theintercept--2020-10-07--ICE Admits Wrongful Deportation of Guatemalan Man

and seemingly unprecedented violation of U.S. due process , a Central American man has been extrajudicially deported by ICE before having his scheduled day in immigration court .
His illegal expulsion happened during an action that sent scores of detainees from Louisiana to Guatemala on an airplane , after they had tested positive for the coronavirus while in ICE detention , but later were deemed virus-free .
The Intercept confirmed that one person was illegally deported in this manner , but there may have been more victims .
On August 19 , Cesar Marroquín was put on a packed flight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ detention , waiting to pursue a claim for asylum and for protection against torture in his home country .
By law , ICE can not deport someone unless an immigration judge first orders their removal ; ICE merely carries out the judges ’ decisions .
But before a judge could rule on whether or not Marroquín should be deported , ICE contravened the court ’ s authority and expelled him .
ICE has admitted to The Intercept that the expulsion was improper .
In an emailed statement , agency spokesperson Bryan Cox said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an “ administrative error ” that is “ exceedingly rare.
” Cox did not respond when asked if other immigrants on the plane in addition to Marroquín were illegally deported .
Illegal deportations do happen , but almost always after an immigrant has lost his or her case in immigration court and is in the process of appealing the decision .
In a typical case , Bakhodir Madjitov , a musician from Uzbekistan , applied for political asylum in the U.S. after he came to this country to perform at the South by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He eventually lost his case but appealed the court ’ s decision .
In 2019 , he won a stay of the removal , but mere hours later ICE tried to deport him from John F. Kennedy International Airport .
In a lawsuit Madjitov filed last month against the government and the ICE agents , he alleges that he insisted to the agents that he had just won a stay of removal and asked them to check the court ’ s website .
He refused to board the plane , and he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him .
He was hospitalized , and his medical records show that he was tasered .
But no judge or court ever ordered Cesar Marroquín deported before he was booted out of the U.S. That he was about to speak with an immigration judge but instead was put on a plane bound for Guatemala “ is stunning , ” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick , policy counsel for the American Immigration Council .
“ I haven ’ t ever heard of anyone deported on the day he was to be taken to a hearing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement he gave to an asylum officer earlier this year , Marroquín recounted how in 2019 , a local man running for mayor with a political party called Valor ordered banners for his campaign from Marroquín ’ s print shop .
While he was making the banners , Marroquín said , he got a visit from a well-heeled , local political kingmaker who worked for a rival party .
He pressured Marroquín to stop making materials for the Valor candidate and to work for his party instead .
Marroquín refused .
The man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
After that , Marroquín and the mayoral candidate were in a riding in a car together one day and were almost run off the road by a vehicle driven by employees of the man who ’ d threatened him .
Later , his house was burglarized .
Nothing was taken but election materials .
After the Valor candidate lost the election and left town out of fear , two men forced Marroquín into a car and pistol-whipped him unconscious .
When he came to , he was in a strange house being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whereabouts of the losing candidate .
The kidnapping and torture lasted for several days before Marroquín was dumped on the side of a road .
He went to the hospital , then fled Guatemala .
Marroquín ’ s uncle , who is in the U.S. legally , offered to support him until it was safe to return home .
Hours after he crossed into South Texas on March 16 , he surrendered to Border Patrol agents .
Within days he was moved to the Catahoula Correctional Center , a privately managed ICE detention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was interviewed by an asylum officer to determine if his story about the threats to his life was credible .
The officer concluded that Marroquín ’ s horrific account was believable yet decided that Marroquín had no claim for protection in the U.S. because he could relocate to a safer part of Guatemala .
Marroquín ’ s lawyer told him that an immigration judge would be reviewing the asylum officer ’ s analysis and warned his client that he had little chance of prevailing in court .
Even so , Marroquín felt he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he wanted to exercise his due process right to tell this to a judge .
He also wanted to request bond so he could get out of detention and gather evidence to bolster his claim .
At Catahoula , Marroquín waited for his chance before a judge , but in the weeks before his bond hearing , he grew terrified of conditions inside the detention center .
By late April , Catahoula was publicly reporting seven cases of Covid-19 — a number that in the next four weeks would spike to 60 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ facility ’ s detainees .
People with fevers were moved into dorms with healthy residents .
Sanitation was lax , he said .
ICE officers did not explain what was happening .
Instead , they stopped meeting with the detainees .
On Sunday , May 3 , as the pandemic worsened , Marroquín joined some five dozen other Central Americans as they took their Bibles to the exercise yard and conducted a prayer protest against what they perceived as ICE indifference to their safety .
Within minutes the protesters were attacked with pepper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was transferred to another Louisiana ICE jail , the River Correctional Facility .
He had a bond hearing there by telephone with immigration Judge Angela Munson .
She denied the bond but assigned Marroquín a later date in her court for a “ master calendar hearing.
” Though usually very brief , these hearings constitute a detained immigrant ’ s first chance to respond to government charges of being in the U.S. illegally .
Munson set Marroquín ’ s master calendar hearing for August 19 .
He was eager to get that over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a merits hearing , where he ’ d be able to present evidence and argue his case .
Shortly after Marroquín failed bond hearing , he tested positive for the coronavirus .
He had no symptoms , but the detention center put him into a small room by himself and made him stay there for 10 days , until he was deemed well .
Several weeks later , in early August , he tested positive once more , again without symptoms , and again was isolated .
Not until August 10 was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His master calendar hearing was scheduled for nine days later , on August 19 .
But Marroquín says that on that day , he was tricked and coerced into boarding an ICE deportation plane bound for Guatemala City .
“ At 8 a.m .
I was showering and getting ready for my hearing , ” he said .
“ Suddenly I was told to gather my things so I could be transferred to another detention center .
I was surprised , because the hearing was for 10 a.m .
I kept telling the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today !
I need to call my lawyer !
’ The deportation officer said , ‘ No , it ’ s been postponed until September .
We ’ re just moving you in the meantime to another detention center .
In Alexandria.
’ ” Marroquín and some other Guatemalan men from his barracks were put in shackles and driven to the airport in Alexandria , Louisiana , where he watched 15 buses discharge shackled detainees who shuffled to a plane .
“ I protested , ” he said .
“ They told me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They said I would be criminally charged if I didn ’ t get on the plane .
I didn ’ t sign anything .
But I ’ m a professional , an educated man .
I had to respect the authorities .
I got on .
I was forced to.
” Marroquín said that another man from his barracks also vehemently protested that he had a court appearance scheduled .
That man was also forced to board and was deported .
( Marroquín did not have the man ’ s full name or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been unable to locate him . )
An hour and a half later , Marroquín was in Guatemala City — devastated , confused , and furious .
According to news reports , 126 Guatemalan men and one woman were deported en masse , each with a coronavirus infection-and-recovery diagnosis .
The total of 127 passengers was a far higher number than on other deportation flights to Guatemala since the coronavirus pandemic began .
Earlier flights had never carried more than about 80 passengers .
Marroquín ’ s immigration lawyer , Carlos Rodriguez , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had just been deported .
Rodriguez recalled that the government ’ s lawyers were unable to explain what had happened .
Subsequently Rodriguez filed a motion to terminate proceedings with the court .
It was as though Marroquín had never been in the U.S. Immigration lawyers and immigrant advocates whom The Intercept spoke with about Marroquín ’ s case expressed shocked at his deportation .
“ ICE frequently deports people it shouldn ’ t , ” said Reichlin-Melnick , of the American Immigration Council .
But that usually happens , he said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ordered deported is later granted a stay , and nobody at ICE checks.
” When told about Marroquín ’ s case , immigration attorney Marty Rosenbluth recalled how one of his clients was deported , even though a motion to reopen her case was pending in a higher court .
Like Marroquín , the woman had repeatedly told ICE staff that she was still in court .
Rosenbluth said they paid no attention but that he successfully petitioned a court to order his client ’ s return to the U.S. “ It took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he said .
Rosenbluth said that Marroquín ’ s attorney “ should have demanded that ICE bring him back and grant him humanitarian parole into the U.S. and let him pursue his case without being detained.
” According to Cox , the ICE spokesperson , “ An alien removed to their home country without a final order can apply for admission to the U.S. ” But there ’ s no guarantee an application for admission will be granted , according to legal scholars , and wrongly deported immigrants must pay all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ application takes months or years .
Marroquín is now stranded on the Guatemala-Mexico border , still fearing for his life .

In a flagrant and seemingly unprecedented violation of U.S. due process, a Central American man has been extrajudicially deported by ICE before having his scheduled day in immigration court. His illegal expulsion happened during an action that sent scores of detainees from Louisiana to Guatemala on an airplane, after they had tested positive for the coronavirus while in ICE detention, but later were deemed virus-free. The Intercept confirmed that one person was illegally deported in this manner, but there may have been more victims.
On August 19, Cesar Marroquín was put on a packed flight to Guatemala after spending five months in detention, waiting to pursue a claim for asylum and for protection against torture in his home country. By law, ICE cannot deport someone unless an immigration judge first orders their removal; ICE merely carries out the judges’ decisions. But before a judge could rule on whether or not Marroquín should be deported, ICE contravened the court’s authority and expelled him.
