to wear face coverings or masks in public until April, right around the time the agency finally issued return-to-work guidelines that were widely panned by health experts as inadequate.
Tuesday’s short briefing featured a solo Trump without taskforce members like Fauci or Dr. Deborah Birx accompanying him. The president began with his prepared remarks advocating mask wearing in language markedly more measured than in previous briefings.
“We're asking everybody that when you are not able to socially distance, wear a mask. Get a mask. Whether you like the mask or not, they have an impact. They'll have an effect and we need everything we can get," he said.
Trump also said he is tested for the virus every two to three days, contradicting a claim from White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany earlier Tuesday that the president is tested every day.
In response to questions from reporters about why he has not donned a face mask in public more often, Trump fished one with a presidential seal from his pocket and said that he wears it when he is in a group or on an elevator.
“I want to protect them also. I put on a mask. I have no problem with a mask. I view it this way: anything that potentially can help and certainly can potentially help is a good thing. I have no problem. I carry it. I wear it. You saw me wearing it a number of times and I’ll continue,” he said.
The president also praised the current national testing capacity. Testing has been an uphill slog since the pandemic began with access to tests and results being delayed.
The U.S. only hit a range of about 500,000 to 700,000 tests administered per day in June, according to the Covid Tracking Project. Johns Hopkins University reports that 3.8 million Americans have been infected with Covid-19 and 141,000 have died as of Tuesday afternoon.
With former massive virus hotspots like New York and California gradually reining in infections, capacity is improving. But in states like Arizona, Texas and Florida – where social distancing restrictions were lifted early by state officials and mask mandates narrowly enforced at best – testing capacity is floundering.
Trump said he will receive a presentation soon on whether the federal government will fork over billions more to assist states with testing.
With the November election just 105 days away, reporters also asked the president whether he felt voters would judge him on the ballot for how he has handled the pandemic.
“The American people will judge us on this and on the economy I created. I am already creating and setting record job numbers. And we’ll have a very strong year next year and a very strong third and fourth quarter,” Trump said.
Thirty-two million Americans are currently jobless. At a hearing last month, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell told Congress he expected the economy to continue to struggle in the third and fourth quarters so long as the pandemic recovery is slow.


courthousenews--2020-07-21--California Settles Fight Over Hoarded Dam Water

( CN ) — Resolving an environmental lawsuit hatched during the state ’ s recent historic drought , California regulators on Tuesday promised new actions intended to ease the demise of endangered salmon populations .
As part of a settlement reached with fishing and environmentalist groups , the California State Water Resources Control Board says it will increase transparency and conduct heightened evaluations when deciding water quality standards and flow limits for the state ’ s critical waterways .
In addition , the water board will lobby the federal government to keep more cold water in the state ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Led by the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance , the environmentalists celebrated the deal as a “ landmark settlement ” that stands to boost protections for fish by improving water quality in the Sacramento River and the San Francisco Bay-Delta .
“ The water board ’ s long-standing pattern and practice of inadequately implementing foundational environmental laws has brought the Central Valley aquatic ecosystem to the brink of collapse , ” said alliance executive director Bill Jennings in a statement .
“ This settlement agreement is a major step forward , compelling the State @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it had previously ignored.
” The lawsuit filed in 2015 in Alameda County Superior Court had environmentalists claiming the water board wrongly waived and loosened certain river flow standards during California ’ s bitter drought .
The plaintiffs argue the water board trampled public trust laws and ignored imperiled wildlife when it granted modifications , known as temporary urgency change petitions , for the State Water Project and the Central Valley Water Project .
In essence , the modifications allowed the operators of California ’ s two largest water delivery systems to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and subsequently less water downstream for fish .
In addition , temperature criteria at certain points on the upper Sacramento River were moved upstream or reduced .
Instead of protecting fish and water quality during the record dry-stretch that resulted in strict water restrictions on California cities , environmentalists say the state caved to pressure from the federal government which was seeking to maximize deliveries to thirsty farmers and cities despite drought conditions .
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Water Resources , which manage the state ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jointly operate two massive delivery networks , countered the reduced flows were necessary to keep enough cold water behind dams to be released in the fall .
The feds ensured the water board they could keep river temperatures cool enough to allow eggs and juvenile salmon to survive the drought .
But after the water board signed off on the feds ’ plan , temperatures below Shasta Dam near Redding spiked in 2014 , frying salmon eggs and killing nearly an entire generation of winter-run and fall-run Chinook salmon .
The bureau blamed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failed temperature monitoring equipment and faulty modeling .
Under the terms of Tuesday ’ s settlement , when considering future temporary modifications the water board will have to conduct enhanced analysis on the potential impacts to public trust resources such as the health of fish below dams .
In addition , the water board will have to explain its findings and describe its decision in writing .
It additionally commits to following a similar process when evaluating updates to the Bay-Delta Plan , which protects the water quality of the San Francisco Bay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As for the Sacramento River , the water board will request within 30 days that the bureau develop a new protocol for temperature monitoring , modeling and planning for future droughts .
The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance , California Water Impact Network and AquAlliance cast the sweeping settlement as a boon for residents and wildlife .
“ A transparent process is the only way to ensure the water board complies with the law , ” said Barbara Vlamis , AquAlliance executive director .
“ Backroom deals will be a lot harder when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ writing , how it is advancing the public ’ s interests in the public trust.
” By agreeing to the deal , the water board will pay the plaintiffs $ 175,000 for legal fees ; the 11-page deal also includes the following disclaimer : “ This settlement agreement does not commit the State Water Board to any particular outcome relating to Sacramento River Temperature Management , temporary urgency change petitions , the Bay-Delta Plan update , or any other related water rights or water quality planning proceedings.
” Water board spokesman George Kostyrko @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , claiming the settlement was “ modest ” and “ no way landmark.
” “ The water board settled the environmental groups ’ lawsuit to conserve state resources and avoid protracted litigation-driven expenses .
As part of the settlement , the board agreed to a few modest measures to better present and explain analyses it performs as part of its planning and water right processes , ” Kostyrko said in an email .
The deal comes amid an ongoing fight between the Trump administration and the state over the future management of California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sides are fighting over new limits on how much water can be taken from California ’ s largest estuary for agricultural deliveries , as well as temperature management standards .

Resolving an environmental lawsuit hatched during the state’s recent historic drought, California regulators on Tuesday promised new actions intended to ease the demise of endangered salmon populations.
(CN) — Resolving an environmental lawsuit hatched during the state’s recent historic drought, California regulators on Tuesday promised new actions intended to ease the demise of endangered salmon populations.
As part of a settlement reached with fishing and environmentalist groups, the California State Water Resources Control Board says it will increase transparency and conduct heightened evaluations when deciding water quality standards and flow limits for the state’s critical waterways. In addition, the water board will lobby the federal government to keep more cold water in the state’s largest river during salmon migration periods.
Led by the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, the environmentalists celebrated the deal as a “landmark settlement” that stands to boost protections for fish by improving water quality in the Sacramento River and the San Francisco Bay-Delta.
“The water board’s long-standing pattern and practice of inadequately implementing foundational environmental laws has brought the Central Valley aquatic ecosystem to the brink of collapse,” said alliance executive director Bill Jennings in a statement. “This settlement agreement is a major step forward, compelling the State Water Board to fulfill crucial legal requirements it had previously ignored.”
The lawsuit filed in 2015 in Alameda County Superior Court had environmentalists claiming the water board wrongly waived and loosened certain river flow standards during California’s bitter drought.
The plaintiffs argue the water board trampled public trust laws and ignored imperiled wildlife when it granted modifications, known as temporary urgency change petitions, for the State Water Project and the Central Valley Water Project. In essence, the modifications allowed the operators of California’s two largest water delivery systems to keep more water behind dams during the drought and subsequently less water downstream for fish. In addition, temperature criteria at certain points on the upper Sacramento River were moved upstream or reduced.
Instead of protecting fish and water quality during the record dry-stretch that resulted in strict water restrictions on California cities, environmentalists say the state caved to pressure from the federal government which was seeking to maximize deliveries to thirsty farmers and cities despite drought conditions.
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Water Resources, which manage the state’s largest reservoirs in Shasta and Oroville and jointly operate two massive delivery networks, countered the reduced flows were necessary to keep enough cold water behind dams to be released in the fall. The feds ensured the water board they could keep river temperatures cool enough to allow eggs and juvenile salmon to survive the drought.
But after the water board signed off on the feds’ plan, temperatures below Shasta Dam near Redding spiked in 2014, frying salmon eggs and killing nearly an entire generation of winter-run and fall-run Chinook salmon. The bureau blamed the warm temperatures and resulting die-offs on failed temperature monitoring equipment and faulty modeling.
Under the terms of Tuesday’s settlement, when considering future temporary modifications the water board will have to conduct enhanced analysis on the potential impacts to public trust resources such as the health of fish below dams. In addition, the water board will have to explain its findings and describe its decision in writing. It additionally commits to following a similar process when evaluating updates to the Bay-Delta Plan, which protects the water quality of the San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
As for the Sacramento River, the water board will request within 30 days that the bureau develop a new protocol for temperature monitoring, modeling and planning for future droughts.
The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, California Water Impact Network and AquAlliance cast the sweeping settlement as a boon for residents and wildlife.
“A transparent process is the only way to ensure the water board complies with the law,” said Barbara Vlamis, AquAlliance executive director. “Backroom deals will be a lot harder when the water board has to explain, in writing, how it is advancing the public’s interests in the public trust.”
By agreeing to the deal, the water board will pay the plaintiffs $175,000 for legal fees; the 11-page deal also includes the following disclaimer: “This settlement agreement does not commit the State Water Board to any particular outcome relating to Sacramento River Temperature Management, temporary urgency change petitions, the Bay-Delta Plan update, or any other related water rights or water quality planning proceedings.”
Water board spokesman George Kostyrko attempted to smother the plaintiffs’ celebration, claiming the settlement was “modest” and “no way landmark.”
“The water board settled the environmental groups’ lawsuit to conserve state resources and avoid protracted litigation-driven expenses. As part of the settlement, the board agreed to a few modest measures to better present and explain analyses it performs as part of its planning and water right processes,” Kostyrko said in an email.
The deal comes amid an ongoing fight between the Trump administration and the state over the future management of California’s most precious resource. The sides are fighting over new limits on how much water can be taken from California’s largest estuary for agricultural deliveries, as well as temperature management standards.


