Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what’s clicking on Foxnews.com.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Tuesday she is not aware of any changes to President Biden’s support of ending cash bail amid a spike in violent crime, though she did not expressly stand up for the proposal.
Biden is set to detail his administration’s crime prevention strategy in a formal address on Wednesday, as cities across the U.S. battle a surge in crime. He’ll make the address following a meeting with state and local officials and law enforcement representatives.
“End the criminalization of poverty,” reads one section of Biden’s criminal justice policy. “Cash bail is the modern-day debtors’ prison. The cash bail system incarcerates people who are presumed innocent. And, it disproportionately harms low-income individuals.”
Asked by Fox News’ Peter Doocy if Biden still thinks now is the right time to end the cash bail system, Psaki said: “I don’t think I have any new position on that for you but I’m happy to check.”
Doocy asked Psaki what Biden thinks is a “deterrent” for committing crime without cash bail.
Psaki, in making a pitch for gun control, argued the surge in crime centered on a surge in gun violence. Doocy pointed to a similar rise in robberies and rape cases.
Psaki said the White House is “still finalizing the specifics” of Biden’s crime policies, but pointed to the president’s proposals for ending gun violence, including strengthening regulations on ghost guns, stabilizing braces that make firearms more lethal, and helping state and local governments “keep more cops on the beat.”
She added that the president has “never supported” defunding the police. “He’s always supported community policing programs. He supported giving funding to states and localities around the country, including through his American Rescue Plan, because he thinks there is an essential role to play for community policing.”
Psaki distanced the president from the violent trend, noting: “There’s been, actually, a rise in crime over the last five years, but really the last 18 months.”
Homicide rates rose about 25% across the nation in 2020.
In Chicago, in the year before George Floyd’s death – May 25, 2019, to May 25, 2020, there were 2,885 shootings that resulted in 525 deaths. In the year following – May 25, 2020, to May 25, 2021, there were 818 deaths from 4,562 shootings, according to the New York Times.
Asked if the crime uptick could thwart police reform negotiations, Psaki said the two matters aren’t “mutually exclusive,” and the White House didn’t think lawmakers involved in the talks had that “particular concern.”
Ana Guerrero, Mayor Eric Garcetti’s top aide, disparaged labor icon Dolores Huerta in Facebook comments reviewed by The Times, saying “I hate her” and using a Spanish term that translates to “jealous old lady.”
Huerta was one of several California leaders — including state Sen. María Elena Durazo (D-Los Angeles), former Assembly Speaker John Pérez and Los Angeles City Councilman Gil Cedillo — to be criticized in the private Facebook group.
In a statement Tuesday, Garcetti said he had asked Guerrero, his chief of staff, to “step away from her executive management responsibilities in the office.” Garcetti spokesman Alex Comisar said Guerrero will be on “administrative leave for the foreseeable future, unpaid for a month.”
Guerrero, in a statement, said the comments were “offensive and wrong.” She said she wanted to “apologize to my colleagues at City Hall and anyone in my life who looks up to and depends on me to set an example for leadership.”
The messages were posted in 2016 and 2017 in a private Facebook group called “Solid Gold,” which included Guerrero and other Los Angeles city employees and friends. Garcetti wasn’t a member of the group, his spokesman has said. In several cases, members of the group took photos of politicians and others off of other people’s Facebook and Instagram pages and reposted them; derisive comments and mocking emojis followed.
Word of the posts comes amid growing scrutiny over the workplace culture in the mayor’s office, which has been rocked by allegations that another top Garcetti aide sexually harassed men for years. Those allegations have generated much attention amid reports that Garcetti is expected to be nominated by the Biden administration to become the U.S. ambassador to India.
The Times reported last week on mocking or suggestive postings in the Solid Gold group about others, including City Planning Director Vince Bertoni and a gathering of politicians that included City Controller Ron Galperin. At that time, Guerrero, 50, issued a statement expressing remorse.
“These years-old posts were jokes between me and a small group of close friends, and they were never meant to be seen outside that context,” Guerrero said.
On Friday, Garcetti said he was disappointed by Guerrero’s posts and that she has “learned lessons” from the experience.
“Obviously, they’re wrong, and I was disappointed to hear them,” he said. “But I know Ana. She’s an exceptional leader and thoughtful, caring friend and colleague, who I know has learned from those mistakes. She’s apologized, and we’re going to move forward.”
Huerta, 91, a co-founder with César Chávez of the United Farm Workers, wasn’t spared the derision of Solid Gold’s members, according to posts newly reviewed by The Times.
Under a photo of Huerta posted in 2016, Guerrero wrote, “I hate her. You hate her.”
“Viejita envidiosa!” Guerrero added, which translates to “Jealous old lady.”
Cecilia Cabello, a onetime Garcetti appointee, chimed in: “I can’t stand that old bag.” Linda Lopez, who formerly headed L.A.’s Office of Immigrant Affairs, wrote: “Has been.”
Efforts to reach Cabello and Lopez were unsuccessful Tuesday.
In an interview Tuesday, Huerta told The Times: “All of us on the front lines are used to having people say negative things about us. The growers used to call me all kinds of names. I think it just reflects badly on them when they have positions like the chief of staff of the mayor. It would seem they would have better ethics.”
Garcetti chief of staff Ana Guerrero said she regrets posting certain private Facebook messages, saying they “were never meant to be seen” outside her small group of friends.
Huerta said she never takes such comments personally but wondered why Guerrero and others had time for gossip, adding: “They are just staffers, and they are not out there doing the work that needs to be done for the community.”
In 2017, a Solid Gold member reposted a campaign post from Durazo, former head of the L.A. County Federation of Labor, who was running for state Senate. In her campaign pitch, Durazo wrote: “I am not asking you to send me to Sacramento. I am asking you to come with me to the state Capitol.”
Guerrero posted an emoji of a red-faced person with the message “¡Guacala!,” which translates to “gross.”
In a statement Tuesday, Durazo said she was focused on helping vulnerable and working people and those facing eviction. “My sincere hope is that those distasteful comments don’t distract from the pressing efforts to help needy Angelenos and Californians,” Durazo said.
A photo of cupcakes with Cedillo’s face on top of them also drew comments on Solid Gold. “Who wants a cupcake?!” a group member wrote. Guerrero responded by posting a vomiting emoji.
“It’s a disservice to the mayor and his high standards,” Cedillo said Tuesday after viewing the photos and comments. “We have a lot of problems in the city, and I think that’s where the attention should be paid.”
Comments about Pérez were posted under a story about potential political seats being filled that featured a photo of the former state leader. Guerrero posted the red-faced cartoon character with “¡Guacala!,” and Cabello posted an image of Jabba the Hutt from “Star Wars.”
“This is no different from the way Donald Trump referred to Rosie O’Donnell in disparaging ways,” Pérez, the former Assembly speaker and chair of the UC Board of Regents, said Tuesday. “When people have a propensity to write things of this nature in a private group, it raises the question of what conversations they have when no one is listening and how it affects their decision-making.”
Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor and former head of the city’s ethics commission, said the postings bring back “memories of a horrendous high school experience. But this is the administration of the second-biggest city in America.”