ICE has admitted to The Intercept that the expulsion was improper. In an emailed statement, agency spokesperson Bryan Cox said that Marroquín’s deportation resulted from an “administrative error” that is “exceedingly rare.” Cox did not respond when asked if other immigrants on the plane in addition to Marroquín were illegally deported.
Illegal deportations do happen, but almost always after an immigrant has lost his or her case in immigration court and is in the process of appealing the decision. In a typical case, Bakhodir Madjitov, a musician from Uzbekistan, applied for political asylum in the U.S. after he came to this country to perform at the South by Southwest festival in Austin, Texas. He eventually lost his case but appealed the court’s decision. In 2019, he won a stay of the removal, but mere hours later ICE tried to deport him from John F. Kennedy International Airport. In a lawsuit Madjitov filed last month against the government and the ICE agents, he alleges that he insisted to the agents that he had just won a stay of removal and asked them to check the court’s website. He refused to board the plane, and he said the agents responded by beating and tasering him. He was hospitalized, and his medical records show that he was tasered.
But no judge or court ever ordered Cesar Marroquín deported before he was booted out of the U.S. That he was about to speak with an immigration judge but instead was put on a plane bound for Guatemala “is stunning,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy counsel for the American Immigration Council. “I haven’t ever heard of anyone deported on the day he was to be taken to a hearing,” Reichlin-Melnick said.
Fleeing Political Persecution
In a sworn statement he gave to an asylum officer earlier this year, Marroquín recounted how in 2019, a local man running for mayor with a political party called Valor ordered banners for his campaign from Marroquín’s print shop. While he was making the banners, Marroquín said, he got a visit from a well-heeled, local political kingmaker who worked for a rival party. He pressured Marroquín to stop making materials for the Valor candidate and to work for his party instead. Marroquín refused. The man threatened to kill him and his family.
After that, Marroquín and the mayoral candidate were in a riding in a car together one day and were almost run off the road by a vehicle driven by employees of the man who’d threatened him. Later, his house was burglarized. Nothing was taken but election materials. After the Valor candidate lost the election and left town out of fear, two men forced Marroquín into a car and pistol-whipped him unconscious. When he came to, he was in a strange house being shocked with electricity and interrogated about the whereabouts of the losing candidate. The kidnapping and torture lasted for several days before Marroquín was dumped on the side of a road. He went to the hospital, then fled Guatemala.
“I haven’t ever heard of anyone deported on the day he was to be taken to a hearing.”
Marroquín’s uncle, who is in the U.S. legally, offered to support him until it was safe to return home. Hours after he crossed into South Texas on March 16, he surrendered to Border Patrol agents. Within days he was moved to the Catahoula Correctional Center, a privately managed ICE detention facility in rural Louisiana. There he was interviewed by an asylum officer to determine if his story about the threats to his life was credible. The officer concluded that Marroquín’s horrific account was believable yet decided that Marroquín had no claim for protection in the U.S. because he could relocate to a safer part of Guatemala.
Marroquín’s lawyer told him that an immigration judge would be reviewing the asylum officer’s analysis and warned his client that he had little chance of prevailing in court. Even so, Marroquín felt he couldn’t live in Guatemala, and he wanted to exercise his due process right to tell this to a judge. He also wanted to request bond so he could get out of detention and gather evidence to bolster his claim.
A Covid-19 Nightmare
At Catahoula, Marroquín waited for his chance before a judge, but in the weeks before his bond hearing, he grew terrified of conditions inside the detention center. By late April, Catahoula was publicly reporting seven cases of Covid-19 — a number that in the next four weeks would spike to 60, about one in eight of the facility’s detainees. People with fevers were moved into dorms with healthy residents. Sanitation was lax, he said. ICE officers did not explain what was happening. Instead, they stopped meeting with the detainees.
On Sunday, May 3, as the pandemic worsened, Marroquín joined some five dozen other Central Americans as they took their Bibles to the exercise yard and conducted a prayer protest against what they perceived as ICE indifference to their safety. Within minutes the protesters were attacked with pepper spray.
Read Our Complete Coverage The War on Immigrants
Meanwhile, political and legal pressure mounted against ICE to empty the detention centers, which epidemiologists and human and immigrants’ rights activists were denouncing as hothouses for Covid-19. Cases of the virus mounted nationwide in ICE facilities, and ICE responded by freeing some people who had medical conditions that increased their vulnerability to serious illness or death. Meanwhile, some ICE staffers got sick with Covid-19. Some died. Others quit their jobs.
Photo: Courtesy of Cesar Marroquin
In late May, Marroquín was transferred to another Louisiana ICE jail, the River Correctional Facility. He had a bond hearing there by telephone with immigration Judge Angela Munson. She denied the bond but assigned Marroquín a later date in her court for a “master calendar hearing.” Though usually very brief, these hearings constitute a detained immigrant’s first chance to respond to government charges of being in the U.S. illegally. Munson set Marroquín’s master calendar hearing for August 19. He was eager to get that over with and ask for what is known as a merits hearing, where he’d be able to present evidence and argue his case.
Shortly after Marroquín failed bond hearing, he tested positive for the coronavirus. He had no symptoms, but the detention center put him into a small room by himself and made him stay there for 10 days, until he was deemed well. Several weeks later, in early August, he tested positive once more, again without symptoms, and again was isolated. Not until August 10 was he released and classified as recovered. His master calendar hearing was scheduled for nine days later, on August 19.
But Marroquín says that on that day, he was tricked and coerced into boarding an ICE deportation plane bound for Guatemala City.
“At 8 a.m. I was showering and getting ready for my hearing,” he said. “Suddenly I was told to gather my things so I could be transferred to another detention center. I was surprised, because the hearing was for 10 a.m. I kept telling the ICE officer, ‘I have court today! I need to call my lawyer!’ The deportation officer said, ‘No, it’s been postponed until September. We’re just moving you in the meantime to another detention center. In Alexandria.’”
Marroquín and some other Guatemalan men from his barracks were put in shackles and driven to the airport in Alexandria, Louisiana, where he watched 15 buses discharge shackled detainees who shuffled to a plane.
“I protested,” he said. “They told me to sign papers but I refused. They said I would be criminally charged if I didn’t get on the plane. I didn’t sign anything. But I’m a professional, an educated man. I had to respect the authorities. I got on. I was forced to.”
Marroquín said that another man from his barracks also vehemently protested that he had a court appearance scheduled. That man was also forced to board and was deported. (Marroquín did not have the man’s full name or contact information, and The Intercept has been unable to locate him.) An hour and a half later, Marroquín was in Guatemala City — devastated, confused, and furious.
According to news reports, 126 Guatemalan men and one woman were deported en masse, each with a coronavirus infection-and-recovery diagnosis. The total of 127 passengers was a far higher number than on other deportation flights to Guatemala since the coronavirus pandemic began. Earlier flights had never carried more than about 80 passengers.
Mistakes Were Made
Marroquín’s immigration lawyer, Carlos Rodriguez, was mystified when he learned that Marroquín had just been deported. Rodriguez recalled that the government’s lawyers were unable to explain what had happened. Subsequently Rodriguez filed a motion to terminate proceedings with the court. It was as though Marroquín had never been in the U.S.
Immigration lawyers and immigrant advocates whom The Intercept spoke with about Marroquín’s case expressed shocked at his deportation. “ICE frequently deports people it shouldn’t,” said Reichlin-Melnick, of the American Immigration Council. But that usually happens, he said, “because someone whom a judge has ordered deported is later granted a stay, and nobody at ICE checks.”
When told about Marroquín’s case, immigration attorney Marty Rosenbluth recalled how one of his clients was deported, even though a motion to reopen her case was pending in a higher court. Like Marroquín, the woman had repeatedly told ICE staff that she was still in court. Rosenbluth said they paid no attention but that he successfully petitioned a court to order his client’s return to the U.S. “It took five months to get her back,” he said.
Rosenbluth said that Marroquín’s attorney “should have demanded that ICE bring him back and grant him humanitarian parole into the U.S. and let him pursue his case without being detained.”
According to Cox, the ICE spokesperson, “An alien removed to their home country without a final order can apply for admission to the U.S.” But there’s no guarantee an application for admission will be granted, according to legal scholars, and wrongly deported immigrants must pay all the costs of trying to return. The application takes months or years.
Marroquín is now stranded on the Guatemala-Mexico border, still fearing for his life.


theintercept--2020-10-08--Fed Lending Saved Corporate America. It Could Do the Same for Cities and States.

President Donald Trump slammed the door on the possibility of another Covid-19 relief package , announcing that his administration would withdraw from negotiations until after the election .
While he ’ s since followed up with an offer to pass parts of the bill , the development has dire consequences for unemployed workers , struggling small businesses , and state and local governments — which are now staring into a fiscal abyss .
Faced with cratering revenues since the start of the pandemic , states have already cut billions from their public education budgets .
More than 200,000 state and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are K-12 teachers , lost their jobs in September .
Washington state is currently considering eliminating Medicaid coverage for all adult dental care .
New Jersey has already halted plans to replace more than 300,000 unsafe lead service lines .
At least 65 percent of U.S. cities plan to delay or cancel capital spending to fix roads , upgrade water systems , or make other infrastructure improvements , according to a survey by the National League of Cities .