courthousenews--2020-07-21--House Passes Defense Bill Removing Confederate Names From Bases

The push to rename military bases and facilities bearing the names of Confederate figures has bipartisan , though not unanimous , support in Congress .
WASHINGTON ( CN ) — The House of Representatives passed a $ 740 billion military spending package on Tuesday , despite a veto threat from President Donald Trump over the renaming of military bases named after Confederate figures .
The sweeping defense bill , called the National Defense Authorization Act , passed the Democrat-controlled House 295-125 on Tuesday evening .
The Senate has started consideration of its own version of the bill and is expected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In addition to setting the Pentagon ’ s budget , the House bill is also packed with a list of policy priorities .
These include banning the Confederate flag on military bases and a process for renaming bases and facilities named for people “ who served in the political or military leadership of any armed rebellion against the United States.
” The Senate version of the bill has a similar renaming requirement and the move to rename military assets that bear the names of Confederate figures has bipartisan , though not unanimous , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threatened a veto for any bill that comes to his desk requiring new names for military assets .
The president has lamented the movement to remove Confederate symbols from the bases , casting it as an attempt to erase history .
“ We won two World Wars , beautiful World Wars that were vicious and horrible and we won them out of Fort Bragg , we won them out of all of these forts and now they want to throw those names away , ” Trump said in an interview with Fox News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ veto threat the White House released on Tuesday said the push to rename the bases would harm the legacy of people who served on the installations and warned it could extend to founders like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson .
“ President Trump has been clear in his opposition to politically motivated attempts like this to rewrite history and to displace the enduring legacy of the American Revolution with a new left-wing cultural revolution , ” the statement of administration policy states .
Outside of government , Trump has also criticized NASCAR for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In addition to the renaming issue , the White House also objects to provisions in the bill that would put constraints on how money is spent in Afghanistan and prevent the administration from pulling troops out of Germany , as well as other initiatives included in the legislation .
The massive defense bill has become law in 59 straight years and is one of the few that comes through Congress every year that is all but guaranteed to pass given its subject matter .
Debate over the massive bill began in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ afternoon as lawmakers voted on a steady stream of amendments , some of which touched on military policy and some that went far beyond .
One of those amendments approved on Monday limits the president ’ s authority under the Insurrection Act , an early 19th century law that allows the president to deploy military personnel to enforce domestic law in certain circumstances .
Though he has not invoked the law , Trump has threatened to do so in response to nationwide protests against police brutality spurred by the death of George Floyd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minneapolis police .
With a 93-324 vote , the House defeated an effort from progressive Democrats to cut the bill ’ s spending authorization by 10 % and by a 129-284 vote rejected an amendment from Representative Ilhan Omar , a Minnesota Democrat , to accelerate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan .
Representative Brad Sherman , a California Democrat , said the bill includes positive provisions , but faulted it for not making permanent language preventing the administration from spending money in contravention to the War Powers Act .
“ We had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ War Powers Act is not enforceable against a president , but with this provision it is , ” Sherman told Courthouse News .
“ We ’ ve got to enforce the War Powers Act .
”

The House of Representatives passed a $740 billion military spending package on Tuesday, despite a veto threat from President Donald Trump over the renaming of military bases named after Confederate figures.
WASHINGTON (CN) — The House of Representatives passed a $740 billion military spending package on Tuesday, despite a veto threat from President Donald Trump over the renaming of military bases named after Confederate figures.
The sweeping defense bill, called the National Defense Authorization Act, passed the Democrat-controlled House 295-125 on Tuesday evening. The Senate has started consideration of its own version of the bill and is expected to pass the measure next week.
In addition to setting the Pentagon’s budget, the House bill is also packed with a list of policy priorities. These include banning the Confederate flag on military bases and a process for renaming bases and facilities named for people “who served in the political or military leadership of any armed rebellion against the United States.”
The Senate version of the bill has a similar renaming requirement and the move to rename military assets that bear the names of Confederate figures has bipartisan, though not unanimous, support in Congress.
But Trump has threatened a veto for any bill that comes to his desk requiring new names for military assets. The president has lamented the movement to remove Confederate symbols from the bases, casting it as an attempt to erase history.
“We won two World Wars, beautiful World Wars that were vicious and horrible and we won them out of Fort Bragg, we won them out of all of these forts and now they want to throw those names away,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News that aired on Sunday.
The formal veto threat the White House released on Tuesday said the push to rename the bases would harm the legacy of people who served on the installations and warned it could extend to founders like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
“President Trump has been clear in his opposition to politically motivated attempts like this to rewrite history and to displace the enduring legacy of the American Revolution with a new left-wing cultural revolution,” the statement of administration policy states.
Outside of government, Trump has also criticized NASCAR for banning the Confederate flag at its races.
In addition to the renaming issue, the White House also objects to provisions in the bill that would put constraints on how money is spent in Afghanistan and prevent the administration from pulling troops out of Germany, as well as other initiatives included in the legislation.
The massive defense bill has become law in 59 straight years and is one of the few that comes through Congress every year that is all but guaranteed to pass given its subject matter.
Debate over the massive bill began in the House on Monday and stretched into Tuesday afternoon as lawmakers voted on a steady stream of amendments, some of which touched on military policy and some that went far beyond.
One of those amendments approved on Monday limits the president’s authority under the Insurrection Act, an early 19th century law that allows the president to deploy military personnel to enforce domestic law in certain circumstances.
Though he has not invoked the law, Trump has threatened to do so in response to nationwide protests against police brutality spurred by the death of George Floyd when he was in the custody of Minneapolis police.
With a 93-324 vote, the House defeated an effort from progressive Democrats to cut the bill’s spending authorization by 10% and by a 129-284 vote rejected an amendment from Representative Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat, to accelerate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.
Representative Brad Sherman, a California Democrat, said the bill includes positive provisions, but faulted it for not making permanent language preventing the administration from spending money in contravention to the War Powers Act.
“We had a Republican attorney general testify that the War Powers Act is not enforceable against a president, but with this provision it is,” Sherman told Courthouse News. “We’ve got to enforce the War Powers Act.”
Courthouse News reporter Jack Rodgers contributed to this report.


