ReportWire

Tag: AMERS

  • Russia’s partial mobilization prompts online insults from Ukraine

    Russia’s partial mobilization prompts online insults from Ukraine

    [ad_1]

    KYIV, Sept 25 (Reuters) – The Ukrainian Defence Ministry on Sunday ridiculed Moscow’s partial mobilization to bolster its forces in Ukraine, posting on Twitter a mash-up of social media videos of Russian police beating and arresting men protesting the call-up.

    The mockery came as Russia’s two top lawmakers expressed concern about the drive, ordering regional officials to resolve “excesses” that have ignited public anger, triggered demonstrations and prompted military-age men to make for border crossings. read more

    “Russia still has remnants of a professional army” that the Ukrainian army “hasn’t yet destroyed,” the Ukrainian defence ministry said in an English-language tweet, referring to this month’s rout of Russian forces from much of the northeastern Kharkiv region. “Looks like we’ll be ‘de-mobilizing’ these Russians ahead of schedule.”

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    The mobilization has prompted both sides to trade a fresh round of insults. In Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Friday that fake statements on social media were in part to blame for the reaction to the announcement.

    “There is now no shortage of explanations and there are opportunities to ask questions,” Peskov said. “We have to look calmly, thoughtfully and objectively at the provocative, huge number of fake statements on social media and not give in to these provocative actions.”

    Multiple reports have documented how people with no military service have been issued draft papers – contrary to Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu’s guarantee that only those with special military skills or combat experience would be called up – prompting even ultra-loyal pro-Kremlin figures to publicly express concern.

    Officials say 300,000 more Russians will called up to serve in the mobilisation campaign.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Jonathan Landay; Editing by Susan Fenton and Daniel Wallis

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Dow posts record closing high, stocks gain for 3rd week; dollar dips

    Dow posts record closing high, stocks gain for 3rd week; dollar dips

    [ad_1]

    • S&P 500, Nasdaq end session lower
    • Evergrande averts default with surprise interest payment
    • U.S. 10-year yields lower

    NEW YORK, Oct 22 (Reuters) – The Dow Jones industrial average registered a record closing high on Friday and major equity indexes posted a third straight week of gains while the U.S. dollar slipped.

    On the day, MSCI’s broadest gauge of global shares (.MIWD00000PUS) was flat, and the S&P 500 (.SPX) and Nasdaq (.IXIC) ended lower.

    Stocks came under pressure after Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said the U.S. central bank was “on track” to begin reducing its purchases of assets. read more

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Intel’s stock (INTC.O)fell 11.7% and was among the biggest drags on the S&P 500. Late Thursday, Intel reported sales that missed expectations and pointed to shortages of chips holding back sales of its flagship processors. read more

    American Express Co’s stock (AXP.N) gained, boosting the Dow after the company beat profit estimates for the fourth straight quarter.

    Next week brings reports from several key mega-cap names including Amazon (AMZN.O). read more

    The dollar pared losses after Powell’s comments, but the dollar index was last down 0.10% at 93.64, and is off from a one-year high of 94.56 last week. read more

    “There’s a bit of a positioning unwind taking place. We’ve obviously seen a firmer dollar since the September” Fed meeting, said Mazen Issa, senior FX strategist at TD Securities in New York. “That also dovetails with the seasonal tendency for the dollar to soften into the end of the month.”

    Investors also digested news that China Evergrande Group (3333.HK) appeared to avert default with a source saying it made a last-minute bond coupon payment. read more

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average (.DJI) rose 73.94 points, or 0.21%, to 35,677.02, the S&P 500 (.SPX) lost 4.88 points, or 0.11%, to 4,544.9 and the Nasdaq Composite (.IXIC) dropped 125.50 points, or 0.82%, to 15,090.20.

    The pan-European STOXX 600 index (.STOXX) rose 0.46% and MSCI’s gauge of stocks across the globe shed 0.03%.

    The MSCI index posted gains for a third straight week along with the three major U.S. stock indexes.

    In the U.S. bond market, yields on longer-dated U.S. Treasuries slid.

    The yield on 10-year Treasury notes was down 1.6 basis points to 1.659% after rising to a five-month high of 1.7064% late Thursday.