Unlike the federal government , most states must balance their budgets .
That means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal government , borrowing on Wall Street , and gutting services .
Many were banking on further federal aid to avoid even deeper cuts .
When California passed its 2021 budget this summer , for example , Gov .
Gavin Newsom agreed to restore $ 11 billion in cuts to housing programs , court services , and public universities if additional federal aid arrived by October 15 .
There could be another way to stave off a devastating wave of austerity , according to a new report .
Instead of slashing spending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governments could cut back on the money they send to Wall Street .
In offering low-interest lending , the Federal Reserve would simply be extending the same benefit to public entities that it already offers to banks and private companies .
The advocacy group Action Center on Race and the Economy estimates that U.S. cities and states spend a cumulative $ 160 billion annually just on interest payment to banks and bondholders , thanks to high borrowing costs .
If the Fed extended long-term , zero-interest loans to public borrowers , borrowers could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funds for immediate needs , according to ACRE .
While the central bank has so far leveraged its CARES Act lending power primarily in service of the investor class , there ’ s nothing stopping it from coming more forcefully to the rescue of cities and states .
There ’ s no silver bullet for soaring state revenue shortfalls , which could top $ 550 billion by the end of fiscal year 2022 , according to a projection by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities .
But the savings from wiping out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the $ 150 billion in direct aid sent to state and local governments through the first relief package .
It ’ s also enough to pay for a host of progressive initiatives , including helping 13 million families avoid eviction by covering their rent for a year , according to the ACRE report .
“ The crisis facing public budgets is so unprecedented that we have state and local governments essentially looking under the couch cushions , ” said Saqib Bhatti , co-executive director of ACRE .
“ It turns out this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Elected officials in five cities and two states have signed onto a letter initiated by ACRE and addressed to Fed Chair Jerome Powell .
While states can currently borrow from the Fed through its Municipal Liquidity Facility , established in April , critics say that the terms are punitive .
“ Shredding an already fragile social safety net to balance the budget will only deepen the crises in our localities , ” the letter reads .
“ We are struggling to balance the budget , service the debt , and keep our cities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future waves of COVID-19.
” Six members of Chicago ’ s City Council introduced a resolution on Wednesday urging the Fed to offer loans with terms of up to 30 years to meet the borrowing needs of state and local governments .
The resolution notes that the city ’ s interest payments for fiscal year 2018 amounted to more than 1.1 billion — the better part of the 1.2 billion budget deficit the city is forecasting as it prepares to pass next year ’ s budget .
The state of Illinois , meanwhile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relies on $ 6 billion in borrowing , with Gov .
JB Pritzker warning that the state faces “ extraordinary painful cuts ” without further federal aid .
So far , only Illinois is just one of two public borrowers to make use of the Fed ’ s municipal lending facility , through a 3.83 percent interest rate bond that must be paid back within a year .
Illinois ’ s credit rating is particularly bad — it sits just above junk status — but high-interest rates and short repayment terms mean that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and counties that are technically eligible for the program could actually do better on the private bond market , according to an analysis by the Center for Popular Democracy .
The “ punitive and unappealing ” terms are particularly stark in comparison with those offered by the Fed through lending facilities that buy corporate bonds and asset-backed securities , noted Covid-19 Congressional Oversight Commissioner Bharat Ramamurti in a September 17 hearing .
Ramamurti questioned the terms set by the Fed and the Treasury Department , under which the Fed purchased a bond from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while a state with the same credit rating would be subject to more than double the interest rate over a shorter repayment term .
Congressional Republicans , as well as Trump , have painted the demand for more aid to local governments as a blue-state bailout that could encourage future fiscal mismanagement .
But the budget shortfalls facing Democratic- and Republican-managed states are effectively equivalent , according to Benjamin Dulchin , director of the Center for Popular Democracy ’ s Fed Up campaign .
“ This isn ’ t a red-state or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a local government problem , ” said Dulchin .
“ There ’ s no ‘ moral hazard ’ here , because cities and states didn ’ t cause the pandemic .
Lending them what they need to avoid austerity and layoffs would be good for residents and good for the economic recovery.
” States and municipalities have already laid off or furloughed more than 1.5 million public-sector workers over the course of the pandemic , deepening a deeply unequal recession .
Laid-off public-sector workers are 20 percent more likely to be Black than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to an analysis by the Center on Economic and Policy Research .
In New York City , the union representing municipal workers is fighting to stop 22,000 layoffs proposed to plug the city ’ s budget gap .
Henry Garrido , executive director of AFSCME District Council 37 , said that in the course of negotiations with the city , he looked into the possibility of Fed borrowing .
But he quickly discovered that the city could get far better terms on the private market .
That remains true even after the city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credit ratings downgraded last week .
Many of the New York City workers facing layoffs had “ essential ” jobs they continued to perform throughout the pandemic , said Garrido , including a respiratory therapist whose entire family died of Covid-19 .
“ That this is the reward for her sacrifice , it ’ s morally reprehensible , ” he said .
“ Somehow , we ’ re always the ones asked to pay .
”

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump slammed the door on the possibility of another Covid-19 relief package, announcing that his administration would withdraw from negotiations until after the election. While he’s since followed up with an offer to pass parts of the bill, the development has dire consequences for unemployed workers, struggling small businesses, and state and local governments — which are now staring into a fiscal abyss.
Faced with cratering revenues since the start of the pandemic, states have already cut billions from their public education budgets. More than 200,000 state and local government employees, many of whom are K-12 teachers, lost their jobs in September. Washington state is currently considering eliminating Medicaid coverage for all adult dental care. New Jersey has already halted plans to replace more than 300,000 unsafe lead service lines. At least 65 percent of U.S. cities plan to delay or cancel capital spending to fix roads, upgrade water systems, or make other infrastructure improvements, according to a survey by the National League of Cities.
Unlike the federal government, most states must balance their budgets. That means that their options are limited to begging the federal government, borrowing on Wall Street, and gutting services. Many were banking on further federal aid to avoid even deeper cuts. When California passed its 2021 budget this summer, for example, Gov. Gavin Newsom agreed to restore $11 billion in cuts to housing programs, court services, and public universities if additional federal aid arrived by October 15.
There could be another way to stave off a devastating wave of austerity, according to a new report. Instead of slashing spending on health care or social services, governments could cut back on the money they send to Wall Street. In offering low-interest lending, the Federal Reserve would simply be extending the same benefit to public entities that it already offers to banks and private companies.
The advocacy group Action Center on Race and the Economy estimates that U.S. cities and states spend a cumulative $160 billion annually just on interest payment to banks and bondholders, thanks to high borrowing costs. If the Fed extended long-term, zero-interest loans to public borrowers, borrowers could refinance their debt and free up these funds for immediate needs, according to ACRE. While the central bank has so far leveraged its CARES Act lending power primarily in service of the investor class, there’s nothing stopping it from coming more forcefully to the rescue of cities and states.
There’s no silver bullet for soaring state revenue shortfalls, which could top $550 billion by the end of fiscal year 2022, according to a projection by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. But the savings from wiping out interest payments would amount to more than the $150 billion in direct aid sent to state and local governments through the first relief package. It’s also enough to pay for a host of progressive initiatives, including helping 13 million families avoid eviction by covering their rent for a year, according to the ACRE report.
“The crisis facing public budgets is so unprecedented that we have state and local governments essentially looking under the couch cushions,” said Saqib Bhatti, co-executive director of ACRE. “It turns out this is a really big chunk of change.”
Elected officials in five cities and two states have signed onto a letter initiated by ACRE and addressed to Fed Chair Jerome Powell. While states can currently borrow from the Fed through its Municipal Liquidity Facility, established in April, critics say that the terms are punitive.
The savings from wiping out interest payments would amount to $160 billion — more help than the first congressional relief package.
“Shredding an already fragile social safety net to balance the budget will only deepen the crises in our localities,” the letter reads. “We are struggling to balance the budget, service the debt, and keep our cities and states afloat while preparing for possible future waves of COVID-19.”
Six members of Chicago’s City Council introduced a resolution on Wednesday urging the Fed to offer loans with terms of up to 30 years to meet the borrowing needs of state and local governments. The resolution notes that the city’s interest payments for fiscal year 2018 amounted to more than 1.1 billion — the better part of the 1.2 billion budget deficit the city is forecasting as it prepares to pass next year’s budget.
The state of Illinois, meanwhile, passed a budget this summer that relies on $6 billion in borrowing, with Gov. JB Pritzker warning that the state faces “extraordinary painful cuts” without further federal aid.
So far, only Illinois is just one of two public borrowers to make use of the Fed’s municipal lending facility, through a 3.83 percent interest rate bond that must be paid back within a year. Illinois’s credit rating is particularly bad — it sits just above junk status — but high-interest rates and short repayment terms mean that 97 percent of cities, states, and counties that are technically eligible for the program could actually do better on the private bond market, according to an analysis by the Center for Popular Democracy.
The “punitive and unappealing” terms are particularly stark in comparison with those offered by the Fed through lending facilities that buy corporate bonds and asset-backed securities, noted Covid-19 Congressional Oversight Commissioner Bharat Ramamurti in a September 17 hearing. Ramamurti questioned the terms set by the Fed and the Treasury Department, under which the Fed purchased a bond from Phillip Morris that pays 0.75 percent interest, while a state with the same credit rating would be subject to more than double the interest rate over a shorter repayment term.