Top Eight

Your Tuesday night briefing from the staff of Courthouse News Top eight CNS stories for today including a group of moms were among peaceful protesters hit with pepper balls and dozens of cans of tear gas in Portland , Oregon ; Bitterly divided European leaders approved a landmark $ 857 billion economic stimulus package to help Europe pick itself up from the coronavirus pandemic ; President Donald Trump signed a memorandum to exclude undocumented immigrants from the decennial census count used to divvy seats in Congress , and more .
Sign up for CNS Top Eight , a roundup of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directly to your email Monday through Friday .
1 . )
Sure to trigger a swift legal challenge from the Democratic jurisdictions such a move targets , President Donald Trump signed a memorandum Tuesday to exclude undocumented immigrants from the decennial census count used to divvy seats in Congress .
2 . )
As the world anxiously awaits a Covid-19 vaccine , chief executives from a slew of pharmaceutical companies reassured Congress on Tuesday about researchers ’ progress and the steps being taken to ensure that speedy work does not come at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden unveiled the third plank of his economic agenda Tuesday , saying the country needs to invest more in caregiving for the young and old to unleash the full power of the American economy .
4 . )
Dressed in yellow , a group of moms who formed a protective wall between federal troops and the 1,000-person crowd were among peaceful protesters hit with pepper balls and dozens of cans of tear gas Monday night in Portland , Oregon .
5 . )
A recent fire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ church in Southern California has brought to the surface 250-year-old sins of Spain and the Catholic Church — part of the complicated and often painful past woven into the fabric of the Golden State .
6 . )
Even as the number of coronavirus cases in California surges past 400,000 and the death toll tops 7,000 , a group of parents sued the state Tuesday demanding schools reopen for business as usual this fall .
7 . )
After marathon negotiations in Brussels , bitterly divided European leaders on Tuesday approved a landmark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help Europe pick itself up from the coronavirus pandemic .
8 . )
Two Chinese hackers were indicted Tuesday on charges that they targeted U.S. researchers developing a vaccine for Covid-19 as part of a global campaign backed by Beijing intelligence .

Top eight CNS stories for today including a group of moms were among peaceful protesters hit with pepper balls and dozens of cans of tear gas in Portland, Oregon; Bitterly divided European leaders approved a landmark $857 billion economic stimulus package to help Europe pick itself up from the coronavirus pandemic; President Donald Trump signed a memorandum to exclude undocumented immigrants from the decennial census count used to divvy seats in Congress, and more.
Your Tuesday night briefing from the staff of Courthouse News
Top eight CNS stories for today including a group of moms were among peaceful protesters hit with pepper balls and dozens of cans of tear gas in Portland, Oregon; Bitterly divided European leaders approved a landmark $857 billion economic stimulus package to help Europe pick itself up from the coronavirus pandemic; President Donald Trump signed a memorandum to exclude undocumented immigrants from the decennial census count used to divvy seats in Congress, and more.
Sign up for CNS Top Eight, a roundup of the day’s top stories delivered directly to your email Monday through Friday.
National
1.) Sure to trigger a swift legal challenge from the Democratic jurisdictions such a move targets, President Donald Trump signed a memorandum Tuesday to exclude undocumented immigrants from the decennial census count used to divvy seats in Congress.
In this Friday, Feb. 21, 2020 photo, Stephan Patterson poses for a photo in Anchorage, Alaska. Patterson and other U.S. Census takers are reporting problems when conducting first-in-the-nation counts in rural parts of Alaska, including lack of communication about assignments, frustration with a smartphone app for filing time sheets and disappointment when they find out they are not being reimbursed for purchasing cold-weather gear. (AP Photo/Mark Thiessen)
2.) As the world anxiously awaits a Covid-19 vaccine, chief executives from a slew of pharmaceutical companies reassured Congress on Tuesday about researchers’ progress and the steps being taken to ensure that speedy work does not come at the cost of safety or efficacy.
This May 4, 2020 photo from the University of Maryland School of Medicine, the first patient enrolled in Pfizer's COVID-19 coronavirus vaccine clinical trial at the University of Maryland School of Medicine in Baltimore, receives an injection. Only about half of Americans say they would get a COVID-19 vaccine if the scientists working furiously to create one succeed, according to a poll conducted May 14-18 by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. (University of Maryland School of Medicine via AP)
3.) Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden unveiled the third plank of his economic agenda Tuesday, saying the country needs to invest more in caregiving for the young and old to unleash the full power of the American economy.
Democratic presidential candidate, former Vice President Joe Biden, speaks during a campaign event, Tuesday, July 14, 2020, in Wilmington, Del. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)
Regional
4.) Dressed in yellow, a group of moms who formed a protective wall between federal troops and the 1,000-person crowd were among peaceful protesters hit with pepper balls and dozens of cans of tear gas Monday night in Portland, Oregon.
Speakers in front of the Multnomah County Justice Center in Portland, Oregon, address protesters about police brutality Monday night, July 20. (Courthouse News photo/Karina Brown)
5.) A recent fire that badly damaged the Mission San Gabriel church in Southern California has brought to the surface 250-year-old sins of Spain and the Catholic Church — part of the complicated and often painful past woven into the fabric of the Golden State.
The charred rooftop of the 215-year old church at Mission San Gabriel in Southern California, damaged by a July 11 fire, is visible from the trellis lining the entrance to the mission’s courtyard. (Courthouse News photo / Martin Macias Jr.)
6.) Even as the number of coronavirus cases in California surges past 400,000 and the death toll tops 7,000, a group of parents sued the state Tuesday demanding schools reopen for business as usual this fall.
Residents of East Los Angeles stand in line and wait in their cars to collect food donations outside James A. Garfield High School as part of the school district’s effort to support families struggling through the Covid-19 pandemic. (Courthouse News photo / Martin Macias Jr.
International
7.) After marathon negotiations in Brussels, bitterly divided European leaders on Tuesday approved a landmark $857 billion economic stimulus package to help Europe pick itself up from the coronavirus pandemic.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, left, and French President Emmanuel Macron walk onto the podium prior to a media conference at the end of an EU summit in Brussels, Tuesday, July 21, 2020. Weary European Union leaders finally clinched an unprecedented budget and coronavirus recovery fund early Tuesday, finding unity after four days and as many nights of fighting and wrangling over money and power in one of their longest summits ever. (John Thys, Pool Photo via AP)
8.) Two Chinese hackers were indicted Tuesday on charges that they targeted U.S. researchers developing a vaccine for Covid-19 as part of a global campaign backed by Beijing intelligence.


courthousenews--2020-07-21--NAACP Loses 11th Circuit Fight Against Alabama Voter ID Law

A two-judge majority upheld the law , while a dissenting judge said it was aimed at a problem that doesn ’ t exist .
ATLANTA ( CN ) — An Alabama law requiring voters to present photo ID when casting in-person or absentee ballots is not unconstitutional or racially discriminatory , the 11th Circuit ruled Tuesday , dismissing a lawsuit filed by the state chapter of the NAACP .
A divided three-judge panel of the Atlanta-based appeals court rejected arguments by the Alabama NAACP that requiring a photo ID to vote violates the Voting Rights Act and the 14th and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the four-year legal battle over the law .
Alabama ’ s Photo Voter Identification Law “ was driven by the need to address well-documented and public cases of voter fraud that occurred in Alabama ” and presents only a “ minimal burden ” to Alabama ’ s voters , U.S .
Circuit Judge Elizabeth Branch , an appointee of President Donald Trump , wrote on behalf of the majority .
Branch was joined in the majority by Senior U.S .
Circuit Judge Ed Carnes , a George H.W .
Bush appointee .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not provide any evidence to show that the law was intended to discriminate against Black and Latino voters .
In a dissenting opinion , U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles , a Barack Obama appointee sitting by designation from the Southern District of Florida , noted that in-person voter fraud is “ virtually non-existent ” and wrote that Alabama “ likely designed a law to cure a problem that did not exist.
” Gayles also took issue with the racial disparity among voters who do not possess valid photo ID , pointing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over Republican candidate Roy Moore by a margin of less than 1 % in 2017 as evidence that the potential impact of the law on minority voters is “ meaningful.
” “ In a time where elections are closely decided , any impact on voter turnout may be significant and probative , ” he wrote .
Despite racist comments made by some lawmakers about other legislation around the time the voter ID law was being drafted , the 11th Circuit majority ruled that there is no evidence “ that the Alabama legislators who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a discriminatory impact or believed that the law would have such an effect.
” Republican State Senator Larry Dixon , who tried for years to pass a voter ID law in Alabama before his retirement in 2010 , made comments to local news outlets in which he claimed that the state ’ s lack of a photo ID law was “ beneficial to the Black power structure ” and “ benefits Black elected leaders.
” Another Republican state senator , Scott Beason , recorded himself in a 2010 meeting with other lawmakers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and referred to the children of immigrants as “ anchor babies ” in a 2011 speech .
The comments were used as evidence by the Alabama NAACP that members of the state legislature have a history of racially discriminatory motivations .
“ The statements made by individual members of the Alabama legislature at one time about other bills do not change the fact that the legislative body passed a nondiscriminatory voter ID law , supported by valid neutral justifications , and that the law permits many different forms of ID and provides @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Branch wrote .
In January 2018 , U.S. District Judge L. Scott Coogler , a George W. Bush appointee , dismissed the lawsuit brought in 2015 by the Alabama NAACP , Greater Birmingham Ministries and three minority voters against Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill .
Coogler ruled that there was no evidence that the Alabama legislature passed the 2011 law with “ racially discriminatory intent or for a racially discriminatory purpose.
” The law , which went into effect in 2014 , requires Alabama voters to present at least one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots .
Seven categories of photo ID are acceptable under the law , including driver ’ s licenses , valid passports , student IDs , or valid U.S. military ID cards .
Alabama offers a variety of free methods to allow registered voters who do not have another form of ID to obtain a photo voter ID card , including in-home visits by a mobile ID-issuing unit .
According to the 11th Circuit ’ s order , evidence presented during the proceedings indicates that less than 2 % of Alabama residents who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of photo ID .
There is only a 1 % difference in ID possession rates between white and minority Alabama voters , the ruling states .
When reached for comment Tuesday afternoon , Alabama NAACP President Benard Simelton said the organization is consulting with attorneys and will issue a statement on the ruling later in the day .
The 11th Circuit panel heard arguments in the case in July 2018 .