It’s unclear why the members of Solid Gold criticized the public figures. Guerrero didn’t respond to a question Tuesday on that topic.
Huerta and Pérez both backed Garcetti’s opponent Wendy Greuel in the 2013 Los Angeles mayor’s race. Big labor groups — including the county federation, led at the time by Durazo — also supported Greuel.
Guerrero, a former community organizer and daughter of migrant farmworkers, has spent two decades with Garcetti, working for him when he was on the City Council and becoming his chief of staff after he was elected mayor in 2013.
The Facebook group has come up repeatedly in depositions in a suit against the city filed by Matthew Garza, an LAPD officer who alleges that a Garcetti aide sexually harassed him. The former aide, Rick Jacobs, has denied harassing anyone.
During her deposition earlier this year, Guerrero testified that she did not remember if Jacobs was discussed in the private Facebook group.
Guerrero worked with Jacobs when he was at City Hall, and at one point in her deposition, she testified that she asked him to stop using the title “executive vice mayor,” which he had adopted.
One post reviewed by The Times shows the group discussing a 2016 L.A. Weekly report outlining how Jacobs had used the title. Guerrero, in the comments section of that post, posted an image of a crocodile or alligator fighting with a winged creature and the phrase “Denied.”
Garcetti, in his statement Tuesday, said the Solid Gold posts don’t reflect his “deep feelings of respect and friendship that I hold for the affected individuals.”
In 2019, the mayor’s Twitter account showed a photo of Garcetti, Huerta and others at a ceremony for a new Boyle Heights square bearing her name.
Huerta said Garcetti called her Tuesday, but she was in a meeting. He left a voicemail “apologizing and saying how much he loves and respects me,” Huerta told The Times.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., joined by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., left, and Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., speaks during a news conference to announce the introduction of S.1., the For the People Act in Washington on Wednesday, March 17, 2021.
Senate Republicans are poised to block a sprawling Democratic voting rights and government ethics bill Tuesday, as federal efforts to respond to a rash of restrictive ballot laws passed by GOP-held state legislatures hit a wall.
The For the People Act aims to set up automatic voter registration, expand early voting, ensure more transparency in political donations and limit partisan drawing of congressional districts, among other provisions. Democrats pushed for the reforms before the 2020 election, but called them more necessary to protect the democratic process after former President Donald Trump’s false claims of electoral fraud sparked an attack on the Capitol and restrictive state voting measures.
The House passed its version of the bill in March. The measure will likely fail a procedural test in a Senate vote later Tuesday, as Republicans signal they will vote against starting debate on the bill.
The plan will need 60 votes to advance in the Senate, split 50-50 by party.
“Should the United States Senate even debate how to protect the voting rights of our citizens? There’s only one correct answer,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said ahead of the vote, contending Republicans are “afraid” a discussion about the bill will shine a light on state-level efforts “to deny the right to vote.”
Republicans have framed the legislation as a power grab by Democrats. They have argued states rather than the federal government should have leeway to set election laws.
The GOP has also questioned the need for a new bill to protect voting rights. Republicans have downplayed the restrictive laws in states such as Georgia and Florida, which took steps including making it harder to vote absentee and limiting ballot drop-off boxes. Critics of the measures say they will disproportionately hurt voters of color and give GOP officials more power over election outcomes.
Ahead of the Senate vote, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called the Democratic bill a “transparently partisan plan,” stressing it was in the works before Republican-led legislatures passed voting laws.
“The Senate is only an obstacle when the policy is flawed and the process is rotten,” he said.
Schumer disputed the argument that the federal government should not exert its will on election laws. He pointed to past bills such as the Voting Rights Act that protected voters from discrimination.
The Biden administration has put its weight behind the For the People Act as a plank of its domestic agenda. The Office of Management and Budget on Tuesday said the 2020 election and its “violent aftermath,” when a pro-Trump mob attacked the Capitol and disrupted the count of the president’s electoral win, “remind us that our democracy is fragile.”
“This landmark legislation is needed to protect the right to vote, ensure the integrity of our elections, and repair and strengthen American democracy,” the administration said.
Vice President Kamala Harris, who has met with voting rights advocates in recent weeks, plans in the coming weeks to promote registration and work with state leaders who are pushing back on restrictive bills, NBC News reported.
The For the People Act has little chance of revival in the current Senate. At least two Democrats — Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — oppose scrapping the legislative filibuster, which would allow the party to pass more bills without Republicans.
Liberals have urged the party to abolish the 60-vote threshold as Democrats pursue their priorities with control of the White House and narrow majorities in the House and Senate.
But Manchin has signaled he would oppose the Democratic-led bill, potentially killing chances of its passage even without the filibuster. He has said he wants to pass a voting rights plan with GOP support, despite Republican opposition to more modest plans to protect ballot access.
Manchin proposed a potential compromise, which includes Democratic-backed provisions such as 15 days of early voting for federal elections and automatic voter registration at state motor vehicles agencies. It also calls for voter identification requirements, which Republicans have typically supported.
McConnell shot down the plan, arguing it contains the “rotten core” of Democrats’ bill.
For instance, in Lawrence County, Tenn. — a rural county on the southern edge of the state, home to a city billed as the “Crossroads of Dixie” — fewer than 35 percent of adults have received at least one shot of vaccine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But in Davidson County, a largely urban county that surrounds the city of Nashville, more than 60 percent of adults have received at least one shot, CDC said.
New Yorkers are gearing up to make a choice in the mayoral primary — the first step in determining who will lead the nation’s largest city at a critical juncture — amid rising crime rates, an ongoing pandemic and economic recovery.
Several factors make this primary unprecedented for the Big Apple, however. New Yorkers are heading to the polls earlier than usual and using ranked-choice voting for the first time, all the while much of the primary race has been clouded by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The primary election is also taking place in June for the first time. Previously, it was held in September.
With the coronavirus having relegated much of campaigning to Zoom during the spring, there has been a mad dash in recent weeks to turn out voters in the five boroughs as life returns a new normal.
This primary serves as a major test for ranked-choice voting in the city.
When casting ballots, New Yorkers will rank up to five candidates for the city’s chief executive instead of checking only one box as in elections past. Unlike a traditional winner-take-all election, the victor is decided through a process of elimination based on those rankings.
Ranked-choice votes come into play if no candidate earns more than 50% of first-choice votes, which is probable for the crowded Democratic primary, where 13 candidates will appear on the ballot, compared to the two Republicans on the GOP ballot. Vote counts then take place in rounds. The last-place candidate is eliminated in each round, allowing supporters of losing candidates to shift their support to their other choices. The rounds continue until one candidate has more than 50% of the vote.
It’s a change that could delay the final outcome for weeks, according to elections officials. The New York City Board of Elections expects to have a preliminary count of first-choice votes on Tuesday night and will then tabulate ranked choices starting the following week.
Who is on the ballots?