Congressional Republicans, as well as Trump, have painted the demand for more aid to local governments as a blue-state bailout that could encourage future fiscal mismanagement. But the budget shortfalls facing Democratic- and Republican-managed states are effectively equivalent, according to Benjamin Dulchin, director of the Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign.
“This isn’t a red-state or a blue-state problem, it’s a local government problem,” said Dulchin. “There’s no ‘moral hazard’ here, because cities and states didn’t cause the pandemic. Lending them what they need to avoid austerity and layoffs would be good for residents and good for the economic recovery.”
States and municipalities have already laid off or furloughed more than 1.5 million public-sector workers over the course of the pandemic, deepening a deeply unequal recession. Laid-off public-sector workers are 20 percent more likely to be Black than those in the private sector, according to an analysis by the Center on Economic and Policy Research.
In New York City, the union representing municipal workers is fighting to stop 22,000 layoffs proposed to plug the city’s budget gap. Henry Garrido, executive director of AFSCME District Council 37, said that in the course of negotiations with the city, he looked into the possibility of Fed borrowing. But he quickly discovered that the city could get far better terms on the private market. That remains true even after the city and state of New York had their credit ratings downgraded last week.
Many of the New York City workers facing layoffs had “essential” jobs they continued to perform throughout the pandemic, said Garrido, including a respiratory therapist whose entire family died of Covid-19.
“That this is the reward for her sacrifice, it’s morally reprehensible,” he said. “Somehow, we’re always the ones asked to pay.”


theintercept--2020-10-07--Louise Glück Should Refuse the Nobel Prize for Literature. Here's Why.

what the American poet Louise Glück said when the Swedish Academy informed her that she won this year ’ s Nobel Prize for Literature , but I know what she should have said : “ Thanks , but no thanks.
” October is the season of the Nobel Prizes , when a handful of people are catapulted into fame and fortune due to the philanthropic legacy of the inventor of dynamite .
Four of the six prizes named after Alfred Nobel are generally uncontroversial — physics , chemistry , medicine , and economics — but the peace and literature prizes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be dubious of the peace prize , which has gone to some great people and organizations but also went to Henry Kissinger and Aung San Suu Kyi .
Yet it ’ s the literature prize that , in its current form , has definitely outlived its usefulness and caused great damage .
Last year , the Nobel Prize for Literature was awarded to Peter Handke , an Austrian writer who created a set of impressive literary works in the first part of his career but since the 1990s fell into a morass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Handke wrote at least a half-dozen books and plays that downplayed and denied the genocide committed by Serbs against Muslims during Bosnia ’ s war .
Handke even attended the funeral , and delivered an eulogy , for the former leader of Serbia , Slobodan Milosevic , who died while on trial for war crimes .
Literary awards have consequences in the real world .
The Serb ultra-nationalists whom Handke defends are heroes to violent white extremists throughout Europe and in the United States .
By giving a Nobel prize to Handke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the literature winner , essentially ratified a conspiracy theory embedded in his work : that Muslims represent a threat to Christians they live with .
Handke ’ s genocide-denying books , rather than being relegated to the rubbish , were vested with the authority of the Nobel Prize .
The Swedish Academy is a strange organization .
It has just 18 members who are appointed for life and who select new members by secret ballot — and the country ’ s king must approve them .
The decision to give the 2019 prize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the organization ’ s unfitness to manage the literature prize .
The Academy had to postpone the 2018 award because of revelations that for decades it had abetted sexual harassment and rape by the husband of one of its members .
Once that scandal broke open , thanks to the investigative work of journalist Matilda Gustavsson of Dagens Nyheter , the dismal response of the male-dominated Academy included forcing out a female member , Sara Danius , who was pushing for sweeping reforms in its ranks .
In a way , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are reminders of the need to implement a root-and-branch reform of the Nobel literature prize .
For much of its existence , the prize generally served as a referendum on the best in Western literature .
For that task , the 18 members of the Swedish Academy were a serviceable jury .
But more than ever , the reach and aspiration of the Nobel literature prize is truly global .
It is laughable and tragic that an award of such influence should be controlled by a tiny and secretive group of Swedes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves to be abettors of sexual assault and genocide denial .
The Nobel Foundation , which oversees all the Nobel Prizes , would do the world a huge favor by firing the Swedish Academy .
I don ’ t have a precise proposal for a replacement , but it would seem wise for a world literature prize to be decided by a diverse jury for whom non-European languages — such as Chinese , Hindi , Arabic , and Urdu — are first or second languages .
And it would be wise to not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because unassailable privilege is an inherent force of rot .
It was expected that the Swedish Academy would announce a “ safe ” choice today who would not invite criticism — that is to say , an individual who unlike Handke does not support genocide and is not European and is not male .
Glück , a celebrated and uncontroversial poet who lives in Massachusetts , checks every box .
The Academy , in this scenario , hopes it will have ridden out its scandals and shown that it can do the job @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fooled .
The Swedish Academy is fatally flawed .
It will do wrong again because it can not surmount its inherent limitations The Nobel Foundation has not shown a willingness to do what it should .
That ’ s why Glück should refuse the award — to force a desperately needed change that would benefit the world ’ s readers and writers .
Glück would become materially poorer by passing up the $ 1 million prize money , but she would probably become more famous and , who knows , that could lead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supposed to be forces of conscience , so standing up to the Swedish Academy would be fitting .
It has happened before : In 1964 , Jean-Paul Sartre refused to accept his literature Nobel .
That ’ s a lot to ask for , of course .
There is a halfway point — accept the award but ceaselessly call out the Swedish Academy , which has little backbone .
Bob Dylan , the literature laureate in 2016 , didn ’ t even issue a statement of thanks and sent Patti Smith to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the check .
The year is 2020 , a time of emergency .
It ’ s the moment to challenge corrupt institutions rather than thank them .
Update : Oct. 8 , 2020 This story has been updated to note that Louise Glück was announced as the winner of the 2020 Nobel Prize for Literature .
Correction : Oct. 7 , 2020 An inaccurate reference to the Nobel Foundation being based in Oslo has been removed .

Photo: Robin Marchant/Getty Images
I don’t know what the American poet Louise Glück said when the Swedish Academy informed her that she won this year’s Nobel Prize for Literature, but I know what she should have said: “Thanks, but no thanks.”
October is the season of the Nobel Prizes, when a handful of people are catapulted into fame and fortune due to the philanthropic legacy of the inventor of dynamite. Four of the six prizes named after Alfred Nobel are generally uncontroversial — physics, chemistry, medicine, and economics — but the peace and literature prizes arouse passions. There is good reason to be dubious of the peace prize, which has gone to some great people and organizations but also went to Henry Kissinger and Aung San Suu Kyi. Yet it’s the literature prize that, in its current form, has definitely outlived its usefulness and caused great damage.
Last year, the Nobel Prize for Literature was awarded to Peter Handke, an Austrian writer who created a set of impressive literary works in the first part of his career but since the 1990s fell into a morass of genocide denial. In recent decades, Handke wrote at least a half-dozen books and plays that downplayed and denied the genocide committed by Serbs against Muslims during Bosnia’s war. Handke even attended the funeral, and delivered an eulogy, for the former leader of Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic, who died while on trial for war crimes.
Literary awards have consequences in the real world. The Serb ultra-nationalists whom Handke defends are heroes to violent white extremists throughout Europe and in the United States. By giving a Nobel prize to Handke, the Swedish Academy, which selects the literature winner, essentially ratified a conspiracy theory embedded in his work: that Muslims represent a threat to Christians they live with. Handke’s genocide-denying books, rather than being relegated to the rubbish, were vested with the authority of the Nobel Prize.
The Swedish Academy is a strange organization. It has just 18 members who are appointed for life and who select new members by secret ballot — and the country’s king must approve them. The decision to give the 2019 prize to Handke is not the only evidence of the organization’s unfitness to manage the literature prize. The Academy had to postpone the 2018 award because of revelations that for decades it had abetted sexual harassment and rape by the husband of one of its members. Once that scandal broke open, thanks to the investigative work of journalist Matilda Gustavsson of Dagens Nyheter, the dismal response of the male-dominated Academy included forcing out a female member, Sara Danius, who was pushing for sweeping reforms in its ranks.
Read our Complete Coverage A Prize For Lies
In a way, we can be thankful for these scandals because they are reminders of the need to implement a root-and-branch reform of the Nobel literature prize. For much of its existence, the prize generally served as a referendum on the best in Western literature. For that task, the 18 members of the Swedish Academy were a serviceable jury. But more than ever, the reach and aspiration of the Nobel literature prize is truly global. It is laughable and tragic that an award of such influence should be controlled by a tiny and secretive group of Swedes, let alone ones who have shown themselves to be abettors of sexual assault and genocide denial.
The Nobel Foundation, which oversees all the Nobel Prizes, would do the world a huge favor by firing the Swedish Academy. I don’t have a precise proposal for a replacement, but it would seem wise for a world literature prize to be decided by a diverse jury for whom non-European languages — such as Chinese, Hindi, Arabic, and Urdu — are first or second languages. And it would be wise to not have these jurors appointed for life, because unassailable privilege is an inherent force of rot.
