Tag: NRLIN:OGOV

As companies bring more jobs to Mexico, US wants labor rights safeguards

[ad_1]

MEXICO CITY, July 3 (Reuters) – The U.S. wants Mexico’s government to build strong institutions to protect worker rights as companies aiming to avoid supply chain disruptions in far-off production spots bring more jobs to the country, a top U.S. labor official told Reuters.

Mexico has begun to benefit from “nearshoring” in which companies seek to move production closer to the U.S. market while maintaining competitive costs.

The trend is further testing a trade deal known as the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), in effect since July 2020.

The pact has tougher labor rules than its 1994 predecessor and underpins new Mexican laws that empower workers to push for better wages and conditions after years of stagnant salaries and pro-business union contracts.

Three years into the deal, experts say, some workers have begun to benefit but broad impacts are still far off.

“Hopefully that will ensure that Mexico doesn’t become a dumping ground for companies looking for cheap labor and lax regulations,” said Thea Lee, U.S. Deputy Undersecretary for International Labor Affairs who polices USMCA compliance.

She said in an interview that Mexico was working to fulfill its commitments, backed by leadership keen on helping workers.

Mexico’s new regulations favor companies taking on higher ethical standards, she said.

“Maybe 20 years ago it was okay for a multinational corporation to throw up their hands and say, ‘we have no idea what’s in our supply chain, what the labor conditions are,’” she added.

“That doesn’t seem to be acceptable anymore.”

Mexico has made progress improving labor courts, resolving worker complaints faster and easing union organization, but needs to do more, Lee said.

“Our hope is that Mexico will be well-poised to take advantage of nearshoring … if they continue on the path towards really building labor institutions that work, where workers can have confidence.”

Since 2020, several U.S. labor complaints in Mexico have paved the way for independent unions to land pay raises and even expand. Lee said such examples inspire workers who in the past may have feared threats or dismissals for trying to organize.

Four more cases are under review: At a garment factory, an auto parts plant, a Goodyear tire plant, and a mine owned by conglomerate Grupo Mexico.

Yet one employer that faced two USMCA complaints, U.S.-based VU Manufacturing that makes interior car parts in the northern city of Piedras Negras, recently dismissed dozens of employees just months after a new union, La Liga, pressed for better wages. VU did not respond to a request for comment.

Lee said the company risks penalties if it does not uphold an agreement around worker rights. But La Liga members have already been laid off, and fear the company aims to discourage organizing, said union leader Cristina Ramirez, who lost her job.

“It’s very disappointing and frustrating,” Ramirez said. “We wanted to fight for things to improve.”

Reporting by Daina Beth Solomon; Editing by David Gregorio

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

July 3, 2023
Trump indictment: Reuters/Ipsos poll shows most Republicans think charges are politically motivated

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON, June 13 (Reuters) – A vast majority of Republicans believe federal criminal charges against Donald Trump are politically motivated, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll completed on Monday that also showed him far ahead of his nearest rival in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

The polling, which began on Friday, a day after Trump was indicted, found that 81% of self-identified Republicans said politics was driving the case, reflecting the deep polarization of the U.S. electorate. President Joe Biden, a Democrat, has repeatedly said he has no involvement in the case brought by the Department of Justice.

The number of Republicans who believe the former president is being unfairly targeted vastly exceeds the 30-35% of Trump supporters who are estimated by political analysts to make up his core base.

Some 62% of respondents in the Reuters/Ipsos poll, including 91% of Democrats and 35% of Republicans, said it was believable that Trump illegally stored classified documents at his home in Florida as alleged by prosecutors.

The indictment did not appear to dent Trump’s standing in the Republican nominating contest for the 2024 presidential election. The specific charges, including obstruction of justice, became public on Friday afternoon when the indictment was unsealed.

Some 43% of self-identified Republicans said Trump was their preferred candidate, compared to 22% who picked Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, Trump’s closest rival.

In early May, Trump led DeSantis 49% to 19%, but that was before DeSantis formally entered the race.

The rest of the Republican field, which includes former Vice President Mike Pence who declared his candidacy last week, had low single-digit levels of support.

Trump flew to Miami on Monday to face federal charges of unlawfully keeping U.S. national security documents and lying to officials who tried to recover them. Trump, who will appear in court on Tuesday, has proclaimed his innocence and vowed to continue his campaign to regain the presidency in the November 2024 general election.