At the center of the debate over who should lead the nation’s largest city, is the uptick in crime and policing. Progressive candidates, including Maya Wiley, former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio, New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan have called for reallocating funds away from the NYPD. Relatively moderate candidates, such as Brooklyn Borough President and former police officer Eric Adams and Andrew Yang, have stated their opposition to the notion of defunding the police and have instead called for more investment in law enforcement.
Affordable housing and economic recovery from the pandemic have also been among the top issues.
Adams is widely considered the front-runner in the race. His campaign is flush with cash, but he’s faced accusations that he resides outside of New York City. Adams has denied those claims, giving reporters a guided tour of the Brooklyn home where he says he lives.
Momentum for Wiley has seemingly surged late in the race with endorsements from progressive heavyweights including Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., though it is unclear what impact those endorsements will have on the outcome.
Former Sanitation Commissioner Kathryn Garcia, too, gained momentum later in the race, buoyed by endorsements from The New York Times and the New York Daily News. Yang, a former presidential candidate, benefitted early on from high name recognition, but support for the businessman has waned. The pair campaigned together over the weekend.
New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer, who was initially considered the progressive candidate to beat, saw his campaign derailed by sexual misconduct allegations. Stringer has vehemently denied those accusations. Despite calls from his opponents to drop out of the race and the loss of major congressional and progressive group endorsements, he has held on.
Dianne Morales, a former non-profit executive, is the furthest left candidate in the Democratic primary. Her campaign faced allegations of union busting and being unable to uphold the progressive ideals she espouses. Morales said she’s worked to address the needs of her staff.
Ray McGuire, a former executive at Citigroup, has raked in donor cash but his campaign hasn’t picked up steam. And Donavan has cast himself as a candidate with a progressive vision and government experience but has struggled to gain traction.
A Democrat will likely succeed de Blasio as the next mayor of New York City, but two Republican candidates are also vying to helm the city. Guardian Angels founder Curtis Sliwa and a restaurateur named Fernando Mateo have campaigned as tough-on-crime candidates pledging to put more officers on the streets.
Fauci’s comments come after CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky on Friday urged Americans to get vaccinated against Covid, saying she expects delta to become the dominant coronavirus variant in the U.S.
Studies suggest it is around 60% more transmissible than alpha, which was more contagious than the original strain that emerged from Wuhan, China, in late 2019
“As worrisome as this delta strain is with regard to its hyper transmissibility, our vaccines work,” Walensky told the ABC program “Good Morning America.” If you get vaccinated, “you’ll be protected against this delta variant,” she added.
The United Kingdom recently saw the delta variant become the dominant strain there, surpassing alpha, which was first detected in the country last fall. The delta variant now makes up more than 60% of new cases in the U.K.
Health officials say there are reports that the delta variant also causes more severe symptoms, but that more research is needed to confirm those conclusions. Still, there are signs that the delta strain could provoke different symptoms than other variants.
Fauci said Tuesday the U.S. has “the tools” to defeat the variant, urging more Americans to get fully vaccinated against Covid and “crush the outbreak”
The Biden administration said earlier Tuesday that it likely won’t hit President Joe Biden’s goal of getting 70% of American adults to receive one vaccine shot or more by the Fourth of July.
“The effectiveness of the vaccines, in this case, two weeks after the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech was 88% effective against the delta and 93% effective against alpha when dealing with symptomatic disease,” Fauci said, citing a study.
The World Health Organization said Friday that delta is becoming the dominant variant of the disease worldwide.
On Monday, WHO officials warned the variant is the fastest and fittest coronavirus strain yet, and it will “pick off” the most vulnerable people, especially in places with low Covid-19 vaccination rates.
It has the potential “to be more lethal because it’s more efficient in the way it transmits between humans and it will eventually find those vulnerable individuals who will become severely ill, have to be hospitalized and potentially die,” Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO’s health emergencies program, said during a news conference.
Delta has now spread to 92 countries, Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO’s technical lead for Covid, said Monday. She said, “unfortunately we don’t yet have the vaccines in the right places to protect people’s lives.”
The WHO has been urging wealthy nations, including the U.S. to donate doses. The Biden administration earlier Monday detailed where it will send 55 million vaccine doses, the majority of which will be distributed through COVAX, the WHO-backed immunization program.
“These vaccines are highly effective against severe disease and death. That is what they are intended for, and that is what they need to be used for” Van Kerkhove said. “This is what COVAX and WHO and all of our partners have been advocating for, that these vaccines reach people most at risk.”
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., joined by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., left, and Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., speaks during a news conference to announce the introduction of S.1., the For the People Act in Washington on Wednesday, March 17, 2021.
Senate Republicans are poised to block a sprawling Democratic voting rights and government ethics bill Tuesday, as federal efforts to respond to a rash of restrictive ballot laws passed by GOP-held state legislatures hit a wall.
The For the People Act aims to set up automatic voter registration, expand early voting, ensure more transparency in political donations and limit partisan drawing of congressional districts, among other provisions. Democrats pushed for the reforms before the 2020 election, but called them more necessary to protect the democratic process after former President Donald Trump’s false claims of electoral fraud sparked an attack on the Capitol and restrictive state voting measures.
The House passed its version of the bill in March. The measure will likely fail a procedural test in a Senate vote later Tuesday, as Republicans signal they will vote against starting debate on the bill.
The plan will need 60 votes to advance in the Senate, split 50-50 by party.
“Should the United States Senate even debate how to protect the voting rights of our citizens? There’s only one correct answer,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said ahead of the vote, contending Republicans are “afraid” a discussion about the bill will shine a light on state-level efforts “to deny the right to vote.”
Republicans have framed the legislation as a power grab by Democrats. They have argued states rather than the federal government should have leeway to set election laws.
The GOP has also questioned the need for a new bill to protect voting rights. Republicans have downplayed the restrictive laws in states such as Georgia and Florida, which took steps including making it harder to vote absentee and limiting ballot drop-off boxes. Critics of the measures say they will disproportionately hurt voters of color and give GOP officials more power over election outcomes.
Ahead of the Senate vote, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called the Democratic bill a “transparently partisan plan,” stressing it was in the works before Republican-led legislatures passed voting laws.
“The Senate is only an obstacle when the policy is flawed and the process is rotten,” he said.
Schumer disputed the argument that the federal government should not exert its will on election laws. He pointed to past bills such as the Voting Rights Act that protected voters from discrimination.
The For the People Act has little chance of revival in the current Senate. At least two Democrats — Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — oppose scrapping the legislative filibuster, which would allow the party to pass more bills without Republicans.
Liberals have urged the party to abolish the 60-vote threshold as Democrats pursue their priorities with control of the White House and narrow majorities in the House and Senate.
But Manchin has signaled he would oppose the Democratic-led bill, potentially killing chances of its passage even without the filibuster. He has said he wants to pass a voting rights plan with GOP support, despite Republican opposition to more modest plans to protect ballot access.
Manchin proposed a potential compromise, which includes Democratic-backed provisions such as 15 days of early voting for federal elections and automatic voter registration at state motor vehicles agencies. It also calls for voter identification requirements, which Republicans have typically supported.
McConnell shot down the plan, arguing it contains the “rotten core” of Democrats’ bill.