An Alabama law requiring voters to present photo ID when casting in-person or absentee ballots is not unconstitutional or racially discriminatory, the 11th Circuit ruled Tuesday, dismissing a lawsuit filed by the state chapter of the NAACP.
ATLANTA (CN) — An Alabama law requiring voters to present photo ID when casting in-person or absentee ballots is not unconstitutional or racially discriminatory, the 11th Circuit ruled Tuesday, dismissing a lawsuit filed by the state chapter of the NAACP.
A divided three-judge panel of the Atlanta-based appeals court rejected arguments by the Alabama NAACP that requiring a photo ID to vote violates the Voting Rights Act and the 14th and 15th Amendments, bringing an end to the four-year legal battle over the law.
Alabama’s Photo Voter Identification Law “was driven by the need to address well-documented and public cases of voter fraud that occurred in Alabama” and presents only a “minimal burden” to Alabama’s voters, U.S. Circuit Judge Elizabeth Branch, an appointee of President Donald Trump, wrote on behalf of the majority.
Branch was joined in the majority by Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Ed Carnes, a George H.W. Bush appointee. The two judges found that the Alabama NAACP did not provide any evidence to show that the law was intended to discriminate against Black and Latino voters.
In a dissenting opinion, U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles, a Barack Obama appointee sitting by designation from the Southern District of Florida, noted that in-person voter fraud is “virtually non-existent” and wrote that Alabama “likely designed a law to cure a problem that did not exist.”
Gayles also took issue with the racial disparity among voters who do not possess valid photo ID, pointing to Democratic Senator Doug Jones’ narrow victory over Republican candidate Roy Moore by a margin of less than 1% in 2017 as evidence that the potential impact of the law on minority voters is “meaningful.”
“In a time where elections are closely decided, any impact on voter turnout may be significant and probative,” he wrote.
Despite racist comments made by some lawmakers about other legislation around the time the voter ID law was being drafted, the 11th Circuit majority ruled that there is no evidence “that the Alabama legislators who supported the law intended the law to have a discriminatory impact or believed that the law would have such an effect.”
Republican State Senator Larry Dixon, who tried for years to pass a voter ID law in Alabama before his retirement in 2010, made comments to local news outlets in which he claimed that the state’s lack of a photo ID law was “beneficial to the Black power structure” and “benefits Black elected leaders.”
Another Republican state senator, Scott Beason, recorded himself in a 2010 meeting with other lawmakers referring to Black people as “Aborigines” and referred to the children of immigrants as “anchor babies” in a 2011 speech.
The comments were used as evidence by the Alabama NAACP that members of the state legislature have a history of racially discriminatory motivations.
“The statements made by individual members of the Alabama legislature at one time about other bills do not change the fact that the legislative body passed a nondiscriminatory voter ID law, supported by valid neutral justifications, and that the law permits many different forms of ID and provides for free IDs for anyone in need,” Branch wrote.
In January 2018, U.S. District Judge L. Scott Coogler, a George W. Bush appointee, dismissed the lawsuit brought in 2015 by the Alabama NAACP, Greater Birmingham Ministries and three minority voters against Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill.
Coogler ruled that there was no evidence that the Alabama legislature passed the 2011 law with “racially discriminatory intent or for a racially discriminatory purpose.”
The law, which went into effect in 2014, requires Alabama voters to present at least one form of photo ID to cast their ballots. Seven categories of photo ID are acceptable under the law, including driver’s licenses, valid passports, student IDs,or valid U.S. military ID cards.
Alabama offers a variety of free methods to allow registered voters who do not have another form of ID to obtain a photo voter ID card, including in-home visits by a mobile ID-issuing unit.
According to the 11th Circuit’s order, evidence presented during the proceedings indicates that less than 2% of Alabama residents who are eligible to vote lack a valid form of photo ID. There is only a 1% difference in ID possession rates between white and minority Alabama voters, the ruling states.
In a statement issued Tuesday evening, the Alabama NAACP said it was “very disappointed” in the ruling.
“This decision comes at a most difficult time as we mourn the loss of Congressman John Lewis who fought so hard for the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. However, the Alabama NAACP will continue this fight in honor of Congressman Lewis, we will get in Good Trouble,” said Benard Simelton, president of the Alabama NAACP.
The organization called on the Senate to take up the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019, “so that the citizens will have the full protection of the Justice Department when it comes to voting.”
“The Alabama NAACP has just begun to fight, we have taken a severe blow to the mid-section, but we have a lot of fight left”, Simelton said.
The 11th Circuit panel heard arguments in the case in July 2018.


courthousenews--2020-07-21--California Parents Sue Newsom to Reopen Schools

( CN ) — Even as the number of coronavirus cases in California surges past 400,000 and the death toll tops 7,000 , a group of parents sued the state Tuesday demanding schools reopen for business as usual this fall .
Schools across the state have been closed since March following California Governor Gavin Newsom ’ s stay-at-home order .
Last week , Newsom said schools in the state ’ s hardest-hit counties will remain closed until the virus is under control .
The Trump administration meanwhile has pushed for schools to reopen across the country this fall despite a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last few months when the virus surged after Memorial Day .
But the parents suing the state of California , Governor Newsom , state Attorney General Xavier Becerra and other officials claim there are thousands of open licensed child care centers across the state and virtual learning is no replacement for in-class lessons .
“ Not providing education for America ’ s children is not a choice , ” the parents say in their 35-page complaint , filed in the Central District of California .
They cite encouragement from the U.S. Department of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Betsy Devos , the analysis organization Center on Reinventing Public Education and a June 29 statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics which “ strongly ” advocated for students to be physically present in school this fall , because of the deficiencies from remote learning .
That organization ’ s talking point was picked up by the Trump administration to push for students to return to the classroom , but this month the group walked backed its previous statement .
“ Science should drive decision-making on safely reopening schools .
Public health agencies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not politics , ” the organization said .
The parents claim there is a “ digital divide ” in homes of “ African American and Hispanic parents ” and pointed to the lack of reliable computer or tablet devices in the home .
They claim special education students are at a disadvantage when it comes to distance learning .
“ Many parents of special needs children in California have reported that their children received none , or nearly none , of the individualized instruction guaranteed by law , ” the parents say in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gave up when faced with technology challenges , while others didn ’ t try at all , and many school districts made zero provision for delivering these federally mandated services to children , despite the federal funding provided to the state for them.
” The parents claim their children ’ s sleep schedules are impacted by not going to school .
Another parent , Erica Sephton from Riverside County , says her daughter who is about to enter transitional kindergarten needs social interaction with fellow classmates .
“ Sephton is aware of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minor risks for children do not outweigh the harm that her daughter is suffering by being deprived of her in-person education , ” according to the complaint .
The complaint details efforts taken by one Los Angeles County school district but claim Newsom ’ s continued restrictions on schools hurts students .
“ Governor Newsom ’ s inexplicable restrictions on school reopening is not based in scientific facts , and is completely arbitrary especially in light of the fact that California allows all of the functional components of schools allowed in camps and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their complaint .
They claim violation of the Equal Protection Clause for arbitrary school closures , violation of due process , civil rights act of 1964 and federal disability rights .
They ’ re seeking a court injunction against the state order to reopen schools .
The plaintiffs are represented by Harmeet Dhillon from the Dhillon Law Group .
Earlier this month , the Los Angeles Unified School District , the largest district in California , said its students would not return to the classroom this fall .
LAUSD Superintendent Austin Beutner said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in ‘ The Wizard of Oz ’ might have said ‘ Tap your heels together three times and say “ There ’ s no place like home ” and you ’ ll be there , ’ actually returning to schools is not so simple .
The federal government could help by providing the funding schools need to make it safe and appropriate for students and staff to return .
The cost of testing all at schools , maybe $ 15 billion , will help make it safer for all 50 million students and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country .
”