It was expected that the Swedish Academy would announce a “safe” choice today who would not invite criticism — that is to say, an individual who unlike Handke does not support genocide and is not European and is not male. Glück, a celebrated and uncontroversial poet who lives in Massachusetts, checks every box. The Academy, in this scenario, hopes it will have ridden out its scandals and shown that it can do the job. But let’s not be fooled. The Swedish Academy is fatally flawed. It will do wrong again because it cannot surmount its inherent limitations
It’s the moment to challenge corrupt institutions rather than thank them.
The Nobel Foundation has not shown a willingness to do what it should. That’s why Glück should refuse the award — to force a desperately needed change that would benefit the world’s readers and writers. Glück would become materially poorer by passing up the $1 million prize money, but she would probably become more famous and, who knows, that could lead to more book sales. Writers are supposed to be forces of conscience, so standing up to the Swedish Academy would be fitting. It has happened before: In 1964, Jean-Paul Sartre refused to accept his literature Nobel.
That’s a lot to ask for, of course. There is a halfway point — accept the award but ceaselessly call out the Swedish Academy, which has little backbone. Bob Dylan, the literature laureate in 2016, didn’t even issue a statement of thanks and sent Patti Smith to the award ceremony, and he still got the check. The year is 2020, a time of emergency. It’s the moment to challenge corrupt institutions rather than thank them.
Update: Oct. 8, 2020
This story has been updated to note that Louise Glück was announced as the winner of the 2020 Nobel Prize for Literature.
Correction: Oct. 7, 2020
An inaccurate reference to the Nobel Foundation being based in Oslo has been removed.


theintercept--2020-10-09--He Sought Asylum After MS-13 Tried To Kill Him. Amy Coney Barrett Sent Him Back into Danger.

2013 , Gerson Alvarenga-Flores was in a taxi with three friends , on his way to a birthday party in a rural town outside of La Unión , El Salvador .
Suddenly , two men with rifles appeared in the road ahead and signaled for the taxi to stop .
The men were both members of the MS-13 gang .
When the passengers refused to exit the taxi , the gang members began shooting .
Three of the passengers were shot : One was grazed by a bullet , another severely wounded — though he would survive — and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had remained in the taxi , which had started reversing away during the scramble .
He was left without a scratch .
He went to the police , who told him that “ they couldn ’ t be responsible for what had happened or for our lives , ” according to a transcript of his asylum hearing .
Soon after the attack , Alvarenga started receiving threats : The gang members didn ’ t want a witness to their murder left alive .
On his way to classes at the university where he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gang members he had encountered stormed onto a bus to confront him , but he was able to jump off and , again , escape .
Alvarenga hid out for a couple of months , but soon realized he had no hope left for a life in El Salvador .
He fled to the United States to ask for asylum .
His five-year search for protection would eventually be denied in 2018 by Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett , then a judge on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals , based on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s story that a dissenting judge called “ trivial.
” After her decision was issued , Alvarenga was deported back to El Salvador , just before Christmas in 2018 .
Now , Alvarenga hardly leaves his parents ’ small property for fear he ’ ll be spotted and killed .
“ I can ’ t go anywhere , not even to the park .
I can barely work , ” he said .
“ This isn ’ t life.
” As the Senate confirmation hearing approaches , Barrett ’ s judicial record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like abortion and health care are being carefully picked apart , but her immigration record has come under less severe scrutiny .
And , while as a 7th Circuit judge — nominated by President Donald Trump and confirmed by the Senate in 2017 — she only issued five immigration-related decisions , she very well may play a key factor in the hyperpartisan realm of immigration law .
Alvarenga ’ s story speaks not only to how Barrett might rule on such immigration cases , but to the systemic regulatory disaster of the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to protect the persecuted .
Whether Trump or Joe Biden wins the presidential election , there could be a raft of immigration-related cases could reach the Supreme Court in the next four years .
But four more years of Trump ’ s harsh policies would likely engender continued — and more consequential — legal challenges .
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick , policy counsel at the American Immigration Council , told The Intercept that there are a number of “ consequential immigration cases that could come before the Supreme Court , ” including cases on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bar poor people from migrating to the U.S. — further attacks on asylum , and other changes to the regulatory system .
Considering her immigration-related decisions from the 7th Circuit , Michael Kagan , a law professor at the University of Nevada , Las Vegas , and author of “ The Battle to Stay in America , ” told The Intercept that Barrett ’ s stance was not necessarily anti-immigrant .
“ Some of her decisions would please the Trump administration and some would please immigration activists , ” Kagan said .
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against immigrants ” — he called her ruling on the Alvarenga case “ boilerplate ” and “ a pretty straightforward decision based on the rules ” — the decision itself adhered to a system of laws whose gears are gummed up by more than a century of anti-immigrant vitriol .
Barrett ’ s other immigration decisions on the 7th Circuit also point to a tight , textual analysis .
She dissented from a ruling in which the majority blocked the Trump administration from wielding a “ public charge ” rule : the racist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government has long wielded to keep out the immigrants it doesn ’ t want .
Barrett even acknowledged in her dissent that some critics view the public charge rule as “ too harsh.
” Nonetheless , she would have upheld it .
In another case , however , she ruled against the Trump administration ’ s attempt to end the use of administrative closure , a tool judges can use to stop deportations in complicated or lengthy proceedings — especially when the immigrant may be eligible to stay legally if given enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which also allows them to prioritize other cases .
For Alvarenga , that Barrett ’ s rulings are based strictly on the word of the law are little comfort .
Under the law , she could have ruled differently — not only in his case itself , but also in a procedural matter that would have kept him safer upon deportation — but Barrett chose not to use her discretion , failing to take the dangers Alvarenga faced into account in her ruling .
In Alvarenga ’ s eyes , Barrett had the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to offer him protection .
Now , he fears for his life .
“ I followed the migration laws , ” Alvarenga said .
“ I respect those laws .
But the system , and those who apply the laws , they got it wrong.
” think about it , ” Alvarenga said of the attack and ordeal that followed .
“ From one night to the next morning , my life was ruined.
” He never was able to finish his degree .
After fleeing , he spent more than two years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — a series of immigration detention centers in the United States — while fighting for asylum .
His name was smeared in the local press when Salvadoran police , in cahoots with MS-13 , issued an arrest warrant for him , triggering an Interpol red alert .
His family , too , received death threats .
His mother said there were “ over two hundred calls ” in the weeks following the attack , including demands for thousands of dollars , which they didn ’ t have .
The reason he ultimately lost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goes back to the details of the attacks themselves .
There were two minor inconsistencies between a written 2013 declaration about the attacks and Alvarenga ’ s version of events presented in person before the courts in 2017 — both related to vehicle doors .
The first declaration , Alvarenga explained , was made over the phone while he was in immigration detention , where he couldn ’ t hear his attorney well and the line kept cutting out .
Transcripts show that initial immigration judge would not allow him to explain the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something Barrett could have interrogated but didn ’ t .
His story , Alvarenga told me , has always been the same .
In the 2013 declaration , Alvarenga supposedly said that his friend José escaped from the front seat of the taxi and ran away , suffering only a graze wound .
In his oral testimony in court , four years later , Alvarenga said that José was seated in the backseat with him and jumped out of the taxi from there .
Likewise , the declaration said that , while riding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the front of the bus to escape his would-be killers .
But , in his in-court oral testimony , he said he escaped through the back door of the bus .
He told me , again , that he had always maintained he had left out the back .
“ They got on in front , ” he said , exasperated .
“ So how could I have gotten off in front ?
I couldn ’ t go through them.
” Judge Thomas Durkin , in his dissenting opinion to the appeal , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his court appearance as “ trivial when considered in relation to Alvarenga ’ s broader story.
” Still , these kinds of immaterial consistencies can be grounds for asylum denial , according to the 2005 REAL ID Act .
The law , purportedly meant to deter terrorists from abusing the asylum system , not only required evidence to support claims , but allowed for judges to deny claims based on even minor discrepancies in an applicant ’ s testimony .
Reichlin-Melnick gave the example of an asylum-seeker stating they were beaten “ a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they were beaten a dozen times — a difference that could be grounds for denial .
Kagan , the law professor , said Barrett ’ s rulings were by the book .
In the immigration court system , appellate judges defer to immigration judges ’ decisions unless the facts “ compel ” the judge to reverse the decision .
“ The court of appeals are not supposed to reverse a decision just because they have a hunch that it was a wrong decision , ” Kagan said .
There are also no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differences or the effects of trauma .
“ Good judges should take all these things into account , ” Reichlin-Melnick said .
“ But not all judges are good judges.
” Despite the constraints , judges have ample room for discretion , leading , for instance , to Durkin ’ s dissent in the Alvarenga case .
By law , judges should also consider the “ totality of the circumstances , ” which entail the conditions of confinement , the fallibility of human memory — especially in regard to trauma — and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Human beings are not automatons , ” Reichlin-Melnick said .
“ Memory is fallible.
” About his time in detention , Alvarenga said : “ It was a totalitarian space .
You have to do everything they tell you .