Shaun Donovan, a former federal housing secretary; Raymond J. McGuire, a former Citi executive; and Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller, who all benefited from heavy spending on television on their behalf, were hoping to show unexpected strength through the ranking process. Dianne Morales, a former nonprofit executive, once appeared poised to be a left-wing standard-bearer, but her standing suffered amid internal campaign turmoil.
No issue dominated the race more than public safety, as poll after poll showed combating crime was the most important issue to New York Democrats.
Sparse public polling suggested that Mr. Adams, a former police captain who challenged misconduct from within the system — part of a complex career — attained credibility on that subject in the eyes of some voters, which will have been a crucial factor if he wins.
But Ms. Wiley repeatedly challenged Mr. Adams from the left on policing matters, expressing skepticism about adding more officers to patrol the subways and calling for greater investments in the social safety net and less in the Police Department budget. She emerged as a favorite of left-wing leaders and progressive voters.
Mr. Yang and Ms. Garcia shared Mr. Adams’s criticisms of efforts to scale back police funding, and those three candidates also frequently addressed quality-of-life issues across the city.
But if the race was defined in part by clashes over policy and vision, it also had all the hallmarks of a bare-knuckled brawl. Mr. Adams faced intense criticism from opponents over transparency and ethics, tied to reports concerning his tax and real estate holding disclosures and fund-raising practices. And Mr. Yang stumbled amid growing scrutiny of his knowledge of municipal government as rivals sharply questioned his capacity to lead.
The ugliest stretch of the contest came in its last days, as Mr. Adams declared that Mr. Yang and Ms. Garcia, who formed an apparent alliance, were seeking to prevent a Black candidate from winning. His allies went further, claiming without evidence that the actions of those candidates amounted to voter suppression.
The news is good when it comes to coronavirus in Michigan and most of the U.S. — as case rates continue to fall, the percentage of positive tests drops to the lowest point since the start of the pandemic and hospitalizations and deaths from the virus dwindle.
The country is headed for a “bright summer. Prayerfully, a summer of joy,” President Joe Biden said at a Friday news conference. But he said he is still concerned about people who haven’t been vaccinated and their risk as a more contagious — and potentially more deadly — variant gains a bigger foothold in the U.S.
Called the delta variant, this strain originated in India and swept through that nation in April and May, causing a massive surge in cases and thousands of deaths. Since then, it has spread to more than 80 countries, including the U.S., and pushed the United Kingdom to extend coronavirus restrictions as case rates climbed.
“It’s kind of been the story of the pandemic that there’s always a surprise around the corner,” said Joshua Petrie, an assistant research professor at the University of Michigan’s School of Public Health.
The following are answers to some of the biggest questions about the delta variant, how many cases have been detected in Michigan and why this strain matters.
Why are people concerned about the delta variant?
It’s possibly the most contagious variant to be identified so far in the pandemic.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention elevated the delta strain to a variant of concern last week, noting that this mutation of the virus spreads easily and also doesn’t appear to respond as well to monoclonal antibody treatments, and it may be more severe and result in higher rates of hospitalization.
Dr. Michael J. Ryan, executive director of the World Health Organization’s Health Emergencies Programme, warned during a news conference Monday that the delta variant is a real threat to vulnerable people around the world.
“This particular delta variant is faster,” Ryan said. “It is better. It will pick off the more vulnerable more efficiently than previous variants. And therefore if there are vulnerable people left without vaccination, they remain even at further risk.
“All of these viruses have been lethal in their own regard. This virus has the potential to be more lethal because it’s more efficient in the way it transmits between humans and it will eventually find those vulnerable individuals who will become severely ill, have to be hospitalized and potentially die.”
The key in preventing another statewide surge or pockets of outbreaks of the delta variant is getting people vaccinated, Petrie told the Free Press.
“The degree to how pocketed it is will be driven by overall (vaccine) coverage within a state,” he said. “So, if the state has very high coverage, there probably will be pockets of outbreaks. If it’s low coverage overall, there may be kind of bigger statewide outbreaks like we’ve experienced throughout the pandemic.”
Michigan, where about 61% of residents 16 and older have gotten at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, is “generally better off than a lot of states,” Petrie said. “But still, there’s definitely room for improvement.
“We know that the vaccines work well against the Delta strain. So the best thing we can do to prevent these outbreaks is getting vaccinated.”
Is the delta variant in Michigan?
Yes. As of Monday, 25 cases of the delta variant have been identified in five Michigan counties — Wayne, Livingston, Oakland, Lapeer and Calhoun — since May 9, said Lynn Sutfin, a spokesperson for the state health department.
However, of those 25 cases, 11 were identified among out-of-state individuals who were tested in Michigan, she said.
It’s difficult to have a true, real-time picture of how prevalent the strain is in the state because only a small number of coronavirus test samples undergo whole genome sequencing to determine whether they’re variant cases, she said. It takes as long as a week to complete the sequencing process for each test.
“We only have information for the subset of COVID cases which undergo sequencing,” Sutfin said. “During the last month, we have not seen a large increase in the B.1.617.2 cases reported … since the first identifications.”
How transmissible is the delta variant?
It is extremely contagious.
Michigan was walloped in the spring by the B.1.1.7 variant, now known as the alpha variant, which was identified in the U.K. That strain was considered 50% more transmissible than other previous strains of the virus, and led to a statewide surge in cases, hospitalizations and deaths.
The delta variant appears to be even more contagious than the alpha strain. A study by Public Health England suggests delta is 60% more transmissible than alpha.
“But I think some of the things that may be somewhat reassuring is that even with the B.1.1.7 outbreak or surge that we had in the spring here, we didn’t have the level of death that we did with previous surges, and I would attribute most of that to the high vaccination coverage in older adults,” Petrie said.
“And I think that’s been kind of consistent with what they’ve seen in the U.K. so far, too. It is that even though they’re getting another pretty big surge right now, they’re not seeing the level of death that they had previously. So that might be one bright spot.”
How prevalent is the delta variant in the US?
All indications are that the delta variant is beginning to take off across the nation, said Dr. Scott Gottlieb, former director of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Last week, he told “Face the Nation” that the delta variant accounted for 10% of all U.S. coronavirus cases, and its prevalence is doubling every two weeks.
It could become the dominant strain of the virus nationally within one to two months, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Friday on “Good Morning America.”
Do the vaccines work against the delta variant?
Yes. Dr. Anthony Fauci, chief medical adviser to the president and director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said during a news conference earlier this month that new research suggests that two weeks after the Pfizer vaccine is fully administered, it’s about 88% effective against the delta strain.
Fauci cautioned, however, that a single dose doesn’t appear to offer as much protection. Three weeks after a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine, the study showed it was about 33% effective in preventing sympomatic COVID-19.
It underscored, he said, that it’s vital that Americans show up for second-dose appointments of the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine.
What about the single-dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine? Does it protect against the delta variant?
Gottleib said the one-dose J&J vaccine appears to be about 60% effective against the delta strain.