Even as the number of coronavirus cases in California surges past 400,000 and the death toll in the state tops 7,000, a group of parents sued the state Tuesday demanding schools reopen for business as usual this fall.
(CN) — Even as the number of coronavirus cases in California surges past 400,000 and the death toll tops 7,000, a group of parents sued the state Tuesday demanding schools reopen for business as usual this fall.
Schools across the state have been closed since March following California Governor Gavin Newsom’s stay-at-home order. Last week, Newsom said schools in the state’s hardest-hit counties will remain closed until the virus is under control.
The Trump administration meanwhile has pushed for schools to reopen across the country this fall despite a record-breaking infection rate and hospitalizations in the last few months when the virus surged after Memorial Day.
But the parents suing the state of California, Governor Newsom, state Attorney General Xavier Becerra and other officials claim there are thousands of open licensed child care centers across the state and virtual learning is no replacement for in-class lessons.
“Not providing education for America’s children is not a choice,” the parents say in their 35-page complaint, filed in the Central District of California.
They cite encouragement from the U.S. Department of Education to reopen schools, Education Secretary Betsy Devos, the analysis organization Center on Reinventing Public Education and a June 29 statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics which “strongly” advocated for students to be physically present in school this fall, because of the deficiencies from remote learning.
That organization’s talking point was picked up by the Trump administration to push for students to return to the classroom, but this month the group walked backed its previous statement.
“Science should drive decision-making on safely reopening schools. Public health agencies must make recommendations based on evidence, not politics,” the organization said.
The parents claim there is a “digital divide” in homes of “African American and Hispanic parents” and pointed to the lack of reliable computer or tablet devices in the home. They claim special education students are at a disadvantage when it comes to distance learning.
“Many parents of special needs children in California have reported that their children received none, or nearly none, of the individualized instruction guaranteed by law,” the parents say in their complaint. “Frustrated instructors simply gave up when faced with technology challenges, while others didn’t try at all, and many school districts made zero provision for delivering these federally mandated services to children, despite the federal funding provided to the state for them.”
The parents claim their children’s sleep schedules are impacted by not going to school. Another parent, Erica Sephton from Riverside County, says her daughter who is about to enter transitional kindergarten needs social interaction with fellow classmates.
“Sephton is aware of the risks of Covid-19 and believes that these minor risks for children do not outweigh the harm that her daughter is suffering by being deprived of her in-person education,” according to the complaint.
The complaint details efforts taken by one Los Angeles County school district but claim Newsom’s continued restrictions on schools hurts students.
“Governor Newsom’s inexplicable restrictions on school reopening is not based in scientific facts, and is completely arbitrary especially in light of the fact that California allows all of the functional components of schools allowed in camps and childcare,” the plaintiffs say in their complaint.
They claim violation of the Equal Protection Clause for arbitrary school closures, violation of due process, civil rights act of 1964 and federal disability rights. They’re seeking a court injunction against the state order to reopen schools.
The plaintiffs are represented by Harmeet Dhillon from the Dhillon Law Group.
Earlier this month, the Los Angeles Unified School District, the largest district in California, said its students would not return to the classroom this fall.
LAUSD Superintendent Austin Beutner said in a statement: “While Dorothy in ‘The Wizard of Oz’ might have said ‘Tap your heels together three times and say, “There’s no place like home,” and you’ll be there,’ actually returning to schools is not so simple. The federal government could help by providing the funding schools need to make it safe and appropriate for students and staff to return. The cost of testing all at schools, maybe $15 billion, will help make it safer for all 50 million students and their teachers in public schools across the country.”


courthousenews--2020-07-22--Feds Won’t Back Down, and Neither Will Portland Protesters

PORTLAND , Ore. ( CN ) — The 54th consecutive night of protests against racism and police brutality was filled with drumming and dancing , then with tear gas and flash bangs .
The stone portico of the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse is covered in graffiti and powered pepper spray — a residual that floats like federal fairy dust from pepper balls shot at protesters on previous nights by the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S .
Marshals Service .
Roughly 1,000 protesters chanted and danced to drums Tuesday night outside the courthouse until a few people started @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s when federal police emerged , flash bangs and tear gas cannisters flying .
This time they used a new formation .
Instead of bursting out of the boarded-up front doors of the courthouse to confront protesters directly , they approached in two groups from opposite sides of the building , converging to push the crowd back through the park across the street , where more tear gas cannisters wafted their toxic contents .
Protesters regrouped repeatedly , pushing back toward the courthouse only to be met with more shots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , flushing eyes and bandaging abrasions .
Fireworks exploded overhead occasionally , their green and red sparks filling the night sky .
City and state officials have objected to the deployment of federal police , whose members include the Border Patrol .
Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum filed an emergency motion for a restraining order against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security , the U.S .
Marshals Service , U.S. Customs and Border Protection on Monday .
Multiple reports indicate that federal police have grabbed protesters off the streets and detained them in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her motion , Rosenblum said it was clear from statements by President Trump and the leaders of the agencies she sued that they plan to continue such constitutionally questionable arrests .
Rosenblum cited Trump ’ s executive order , calling for federal troops and law enforcement to “ protect federal property ” for six months .
“ My administration will not allow violent mobs incited by a radical fringe to become the arbiters of the aspects of our history that can be celebrated in public spaces , ” Trump ’ s June 26 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local public officials ’ abdication of their law enforcement responsibilities in deference to this violent assault must end.
” U.S. District Judge Michael Mosman was to hear arguments on the motion Wednesday morning .
A new federal lawsuit was filed Tuesday by two Oregon state representatives , a Unitarian church and the Western States Center , claiming Trump ’ s deployment of federal troops to Portland is unconstitutional and designed to avoid police accountability .
“ Though sent in the guise of bringing order to Portland ’ s streets , their arrival has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” the lawsuit states .
Several people abducted from the streets have said the police did not identify themselves or say why they carrying out the arrests , leading some victims to worry that the perpetrators may have been right-wing militias .
Chad Wolf , acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security , told Fox News on Tuesday that federal police under his command are doing “ proactive arrests ” of Portland protesters .
“ And so the department , because we don ’ t have that local law enforcement support , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proactively arrest individuals , ” Wolf told Fox News host Martha MacCallum .
“ And we need to do that because we need to hold them accountable.
” Wolf said that video showing U.S. marshals in combat fatigues snatching protesters off the street and whisking them away in rented minivans without probable cause was taken out of context .
“ Any time you grab a few seconds of any one video , what you don ’ t see is the video in the preceding minutes and the minutes after that , ” Wolf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the day , this is a violent situation .
We have law enforcement officers going up against 400 , 500 , 600 violent individuals .
So we need to be aggressive with these individuals .
We need to hold them accountable.
” The Democratic chairs of the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform and the Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties said Tuesday that the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security have stonewalled their efforts to investigate the use of force by federal police deployed in Portland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York and Jamie Raskin of Maryland demanded information in a June 5 letter .
“ To date , we have not received any meaningful answers to our oversight requests , and the Trump Administration continues to violate the rights of American citizens and their state governments unabated , ” the lawmakers said in a joint statement .
Former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday said Trump is “ determined to sow chaos and division.
” “ We all remember the appalling scenes in front of the White House , when peaceful protesters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump photo op , ” Biden said in a statement .
“ Now Homeland Security agents — without a clearly defined mandate or authority — are ranging far from federal property , stripped of badges and insignia and identifying markings , to detain people .
They are brutally attacking peaceful protesters , including a U.S. Navy veteran.
” Oregon Senator Ron Wyden shared a video on Twitter of Portland moms leading a crowd of thousands in a protest song resembling a lullaby : “ Hands up , please don ’ t shoot me.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to convince the entire country that these people are violent anarchists , then deploy paramilitary forces to tear gas them , ” Wyden wrote .