For a human being , that ’ s hard .
I couldn ’ t sleep , I didn ’ t feel good .
Psychologically , it was so hard .
You even lose your sense of time.
” He went for long periods , he told me , without even seeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , adding insult to injury can come from a simple failure to acknowledge the circumstances of a case , even as part of a by-the-book decision against an asylum-seeker .
As she ruled against Alvarenga , for instance , Barrett didn ’ t mention any of the context stacked against people like him : from the trauma of the initial incidents to navigating the labyrinth of immigration court to the cruelties of detention , all done outside of native languages .
Barrett offered no comment on how any of that might have resulted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a small piece of her final ruling that Alvarenga saw as disdain for his experience — an unnecessary swipe , apart from the decision to deport him , but casting a pall over that ruling nonetheless .
In Barrett ’ s decision , there is a footnote on page 2 : Alvarenga , still scared for his life , had asked for his name to be redacted in the published record of his case — something the 7th Circuit has granted in similar cases .
It would have brought a small measure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t want the gangs or the corrupt local police in El Salvador to realize he was being sent back .
He didn ’ t want to be a target again .
Barrett refused his request .

In early March 2013, Gerson Alvarenga-Flores was in a taxi with three friends, on his way to a birthday party in a rural town outside of La Unión, El Salvador. Suddenly, two men with rifles appeared in the road ahead and signaled for the taxi to stop. The men were both members of the MS-13 gang. When the passengers refused to exit the taxi, the gang members began shooting.
Three of the passengers were shot: One was grazed by a bullet, another severely wounded — though he would survive — and a third killed on the spot. Alvarenga had remained in the taxi, which had started reversing away during the scramble. He was left without a scratch. He went to the police, who told him that “they couldn’t be responsible for what had happened or for our lives,” according to a transcript of his asylum hearing.
Soon after the attack, Alvarenga started receiving threats: The gang members didn’t want a witness to their murder left alive. On his way to classes at the university where he was studying systems engineering, the same gang members he had encountered stormed onto a bus to confront him, but he was able to jump off and, again, escape.
Alvarenga hid out for a couple of months, but soon realized he had no hope left for a life in El Salvador. He fled to the United States to ask for asylum.
“I can’t go anywhere, not even to the park. I can barely work. This isn’t life.”
His five-year search for protection would eventually be denied in 2018 by Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, then a judge on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, based on the technicality of minor discrepancies in Alvarenga’s story that a dissenting judge called “trivial.” After her decision was issued, Alvarenga was deported back to El Salvador, just before Christmas in 2018.
Now, Alvarenga hardly leaves his parents’ small property for fear he’ll be spotted and killed. “I can’t go anywhere, not even to the park. I can barely work,” he said. “This isn’t life.”
As the Senate confirmation hearing approaches, Barrett’s judicial record and past statements on hot-button legal issues like abortion and health care are being carefully picked apart, but her immigration record has come under less severe scrutiny. And, while as a 7th Circuit judge — nominated by President Donald Trump and confirmed by the Senate in 2017 — she only issued five immigration-related decisions, she very well may play a key factor in the hyperpartisan realm of immigration law.
Alvarenga’s story speaks not only to how Barrett might rule on such immigration cases, but to the systemic regulatory disaster of the U.S. asylum process itself: how it fails to protect the persecuted.
Whether Trump or Joe Biden wins the presidential election, a raft of immigration-related cases could reach the Supreme Court in the next four years. But four more years of Trump’s harsh policies would likely engender continued — and more consequential — legal challenges. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy counsel at the American Immigration Council, told The Intercept that there are a number of “consequential immigration cases that could come before the Supreme Court,” including cases on the public charge rule — which serves to bar poor people from migrating to the U.S. — further attacks on asylum, and other changes to the regulatory system.
Considering her immigration-related decisions from the 7th Circuit, Michael Kagan, a law professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and author of “The Battle to Stay in America,” told The Intercept that Barrett’s stance was not necessarily anti-immigrant. “Some of her decisions would please the Trump administration and some would please immigration activists,” Kagan said. While Kagan detected “no bias for or against immigrants” — he called her ruling on the Alvarenga case “boilerplate” and “a pretty straightforward decision based on the rules” — the decision itself adhered to a system of laws whose gears are gummed up by more than a century of anti-immigrant vitriol.
(The White House did not respond to a request for comment about the Alvarenga case and Barrett’s immigration record.)
Barrett’s other immigration decisions on the 7th Circuit also point to a tight, textual analysis. She dissented from a ruling in which the majority blocked the Trump administration from wielding a “public charge” rule: the racist, classist, misogynist, centuries-old club the government has long wielded to keep out the immigrants it doesn’t want. Barrett even acknowledged in her dissent that some critics view the public charge rule as “too harsh.” Nonetheless, she would have upheld it.
In another case, however, she ruled against the Trump administration’s attempt to end the use of administrative closure, a tool judges can use to stop deportations in complicated or lengthy proceedings — especially when the immigrant may be eligible to stay legally if given enough time to process an application — and which also allows them to prioritize other cases.
For Alvarenga, that Barrett’s rulings are based strictly on the word of the law are little comfort. Under the law, she could have ruled differently — not only in his case itself, but also in a procedural matter that would have kept him safer upon deportation — but Barrett chose not to use her discretion, failing to take the dangers Alvarenga faced into account in her ruling. In Alvarenga’s eyes, Barrett had the last say in his case and failed to offer him protection. Now, he fears for his life.
“I followed the migration laws,” Alvarenga said. “I respect those laws. But the system, and those who apply the laws, they got it wrong.”
“It hurts to think about it,” Alvarenga said of the attack and ordeal that followed. “From one night to the next morning, my life was ruined.” He never was able to finish his degree. After fleeing, he spent more than two years in what he referred to as prison — a series of immigration detention centers in the United States — while fighting for asylum. His name was smeared in the local press when Salvadoran police, in cahoots with MS-13, issued an arrest warrant for him, triggering an Interpol red alert. His family, too, received death threats. His mother said there were “over two hundred calls” in the weeks following the attack, including demands for thousands of dollars, which they didn’t have.
The reason he ultimately lost his plea to stay in the U.S. goes back to the details of the attacks themselves. There were two minor inconsistencies between a written 2013 declaration about the attacks and Alvarenga’s version of events presented in person before the courts in 2017 — both related to vehicle doors. The first declaration, Alvarenga explained, was made over the phone while he was in immigration detention, where he couldn’t hear his attorney well and the line kept cutting out. Transcripts show that initial immigration judge would not allow him to explain the problems with the declaration in court — something Barrett could have interrogated but didn’t. His story, Alvarenga told me, has always been the same.
In the 2013 declaration, Alvarenga supposedly said that his friend José escaped from the front seat of the taxi and ran away, suffering only a graze wound. In his oral testimony in court, four years later, Alvarenga said that José was seated in the backseat with him and jumped out of the taxi from there. Likewise, the declaration said that, while riding to class, Alvarenga jumped out of the front of the bus to escape his would-be killers. But, in his in-court oral testimony, he said he escaped through the back door of the bus. He told me, again, that he had always maintained he had left out the back. “They got on in front,” he said, exasperated. “So how could I have gotten off in front? I couldn’t go through them.”
Judge Thomas Durkin, in his dissenting opinion to the appeal, saw the inconsistencies that came up in his court appearance as “trivial when considered in relation to Alvarenga’s broader story.” Still, these kinds of immaterial consistencies can be grounds for asylum denial, according to the 2005 REAL ID Act. The law, purportedly meant to deter terrorists from abusing the asylum system, not only required evidence to support claims, but allowed for judges to deny claims based on even minor discrepancies in an applicant’s testimony. Reichlin-Melnick gave the example of an asylum-seeker stating they were beaten “a few times” and then later specifying that they were beaten a dozen times — a difference that could be grounds for denial.
“Good judges should take all these things into account. But not all judges are good judges.”
Kagan, the law professor, said Barrett’s rulings were by the book. In the immigration court system, appellate judges defer to immigration judges’ decisions unless the facts “compel” the judge to reverse the decision. “The court of appeals are not supposed to reverse a decision just because they have a hunch that it was a wrong decision,” Kagan said. There are also no explicit requirements to take into account cultural differences or the effects of trauma. “Good judges should take all these things into account,” Reichlin-Melnick said. “But not all judges are good judges.”
Despite the constraints, judges have ample room for discretion, leading, for instance, to Durkin’s dissent in the Alvarenga case. By law, judges should also consider the “totality of the circumstances,” which entail the conditions of confinement, the fallibility of human memory — especially in regard to trauma — and the time between the act and the testimony. “Human beings are not automatons,” Reichlin-Melnick said. “Memory is fallible.”
About his time in detention, Alvarenga said: “It was a totalitarian space. You have to do everything they tell you. For a human being, that’s hard. I couldn’t sleep, I didn’t feel good. Psychologically, it was so hard. You even lose your sense of time.” He went for long periods, he told me, without even seeing the sun.
For advocates, however, adding insult to injury can come from a simple failure to acknowledge the circumstances of a case, even as part of a by-the-book decision against an asylum-seeker. As she ruled against Alvarenga, for instance, Barrett didn’t mention any of the context stacked against people like him: from the trauma of the initial incidents to navigating the labyrinth of immigration court to the cruelties of detention, all done outside of native languages. Barrett offered no comment on how any of that might have resulted in those discrepant details.