“Even with the previous variants, the mRNA vaccines with two doses had better effectiveness than the Johnson & Johnson, but Johnson & Johnson still had pretty decent protection and it was definitely a lot, lot better than being unvaccinated,” Petrie said.
Who is most vulnerable to the delta variant?
People who are not vaccinated:These are the most vulnerable.
“The data is clear: If you are unvaccinated, you’re at risk of getting seriously ill or dying or spreading it,” Biden said Friday. “People getting seriously ill and being hospitalized due to COVID-19 are those who have not been fully vaccinated. The new variant will leave unvaccinated people even more vulnerable. … It’s a variant that is more easily transmissible, potentially deadlier, and particularly dangerous for young people.”
People who’ve gotten only one dose of the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine: Research suggests a single dose offers significantly less protection than two.
People who have compromised immune systems: This includes those who take immune-suppressing medication to manage health conditions, such as cancer, auto-immune disorders, and people who have had transplants or have HIV.
Even if they’ve been fully vaccinated, there is a possibility that they may not be as protected as people who are not immune-compromised.
What should I do if I’ve not been vaccinated or have a compromised immune system?
What it is recommended at the moment is in spite of the relaxation of the coronavirus restrictions and mask mandates, immunosuppressed patients should continue to wear masks, use hand sanitizer and practice self-distancing if they’re going to be in a public place where no one can tell the vaccination status of the people sitting next to them, said Dr. Millie Samaniego, director of the kidney, pancreas transplant program at the Henry Ford Transplant Institute.
When healthy people get vaccines, Samaniego said, it helps to protect those who are immune-compromised. That’s why anyone who lives with people who have those underlying conditions or is close to them should be vaccinated.
“We just need to be realistic and try to do the right thing,” she said. “As citizens, we have responsibilities towards older people. Being immunized is one of them, in my opinion. … I think we all should pursue vaccination.”
People with cancer, autoimmune diseases and those who’ve had organ transplants should get vaccinated, too.
“There are no contraindications,” she said.
Where can I get a COVID-19 vaccine?
The vaccines are free and available at most pharmacies on a walk-up basis with no need for an appointment.
You can text your ZIP code to 438829 to get an immediate response with vaccination sites closest to you. The text messaging system also will help you get a free Uber or Lyft ride to and from vaccination sites or free child care.
Young kids can’t get vaccinated. What about them?
Children ages 12 and older are eligible for the Pfizer vaccine in the United States, but no COVID-19 vaccine has FDA emergency use authorization for children younger than 12.
“For the older children that are eligible, (parents) definitely should consider getting them vaccinated,” Petrie said. And as soon as a COVID-19 vaccine gets approval for younger kids, get them vaccinated as well.
“I think the position we’re in now, … especially in Michigan, we have pretty low levels of transmission. But there is that risk, particularly with the delta variant, that things could pick up again. I think that makes it kind of important to keep an eye on what are the trends in your local area, and keep an ear out for advisories from your health department or the state, and try to base some of your activities around that.
“If transmission stays low you can, as the governor has suggested, start getting back to a lot of normal activities. But if things pick back up again, you may want to consider going back to some of the measures that we’ve been doing throughout the pandemic,” such as wearing a mask and avoiding large gatherings, especially indoors.
Could the delta variant lead to more COVID-19 restrictions?
Probably not, Biden said.
“I don’t think so because so many people have already been vaccinated,” he said, “but the delta variant can cause more people to die in areas where people have not been vaccinated.”
Could the delta variant affect the start of the school year in the fall?
It might, Gottlieb said.
“When we saw that big surge of infection in Michigan (in March and April 2021), it happened right around the time they opened their schools,” Gottlieb, the former director of the U.S. Food & Drug Administration, told CNBC on Monday. “And I think the consensus was among most people that the opening of the schools contributed to that big surge. We saw the schools did become focal points of spread of the B.1.1.7, which was the more transmissible strain.
“Now we have the new delta variant which is even more transmissible.”
Schools, Gottlieb said, would be smart to consider some coronavirus mitigation measures when they reopen.
“I think a lot of school districts are going to want to start the year and probably should with some forms of mitigation,” he said, “whether it’s masks, or just some distancing and good prudent practices within the school … until they figure out which way this goes, and whether or not these models are right.
“Most of the models showing upsurge early in the fall; they show this happening in September with the new one, with the delta variant.”
Contact Kristen Shamus: kshamus@freepress.com. Follow her on Twitter @kristenshamus.
Then-President Donald Trump holding a Bible as he visits outside St. John’s Church across Lafayette Park from the White House on June 1, 2020.
Patrick Semansky/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Patrick Semansky/AP
Then-President Donald Trump holding a Bible as he visits outside St. John’s Church across Lafayette Park from the White House on June 1, 2020.
Patrick Semansky/AP
A federal judge has dismissedclaims that former White House officials conspired to forcibly remove peaceful protesters last year from Washington, D.C.’s Lafayette Square so that then-President Donald Trump could pose for a photo holding a Bible at a nearby church.
Trump, accompanied by then-Attorney General William Barr, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, strode to St. John’s Episcopal Church across from the square, where the photo was taken.
In four overlapping suits, Black Lives Matter and three other plaintiffs represented by the American Civil Liberties Union alleged that the former president, Barr and other Trump administration officials conspired to violate the civil rights of the protesters.
Last month, the Department of Justice asked U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich to dismiss the lawsuits.
On Monday, Friedrich called the plaintiff’s claims speculative and dismissed the allegations against Barr, U.S. Park Police chief Gregory Monahan and other federal officials.
In her ruling, Friedrich, a Trump appointee, wrote that plaintiffs had failed to prove an agreement or plan to violate the rights of the protesters.
“These allegations, taken as true, do not show sufficient ‘events, conversations, or documents indicating an agreement or meeting of the minds’ amongst the defendants to violate [plaintiffs’] rights based on [their] membership in a protected class,'” she said.
Then-President Donald Trump departs the White House to visit outside St. John’s Church in Washington on June 1, 2020. Walking behind Trump from left are former Attorney General William Barr, former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Patrick Semansky/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Patrick Semansky/AP
Then-President Donald Trump departs the White House to visit outside St. John’s Church in Washington on June 1, 2020. Walking behind Trump from left are former Attorney General William Barr, former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Patrick Semansky/AP
The ACLU had said that the forcible clearing of the square could have a chilling effect on free speech, a contention that Friedrich also rejected.
“The plaintiffs allege that they continue to demonstrate in or near Lafayette Square and that they fear law enforcement officers may disperse or attack them,” she wrote.
“The plaintiffs’ primary basis for these fears are the alleged events of June 1, 2020 and President Trump’s social media posts before and after the clearing of Lafayette Square,” she continued. “Significantly, the plaintiffs do not rely on any alleged law or policy as the basis for this claimed risk of future harm.”
The judge also ruled that Barr, Monahan and others are immune from civil suits and cannot be sued for damages.
BREAKING: Today, a federal judge dismissed our lawsuit that held federal officers accountable for attacking Lafayette Square Park protestors with tear gas, rubber bullets, and flash bombs on June 1, 2020.
