The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
Tag: d c
Washington, DC Mayor Pushes Back Against Trump Takeover Of July Fourth

Washington, DC Mayor Pushes Back Against Trump Takeover Of July Fourth

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Fourth of July events in Washington, D.C. require a great deal of planning, from security and law enforcement considerations to financial preparation and budgeting. But this year, Independence Day could be even more challenging in the U.S. capital thanks to an event that President Donald Trump is billing as “A Salute to America.”

The event that Trump has in mind would include a presidential address, fireworks, and entertainment, and it will be held on the National Mall — perhaps at the Lincoln Memorial. “A Salute to America” would be on top of the usual range of Fourth of July activities that take place in Washington, D.C., which include a fireworks show, a parade and the time-honored “A Capitol Fourth” concert on the Capitol Lawn. And Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser has expressed concerns about all the additional security and law enforcement resources that “A Salute to America” could require.

The 46-year-old Democrat told the Washington Post, “If we have to put more police to cover his movements, more police for the fireworks and an additional location for police where the fireworks are going to get set off, that puts a strain on us. We won’t allow it to impact neighborhood safety. So, the chief will have to think about if he needs additional resources.”

ABC News quotes Christopher Rodriguez, director of the D.C. Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency, as saying that the agency is “working closely with local and federal partners to make sure residents and visitors can safely celebrate the Fourth of July here in the nation’s capital.”

The “A Capitol Fourth” concert is now in its 39th year and is broadcast by PBS. This Fourth of July will mark the United States’ 243rd anniversary as an independent government: it was on July 4, 1776 that the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia.

 

Over 1,000 Arrests In Anti-Corruption Democracy Spring Protests

Over 1,000 Arrests In Anti-Corruption Democracy Spring Protests

Since April 11, hundreds of protesters have stood outside the U.S. Capitol, protesting political corruption and getting arrested in scores. Over the past week, over 1,000 protesters were arrested not far from the steps of the Capitol.

“We demand that Congress take immediate action to end the corruption of big money in our politics and ensure free and fair elections in which every American has an equal voice,” read a statement on Democracy Spring’s website. The group is a coalition of 120 civic organizations pushing for action on a variety of progressive causes, central among them campaign finance reform.

“We will demand that Congress listen to the People and take immediate action to save our democracy. And we won’t leave until they do — or until they send thousands of us to jail, along with the unmistakable message that our country needs a new Congress, one that that will end the legalized corruption of our democracy and ensure that every American has an equal voice in government.”

Led by Democracy Spring, thousands of protesters arrived on Capitol Hill on April 11 with four key demands: the overturning of the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, restoration of voter protections promised under the Voting Rights Act, greater transparency in the voting process, and publicly financed elections.

By the end of a week of protests, the organization claimed that around 1,300 people had been arrested for unlawful protesting. At the start of the event, 3,500 people had pledged to be arrested. The protests, initially ignored by the major TV networks, were buoyed with some coverage following the arrests of notable politically active public figures.

Rosario Dawson, who has emerged as a prominent supporter of Bernie Sanders, was arrested last Friday during the protests. On Monday, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, of Ben & Jerry’s fame, were also arrested for taking part in the protests. They too have emerged as important backers of the Sanders campaign.

Even Larry Lessig, a professor at Harvard Law School who briefly ran for the Democratic nomination, was arrested during the protests. “I’m a law professor,” he said. “I don’t get arrested.”

The protests highlight the deep level of dissatisfaction most Americans have with the state of their democratic institutions. The anger bubbling against the influence of money in politics may partially explain the rise of both Sanders and Donald Trump, who have each eschewed support from so-called super PACs. Trump often mentions that his supposedly “self-financed” campaign means that he is not beholden to any special interests, and while most, if not all, of the groups under the Democracy Spring umbrella are progressive, disgust with the state of money and politics appears to be bipartisan.

Photo: Flickr user alsacienne.

House Republicans Hesitate To Overturn D.C. Law On Reproductive Rights

House Republicans Hesitate To Overturn D.C. Law On Reproductive Rights

By Billy House, Bloomberg News (TNS)

WASHINGTON — Congress faces a Monday deadline to repeal a new Washington, D.C., law that would prohibit employers from discriminating against employees who obtain abortions or use birth control, and Republicans in the House seem divided about whether to make the effort.

Sponsored by Republican Representative Diane Black of Tennessee, the “resolution of disapproval” (H.J. Res 43) would undo the D.C.-passed Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Act. The disapproval measure passed the Oversight and Government Reform Committee on April 21, by a 20-16 vote, according to House records.

The law, signed by Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser on January 25, protects employees in Washington, D.C., from being fired for reproductive health choices such as the use of birth control, or getting an abortion. Members of Congress who want to see the law overturned say that it discriminates against employers who have religious objections to birth control and abortion. They also argue that the law could force employers with religious objections to cover the abortions in their health care plans, or even hire abortion activists.