    Oil rose and ended up for the week, near multi-year highs. Brent crude futures rose 92 cents to settle at $85.53 a barrel, and registered its seventh weekly gain. U.S. crude futures gained $1.26, to settle at $83.76, and rose for a ninth straight week. read more

    Spot gold was up 0.6% at $1,793.82 per ounce.

    Among cryptocurrencies, bitcoin last fell 2.21% to $60,841.96.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Additional reporting by Simon Jessop in London, and Karen Brettell, Sinead Carew and Herbert Lash in New York and Kevin Buckland in Tokyo
    Editing by Hugh Lawson Mark Potter and David Gregorio

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • White House repeats no Taiwan policy change; experts see Biden gaffe

    White House repeats no Taiwan policy change; experts see Biden gaffe

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON, Oct 22 (Reuters) – The White House on Friday reiterated that Joe Biden was not signaling a change in U.S. policy toward Taiwan when he said the United States would come to the island’s aid if it was attacked by China, and analysts dismissed the president’s remark as a gaffe.

    While Washington is required by law to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself, it has long followed a policy of “strategic ambiguity” on whether it would intervene militarily to protect Taiwan in the event of a Chinese attack.

    Biden called that into question when he was asked at a CNN town hall in Baltimore on Thursday night whether the United States would come to Taiwan’s defense if it was attacked by China and he replied: “Yes, we have a commitment to do that.”

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Shortly after he spoke, a White House spokesperson said there was no change in policy and analysts said it appeared the president misspoke.

    Asked at a Friday news briefing whether it was Biden’s intention to move away from strategic ambiguity to make an unambiguous statement about how the United States would respond to a Chinese attack on Taiwan, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said: “Our policy has not changed. He was not intending to convey a change in policy, nor has he made a decision to change our policy.”

    Psaki added that, as stated in Brussels earlier on Friday by U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, “nobody wants to see cross-strait issues come to blows, certainly not President Biden, and there’s no reason that it should.”

    Psaki said the U.S. defense relationship with Taiwan was guided by the long-established Taiwan Relations Act, under which Washington would “continue assisting Taiwan in maintaining a sufficient self-defense capability.”

    Another principle of the act was that Washington “would regard any efforts to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific and of grave concern to the United States,” she added.

    Bonnie Glaser, a Taiwan expert at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, called Biden’s remark a “gaffe” and said it was “patently not true” that Washington has a commitment to defend Taiwan.

    “Some are suggesting a deliberate effort to send unclear signals, but in my view, that makes no sense. A confused U.S. policy weakens deterrence,” she said, noting that Biden’s Asia policy czar, Kurt Campbell, had rejected “strategic clarity” over Taiwan.

    Another Taiwan expert, Douglas Paal, a former U.S. representative in Taipei, said Biden was focused at the town hall on selling his domestic economic agenda.

    “Despite his reputation on foreign affairs, he can be occasionally sloppy when distracted,” Paal said. “The White House was right to issue a speedy ‘no-change-in-policy’ correction, because that is where policy is.”

    Biden’s remark comes at an awkward time, while White House officials are gearing up for a virtual meeting between him and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, which, sources say, they hope will show the world Washington can responsibly manage tense relations between the rival superpowers.

    China, which claims self-ruled Taiwan as its own, expressed its displeasure, with a foreign ministry spokesman saying Beijing has no room for concessions on its core interests.

    China urges the United States “not to send the wrong signals to the forces of Taiwan independence, to avoid seriously harming Sino-U.S. ties and peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait,” spokesman Wang Wenbin said.

    Taiwan’s presidential office said its position remained the same, which is that it will neither give in to pressure nor “rashly advance” when it gets support.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Jeff Mason, Tim Ahmann and David Brunnstrom; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Jonathan Oatis

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • White House signals Biden may address filibuster reform soon

    White House signals Biden may address filibuster reform soon

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON, Oct 22 (Reuters) – The White House on Friday offered a strong signal that it is preparing to seek changes soon to a long-standing Senate tradition that has allowed Republicans to block voting rights legislation and other major Democratic initiatives.