— ACLU of the District of Columbia (@ACLU_DC) June 21, 2021
In a tweet, the ACLU of the District of Columbia said the ruling not only represents “a stunning rejection of our constitutional values and protestors’ First Amendment rights, but it opens the door for future violence at the hands of the federal government and effectively places federal officials above the law.”
One claim against the federal defendants survives: Judge Friedrich said that the plaintiffs can still challenge continued restrictions on access to Lafayette Square because they have “plausibly alleged an ongoing injury.”
“To this day, over a year after the events of June 1, Lafayette Square remains subject to heightened restrictions that periodically limit protestors’ access to the Square,” she said. “Despite the change in Administrations, the federal defendants have not met the high bar of showing that this claim has been mooted by subsequent events.”
In asking for the suits to be dismissed, Justice Department trial attorney David Cutler said last month that the police acted lawfully and that the president’s security is of “paramount” government interest, according to The Washington Post.
Earlier this month, the Interior Department’s inspector general, Mark Greenblatt, concluded that the U.S. Park Police did not clear the protesters from the square specifically for Trump’s photo-op.
“[T]he evidence established that relevant USPP officials had made those decisions and had begun implementing the operational plan several hours before they knew of a potential Presidential visit to the park, which occurred later that day,” Greenblatt wrote in a statement.
RANDOLPH, N.J. — A New Jersey board of education reversed itself following a public outcry and has restored the names of holidays to its school calendar.
The Randolph school board on Monday night voted 8-1 to overturn a decision made earlier this month to replace the names of holidays with just the phrase “day off.” The panel also will create a committee to gain input from the public.
Criticism began when the school board voted in May to refer to Columbus Day as Indigenous Peoples Day. Following complaints from Italian Americans, the board then voted to label holidays generically.
Critics accused the board of bowing to so-called cancel culture.
An online petition called for Superintendent Jennifer Fano and members of the school board to resign.
The district issued a statement in which it said the actions were “misconstrued.”
“The buck stops here with those of us seated in front of you and we own it,” school board president Tammy MacKay said. “Neither the superintendent nor any other administrator, principal, teacher or other district employee had anything to do with those votes or decisions. To cast blame on any of them for what this board did is quite simply wrong.”
New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Andrew Yang prepares to cast his ballot at an early voting site last week. The election provides America’s biggest-yet test for ranked-choice voting.
John Minchillo/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
John Minchillo/AP
New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Andrew Yang prepares to cast his ballot at an early voting site last week. The election provides America’s biggest-yet test for ranked-choice voting.
John Minchillo/AP
An important election takes place Tuesday in New York City.
But beyond who wins the mayoral primaries there, what happens could have consequences for how millions of Americans vote in the future.
That’s because the city, for the first time, is using ranked-choice voting. The method, which allows voters to rank candidates by preference rather than selecting just their top choice, has gained some traction throughout the country, pushed by reformers who say it’s a better election system.
New York City, though, is by far the largest jurisdiction to implement ranked-choice voting, and that means it’s about to go under a white-hot spotlight.
So what is it exactly, where has it been used, and what are the arguments for and against it?
What is ranked-choice voting?
In the system, voters get to rank their preferred candidates. New York City is having voters rank their top five — though voters are not actually required to rank all five.
In the Democratic primary, there are 13 candidates on the ballot, while the Republican primary in the heavily Democratic city has just two candidates. New York now uses ranked-choice voting for primaries and special elections after almost three-quarters of voters approved its use in a 2019 ballot measure.
Most Americans are used to casting one vote for one person per office, and the person with the most votes wins. Ranking candidates is far more complicated, but advocates believe it is fairer and more accurately reflects the collective will of the majority.
Here’s an example of a Democratic ballot that a New Yorker in Flushing, Queens (where your author is from) will see:
How does it work?
If someone gets 50% plus one after all the first-choice votes are counted, then the election is over and that candidate wins.
But if no one gets 50% plus one, it’s on to Round 2.
The person with the lowest number of first-place votes is eliminated, and that candidate’s voters’ second choices get redistributed as votes for other candidates.
This reallocation of votes goes on until someone reaches 50% plus one.
In the New York Democratic mayoral primary, with such a large field of candidates and a high percentage of undecided voters, it could take many rounds before someone reaches a majority.
There are some 20 jurisdictions around the country that use ranked-choice voting, according to FairVote, a nonpartisan vote-reform advocacy group.
Just two states — Maine and Alaska — have switched to it for both statewide and presidential elections, while a few more used it for 2020 presidential primaries.
It had a serious impact on a 2018 Maine congressional race. A Republican had the most first-choice votes and was leading the Democrat narrowly by a couple thousand votes. But two independent candidates also received a fair amount of votes, and when their second-choice votes were redistributed, the Democrat wound up winning by a few thousand.
Popular overseas. It’s also been used by Australia, Ireland and Malta since the early 20th century. Northern Ireland, New Zealand and Scotland have all adopted it as well.
Not the first push in the U.S. Two dozen cities adopted ranked-choice voting in this country in the early-to-mid-20th century, but it faced a backlash and was repealed in all of them but one, Cambridge, Mass., where it’s still in use.
Outside politics. The Oscars have also been using it since 2009 for its Best Picture category, but not everyone is a fan of the results it has produced.
What are the arguments in favor of it?
Proponents of ranked-choice voting say:
It means the winner gets a majority of the vote. The usual system of “most votes wins” can mean someone with only a plurality of the overall vote can be elected, not necessarily the person with majority support. And that can make for some broadly unpopular or unqualified candidates winning. In other words, ranked-choice voting can drastically reduce the possibility of spoilers.
More moderate candidates. It’s less likely that extreme candidates with a strong base of support, but who aren’t liked more broadly, could get through in a crowded primary.
More cost-effective than other runoff elections. Ranked-choice voting, sometimes called “instant runoff elections,” costs less than other runoffs. If no one hits a needed threshold to win those races, candidates with depleted funds then have to often campaign several more weeks. It also saves local jurisdictions money because they don’t have to spend more on another election to administer.
Less negative campaigning. The argument goes that candidates need a majority of voters to like them (at least more than the next person).
People can feel good about casting their vote. Instead of holding their nose for that one choice they get, voters can express at least a first choice for the person they really like.
What are the arguments against it?
Opponents of ranked-choice voting say:
It’s complicated. And complications can lead to errors. It’s new and voters get confused and make more errors on a ranked-choice ballot than a regular one, one Maine policy analyst found. In fact, the analyst said ranked ballots are three to five times more likely to be uncounted because of mistakes than regular ones.
Some argue it’s less democratic, because it eschews the idea of one person, one vote.
Lots of people don’t fill out all the choices. In that Marist survey of the New York race, just a quarter of potential voters made five selections. Without all the choices, opponents argue, you’re getting bad data. How can you know the true will of a majority of the people if everyone isn’t filling out all the choices? Australia requires everyone to rank all of the candidates (in addition to requiring everyone to vote). But without that requirement, if voters don’t rank all of the candidates, it’s possible to still not get to a majority. That’s already happened in the U.S.