“We cannot let this bill stand,” declared Oversight committee chairman Jason Chaffetz of Utah, in a statement prior to the panel’s vote in favor of the resolution of disapproval.

The Oversight Committee’s top Democrat, Elijah Cummings of Maryland, argues that Congress is resurrecting a legislative relic that allows Congress to disapprove laws enacted by the District of Columbia — something the lawmakers have not done in decades — for the purpose of infringing the rights of women, as well as local government control.

As of Wednesday afternoon, Chaffetz and Republican House leaders still had not discharged that resolution out of committee, which is a procedural requirement for a vote by the entire House. Because the bill has not been reported out of committee, no individual member of the House can invoke parliamentary privilege to call up the bill.

The delay caused a group of House conservatives Wednesday to press Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) for a floor vote “as quickly as possible.” But aides to Boehner’s chief deputy, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, and to other Republican leaders won’t discuss their plans, saying only that the dispute is the subject of ongoing discussions.

In any event, the battle seems more politically symbolic — and perhaps indicative of GOP leaders’ reluctance to continue fighting over divisive social issues — than substantive. Under federal law, a District law may be overturned if both houses of Congress vote to do so and the president agrees within 30 legislative days, something that hasn’t happened in 23 years. The deadline for action has been determined by the congressional parliamentarians to be Monday. Even if the House does vote, it seems unlikely that the Senate would act quickly enough to get the legislation to the desk of President Barack Obama who, in turn, would be unlikely to sign it.

Mike Long, a McCarthy spokesman, would not directly say whether the Monday deadline for passage of the disapproval resolution would be met — and if not, why not.

Black said there are ongoing talks, but would not say what those discussions were focused on. She said she still hopes to see the bill brought to the House floor for a vote in the coming days, but acknowledged in an interview Wednesday that a deadline is imminent.

Chaffetz’s committee spokesman did not respond to a request for comment about why his committee has not discharged the resolution of disapproval.

Internal tension being caused by the delay became public Wednesday when the conservative House Freedom Caucus released a statement calling on their Republican leaders to allow a vote on H.J. Res. 43. Their statement warned the D.C. law “could force religious and conservative employers in the District to cover abortions in their health care plans and require pro-life organizations to hire abortion advocates.”

This could be stopped, they note, because “Under the Home Rule Act, ‘Congress is statutorily empowered to review actions by the D.C. Council.’ ”

Photo: Adam Fagen via Flickr

Federal Judge Rules Against DC Ban On Carrying Guns

Federal Judge Rules Against DC Ban On Carrying Guns

By Kathleen Hennessey, Tribune Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — A federal judge struck down the nation’s last complete prohibition on carrying guns outside the home, declaring the District of Columbia’s strict handgun ban unconstitutional.

The ruling by a federal judge in New York, announced late Saturday, is the latest blow to the decades-long gun law in the nation’s capital, which is plagued by violent crime. In 2008, the Supreme Court struck down the city’s handgun ban, establishing for the first time a personal right to own a weapon under the 2nd Amendment.

Senior District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr., a former U.S. Army colonel appointed to the court by President George H. W. Bush, ruled that the right to a weapon extends outside the home both for residents and visitors to the city.

Going well beyond the Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, Scullin found that carrying arms outside the home for self-defense falls within the legal definition of the right to bear arms enunciated in the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

In the Heller case, the Supreme Court did not address whether the Second Amendment Amendment allowed someone to carry a weapon outside the home. The high court has repeatedly turned down invitations to decide that issue.

Scullin, who sits in Syracuse, N.Y., but was assigned the case by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., relied heavily on U.S. appellate court rulings striking down public-carry bans in San Diego County and Illinois.

Four plaintiffs and the Second Amendment Foundation, a gun-rights advocacy group, challenged the D.C. ban as it was rewritten after the Supreme Court ruling. The revised law allowed police to issue gun permits for self-defense use only inside homes.

That process effectively prohibited nonresidents from obtaining permits and limited an individual’s right to self defense, according to the plaintiffs who challenged the law in 2009.

The case stalled on the District Court’s crowded docket and was eventually reassigned to Scullin with the goal of speeding up the process.

Although Scullin found that D.C.’s law violated Second Amendment rights, he said the government could place “some reasonable restrictions” on the carrying of handguns, such as bans in public schools, age restrictions, and mental-health requirements.

Such measures amount to a “proper balance” between gun rights and public safety, he wrote. A gun owner may simply decide not to enter a school, he said, and would experience “a lesser burden” on the right to self-defense.

Scullin did not stay enforcement of his ruling pending appeal, leading gun-rights groups to assert that it is now legal to openly carry a pistol in the district. The city is expected to seek a stay of the ruling either from Scullin or a federal appeals court.

Photo: Rob Bixby via Flickr

Interested in national news? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!