    Democratic President Joe Biden, who spent 36 years in the Senate, has previously opposed any significant overhaul of a Senate rule known as the filibuster, which requires 60 of the 100 senators to agree on most legislation. read more

    His opposition has angered Democrats and activists who say an arcane rule should not stand in the way of important issues such as voting rights and immigration.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    “I expect you’ll hear more from the president about it in the coming weeks,” White House spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters on Friday about the filibuster. Asked what more he would want to address with filibuster reform beyond voting rights, Psaki said to “stay tuned.”

    During a televised town hall event on Thursday, Biden said the Senate should “fundamentally alter” the filibuster process, but did not offer specifics on how.

    The White House’s potential shift on the issue comes after the latest successful effort by Republicans to block Democratic legislation aimed at thwarting restrictive new voting laws enacted in Republican-led states. On Wednesday, Republicans used the filibuster to block beginning a debate on the measure.

    When Republicans control the White House and the Senate, Democrats have used the filibuster as well.

    Psaki suggested Biden had lost patience with Republican resistance to Democrats’ ideas on voting rights, saying the president is “frustrated” and “disappointed.”

    “When a hand has been extended by Democrats to work together to protect the fundamental right, Republicans have not only recoiled, they have blocked the … ability to make any semblance of progress,” Psaki said.

    While Democrats are united on voting rights, they are not unified in whether to overhaul the filibuster. U.S. Senator Joe Manchin, a moderate Democrat from West Virginia, has publicly opposed eliminating the filibuster, even for specific issues.

    With a 50-50 split in the Senate, Democrats would need all of its members to support changes.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Jeff Mason and Jarrett Renshaw; additional reporting by Steve Holland; Editing by Jonathan Oatis and Bill Berkrot

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ex-Giuliani associate Parnas found guilty of violating U.S. campaign finance law

    Ex-Giuliani associate Parnas found guilty of violating U.S. campaign finance law

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK, Oct 22 (Reuters) – Lev Parnas, a onetime associate of Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, was found guilty on Friday of violating U.S. campaign finance laws during the 2018 elections.

    Parnas, a Ukraine-born American businessman, and his former associate Igor Fruman had been accused of soliciting funds from Russian businessman Andrey Muraviev to donate to candidates in states where the group was seeking licenses to operate cannabis businesses in 2018.

    Parnas also concealed that he and Fruman, who pleaded guilty in September, were the true source of a donation to a group supporting Republican then-President Trump, prosecutors said. Giuliani’s attorney has said the Parnas case is separate from a probe into whether violated lobbying laws while representing Trump.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Giuliani, a U.S. prosecutor in the 1980s before he was elected New York’s mayor in 1994, has not been charged with any crimes and denies wrongdoing.

    Parnas was found guilty on all six counts of federal election law violations that he faced, which included illegally helping a foreigner contribute to a U.S. election campaign, making contributions in the names of others, and lying to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC).

    Andrey Kukushkin, a Muraviev associate and California resident who was tried alongside Parnas, was found guilty on Friday of two counts of campaign finance violations. Kukushkin is also a Ukraine native.

    The trial in U.S. District Court in Manhattan has drawn attention because of the role Parnas and Belarus-born U.S. citizen Fruman played in helping Giuliani, who was Trump’s personal attorney while he held office, to investigate Democrat Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential campaign. Biden won the election, denying Trump a second term.

    Parnas, dressed in a blue suit, stared straight at the jury as the verdict was read. Kukushkin, wearing a grey sweater, shook his head after he was pronounced guilty on the second count.

    “I’ve never hid from nobody,” Parnas said as he left court wearing a black “Combat COVID” mask. “I’ve always stood and tried to tell the truth.”

    His attorney Joseph Bondy said they would be filing a motion to vacate the verdict “in the interest of justice.”

    Lev Parnas, Ukrainian-American businessman and former Giuliani associate, walks to the United States Court in Manhattan in New York City, New York, U.S., October 18, 2021. REUTERS/Mike Segar

    “It’s obviously a very difficult time for Mr. Parnas and his wife and his children,” Bondy said.

    U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken denied a request from prosecutors to detain Parnas and Kukushkin. “The defendants have sufficiently established that they’re not a risk of flight,” Oetken said after the jury left.