It could encourage horse-trading. Ranked-choice voting might make for less strategic voting, but it could open the door for candidates to make deals with each other about who their voters should go for as a second choice. Over the weekend in New York, that was on full display. Andrew Yang, the former presidential candidate who is running for mayor, and fellow Democratic candidate Kathryn Garcia have formed a late alliance. “You can vote for both of us,” Garcia said, as the two stood together. Yang added, “If you support me, please make sure to also support Kathryn Garcia on your ballot.”
It might not necessarily reduce negative campaigning. As it is already, candidates don’t like putting their names on negative campaigning. Much of it is done by outside groups, and nothing in ranked-choice voting stops those entities from continuing to muddy up others in the race. Some argue it could have the unintended consequence of more strident candidates, as fringe extremists appeal to another hard-line candidate’s followers for second-choice votes.
Outside a mobile Covid-19 vaccination center in Bolton, U.K., earlier this month, where the Delta variant, first identified in India, is driving up hospitalizations. This dangerous variant of the coronavirus is quickly spreading in the U.S., too, a new scientific analysis shows, and only broad vaccination is likely to stop it.
Peter Byrne/PA Images via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Peter Byrne/PA Images via Getty Images
Outside a mobile Covid-19 vaccination center in Bolton, U.K., earlier this month, where the Delta variant, first identified in India, is driving up hospitalizations. This dangerous variant of the coronavirus is quickly spreading in the U.S., too, a new scientific analysis shows, and only broad vaccination is likely to stop it.
Peter Byrne/PA Images via Getty Images
The dangerous Delta variant of the coronavirus is spreading so quickly in the United States that it’s likely the mutant strain will become predominant in the U.S. within weeks, according to a new analysis.
The variant, first identified in India, is the most contagious yet and, among those not yet vaccinated, may trigger serious illness in more people than other variants do, say scientists tracking the spread of infection.
The Delta variant apparently already accounts for at least 14% of all new infections, according to the research analysis posted online Mondayof more than 242,000 infections nationwide over the last six months.
Another reason to get vaccinated
“It definitely is of concern,” says William Lee, the vice president of science at Helix, which is under contract with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to help track the variants.
“Just the fact that it’s so transmissible means that it’s it’s dangerous,” Lee says, “and so I think you’ll see outbreaks of Delta around the country and more people will get sick from it.”
Helix launched the study when researchers spotted a drop in the prevalence of the Alpha variant, a contagious strain first spotted in the U.K. that had quickly become the dominant variant in that country and the U.S.
The researchers discovered the drop in relative frequency of the Alpha variant in their spot checks of strains circulating in the U.S. was due to a rapid increase in two other variants: the Gamma variant, first spotted in Brazil, and the Delta variant. The Gamma variant may be slightly better than the original strain at outmaneuvering the vaccines, researchers say.
“It looks like both of them are going to slowly push out Alpha,” says Lee, whose study has not yet been peer-reviewed but has been posted on a pre-print server.
How Delta could prompt another U.S. COVID-19 surge
All the vaccines authorized for use in the U.S. appear, in general, to provide powerful protection against all the variants, including Delta. But the rapid spread of the variants is still raising concern because of the large number of people who remain unvaccinated.
“There still are big portions of the country where the rates of vaccination are quite low,” notes Dr. Jeremy Luban, a virologist at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. “And, in fact, the Helix paper shows that this Delta variant is increasing in frequency — the speed at which it’s increasing in frequency is greatest in those areas where vaccination rates are lowest.”
The Delta variant could trigger yet another moderate surge of infections through many parts of the U.S. because of these pockets of unvaccinated people, according to a recent set of projections from the COVID-19 Scenario Modeling Hub, which is helping the CDC plot the future course of the pandemic.
The projections indicate that infections could start to rise again as soon as some time in July, especially if the vaccination campaign continues to stall.
“For the most part, it’s a moderate resurgence,” says Justin Lessler, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University who is helping coordinate the hub.
“We’re not having massive epidemics at a national level, but we have this kind of continuation of the virus just sticking around and keeping us on our toes,” Lessler says. “And in specific places there could be substantial epidemics still.”
The city initially celebrated its collaboration with Mr. Trump when the rising real estate developer first won the contract to refurbish Wollman Rink in Central Park in the 1980s. Mr. Trump’s company finished the project under budget and ahead of its deadline, and city officials embraced him; one even joked about planting a “Trump tree” in the park.
“I’m not used to having nice things said about me,” Mr. Trump said at the time.
The contracts were renewed during the tenure of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. But Mr. de Blasio, a progressive Democrat, staked out a position against Mr. Trump, one that put him in line with his many liberal constituents.
The lawsuit comes as Mr. Trump and his company are facing an unrelated criminal investigation from the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which is examining whether the former president and his employees committed financial fraud in recent years.
Prosecutors appear to be in the final stages of investigating Allen H. Weisselberg, Mr. Trump’s long-serving chief financial officer, and could criminally charge him this summer, The New York Times previously reported.
Mr. Weisselberg, who has worked for the Trump family since 1973, was listed as the contact for the company on the city’s contract for the Central Park carousel.
Barack Obama has backed conservative West Virginia Democratic senator Joe Manchin’s voting rights proposal, calling it a “product of compromise” as the landmark legislation struggles towards a crucial vote in the US Senate on Tuesday.
The former US president weighed in, as did his wife and former first lady, Michelle Obama, decrying Republican efforts in many statehouses across the country to bring in new laws that restrict voting, and urging Congress to pass federal legislation “before it’s too late”.
Barack Obama said the future of the country was at stake.
“I have tried to make it a policy not to weigh in on the day-to-day scrum in Washington, but what is happening this week is more than just a particular bill coming up or not coming up to a vote,” he said in an interview with Yahoo News.
He added: “I do want folks who may not be paying close attention to what’s happening … to understand the stakes involved here, and why this debate is so vitally important to the future of our country,” Obama said.
And the White House said on Monday it views the Senate’s work on an elections bill overhaul and changes being offered by Manchin as a “step forward”, even though the Democrats’ priority legislation is expected to be blocked by a Republican filibuster.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki said the revisions proposed by Manchin are a compromise, another step as Democrats work to shore up voting access and what Joe Biden sees as “a fight of his presidency”.
“The president’s effort to continue that fight doesn’t stop tomorrow at all,” Psaki said.
The Senate is preparing for a showdown Tuesday, a test vote of the For the People Act, a sweeping elections bill that would be the largest overhaul of US voting procedures in a generation.
A top priority for Democrats seeking to ensure access to the polls and mail-in ballots made popular during the pandemic, it is opposed by Republicans as a federal overreach into state systems.
Manchin has been a vocal Democratic Party holdout on Capitol Hill, opposing the For the People Act and insisting on gleaning bipartisan support for such legislation.
But last week he introduced a list of compromises he would support, including 15 days of early voting and automatic voter registration. His compromise would also ban partisan gerrymandering and requiring voter ID.
Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, said he opposed the compromise, and hopes are fading in many Democratic quarters that a vote on Tuesday in the Senate will take the legislation to the debate stage, thus leaving it stalled.