Then there was a small piece of her final ruling that Alvarenga saw as disdain for his experience — an unnecessary swipe, apart from the decision to deport him, but casting a pall over that ruling nonetheless.
In Barrett’s decision, there is a footnote on page 2: Alvarenga, still scared for his life, had asked for his name to be redacted in the published record of his case — something the 7th Circuit has granted in similar cases. It would have brought a small measure of insurance; upon deportation, he didn’t want the gangs or the corrupt local police in El Salvador to realize he was being sent back. He didn’t want to be a target again. Barrett refused his request.


theintercept--2020-10-09--The DCCC Is Stepping Up for Two Left Candidates While Progressive Groups Step Back

of the 2018 House midterms , a piece of conventional wisdom solidified in Washington : The new progressive insurgency was a genuine threat in deep-blue districts , where grassroots organizing and small dollars could propel candidates , like the freshmen who made up “ the Squad , ” through primaries .
But candidates with similar politics weren ’ t able to win in swing districts , which meant that the movement was relegated to a backseat in the party .
Exhibits A and B in that indictment were the failed campaigns of Kara Eastman in Omaha , Nebraska , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Like dozens of other candidates , they battled establishment opponents in the primary .
Unlike dozens of others , they won those primaries .
But when they went on to lose close races in the general election , corporate-backed groups like Third Way crowed that only through centrism lay a Democratic majority .
Progressives , meanwhile , had only the victory by Katie Porter , who flipped a red seat in California , to point to — but she was heavily behind on Election Day , and her win only came days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slow counting of mail ballots , so it had little effect on the quickly solidifying narrative .
This year , Eastman and Balter are back , and both again won their primaries , giving the left a second chance to show that it can win in swing districts .
Yet left-wing organizations have played a minimal role in the contests .
Instead , the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee , the bane of insurgent candidates last cycle , has stepped in to fill the void , with planned spending of at least $ 2.5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in upstate New York .
That planned budget , some of which has gone to coordinated side spending with the campaigns and local Democratic parties , hasn ’ t closed the independent expenditure gap in Eastman ’ s race .
Outside groups supporting incumbent Republican Don Bacon have outspent groups supporting Eastman by over 2 to 1 thus far — $ 3.18 million to $ 1.45 million — according to the Center for Responsive Politics ( not counting future ad spending ) .
Balter has maintained rough parity with her opponent , incumbent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 2.62 million for Balter and $ 2.77 million for Katko ) .
But spending takes time to show up publicly .
A closer look at the television ad-buying space shows the GOP spending to be much larger , suggesting that Eastman is facing an avalanche of money as Republicans retreat from efforts to flip Democratic seats and consolidate resources in an effort to protect incumbents .
A slew of super PACs , including one from the American Bankers Association , have spent more than $ 5 million on the Omaha airwaves to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brigadier general , according to a source with access to the data .
House Majority PAC , the super PAC linked to the DCCC , is planning to spend at least $ 1.5 million .
That still leaves Eastman at a deficit , suggesting a role for progressive groups to fill .
That race is also important nationally , as her congressional district comes along with its own Electoral College vote , due to Nebraska ’ s unusual distribution of votes .
In some maps , that single elector could be the difference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ victory .
Polls of the district have Joe Biden ahead , with a lead in the high single districts , and Eastman pacing behind him .
A new poll paid for by the Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC found Eastman up two over Bacon .
( The CPC has not announced an outside spending effort for Eastman . )
One poll released earlier this week shows Balter with a narrow lead over Katko , but also behind Biden .
Down-ballot candidates often get outpaced by the top of the ticket , but if Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Bacon , the left will never hear the end of it .
Yet if Eastman can bring out new voters to the polls who go on to cast their ballots for Biden as well , they ’ ll have an argument that progressive politics can play even in Nebraska .
That dynamic makes the lack of national progressive energy all the more confounding .
Indivisible , which endorsed Eastman in 2018 in the contested primary , hasn ’ t done so again .
Kenny Palmer , an Indivisible spokesperson , said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made no endorsement and has been unresponsive to the national organization , and without a local endorsement , Indivisible can ’ t jump in the race .
For Balter , Indivisible said they would use the peer-to-peer texting campaign they employed in her successful primary .
But they added that they would be more involved in other races in which they could drive up turnout and help the top of the ticket where it matters , in states like Michigan .
Of course , Nebraska ’ s 2nd District is one of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the presidential election as well .
Justice Democrats , which spent well more than $ 1 million between Jamaal Bowman , Alex Morse , Marie Newman , Jessica Cisneros , and Cori Bush ’ s primaries against Democrats in New York , Massachusetts , Illinois , Texas , and Missouri , have not invested heavily in either Eastman ’ s or Balter ’ s race , though it helped raise money for Eastman ’ s campaign and organized some text messaging into the district .
Sunrise Movement threw down heavily for those same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been absent in Omaha and Syracuse .
With no local chapters in either Syracuse or Omaha to build on , the group decided to focus elsewhere .
The Working Families Party , which endorsed Eastman in 2018 , hasn ’ t gotten involved yet this time around .
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee , or PCCC , a backer of Eastman in 2018 , has also not spent heavily in the district , limiting its help so far to fundraising from its members and other organizational support .
Sen. Bernie Sanders , I-Vt. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Balter , and sent a fundraising email on Eastman ’ s behalf .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren , D-Mass.
, is planning to host a fundraiser for Eastman .
For some groups , it was difficult to get either national grassroots donors or the ideological lefties who can write big checks interested in the races .
In some ways , that ’ s a sign of growth for the left .
As the party has become more progressive generally , the gap between Eastman and Balter and a more standard Democrat has narrowed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideologically motivated donors , who get more excited at taking on Democrats hostile to progressives , like Dan Lipinski ( Newman ) , Henry Cuellar ( Cisneros ) , Eliot Engel ( Bowman ) , Lacy Clay Jr. ( Bush ) , or Richie Neal ( Morse ) .
With the House of Representatives comfortably in Democrats ’ hands for the time being , the incentive to flip two extra seats is minimized .
Adam Green , co-founder of PCCC , said he ’ s trying to counteract that instinct by making the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign and will soon be launching a fundraising drive for six candidates around that theme , plus Balter to help get her over the finish line .
Other than Eastman and Balter , they ’ ll be driving support to Jon Hoadley , a state representative in Michigan , taking on Rep. Fred Upton in a state where Donald Trump won by fewer than 11,000 votes .
They ’ re also backing three candidates in Texas — Mike Siegel , Julie Oliver , and Candace Valenzuela — where Biden is tied , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another close presidential state .
For Eastman specifically , PCCC is teaming with Rebellion PAC to put together a six-figure outside expenditure , Green said , though the exact size is still being worked out .
An “ enthusiasm event ” scheduled for next week will encourage PCCC members to volunteer on behalf of Eastman and the organization ’ s other endorsed candidates .
Relatedly , resources — not just money , but time — are limited , and for some groups , Eastman and Balter just didn ’ t make the cut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specific reasons for each of the races it decided to prioritize .
Siegel , for instance , is a proud supporter of the Green New Deal , yet also managed to win over local labor support in the fossil-fuel heavy Texas district he ’ s trying to flip .
If he beats incumbent Mike McCaul , he ’ ll be one of the most populist-progressive candidates elected in a swing district in modern memory , which would show that a Green New Deal can win anywhere .
Next door , Sunrise-backed Julie Oliver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Deal , and winning both would be a coup for the organization and shift climate politics in the House .
Sunrise has prioritized three other races of significance .
Audrey Denney is running as a climate candidate in a heavily Republican northern California district .
It ’ s the home of Paradise , which was notably devastated by wildfires and has continued to burn off and on since .
Sanders recently endorsed and raised money for Denney , and activists believe that hostility toward GOP climate denial and inaction could make the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also focusing on unseating Upton , former chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee and a fierce ally of dirty energy companies .
He ’ s seeking his 18th term , and hasn ’ t had an organized challenge since 2014 , though he won by just 5 points last cycle .
Hoadley has been the subject of a wildly out-of-context homophobic smear campaign by Republicans in the district .
Cathy Kunkel , running as part of the West Virginia Can ’ t Wait slate , under the banner of “ For the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same slogan as Jeremy Corbyn ’ s Labour Party in the U.K. ) , is another Sunrise and Sanders priority , hoping to show that a Green New Deal can win in West Virginia despite its pro-coal legacy .
One key Democrat , however , has weighed in on the Omaha race .
To win her primary in 2018 , Eastman had to beat the DCCC-backed former Rep. Brad Ashford ; in 2020 , she defeated Ashford ’ s wife .
On Wednesday , in a sign of the ongoing political realignment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d set out to beat last cycle : Republican Rep. Don Bacon .

In the wake of the 2018 House midterms, a piece of conventional wisdom solidified in Washington: The new progressive insurgency was a genuine threat in deep-blue districts, where grassroots organizing and small dollars could propel candidates, like the freshmen who made up “the Squad,” through primaries. But candidates with similar politics weren’t able to win in swing districts, which meant that the movement was relegated to a backseat in the party.