The 54th consecutive night of protests against racism and police brutality was filled with drumming and dancing, then with tear gas and flash bangs.
PORTLAND, Ore. (CN) — The 54th consecutive night of protests against racism and police brutality was filled with drumming and dancing, then with tear gas and flash bangs.
The stone portico of the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse is covered in graffiti and powered pepper spray — a residual that floats like federal fairy dust from pepper balls shot at protesters on previous nights by the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Marshals Service.
Roughly 1,000 protesters chanted and danced to drums Tuesday night outside the courthouse until a few people started a small fire on the courthouse steps. That’s when federal police emerged, flash bangs and tear gas cannisters flying. This time they used a new formation. Instead of bursting out of the boarded-up front doors of the courthouse to confront protesters directly, they approached in two groups from opposite sides of the building, converging to push the crowd back through the park across the street, where more tear gas cannisters wafted their toxic contents.
Protesters regrouped repeatedly, pushing back toward the courthouse only to be met with more shots and flash bangs. Medics zoomed around, flushing eyes and bandaging abrasions. Fireworks exploded overhead occasionally, their green and red sparks filling the night sky.
City and state officials have objected to the deployment of federal police, whose members include the Border Patrol. Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum filed an emergency motion for a restraining order Monday against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Marshals Service, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Multiple reports indicate that federal police have grabbed protesters off the streets and detained them in unmarked vehicles without probable cause. In her motion, Rosenblum said it was clear from statements by President Trump and the leaders of the agencies she sued that they plan to continue such constitutionally questionable arrests.
Rosenblum cited Trump’s executive order, calling for federal troops and law enforcement to “protect federal property” for six months.
“My administration will not allow violent mobs incited by a radical fringe to become the arbiters of the aspects of our history that can be celebrated in public spaces,” Trump’s June 26 executive order states. “State and local public officials’ abdication of their law enforcement responsibilities in deference to this violent assault must end.”
A group of mothers who said they were there to protect protesters lined up outside the federal courthouse at a protest against police brutality in Portland, Ore., on Tuesday, July 21. (Courthouse News photo/Karina Brown)
U.S. District Judge Michael Mosman was to hear arguments on the motion Wednesday morning.
A new federal lawsuit was filed Tuesday by two Oregon state representatives, a Unitarian church and the Western States Center, claiming Trump’s deployment of federal troops to Portland is unconstitutional and designed to avoid police accountability.
“Though sent in the guise of bringing order to Portland’s streets, their arrival has made things much worse for Portlanders,” the lawsuit states. Several people abducted from the streets have said the police did not identify themselves or say why they carrying out the arrests, leading some victims to worry that the perpetrators may have been right-wing militias.
Chad Wolf, acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, told Fox News on Tuesday that federal police under his command are doing “proactive arrests” of Portland protesters.
“And so the department, because we don’t have that local law enforcement support, we are having to go out a proactively arrest individuals,” Wolf told Fox News host Martha MacCallum. “And we need to do that because we need to hold them accountable.”
Wolf said that video showing U.S. marshals in combat fatigues snatching protesters off the street and whisking them away in rented minivans without probable cause was taken out of context.
“Any time you grab a few seconds of any one video, what you don’t see is the video in the preceding minutes and the minutes after that,” Wolf said. “But at the end of the day, this is a violent situation. We have law enforcement officers going up against 400, 500, 600 violent individuals. So we need to be aggressive with these individuals. We need to hold them accountable.”
The Democratic chairs of the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform and the Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties said Tuesday that the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security have stonewalled their efforts to investigate the use of force by federal police deployed in Portland.
Five Democratic members of Congress demanded information in a June 5 letter.
“To date, we have not received any meaningful answers to our oversight requests, and the Trump Administration continues to violate the rights of American citizens and their state governments unabated,” the lawmakers said in a joint statement.
Former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday said Trump is “determined to sow chaos and division.”
“We all remember the appalling scenes in front of the White House, when peaceful protesters were gassed to make way for a Trump photo op,” Biden said in a statement. “Now Homeland Security agents — without a clearly defined mandate or authority — are ranging far from federal property, stripped of badges and insignia and identifying markings, to detain people. They are brutally attacking peaceful protesters, including a U.S. Navy veteran.”
Oregon Senator Ron Wyden shared a video on Twitter of Portland moms leading a crowd of thousands in a protest song resembling a lullaby: “Hands up, please don’t shoot me.”
“Only a coward would try to convince the entire country that these people are violent anarchists, then deploy paramilitary forces to tear gas them,” Wyden wrote.


Clinical Necessity

SAN FRANCISCO — Insurer United Behavioral Health may have misrepresented the restrictiveness of its definition of “ clinical necessity , @ @ @ @ @ California ruled in a suit brought by two substance abuse treatment providers .

The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.


Watchlists

GREENBELT , Md .
— A federal court in Maryland ruled that certain plaintiffs who are included in the government @ @ @ @ @ and various related watchlists may pursue their Religious Freedom Restoration Act claims against the government @


Opioid Crisis

CHARLESTON , W. Va. — Various cities in West Virginia failed to prove that pain treatment standards approved by a @ @ @ @ @ caused the “ widespread societal ills and costs ” associated with the opioid crisis , @ @ @ @ @ state ruled .


Wrestling

PITTSBURGH — A federal court in Pennsylvania denied professional wrestling commentator Jim Cornette ’ s motion for a preliminary injunction @ @ @ @ @ wrestler Brandon Graver from selling disparaging T-shirts bearing Cornette ’ s name and likeness .


Yahoo Settlement

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal court in California granted final approval of a $ 117 million class action settlement with @ @ @ @ @ breach .
Class members will receive credit monitoring services or a cash payment .


courthousenews--2020-07-22--Kentucky Sues Financial Firms, Advisers Over Handling of Retirement System Funds

( CN ) — Kentucky is accusing hedge-fund sellers and retirement-fund overseers of sinking its public employees and retirees into a financial quagmire that will require an extra annual $ 1 billion “ indefinitely ” to remedy .
The commonwealth asserted claims of breach of fiduciary duty and civil conspiracy on Tuesday in a 133-page lawsuit in Franklin County Circuit Court .
Kentucky is suing “ sophisticated , high-powered financial firms ” that sold the Kentucky Retirement System “ unsuitable , high-risk , high-fee funds.
” The commonwealth also sought punitive damages and the restoration of its pension funds “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial condition of KRS and the waste of its funds.
” Investment advisers were also named as defendants , along with individual KRS trustees and officers .
Entering the new millennium , the 350,000 former and present state and local employees had fully funded KRS , with a $ 2 billion surplus .
“ Today , the KRS Plans are in danger of failing .
They are among the worst-funded public pension plans in the United States , ” the lawsuit states .
The retirement system lost $ 2.2 billion in 2000 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billion loss in 2008 and 2009 , according to the complaint .
“ The trustees had been utilizing outmoded , unrealistic and even false actuarial estimates and assumptions about the Pension Plans ’ key demographics , i.e.
, retiree rates , longevity , new hires , wage increases and inflation , ” the lawsuit states .
At the same time , the plans were promising a 7.75 % average annual rate of investment return , which Kentucky called “ unrealistic and unachievable.
” Each of the two losses was spread over the following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their numbers increased , while government hiring slowed down .
This led to fewer new employees contributing to the system .
The commonwealth called this a “ tightened financial/actuarial vise.
” The trustees responded by choosing “ to cover up the true extent of the KRS financial/actuarial shortfalls and take longshot imprudent risks with KRS Funds to try to catch up for the Funds ’ prior losses and deceptions , ” the lawsuit states .
Their desire to climb out of the hole made them a target of hedge-fund sellers KKR & Co. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Asset Management Co. and The Blackstone Group , according to the commonwealth .
They allegedly sold the trustees “ something far more exotic , risky , toxic and expensive than an ordinary hedge fund , ” so-called “ Black Box ” hedge funds that invest in other hedge funds .
KRS trustees allegedly invested between $ 400 million and $ 500 million in each of three Black Boxes , which get their nickname from the inability to see what is being invested by the downstream funds .
The sellers allegedly called the Kentucky-specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ The Newport Colonels Fund ” and “ The Henry Clay Fund.
” Kentucky is not the only state to run into this problem , according to the lawsuit .
A 2015 study by the Roosevelt Institute showed that 11 public pension funds lost $ 8 billion in investment funds while paying 57 cents in fees for every dollar earned .
By 2016 and 2017 , journalists and an independent investigation revealed the funds ’ losses and excessive fees , according to the lawsuit .
“ Trustees and officers failed to follow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investment of trust monies for which they were responsible , consisting of both pension funds and tax dollars , wasting billions of tax dollars and damaging the Commonwealth , KRS , its Pension Funds and the Kentucky taxpayers , ” it states .
Many states have well-funded pension funds , according to the lawsuit , which drew a contrast to the alleged conduct of KRS officers and trustees .
“ If they honestly and in good faith factored in these realistic assumptions and known demographics trends , the published underfunded status of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , their stewardship would be vigorously criticized and investigated , resulting in them being ousted or even sued , a situation they wanted to avoid , ” the commonwealth states .
Instead , it added , taxpayers must pour another $ 1 billion each year into the pension pot indefinitely .
The commonwealth alleged that the KRS Trustees “ created a mosaic of false and misleading statements and reassurances that were intended to and did give a false sense of security as to the Funds and the quality of their stewardship.
” In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and punitive damage claims , the state is also seeking an accounting and disgorgement of the defendants ’ fees , compensation and profits .
Attorneys J. Christian Lewis , Victor Maddox , Justin Clark , Steve Humphress and Aaron Silletto of the Kentucky Attorney General ’ s Office filed the lawsuit on behalf of the commonwealth ’ s taxpayers .
KKR did not immediately respond to a request for comment .