    Oetken set a sentencing date of Feb. 16 for Kukushkin. He did not set a sentencing date for Parnas, who faces another possible trial on separate fraud charges.

    ‘IN WELL OVER HIS HEAD’

    The case provided a glimpse into the inner workings of political fundraising in the United States.

    “You saw the wires from Muraviev,” Assistant U.S Attorney Hagan Scotten told the jury during closing arguments on Thursday. “You saw how that money came out on the other side, finding its way into American elections, where the defendants thought they had bought influence to further their business.”

    Parnas’ defense lawyers countered that Muraviev’s funds went toward business investments, not campaign contributions, and that the donation to the pro-Trump group was from a company founded by Parnas and broke no laws.

    In his closing statement Parnas attorney Bondy characterized his client as a passionate proponent of marijuana legalization who was “in well over his head.” He argued that Muraviev’s money funded business operations, not campaign contributions.

    Deliberations in the trial began on Friday morning and lasted about five hours.

    Fruman, who lives in Florida, pleaded guilty to one count of soliciting campaign contributions from a foreign national. His sentencing is scheduled for Jan. 21.

    Parnas and Kukushkin had faced two counts of conspiring to make donations from a foreign national, and making the donations. Parnas had also been charged with four other counts, including making false statements to the Federal Elections Commission.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware; Editing by Franklin Paul, Grant McCool and Jonathan Oatis

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    Jody Godoy

    Thomson Reuters

    Jody Godoy reports on banking and securities law. Reach her at jody.godoy@thomsonreuters.com

    Luc Cohen

    Thomson Reuters

    Reports on the New York federal courts. Previously worked as a correspondent in Venezuela and Argentina.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Exclusive: U.S. hopes to soon relocate Afghan pilots who fled to Tajikistan, official says

    Exclusive: U.S. hopes to soon relocate Afghan pilots who fled to Tajikistan, official says

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON, Oct 22 (Reuters) – The United States hopes to soon relocate around 150 U.S.-trained Afghan Air Force pilots and other personnel detained in Tajikistan for more than two months after they flew there at the end of the Afghan war, a U.S. official said.

    The State Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, declined to offer a timeline for the transfer but said the United States wanted to move all of those held at the same time. The details of the U.S. plan have not been previously reported.

    Reuters exclusively reported first-person accounts from 143 U.S.-trained Afghan personnel being held at a sanatorium in a mountainous, rural area outside of the Tajik capital, Dushanbe, waiting for a U.S. flight out to a third country and eventual U.S. resettlement.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Speaking on smuggled cell phones kept hidden from guards, they say they have had their phones and identity documents confiscated.

    There are also 13 Afghan personnel in Dushanbe, enjoying much more relaxed conditions, who told Reuters they are also awaiting a U.S. transfer. They flew into the country separately.

    The Afghan personnel in Tajikistan represent the last major group of U.S.-trained pilots still believed to be in limbo after dozens of advanced military aircraft were flown across the Afghan border to Tajikistan and to Uzbekistan in August during the final moments of the war with the Taliban.

    In September, a U.S.-brokered deal allowed a larger group of Afghan pilots and other military personnel to be flown out of Uzbekistan to the United Arab Emirates.

    Two detained Afghan pilots in Tajikistan said their hopes were lifted in recent days after visits by officials from the U.S. embassy in Dushanbe.

    Although they said they had not yet been given a date for their departure, the pilots said U.S. officials obtained the biometric data needed to complete the process of identifying the Afghans. That was the last step before departure for the Afghan pilots in Uzbekistan.

    PREGNANT AFGHAN PILOT

    U.S. lawmakers and military veterans who have advocated for the pilots have expressed deep frustration over the time it has taken for President Joe Biden’s administration to evacuate Afghan personnel.

    Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was pressed on the matter in Congress last month, expressing concern at a hearing for the pilots and other personnel.

    Reuters had previously reported U.S. difficulties gaining Tajik access to all of the Afghans, which include an Afghan Air Force pilot who is eight months pregnant.