Exhibits A and B in that indictment were the failed campaigns of Kara Eastman in Omaha, Nebraska, and Dana Balter in Syracuse, New York. Like dozens of other candidates, they battled establishment opponents in the primary. Unlike dozens of others, they won those primaries. But when they went on to lose close races in the general election, corporate-backed groups like Third Way crowed that only through centrism lay a Democratic majority. Progressives, meanwhile, had only the victory by Katie Porter, who flipped a red seat in California, to point to — but she was heavily behind on Election Day, and her win only came days later due to the state’s slow counting of mail ballots, so it had little effect on the quickly solidifying narrative.
This year, Eastman and Balter are back, and both again won their primaries, giving the left a second chance to show that it can win in swing districts. Yet left-wing organizations have played a minimal role in the contests. Instead, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the bane of insurgent candidates last cycle, has stepped in to fill the void, with planned spending of at least $2.5 million in Omaha and $2.98 million in upstate New York.
That planned budget, some of which has gone to coordinated side spending with the campaigns and local Democratic parties, hasn’t closed the independent expenditure gap in Eastman’s race. Outside groups supporting incumbent Republican Don Bacon have outspent groups supporting Eastman by over 2 to 1 thus far — $3.18 million to $1.45 million — according to the Center for Responsive Politics (not counting future ad spending). Balter has maintained rough parity with her opponent, incumbent John Katko, in outside ads ($2.62 million for Balter and $2.77 million for Katko).
But spending takes time to show up publicly. A closer look at the television ad-buying space shows the GOP spending to be much larger, suggesting that Eastman is facing an avalanche of money as Republicans retreat from efforts to flip Democratic seats and consolidate resources in an effort to protect incumbents. A slew of super PACs, including one from the American Bankers Association, have spent more than $5 million on the Omaha airwaves to defend Bacon, a former Air Force brigadier general, according to a source with access to the data. House Majority PAC, the super PAC linked to the DCCC, is planning to spend at least $1.5 million.
That still leaves Eastman at a deficit, suggesting a role for progressive groups to fill. That race is also important nationally, as her congressional district comes along with its own Electoral College vote, due to Nebraska’s unusual distribution of votes. In some maps, that single elector could be the difference between a Biden loss and a Biden victory. Polls of the district have Joe Biden ahead, with a lead in the high single districts, and Eastman pacing behind him. A new poll paid for by the Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC found Eastman up two over Bacon. (The CPC PAC plans to spend at least $300,000 through an independent expenditure, spread between Eastman, Balter, and five other swing-district Democrats; a recent fundraiser they held for Eastman, Balter, and two others netted around $70,000 a spokesperson said.) One poll released earlier this week shows Balter with a narrow lead over Katko, but also behind Biden.
Down-ballot candidates often get outpaced by the top of the ticket, but if Biden wins the district and Eastman loses it to Bacon, the left will never hear the end of it. Yet if Eastman can bring out new voters to the polls who go on to cast their ballots for Biden as well, they’ll have an argument that progressive politics can play even in Nebraska.
That dynamic makes the lack of national progressive energy all the more confounding. Indivisible, which endorsed Eastman in 2018 in the contested primary, hasn’t done so again. Kenny Palmer, an Indivisible spokesperson, said that the group’s local Omaha chapter made no endorsement and has been unresponsive to the national organization, and without a local endorsement, Indivisible can’t jump in the race.
For Balter, Indivisible said they would use the peer-to-peer texting campaign they employed in her successful primary. But they added that they would be more involved in other races in which they could drive up turnout and help the top of the ticket where it matters, in states like Michigan. Of course, Nebraska’s 2nd District is one of those seats where increasing turnout would matter for the presidential election as well.
Read Our Complete Coverage Election 2020
Justice Democrats, which spent well more than $1 million between Jamaal Bowman, Alex Morse, Marie Newman, Jessica Cisneros, and Cori Bush’s primaries against Democrats in New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Texas, and Missouri, have not invested heavily in either Eastman’s or Balter’s race, though it helped raise money for Eastman’s campaign and organized some text messaging into the district. After publication, Justice Democrats executive director Alexandra Rojas said that the group is planning to spend a minimum of $250,000 in an upcoming independent expenditure for Eastman. Justice Democrats had raised $84,000 directly for Eastman through small donors, which is more than it raised for Cori Bush ($74,000), though less than for Jessica Cisneros ($128,000).
Sunrise Movement threw down heavily for those same insurgent candidates this cycle, but has been absent in Omaha and Syracuse. With no local chapters in either Syracuse or Omaha to build on, the group decided to focus elsewhere.
The Working Families Party, which endorsed Eastman in 2018, hasn’t gotten involved yet this time around. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, or PCCC, a backer of Eastman in 2018, has also not spent heavily in the district, limiting its help so far to fundraising from its members and other organizational support. WFP in New York, however, where the group is based, is backing Balter, having supported her in both her primary victories. WFP is funding two organizers, sending mail on her behalf, and working closely with the campaign.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., recently endorsed Eastman, but not Balter, and sent a fundraising email on Eastman’s behalf. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is planning to host a fundraiser for Eastman.
.@karaforcongress is facing the same incumbent Republican she came within just 1.9% of defeating two years ago while running on a strong progressive platform that prioritizes the needs of working people in Omaha and beyond. Let’s make sure Kara is elected to Congress this year. pic.twitter.com/kEINTeFRRC — Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 16, 2020
For some groups, it was difficult to get either national grassroots donors or the ideological lefties who can write big checks interested in the races. In some ways, that’s a sign of growth for the left. As the party has become more progressive generally, the gap between Eastman and Balter and a more standard Democrat has narrowed, paradoxically making their races less interesting to ideologically motivated donors, who get more excited at taking on Democrats hostile to progressives, like Dan Lipinski (Newman), Henry Cuellar (Cisneros), Eliot Engel (Bowman), Lacy Clay Jr. (Bush), or Richie Neal (Morse). With the House of Representatives comfortably in Democrats’ hands for the time being, the incentive to flip two extra seats is minimized.
Adam Green, co-founder of PCCC, said he’s trying to counteract that instinct by making the connection between House races and the presidential campaign and will soon be launching a fundraising drive for six candidates around that theme, plus Balter to help get her over the finish line. Other than Eastman and Balter, they’ll be driving support to Jon Hoadley, a state representative in Michigan, taking on Rep. Fred Upton in a state where Donald Trump won by fewer than 11,000 votes. They’re also backing three candidates in Texas — Mike Siegel, Julie Oliver, and Candace Valenzuela — where Biden is tied, as well as Pam Keith in Florida, another close presidential state.
For Eastman specifically, PCCC is teaming with Rebellion PAC to put together a six-figure outside expenditure, Green said, though the exact size is still being worked out. An “enthusiasm event” scheduled for next week will encourage PCCC members to volunteer on behalf of Eastman and the organization’s other endorsed candidates.
With the House of Representatives comfortably in Democrats’ hands for the time being, the incentive to flip two extra seats is minimized.
Relatedly, resources — not just money, but time — are limited, and for some groups, Eastman and Balter just didn’t make the cut. Sunrise, for instance, had specific reasons for each of the races it decided to prioritize. Siegel, for instance, is a proud supporter of the Green New Deal, yet also managed to win over local labor support in the fossil-fuel heavy Texas district he’s trying to flip. If he beats incumbent Mike McCaul, he’ll be one of the most populist-progressive candidates elected in a swing district in modern memory, which would show that a Green New Deal can win anywhere. Next door, Sunrise-backed Julie Oliver is also a champion of the Green New Deal, and winning both would be a coup for the organization and shift climate politics in the House.
Sunrise has prioritized three other races of significance. Audrey Denney is running as a climate candidate in a heavily Republican northern California district. It’s the home of Paradise, which was notably devastated by wildfires and has continued to burn off and on since. Sanders recently endorsed and raised money for Denney, and activists believe that hostility toward GOP climate denial and inaction could make the race surprisingly close.
They’re also focusing on unseating Upton, former chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee and a fierce ally of dirty energy companies. He’s seeking his 18th term, and hasn’t had an organized challenge since 2014, though he won by just 5 points last cycle. Hoadley has been the subject of a wildly out-of-context homophobic smear campaign by Republicans in the district.
Cathy Kunkel, running as part of the West Virginia Can’t Wait slate, under the banner of “For the many, not the few” (the same slogan as Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party in the U.K.), is another Sunrise and Sanders priority, hoping to show that a Green New Deal can win in West Virginia despite its pro-coal legacy.
One key Democrat, however, has weighed in on the Omaha race. To win her primary in 2018, Eastman had to beat the DCCC-backed former Rep. Brad Ashford; in 2020, she defeated Ashford’s wife. On Wednesday, in a sign of the ongoing political realignment, Ashford endorsed the man he’d set out to beat last cycle: Republican Rep. Don Bacon.
David Dayen and Alex Sammon contributed reporting.
Update: October 9, 2020, 9:40 a.m.
After publication, Alexandra Rojas, the executive director of Justice Democrats, said the group is planning to spend at least $250,000 for Eastman. The article has been updated to reflect this, and to include WFP’s support for Balter, and new spending by the CPC PAC.