Kentucky is accusing hedge-fund sellers and retirement-fund overseers of sinking its public employees and retirees into a financial quagmire that will require an extra annual $1 billion “indefinitely” to remedy.
(CN) — Kentucky is accusing hedge-fund sellers and retirement-fund overseers of sinking its public employees and retirees into a financial quagmire that will require an extra annual $1 billion “indefinitely” to remedy.
The commonwealth asserted claims of breach of fiduciary duty and civil conspiracy on Tuesday in a 133-page lawsuit in Franklin County Circuit Court.
Kentucky is suing “sophisticated, high-powered financial firms” that sold the Kentucky Retirement System “unsuitable, high-risk, high-fee funds.”
The commonwealth also sought punitive damages and the restoration of its pension funds “after years of concealment of the true financial condition of KRS and the waste of its funds.”
Investment advisers were also named as defendants, along with individual KRS trustees and officers.
Entering the new millennium, the 350,000 former and present state and local employees had fully funded KRS, with a $2 billion surplus.
“Today, the KRS Plans are in danger of failing. They are among the worst-funded public pension plans in the United States,” the lawsuit states.
The retirement system lost $2.2 billion in 2000 and 2001, followed by a $4.4 billion loss in 2008 and 2009, according to the complaint.
“The trustees had been utilizing outmoded, unrealistic and even false actuarial estimates and assumptions about the Pension Plans’ key demographics, i.e., retiree rates, longevity, new hires, wage increases and inflation,” the lawsuit states.
At the same time, the plans were promising a 7.75% average annual rate of investment return, which Kentucky called “unrealistic and unachievable.”
Each of the two losses was spread over the following five-year period.
Retirees lived longer and their numbers increased, while government hiring slowed down. This led to fewer new employees contributing to the system. The commonwealth called this a “tightened financial/actuarial vise.”
The trustees responded by choosing “to cover up the true extent of the KRS financial/actuarial shortfalls and take longshot imprudent risks with KRS Funds to try to catch up for the Funds’ prior losses and deceptions,” the lawsuit states.
Their desire to climb out of the hole made them a target of hedge-fund sellers KKR & Co., Prisma Capital Partners, Pacific Alternative Asset Management Co. and The Blackstone Group, according to the commonwealth.
They allegedly sold the trustees “something far more exotic, risky, toxic and expensive than an ordinary hedge fund,” so-called “Black Box” hedge funds that invest in other hedge funds.
KRS trustees allegedly invested between $400 million and $500 million in each of three Black Boxes, which get their nickname from the inability to see what is being invested by the downstream funds.
The sellers allegedly called the Kentucky-specific investments “The Daniel Boone Fund,” “The Newport Colonels Fund” and “The Henry Clay Fund.”
Kentucky is not the only state to run into this problem, according to the lawsuit. A 2015 study by the Roosevelt Institute showed that 11 public pension funds lost $8 billion in investment funds while paying 57 cents in fees for every dollar earned.
By 2016 and 2017, journalists and an independent investigation revealed the funds’ losses and excessive fees, according to the lawsuit.
“Trustees and officers failed to follow legal mandates regarding the safeguarding and prudent investment of trust monies for which they were responsible, consisting of both pension funds and tax dollars, wasting billions of tax dollars and damaging the Commonwealth, KRS, its Pension Funds and the Kentucky taxpayers,” it states.
Many states have well-funded pension funds, according to the lawsuit, which drew a contrast to the alleged conduct of KRS officers and trustees.
“If they honestly and in good faith factored in these realistic assumptions and known demographics trends, the published underfunded status of the Funds would skyrocket by billions of dollars, their stewardship would be vigorously criticized and investigated, resulting in them being ousted or even sued, a situation they wanted to avoid,” the commonwealth states.
Instead, it added, taxpayers must pour another $1 billion each year into the pension pot indefinitely.
The commonwealth alleged that the KRS Trustees “created a mosaic of false and misleading statements and reassurances that were intended to and did give a false sense of security as to the Funds and the quality of their stewardship.”
In addition to the fiduciary duty, conspiracy and punitive damage claims, the state is also seeking an accounting and disgorgement of the defendants’ fees, compensation and profits.
Attorneys J. Christian Lewis, Victor Maddox, Justin Clark, Steve Humphress and Aaron Silletto of the Kentucky Attorney General’s Office filed the lawsuit on behalf of the commonwealth’s taxpayers.
KKR did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


courthousenews--2020-07-22--San Franciscans to Vote on Police Staffing Levels, Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board

SAN FRANCISCO ( CN ) — Since 1994 , San Francisco ’ s city charter has required its police department to maintain a force of 1,971 full-time officers .
Voters will have a chance to repeal that requirement in November , after a proposed charter amendment sailed through the city ’ s Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday .
“ To create a thoughtful process for determining police staffing levels that can actually prioritize the needs of communities , we need to remove the handcuffs that the mandatory minimum staffing requirement has placed on San Franciscans and our budgets , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who proposed the amendment .
He called it an “ antiquated number , ” born out of a 1979 class action settlement to address race and sex discrimination in the department .
The lawsuit , filed in 1973 by a group of Black police officers , also gained support from League of United Latin American Citizens , Chinese for Affirmative Action , National Organization of Women , and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People .
The officers alleged discriminatory promotional examinations and physical agility tests scored and weighted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the settlement , the force of 1,670 had only 60 women and 200 Black , Asian , or Hispanic officers .
The settlement required the police department to set a minimum staffing level at 1,971 and maintain that level for three years , and became part of the city charter in 1994 with the passage of a ballot measure .
Yee said the charter amendment will base staffing levels on workload .
It also compels the department to submit a staffing report to the Police Commission every two years , on which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a public hearing .
It will also have to consider the report when approving the department ’ s budget .
At Tuesday ’ s meeting , San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott said that while SFPD had some issues with the amendment ’ s staffing models , he appreciated Yee ’ s collaborative approach that gave the department the opportunity to weigh in .
“ Definitely the department does not oppose this legislation , ” he said .
The supervisors Tuesday also unanimously passed another charter amendment that would create a Sheriff ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Department Office of Inspector General that would investigate complaints of non-criminal misconduct and inmate deaths in San Francisco county jails .
Supervisor Shamann Walton , who introduced the measure , said he had been working on creating the new agency with late Public Defender Jeff Adachi in light of reports of inmate mistreatment at the hands of sheriff ’ s deputies .
The amendment will also appear on the Nov. 3 ballot .
It establishes the office of the inspector general , which would operate under the oversight board and would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Four of the oversight board ’ s members will be chosen by the board of supervisors , and three by the mayor .
The board would make recommendations to the city supervisors based on the inspector general ’ s investigations of in-custody deaths and complaints made against the sheriff ’ s department and its contractors .
“ With the recent uprisings and calls for justice reform due to the many instances of law enforcement ’ s attack on black people and people of color , this charter amendment comes at a perfect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This ordinance is a first step in rebuilding community trust .
”