    In an interview with Reuters, the 29-year-old pilot had voiced her concerns to Reuters about the risks to her and her child at the remote sanatorium. She was subsequently moved to a maternity hospital.

    “We are like prisoners here. Not even like refugees, not even like immigrants. We have no legal documents or way to buy something for ourselves,” she said.

    The pregnant pilot would be included in the relocation from Tajikistan, the U.S. State Department official said.

    Even before the Taliban’s takeover, the U.S.-trained, English-speaking pilots had become prime targets of the Taliban because of the damage they inflicted during the war. The Talibantracked down the pilotsand assassinated them off-base.

    Afghanistan’s new rulers have said they will invite former military personnel to join the revamped security forces and that they will come to no harm.

    Afghan pilots who spoke with Reuters say they believe they will be killed if they return to Afghanistan.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Phil Stewart; editing by Grant McCool

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • White House says no new deadlines on reconciliation bill

    White House says no new deadlines on reconciliation bill

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON, Oct 22 (Reuters) – U.S. President Joe Biden does not have any new deadlines as the administration continues to negotiate with Democratic lawmakers on the framework of a massive spending bill aimed at social programs and tackling climate change, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said on Friday.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting By Jarrett Renshaw

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Viral video, opinions challenge Georgia jury selection for Arbery case

    Viral video, opinions challenge Georgia jury selection for Arbery case

    [ad_1]

    Oct 22 (Reuters) – A Georgia court struggled this week to seat jurors in the trial of three white men accused of murdering Black jogger Ahmaud Arbery, underscoring the challenge of finding people who have not formed firm opinions based on a viral video of the shooting.

    “I saw the news footage and I saw the video footage of the crime, and I’ve already formed a guilty opinion of the crime,” one woman told the court earlier this week.

    Arbery’s killing just outside the coastal city of Brunswick, Georgia, in February 2020 stoked national outrage and protests after the cellphone video taken by one of the three defendants went viral.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Defense lawyers and prosecutors say they are not looking for jurors who have not seen the video or don’t know about the case. Rather, they are trying to determine whether potential jurors can set aside any opinions they have and make a decision based on evidence presented to the court.

    Former policeman Gregory McMichael, 65; his son Travis McMichael, 35; and neighbor William “Roddie” Bryan, 52, face charges of murder, aggravated assault and false imprisonment. If convicted on all charges, they could draw a maximum sentence of life in prison.

    Superior Court Judge Timothy Walmsley told prosecutors and defense attorneys to speed things up. “I am not comfortable with this,” he said of the pace on the first day of jury selection on Monday.

    As of late Thursday night, out of 80 Glynn County residents interviewed, only 23 residents had been prequalified for a group of 64, from which the ultimate 12 jurors and four alternates will be selected to hear the case.

    Walsley said on Thursday that selection could take well into next week or possibly the week after. The court was not in session on Friday; jury selection is slated to resume on Monday.

    CITIZEN’S ARREST DEFENSE

    Defense attorneys have said in interviews that they plan to base their case largely on a now-defunct version of a “citizen’s arrest” law that allows people in the state to detain someone they suspect of a crime. The three defendants told police they thought Arbery was a burglar and the shooting was in self-defense after Arbery grappled with a shotgun leveled by Travis McMichael.

    Arbery, an avid runner and former high school football star, was shot three times and fell on the street in the suburban neighborhood.

    One potential juror was dismissed because he watched the video more than six times and told the court he thought the men were “guilty. They killed him. They did it as a team.”

    Another said, “The only time I’ve heard of citizen’s arrest is in ‘The Andy Griffith show’,” the 1960s TV comedy about a small-town sheriff.

    The man added that he would listen to both sides in the case. “Everyone deserves their day in court. It’s the foundation of our country, it’s the rule of law.”

    Of the 80 people brought to court through Thursday, a few said they had seen only clips from the video, and only two people told the court they hadn’t seen it.

    “I didn’t want to see somebody killed,” said one man in his 70s.

    Chris Slobogin, a Vanderbilt University law professor, said picking fair juries is harder in the days of cellphones and social media.

    “I mean, everyone’s seen this video,” he said. “I believe the judge will eventually find 12 jurors, but the work is to figure out if a person is being forthright when they say they can set aside what they saw.”

