supreme-court

‘I’ll be here a lot,’ Trump says of Pennsylvania in safe GOP district
President weighs in on special election after Biden kicks off campaign in Keystone State

Supporters of President Donald Trump, pose for a picture while waiting to enter his rally at the Williamsport Regional Airport in Montoursville, Pa., on Monday. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

MONTOURSVILLE, Pa. — Air Force One landed here Monday evening ahead of a special House election as AC/DC’s “Thunderstruck” blared inside an airport hangar. Minutes later, with Air Force One parked in front of small tree-lined peaks, President Donald Trump issued a thunderous endorsement of a GOP House candidate and attack on Democrats.

And repeatedly, the friendly audience showered Trump with chants of “four more years!” And during one rare quiet moment, a man shouted, “We love you, Trump!” Minutes later, the entire crowd, which did not quite fill the hangar, shouted in unison, “We love Trump!”

Legal battle heats up as more states test strict abortion bans
Other states are already pursuing and defending laws to ban abortion after six weeks of pregnancy

Pro-choice protesters shout at pro-life protesters outside of the Supreme Court June 26, 2018. Alabama’s new abortion law, which would essentially ban abortion in most cases, could open the door to restrictions in other states — even though they will all likely be challenged in court. (Sarah Silbiger/CQ Roll Call file photo)

Advocates are preparing for a legal battle after Alabama passed the strictest abortion bill in the country late Tuesday, part of a growing national push by abortion opponents to test whether the courts will curb constitutional protections for the procedure.

Alabama’s move, which would essentially ban abortion in most cases, could open the door to restrictions in other states — even though they will all likely be challenged in court. Other states are already pursuing and defending laws to ban abortion after six weeks of pregnancy.

White House to Judiciary Chairman Nadler: ‘How about you pass a bill?’
‘We will subpoena whoever we have to subpoena,’ Nadler vows as legal war escalates

The White House and House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler are at war over his requests for information from and testimony by Trump administration officials past and present. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call file photo)

The White House has a message for House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler: Pass a bill — any bill — rather than trying to “replicate” Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller’s Russia election meddling probe.

In a letter to Nadler and a subsequent call with reporters, White House officials charged the New York Democrat with “political theater” by continuing to investigate the Russian interference campaign and possible connections to the 2016 Trump-Pence campaign, as well as whether President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice — a crime — since taking office.

Supreme Court requests response from Ohio and Michigan gerrymander challengers
Justices give challengers a week to respond to requests from GOP state officials to stop court-ordered redrawing of district lines

Anti-gerrymandering activists gather on the steps of the Supreme Court in March 2018 as the justices prepare to hear a case challenging Maryland’s congressional map. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call file photo)

The Supreme Court on Monday gave the challengers of congressional maps in Ohio and Michigan until May 20 to respond to requests from state officials to stop court-ordered redrawing of district lines. Lower courts found the maps were partisan gerrymanders, an issue the high court is now considering in two other cases.

Republican lawmakers and officials in both states had argued that they did not have enough time to comply with recent federal court mandates to redraw their districts by June 14 in Ohio and Aug. 1 in Michigan.

Who’s afraid of political gerrymandering?
Political Theater Podcast, Episode 71

Anti-gerrymandering activists gather on the steps of the Supreme Court as justices prepare to hear the Benisek v. Lamone case on Wednesday, March 28, 2018. The case challenged Maryland's 2012 Congressional redistricting. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call file photo)

Political gerrymandering is losing friends fast, at least in the courts. Ohio and Michigan recently got smacked by federal judges for rigging the maps in favor of Republicans. At the same time, the Supreme Court could decide next month whether Maryland and North Carolina drew unconstitutional gerrymandered maps to favor Democrats and Republicans, respectively.  Why all the interest all of a sudden in such an esoteric part of politics? CQ Roll Call campaign reporters Simone Pathé and Stephanie Akin are our guides through the maze of maps on the latest Political Theater podcast. 

Trump’s federal judge pace matches recent presidents — but with a big twist
Incumbent has stressed putting conservatives in legal realm’s ‘big leagues,’ expert says

At federal judicial buildings like Washington’s E. Barrett Prettyman United States Courthouse, Trump-nominated judges have given the federal judiciary a conservative bent. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call file photo)

In what the White House, Republican senators and right-leaning organizations hailed as a major milestone, President Donald Trump last week saw his 100th judicial nominee confirmed by the Senate.

But his record of getting federal judges confirmed is largely in line with his most recent predecessors, even if he’s been more successful in elevating nominees to the influential appellate courts.

3 things to watch when Trump, GOP senators discuss immigration
Jared Kushner has been WH point person — but Stephen Miller has been Trump’s voice

Sens. David Perdue, R-Ga., and Tom Cotton, R-Ark., will meet with President Donald Trump on Tuesday to discuss immigration. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

Perhaps sensing momentum in the post-Mueller report realm, President Donald Trump has summoned a group of Senate Republicans to the White House to talk about overhauling the immigration system.

A small group of GOP senators will meet Tuesday afternoon with Trump and senior White House aides to hear details of a plan administration officials have been cobbling together. Presidential son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner has been the point person in crafting the proposal.

Will the White House or Trump’s lawyers block Don McGahn from testifying?
President’s team is examining case law for possible claim of executive privilege or immunity

The House Judiciary Committee has issued a subpoena for former White House Counsel Don McGahn to testify before the panel. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call file photo)

White House officials have yet to determine whether they will exert executive privilege to block all or some of Don McGahn’s possible testimony to Congress, after Robert S. Mueller III’s report portrayed him as defying the president’s orders to hinder the special counsel’s investigation.

The report, released in redacted form last week, details several early instances when the White House counsel refused to follow through with President Donald Trump’s orders to remove Mueller. Trump has since criticized McGahn without naming him, and a decision on allowing him to appear before congressional panels — and how much he might be permitted to say — is still pending, White House aides say.

Justices ask in Census case: ‘Congress is silent. Should the court then step in?’
Conservative majority appears ready to let citizenship question stand

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross testifies during a House Oversight and Reform Committee hearing in Rayburn Building to discuss preparations for the 2020 Census and citizenship questions on March 14, 2019. The Census case was argued in front of the Supreme Court on April 23. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call file photo)

The House came to the Supreme Court to argue against the Trump administration’s plan to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census — and ended up getting quizzed about why lawmakers didn’t take their own action if they wanted to stop it.

In about 90 minutes of lively questioning Tuesday, the conservative majority of the court appeared ready to defer to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’ decision to add the question even though it could reduce census responses among noncitizen households.

Supreme Court to decide whether LGBTQ people are covered by Civil Rights Act
It's the first time the Supreme Court will decide a major LGBTQ rights case since the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh

Sam Brinton, Head of Advocacy and Government Affairs at The Trevor Project, a confidential suicide hotline for LGBTQ youth, said his group was receiving calls related to the decision on the Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission which ruled in favor of Colorado baker Jack Phillips Monday, June 4, 2018. Next term, the court will take on a trio of cases about employment discrimination based on “sex,” deciding whether LGBTQ people are protected by the Civil Rights Act. (Sarah Silbiger/CQ Roll Call file photo)

The Supreme Court will decide next term whether federal law protects LGBT individuals from workplace discrimination, a major case on the politically divisive social and religious issue that will play out against the backdrop of the 2020 presidential election.

The justices announced Monday they will consider a trio of cases about prohibiting employment discrimination based on “sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and whether it also covers sexual orientation and transgender persons.