Since 1994, San Francisco’s city charter has required its police department to maintain a force of 1,971 full-time officers. Voters will have a chance to repeal that requirement in November, after a proposed charter amendment sailed through the city’s Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday.
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Since 1994, San Francisco’s city charter has required its police department to maintain a force of 1,971 full-time officers. Voters will have a chance to repeal that requirement in November, after a proposed charter amendment sailed through the city’s Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday.
“To create a thoughtful process for determining police staffing levels that can actually prioritize the needs of communities, we need to remove the handcuffs that the mandatory minimum staffing requirement has placed on San Franciscans and our budgets,” said Board of Supervisors President Norman Yee, who proposed the amendment.
He called it an “antiquated number,” born out of a 1979 class action settlement to address race and sex discrimination in the department. The lawsuit, filed in 1973 by a group of Black police officers, also gained support from League of United Latin American Citizens, Chinese for Affirmative Action, National Organization of Women, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The officers alleged discriminatory promotional examinations and physical agility tests scored and weighted to disfavor female applicants. At the time of the settlement, the force of 1,670 had only 60 women and 200 Black, Asian, or Hispanic officers.
The settlement required the police department to set a minimum staffing level at 1,971 and maintain that level for three years, and became part of the city charter in 1994 with the passage of a ballot measure.
Yee said the charter amendment will base staffing levels on workload. It also compels the department to submit a staffing report to the Police Commission every two years, on which the commission will be required to hold a public hearing. It will also have to consider the report when approving the department’s budget.
At Tuesday’s meeting, San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott said that while SFPD had some issues with the amendment’s staffing models, he appreciated Yee’s collaborative approach that gave the department the opportunity to weigh in.
"Definitely the department does not oppose this legislation,” he said.
The board passed the proposal 11-0.
The supervisors Tuesday also unanimously passed another charter amendment that would create a Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board and Sheriff’s Department Office of Inspector General that would investigate complaints of non-criminal misconduct and inmate deaths in San Francisco county jails.
Supervisor Shamann Walton, who introduced the measure, said he had been working on creating the new agency with late Public Defender Jeff Adachi in light of reports of inmate mistreatment at the hands of sheriff's deputies.
The amendment will also appear on the Nov. 3 ballot. It establishes the office of the inspector general, which would operate under the oversight board and would be separate from the sheriff’s department.
Four of the oversight board’s members will be chosen by the board of supervisors, and three by the mayor. The board would make recommendations to the city supervisors based on the inspector general’s investigations of in-custody deaths and complaints made against the sheriff’s department and its contractors.
“With the recent uprisings and calls for justice reform due to the many instances of law enforcement’s attack on black people and people of color, this charter amendment comes at a perfect time,” Walton said. “This ordinance is a first step in rebuilding community trust.”


courthousenews--2020-07-22--Business Groups Sue Over Presidential Proclamation Restricting Employment Visas

( CN ) — A group of manufacturers and corporations Tuesday filed a suit against the U.S .
Homeland Security and State Departments over a recent presidential proclamation that banned workers in several key nonimmigrant visa categories from entering the county .
On June 22 , President Donald Trump signed Presidential Proclamation 10052 , an order that essentially barred additional nonimmigrant workers from entering the U.S. under commonly used visa programs , including the H1-B and H-2B programs .
The order — currently set to stay in effect until the end of the year with an option to renew as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration with the justification that it would help to protect domestic workers from further work disruptions as the country continues to battle the Covid-19 pandemic .
The order contends that in an economy gripped by the coronavirus , some employment authorized by certain nonimmigrant visa programs “ pose an unusual threat to the employment of American workers.
” But a group of businesses and organizations , including the National Association of Manufacturers ( NAM ) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce , launched a legal challenge against the proclamation Tuesday in a federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proclamation and its visa restrictions will do untold damage to the American economy at a particularly vulnerable time .
“ These overreaching , unlawful restrictions don ’ t just limit visas — they will restrain our economic recovery at a time when the very future of our country hangs in the balance , ” Linda Kelly , NAM senior vice president and general counsel , said in a statement .
“ Manufacturers and program sponsors are going to court because these restrictions are far outside the bounds of the law and would deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We can not let this stand.
” The lawsuit argues the proclamation could lead to a severe worker shortage , saying it prohibits companies to move workers who may have developed skills outside of the U.S. into domestic work roles and that such a limitation will curtail the development of new projects or the expansion of business opportunities .
The complaint states that this could lead to some work positions going completely unfilled , potentially putting entire projects on ice that would have otherwise created jobs or advanced the nation ’ s economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as to say that the proclamation , despite being billed as a tool to help protect domestic workers , has actually resulted in some domestic workers losing their jobs .
Many companies have actually had to furlough or lay off many domestic employees because some business operations that strongly rely on temporary workers have been put on hold , the plaintiffs claim .
This consequence of the proclamation could be so severe , according to the lawsuit , that some companies may even be forced out of business .
The plaintiffs suggest that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States ’ role on the world stage , pointing out that the country has long held a significant role in acting as an economic leader around the globe , and that part of that leadership role has come from an interest in attracting some of the best talent from other nations .
The suit says that once the U.S. closes its doors to nonimmigrant workers , that talent has nowhere to go but somewhere else .
“ Our industry should be laser-focused on leading our recovery and renewal , but these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ competitive advantage because they will drive talented individuals away from the United States , ” Kelly said .
“ These restrictions could harm every corner of our economy , as evidenced by the broad coalition that has come together to oppose them.
” The complaint further alleges that , under the Immigration and Nationality Act , Congress is the governmental body charged with managing and issuing visas — not the president .
“ The Proclamation suspends the entry of noncitizens in response to a purely domestic economic policy problem , but Congress has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ area at issue , ” the complaint states .
“ The INA does not authorize the President to enter such an order.
” The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare that the entire proclamation was an overreach of the executive branch and that the entire proclamation — including any actions taken to help enforce it — should be tossed .

A group of manufacturers and corporations Tuesday filed a suit against the U.S. Homeland Security and State Departments over a recent presidential proclamation that banned workers in several key nonimmigrant visa categories from entering the county.
(CN) — A group of manufacturers and corporations Tuesday filed a suit against the U.S. Homeland Security and State Departments over a recent presidential proclamation that banned workers in several key nonimmigrant visa categories from entering the county.
On June 22, President Donald Trump signed Presidential Proclamation 10052, an order that essentially barred additional nonimmigrant workers from entering the U.S. under commonly used visa programs, including the H1-B and H-2B programs.
The order — currently set to stay in effect until the end of the year with an option to renew as needed — was issued by the Trump administration with the justification that it would help to protect domestic workers from further work disruptions as the country continues to battle the Covid-19 pandemic. The order contends that in an economy gripped by the coronavirus, some employment authorized by certain nonimmigrant visa programs “pose an unusual threat to the employment of American workers.”
But a group of businesses and organizations, including the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, launched a legal challenge against the proclamation Tuesday in a federal court in California with claims that the proclamation and its visa restrictions will do untold damage to the American economy at a particularly vulnerable time.
“These overreaching, unlawful restrictions don’t just limit visas — they will restrain our economic recovery at a time when the very future of our country hangs in the balance,” Linda Kelly, NAM senior vice president and general counsel, said in a statement. “Manufacturers and program sponsors are going to court because these restrictions are far outside the bounds of the law and would deal a severe blow to our industry. We cannot let this stand.”
The lawsuit argues the proclamation could lead to a severe worker shortage, saying it prohibits companies to move workers who may have developed skills outside of the U.S. into domestic work roles and that such a limitation will curtail the development of new projects or the expansion of business opportunities.
The complaint states that this could lead to some work positions going completely unfilled, potentially putting entire projects on ice that would have otherwise created jobs or advanced the nation’s economic health.
The complaint goes so far as to say that the proclamation, despite being billed as a tool to help protect domestic workers, has actually resulted in some domestic workers losing their jobs. Many companies have actually had to furlough or lay off many domestic employees because some business operations that strongly rely on temporary workers have been put on hold, the plaintiffs claim.
This consequence of the proclamation could be so severe, according to the lawsuit, that some companies may even be forced out of business.
The plaintiffs suggest that the proclamation will have far-reaching consequences regarding the United States’ role on the world stage, pointing out that the country has long held a significant role in acting as an economic leader around the globe, and that part of that leadership role has come from an interest in attracting some of the best talent from other nations.
The suit says that once the U.S. closes its doors to nonimmigrant workers, that talent has nowhere to go but somewhere else.
“Our industry should be laser-focused on leading our recovery and renewal, but these visa restrictions will hand other countries a competitive advantage because they will drive talented individuals away from the United States,” Kelly said. “These restrictions could harm every corner of our economy, as evidenced by the broad coalition that has come together to oppose them.”
The complaint further alleges that, under the Immigration and Nationality Act, Congress is the governmental body charged with managing and issuing visas — not the president.
“The Proclamation suspends the entry of noncitizens in response to a purely domestic economic policy problem, but Congress has already struck the policy balance in the area at issue,” the complaint states. “The INA does not authorize the President to enter such an order.”
The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare that the entire proclamation was an overreach of the executive branch and that the entire proclamation — including any actions taken to help enforce it — should be tossed.