    A nurse told the court that she had thought hard about whether she could be a fair, impartial juror and “prayed about it.”

    “I feel firmly that I could do that,” she said.

    Another potential juror, a retired auto shop owner, said it would be hard to disregard the video.

    “Some things you just can’t unsee,” he said.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Rich McKay in Atlanta; Additional reporting by Jonathan Allen in New York; Editing by Jonathan Oatis

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. Supreme Court takes up Texas abortion case, lets ban remain

    U.S. Supreme Court takes up Texas abortion case, lets ban remain

    [ad_1]

    Oct 22 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear on Nov. 1 a challenge to a Texas law that imposes a near-total ban on the procedure and lets private citizens enforce it – a case that could dramatically curtail abortion access in the United States if the justices endorse the measure’s unique design.

    The justices took up requests by President Joe Biden’s administration and abortion providers to immediately review their challenges to the law. The court, which on Sept. 1 allowed the law to go into effect, declined to act on the Justice Department’s request to immediately block enforcement of the measure.

    The court will consider whether the law’s unusual private-enforcement structure prevents federal courts from intervening to strike it down and whether the federal government is even allowed to sue the state to try to block it.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    The measure bans abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy, a point when many women do not yet realize they are pregnant. It makes an exception for a documented medical emergency but not for cases of rape or incest.

    Liberal Justice Sotomayor dissented from the court’s deferral of a decision on whether to block enforcement of the law while the litigation continues. Sotomayor said the law’s novel design has suspended nearly all abortions in Texas, the second most populous U.S. state, with about 29 million people.

    “The state’s gambit has worked. The impact is catastrophic,” Sotomayor wrote.

    The Texas dispute is the second major abortion case that the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has scheduled for the coming months, with arguments set for Dec. 1 over the legality of a restrictive Mississippi abortion law.

    The Texas and Mississippi measures are among a series of Republican-backed laws passed at the state level limiting abortion rights – coming at a time when abortion opponents are hoping that the Supreme Court will overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade that legalized the procedure nationwide.

    Mississippi has asked the justices to overturn Roe v. Wade, and the Texas attorney general on Thursday signaled that he also would like to see that ruling fall.

    A supporter of reproductive rights holds a sign outside the Texas State Capitol building during the nationwide Women’s March, held after Texas rolled out a near-total ban on abortion procedures and access to abortion-inducing medications, in Austin, Texas, U.S. October 2, 2021. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

    Lower courts already have blocked Mississippi’s law banning abortions starting at 15 weeks of pregnancy.

    The Texas measure takes enforcement out of the hands of state officials, instead enabling private citizens to sue anyone who performs or assists a woman in getting an abortion after cardiac activity is detected in the embryo. That feature has helped shield the law from being immediately blocked as it made it more difficult to directly sue the state.

    Individual citizens can be awarded a minimum of $10,000 for bringing successful lawsuits under the law. Critics have said this provision lets people act as anti-abortion bounty hunters, a characterization its proponents reject.

    Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing the abortion providers, said Friday’s decision to hear their case “brings us one step closer to the restoration of Texans’ constitutional rights and an end to the havoc and heartache of this ban.”

    Alexis McGill Johnson, president of healthcare and abortion provider Planned Parenthood, said it is “devastating” that the justices did not immediately block a law that already has had a “catastrophic impact” after being in effect nearly two months.

    “Patients who have the means have fled the state, traveling hundreds of miles to access basic care, and those without means have been forced to carry pregnancies against their will,” she added.

    Kimberlyn Schwartz, a spokesperson for the Texas Right to Life anti-abortion group, praised the court’s action, saying it “will continue to save an estimated 100 babies per day, and because the justices will actually discuss whether these lawsuits are valid in the first place.”

    The Supreme Court only rarely decides to hear cases before lower courts have ruled, indicating that the justices have deemed the Texas matter of high public importance and requiring immediate review.

    The Justice Department filed its lawsuit in September challenging the Texas law, arguing that it is unconstitutional and explicitly designed to evade judicial review.

    Rulings in Texas and Mississippi cases are due by the end of next June, but could come sooner.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link