Latest news with #U.S.Constitution
Straits Times
14 minutes ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
US Supreme Court upholds law allowing Palestinian authorities to be sued over attacks
FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen the morning before justices are expected to issue opinions in pending cases, in Washington, U.S., June 14, 2024. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz/File Photo WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court upheld on Friday a statute passed by Congress to facilitate lawsuits against Palestinian authorities by Americans killed or injured in attacks abroad as plaintiffs pursue monetary damages for violence years ago in Israel and the West Bank. The 9-0 ruling overturned a lower court's decision that the 2019 law, the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, violated the rights of the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization to due process under the U.S. Constitution. Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, who authored the ruling, said the 2019 jurisdictional law comported with due process rights enshrined in the Constitution's Fifth Amendment. "It is permissible for the federal government to craft a narrow jurisdictional provision that ensures, as part of a broader foreign policy agenda, that Americans injured or killed by acts of terror have an adequate forum in which to vindicate their right" to compensation under a federal law known as the Antiterrorism Act of 1990, Roberts wrote. The U.S. government and a group of American victims and their families had appealed the lower court's decision that struck down a provision of the law. Among the plaintiffs are families who in 2015 won a $655 million judgment in a civil case alleging that the Palestinian organizations were responsible for a series of shootings and bombings around Jerusalem from 2002 to 2004. They also include relatives of Ari Fuld, a Jewish settler in the Israel-occupied West Bank who was fatally stabbed by a Palestinian in 2018. "The plaintiffs, U.S. families who had loved ones maimed or murdered in PLO-sponsored terror attacks, have been waiting for justice for many years," said Kent Yalowitz, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. "I am very hopeful that the case will soon be resolved without subjecting these families to further protracted and unnecessary litigation," Yalowitz added. The ongoing violence involving Israel and the Palestinians served as a backdrop to the case. U.S. courts for years have grappled over whether they have jurisdiction in cases involving the Palestinian Authority and PLO for actions taken abroad. Under the language at issue in the 2019 law, the PLO and Palestinian Authority automatically "consent" to jurisdiction if they conduct certain activities in the United States or make payments to people who attack Americans. Roberts in Friday's ruling wrote that Congress and the president enacted the jurisdictional law based on their "considered judgment to subject the PLO and PA (Palestinian Authority) to liability in U.S. courts as part of a comprehensive legal response to 'halt, deter and disrupt' acts of international terrorism that threaten the life and limb of American citizens." New York-based U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled in 2022 that the law violated the due process rights of the PLO and Palestinian Authority. The New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling. President Joe Biden's administration initiated the government's appeal, which subsequently was taken up by President Donald Trump's administration. The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on April 1. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ohio lawmakers are trying once again to remove slavery from state's constitution
Juneteenth flag. (Getty images) Ohio Democratic lawmakers want to eradicate slavery from the Ohio Constitution. State Reps. Dontavius Jarrells, D-Columbus, and Veronica Sims, D-Akron, are working on a joint resolution that would remove slavery from the state's foundational document. 'This isn't political,' Jarrells said Wednesday during an Ohio Legislative Black Caucus press conference. 'This isn't personal. This is a moral overdue journey to change our constitution once and for all. Other states have already done it. We simply want Ohio to live up to this promise of freedom.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for being convicted of a crime. The Ohio Constitution currently says 'There shall be no slavery in this state; nor involuntary servitude, unless for the punishment of crime.' Seven states have removed the slavery loophole from their constitution — Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, Utah, Colorado, and Nebraska, according to the Abolish Slavery National Network. 'I submit that slavery and or involuntary servitude in any shape, form or fashion, should be disembodied from the sacred pages of the founding document of our great state,' Sims said. 'It is time to remove any exception under any circumstances, slavery is a vile, despicable imposition upon another human being.' This is not the first time there have been legislative attempts in Ohio to remove slavery from the state's constitution. Jarrells had a bipartisan joint resolution that was unable to get out of committee during the last General Assembly. A Senate Joint Resolution was also unsuccessful back in 2020. If the House and Senate pass the new joint resolution, it would go to the statewide ballot for the voters to decide. Wednesday's press conference was hosted by members of the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus in honor of Juneteenth, a federal holiday Thursday remembering the end of slavery in the United States on June 19, 1865 — two years after the Emancipation Proclamation. 