“Around the world we’ve seen once-vibrant democracies go in reverse,” Obama said. “It is happening in other places around the world and these impulses have crept into the United States … we are not immune from some of these efforts to weaken our democracy.”
“If we have the same kinds of shenanigans that brought about January 6, you know – if we have that for a couple more election cycles we’re going to have real problems in terms of our democracy long term.”
In a post on Instagram, Michelle Obama talked of the Biden legislation fighting voter suppression and strengthening democracy.
“Over the past few months, there’s been a movement in state legislatures all across the country to pass laws that make it harder for people to cast a ballot. That means we’ve got to pass the For the People Act before it’s too late. This bill is one of our best chances…to ensure all of us have a say in our future – whether that’s issues like pandemic relief, criminal justice, immigration, healthcare, education, or anything else,” she wrote.
Manchin had been the sole holdout. His proposed changes to the bill are being well received by some in his party, and any nod from the White House lends them credibility.
He has suggested adding a national voter ID requirement, which has been popular among Republicans, and dropping other measures from the bill like its proposed public financing of campaigns.
Among voting rights advocates, one key voice, Georgia-based Democrat and activist Stacey Abrams, has said she could support Manchin’s proposal.
Ahead of Tuesday’s vote, it is clear Democrats in the split 50-50 Senate will be unable to open debate, blocked by a filibuster by Republicans.
In the Senate, it takes 60 votes to overcome the filibuster, and without any Republican support, the Democrats cannot move forward.
“Will the Republicans let us debate it?” said Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer as he opened the chamber on Monday afternoon. “We’re about to find out.”
U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., has defended his affiliation with an exclusive beach club after a reporter, describing the membership of the club as “all white,” questioned him about it.
Whitehouse is a longtime member of Bailey’s Beach Club, formally known as the Spouting Rock Beach Association. The association is “an exclusive private beach club in Newport, Rhode Island,” according to its employment page.
After being questioned about his membership and the racial makeup of the club, Whitehouse on Friday told a reporter from GoLocal Providence, “I think the people who are running the place are still working on that,” referring to diversifying membership. “I’m sorry it hasn’t happened yet.”
USA TODAY reached out to Whitehouse’s office for comment but did not get a response.
Whitehouse spokesman Richard Davidson told the Washington Post Monday that the beach club has “‘no such restrictive policy’ regarding the race or ethnicity of its members.”
“The club has had and has members of color,” Davidson told the Post.
Whitehouse announced his intent to quit Bailey’s Beach Club while campaigning for senator in 2006, GoLocal reported, but the Rhode Island senator instead consolidated his membership with his wife. When asked in 2017 if he would pressure the club to open up membership, Whitehouse told GoLocal, “I’ll take that up privately.”
The Spouting Rock Beach Association declined to discuss the racial composition of its membership in response to requests for comments, The Washington Post reported. A representative described it only as a “very small beach club.”
On Monday, Whitehouse told reporters that Bailey’s Beach Club had told him it did have “diversity of membership,” Politico reported.
“I believe that there are (people of color who are members at the club),” Whitehouse told reporters, according to Politico. “I don’t spend a lot of time there.”
In a brief order, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay of Judge Roger T. Benitez’s June 4 decision, in which he likened an AR-15 semiautomatic to a Swiss Army knife and called it “good for both home and battle.”
Benitez’s decision overturning the California ban gave the state 30 days to challenge the decision. The 9th Circuit, acting on a June 10 appeal filed by Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, put Benitez’s ruling on hold pending decisions in other gun cases that are now before the court.
“This leaves our assault weapons laws in effect while appellate proceedings continue,” Bonta said in a tweet. “We won’t stop defending these life-saving laws.”
The 9th Circuit judges on the panel issuing the stay were Barry G. Silverman, an appointee of President Clinton; Jacqueline Nguyen, an Obama appointee; and Ryan D. Nelson, a Trump appointee.
The order said the stay would be in effect until the 9th Circuit ruled in another case challenging California’s assault weapons regulations. That case also has been put on hold pending a ruling in a lawsuit over California’s ban on large-capacity magazines.
An 11-judge 9th Circuit “en banc” panel is scheduled to hear arguments in that case Tuesday, and the ruling is likely to determine the future of the state’s assault weapons ban. A majority of the judges on the panel are Democratic appointees.
Benitez also was the judge who struck down the voter-approved 2016 ban on large-capacity magazines. A three-judge 9th Circuit panel upheld his decision, but the state successfully sought review by a larger en banc panel. Gov. Gavin Newsom authored the ballot measure banning the magazines when he was the state’s lieutenant governor.
Benitez, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said the assault weapons ban unconstitutionally infringed on the rights of California gun owners and “has had no effect” on curtailing mass shootings.
California is one of seven states and Washington, D.C., that ban assault weapons. The California case is expected to go to the Supreme Court, where a majority of justices are conservative and some have been highly critical of gun regulations.
Twenty-two states, led by Arizona, which is under the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction, asked the appeals court to uphold the order against California’s law.
“Calling modern rifles ‘assault weapons’ is a misnomer— they are most often used by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes like personal protection or target and sport shooting,” the states argued. “There is nothing sinister about citizens keeping or bearing a modern rifle.”
Joining Arizona were Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.
The Firearms Policy Coalition, which challenged the assault weapons ban, criticized the 9th Circuit for putting Benitez’s decision “on ice” and choosing “government tyranny over human lives and rights.”
“Tens of millions of Californians have suffered under the state’s unconstitutional and oppressive gun control scheme for far too long,” the group said.
Citing the threat to public safety, California appeals a federal judge’s ruling that declared the state’s ban on assault weapons unconstitutional.
More Coverage
California passed the ban more than 30 years ago in response to a 1989 mass shooting in a Stockton schoolyard. The shooter used an AK-47 and large-capacity magazines to kill five children.
In the appeal to the 9th Circuit, state officials said five federal appeals courts have rejected constitutional challenges to assault weapons bans.
California’s law restricts the manufacture, importation, sale and possession of rifles, pistols and shotguns defined as “assault weapons” under the state’s penal code.
Benitez, who serves in the Southern District of California, is well known for his pro-gun rulings.
His decision overturning the assault weapons ban spurred outrage across the country. Newsom, in announcing the state’s appeal, said California would never “let these weapons of war back onto our streets.”
“This is a fight California will never back down from, period,” the governor said.
Supporters of gun restrictions have worried that Benitez’s decision was part of a strategy by the gun lobby to get cases to the U.S. Supreme Court, where appointees by former President Trump are seen as sympathetic to 2nd Amendment arguments.
“A lot is on the line,” Newsom said.
California was the first state to ban assault weapons. Gov. George Deukmejian, a conservative Republican, signed the original law, which banned the manufacture and sale of about 60 models of assault weapons.
The state expanded the law several times over the following years to add a features-based definition of assault weapons to prevent gun makers from producing firearms functionally identical to the banned models.
Staff writer Patrick McGreevy contributed to this report.
This is a widget area - If you go to "Appearance" in your WP-Admin you can change the content of this box in "Widgets", or you can remove this box completely under "Theme Options"