'Juneteenth signifies the end of slavery, and it's a time to celebrate,' said State Rep. Terrence Upchurch, D-Cleveland. 'Although we are proud of the progress we have made, that does not negate the fact that there are still several challenges Black Ohioans face across the state. People are still struggling with finding housing, healthy foods, good paying jobs, satisfactory education, fair treatment in the justice system, and so much more.' Jarrells introduced House Bill 306 last month, also known as the Enact the Hate Crime Act. 'It empowers victims with real civil remedies and gives law enforcement clear, enforceable tools to hold perpetrators accountable,' he said. 'This bill says that every single person in this state deserves to live without fear, and if you are targeted for who you are, this state will stand with you.' State Rep. Darnell T. Brewer, D-Cleveland, talked about recent gun legislation he is working on. 'Gun violence is devastating our communities,' he said. 'We can no longer afford to be silent or inactive.' Black youth are 11 times more likely to die from firearm homicide than their white peers, according to Brady: United Against Gun Violence. Brewer said he plans on introducing a resolution to encourage responsible gun ownership by promoting safe storage practices to prevent children from accessing guns and a resolution on safe firearm storage education. 'Gun violence is not just an emergency,' he said. 'It's a daily reality.' Infant mortality, when a child dies before their first birthday, is higher for Black babies compared to white babies. The national infant mortality rate is 5.5 per 1,000 live births for babies and 10.9 for Black babies, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The infant mortality rate for Ohio Black babies in 2022 was 13.4 per 1,000 live births. 'Why do we stop caring about babies after they're born?' State Rep. Derrick Hall, D-Akron, asked. State Rep. Ismail Mohamed, D-Columbus, talked about House Bill 281, a bill that would withhold Medicaid funding from hospitals that do not cooperate with the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. State Rep. Josh Williams, R-Sylvania Twp., introduced the bill last month. 'What this bill does is essentially force medical providers to choose between honoring your oath as medical providers or complying with the state's political agenda,' Mohamed said. 'It will discourage immigrant communities from seeking life saving treatment care out of fear.' Mohamed also talked about House Bill 1, a piece of legislation that would place restrictions on foreign ownership of land. State Reps. Angie King, R-Celina, and Roy Klopfenstein, R-Haviland, introduced the bill earlier this year. 'It is arbitrary,' Mohamed said. 'It is discriminatory in its face, and will negatively impact economic development in the state of Ohio.' Follow Capital Journal Reporter Megan Henry on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
US Supreme Court upholds Tennessee law banning youth transgender care
Washington: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Republican-backed ban in Tennessee on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors on Wednesday in a setback for transgender rights that could bolster efforts by states to defend other measures targeting transgender people. The court, in a 6-3 ruling powered by its conservative justices, decided that the ban does not violate the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment promise of equal protection, as challengers to the law had argued. The ruling affirmed a lower court's decision that backed Tennessee's law, which bars medical treatments such as puberty blockers and hormones for people under age 18 experiencing gender dysphoria. The Supreme Court's three liberal justices dissented. "Tennessee concluded that there is an ongoing debate among medical experts regarding the risks and benefits associated with administering puberty blockers and hormones to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder and gender incongruence. (The law's) ban on such treatments responds directly to that uncertainty," conservative Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court's majority. Gender dysphoria is the clinical diagnosis for significant distress that can result from an incongruence between a person's gender identity and the sex assigned at birth. Chase Strangio, a transgender American Civil Liberties lawyer who represented some of the challengers in the case, called the ruling "a devastating loss for transgender people, our families and everyone who cares about the Constitution." Transgender rights as an issue has become a major flashpoint in the U.S. culture wars. Since returning to office in January, Republican President Donald Trump has taken a hardline stance against transgender rights. Wednesday's ruling will have a broad impact as Tennessee's law is one of 25 such policies enacted by conservative state lawmakers around the United States. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi , a Trump appointee, in a social media post applauded the ruling and encouraged other states to "follow Tennessee's lead and enact similar legislation to protect our kids." Various other state restrictions have been enacted in recent years targeting transgender people, from bathroom use to sports participation, some limited to minors but others extending to adults. Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed dismay that the Supreme Court largely deferred to the state legislature's policy choices in upholding the ban. "By retreating from meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most, the court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims. In sadness, I dissent," Sotomayor wrote, joined by fellow liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The Justice Department under Democratic former President Joe Biden's administration had challenged the law. Trump's administration told the Supreme Court in February that Tennessee's ban was not unlawful, reversing the government's position. Tennessee's law, passed in 2023, aims to encourage minors to "appreciate their sex" by prohibiting healthcare workers from prescribing puberty blockers and hormones to help them live as "a purported identity inconsistent with the minor's sex." Providers can be sued and face fines and professional discipline under the law for any violations. The law allows these medications to be used for any other purpose, including to address congenital defects, early-onset puberty or other conditions. Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti welcomed Wednesday's ruling, saying that the state legislature had "voted to protect kids from irreversible decisions they cannot yet fully understand." Several plaintiffs - three transgender minors and their parents, as well as a doctor who provides the type of care at issue - sued to challenge the Tennessee law's legality. Biden's Justice Department subsequently intervened in the lawsuit, opposing Tennessee's law. The challengers argued that the law discriminates against these adolescents based on sex and transgender status, violating the 14th Amendment. 'DIGNITY AND EQUALITY' Some transgender people gathered at a church near the Supreme Court building and denounced the ruling. "I am myself trans, and I am very concerned about efforts to erase transgender people from public life," Nicky Sundt said in an interview. The ACLU's Strangio said, "We are as determined as ever to fight for the dignity and equality of every transgender person." Tennessee has said it is banning "risky, unproven gender-transition interventions," pointing to "scientific uncertainty," tightened restrictions in some European countries and "firsthand accounts of regret and harm" from people who discontinue or reverse treatments. Medical associations, noting that gender dysphoria is associated with higher rates of suicide, have said gender-affirming care can be life-saving, and that long-term studies show its effectiveness. Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, a lawyer at the ACLU of Tennessee, said, "This ruling creates a class of people who politicians believe deserve healthcare, and a class of people who do not." A federal judge blocked the law as likely violating the 14th Amendment but the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later reversed the judge's preliminary injunction. In a June 11-12 Reuters/Ipsos poll of Americans, 53% of respondents said they supported "laws that prevent transgender children under the age of 18 from getting medical treatment related to gender identity and gender transitioning." Another 28% opposed such laws and the rest were unsure or did not answer the question. Among Republicans, support for such laws was at 57% and opposition at 28%. Among Democrats, support was at 23% and opposition at 54%. The Supreme Court on May 6 permitted Trump's administration to implement his ban on transgender people in the military while legal challenges play out. Trump has taken actions targeting "gender ideology" and declaring that the U.S. government will recognize two sexes: male and female. Trump issued executive orders curtailing gender-affirming medical treatments for youth under 19 and excluding transgender girls and women from female sports, while rescinding Biden's orders combating discrimination against gay and transgender people. Will Dunham )
The Sun
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Sun
Trump administration tightens social media vetting for foreign students
WASHINGTON: The United States is restarting student visa appointments but will significantly tighten its social media vetting in a bid to identify applicants who are hostile towards the United States or pose a threat to national security, according to an internal State Department cable reviewed by Reuters. U.S. consular officers are required to conduct a "comprehensive and thorough vetting" of all student and exchange visitor applicants to identify those who "bear hostile attitudes toward our citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles," said the cable, which was dated June 18 and sent to U.S. missions on Wednesday. On May 27, the Trump administration ordered its missions abroad to stop scheduling new appointments for student and exchange visitor visa applicants as the State Department prepared to expand social media vetting of foreign students. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had said updated guidance would be released once a review was completed. The cable, which was signed by Rubio, directed officers to look for "applicants who demonstrate a history of political activism, especially when it is associated with violence or with the views and activities described above, you must consider the likelihood they would continue such activity in the United States." A State Department official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said under new guidance, consular officers will ask for access to applicants' social media accounts. "To facilitate this vetting, all applicants for F, M, and J nonimmigrant visas will be asked to adjust the privacy settings on all their social media profiles to 'public.' Posts may resume scheduling F, M, and J visa applications," the official said. "The enhanced social media vetting will ensure we are properly screening every single person attempting to visit our country." Rubio, Trump's top diplomat and national security adviser, has said he has revoked the visas of hundreds, perhaps thousands of people, including students, because they got involved in activities that he said went against U.S. foreign policy priorities. Those activities include support for Palestinians and criticism of Israel's conduct in the war in Gaza. The change was earlier reported by The Free Press. Trump's critics have said the administration's actions are an attack on free speech rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In a cable in late May, Rubio had asked U.S. consular missions around the world to begin additional vetting of visa applicants looking to travel to Harvard University for any purpose. The Trump administration has been in a multifront dispute with the nation's oldest and wealthiest university. The directive said that would serve as a "pilot for expanded screening and vetting of visa applicants", raising the possibility of the measures being used as a template for applicants to other universities. In the same cable, consular officers were directed to consider questioning the credibility of an applicant if the individual's social media accounts were private, as that may be reflective of "evasiveness". Activities deemed antisemitic or anti-American are increasingly a red flag for the administration in its visa determination process. Such activities were raised as a source of concern by the State Department in a separate internal cable dated June 14 that recommended 36 more countries be added to Trump's travel ban.
The Sun
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Sun
U.S. tightens visa vetting with social media checks
WASHINGTON: The United States is restarting student visa appointments but will significantly tighten its social media vetting in a bid to identify applicants who are hostile towards the United States or pose a threat to national security, according to an internal State Department cable reviewed by Reuters. U.S. consular officers are required to conduct a "comprehensive and thorough vetting" of all student and exchange visitor applicants to identify those who "bear hostile attitudes toward our citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles," said the cable, which was dated June 18 and sent to U.S. missions on Wednesday. On May 27, the Trump administration ordered its missions abroad to stop scheduling new appointments for student and exchange visitor visa applicants as the State Department prepared to expand social media vetting of foreign students. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had said updated guidance would be released once a review was completed. The cable, which was signed by Rubio, directed officers to look for "applicants who demonstrate a history of political activism, especially when it is associated with violence or with the views and activities described above, you must consider the likelihood they would continue such activity in the United States." A State Department official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said under new guidance, consular officers will ask for access to applicants' social media accounts. "To facilitate this vetting, all applicants for F, M, and J nonimmigrant visas will be asked to adjust the privacy settings on all their social media profiles to 'public.' Posts may resume scheduling F, M, and J visa applications," the official said. "The enhanced social media vetting will ensure we are properly screening every single person attempting to visit our country." Rubio, Trump's top diplomat and national security adviser, has said he has revoked the visas of hundreds, perhaps thousands of people, including students, because they got involved in activities that he said went against U.S. foreign policy priorities. Those activities include support for Palestinians and criticism of Israel's conduct in the war in Gaza. The change was earlier reported by The Free Press. Trump's critics have said the administration's actions are an attack on free speech rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In a cable in late May, Rubio had asked U.S. consular missions around the world to begin additional vetting of visa applicants looking to travel to Harvard University for any purpose. The Trump administration has been in a multifront dispute with the nation's oldest and wealthiest university. The directive said that would serve as a "pilot for expanded screening and vetting of visa applicants", raising the possibility of the measures being used as a template for applicants to other universities. In the same cable, consular officers were directed to consider questioning the credibility of an applicant if the individual's social media accounts were private, as that may be reflective of "evasiveness". Activities deemed antisemitic or anti-American are increasingly a red flag for the administration in its visa determination process. Such activities were raised as a source of concern by the State Department in a separate internal cable dated June 14 that recommended 36 more countries be added to Trump's travel ban.