Many Republican contenders in the 2024 race have accused the U.S. Justice Department of political bias and say it is being “weaponized” against Biden’s biggest Republican challenger. The department says all investigative decisions are made without regard to partisan politics.

Trump also faces charges in New York in a state criminal case related to alleged hush money payments to a pornographic film star. A Reuters/Ipsos poll in March found that Republicans also saw that investigation as politically motivated.

Biden’s approval rating stood at 41% last week, close to the lowest level of his presidency. Trump had a 40% approval rating at this point in his 2017-2021 presidency.

The latest poll included responses from 1,005 adults nationwide and had a credibility interval, a measure of precision, of 4 percentage points for all voting-age Americans and between 6 and 7 percentage points for Republicans.

Reporting by Jason Lange; Editing by Andy Sullivan, Ross Colvin and Howard Goller

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

June 13, 2023
US colleges game out a possible end to race-conscious student admissions

[ad_1]

[1/3] Members of the University of North Carolina’s diverse student body mingle and make their way across campus as the Supreme Court weighs the issue of race-conscious admissions to colleges, in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, U.S., March 28, 2023. REUTERS/Jonathan Drake/File Photo

WASHINGTON, May 24 (Reuters) – In 1998, the year a voter-approved measure barring the use of race-conscious admissions policies for public colleges and universities in California took effect, the percentage of Black, Hispanic and Native American students admitted at two of the state’s elite public schools plummeted by more than 50%.

Those figures for UCLA and the University of California, Berkeley offer a cautionary tale as administrators at schools around the United States await a Supreme Court decision due by the end of June that is expected to prohibit affirmative action student admissions policies nationwide.

That potential outcome in cases involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina has brought new urgency to efforts by schools to maintain or increase racial and ethnic diversity in their student populations, according to interviews with senior administrators at a dozen colleges and universities.

“We cannot afford as a nation to regress on our goals to create an educated and equitable society,” said Seth Allen, head of admissions at Pomona College in California. “So it’s incumbent on higher education to figure out how to work collectively together to ensure that we’re not furthering the enrollment gap among different groups of students.”

Many selective U.S. colleges and universities for decades have used some form of affirmative action to boost enrollment of minority students, seeing value in having a diverse student population not only to offer educational opportunity but to bring a range of perspectives onto campuses.

Affirmative action refers to policies that favor people belonging to certain groups considered disadvantaged or subject to discrimination, in areas such as hiring and student admissions.

Schools are exploring numerous options. Administrators said they are drafting strategies to expand their recruitment of diverse applicants, remove application barriers and increase the rate of minority students who accept their admissions offers.

An official at Rice University in Houston said the school will lean on student essay responses to ensure it admits students from diverse backgrounds. The U.S. Air Force Academy will focus on recruiting more students from diverse congressional districts.

The president of Skidmore College in New York said connecting with high school counselors will become “more important than ever” to broaden the school’s applicant pool.

Many schools said they already have waived fees, made standardized testing optional and are looking to improve financial aid offers – steps that could help boost minority enrollment.

All of the administrators said their plans could change to comply with the scope of the Supreme Court’s reasoning in the Harvard and UNC cases. Some acknowledged that whatever steps schools take to circumvent a ban on race-conscious admissions policies might face legal challenges of their own.

“We’re likely to see a whole new generation of lawsuits arise from the new admission standards that will be adopted by colleges and universities,” said Danielle Holley, current dean of Howard University School of Law in Washington and incoming president of Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts.

Lawsuits backed by an anti-affirmative action activist accused Harvard and UNC of unlawful discrimination in student admissions either by violating the U.S. Constitution’s promise of equal protection under the law or a federal law barring discrimination based on race and other factors.

UNC was accused of discriminating against white and Asian American applicants. Harvard was accused of bias against Asian American applicants. The schools denied these allegations.

GOING LOCAL

Many of the school administrators said they plan to focus resources on recruitment, a part of the admissions cycle they do not expect the court will restrict.

Admissions officers said they were broadening their outreach to high schools and community-based organizations in neighborhoods with lower incomes and educational attainment – places often populated by racial minorities.

Yvonne Berumen, vice president of admissions at Pitzer College in California, said her team might run essay workshops at high schools in those targeted zip codes – postal regions – in hopes of generating applications.

Chris George, dean of admissions at St. Olaf College in Minnesota, said high school data from national organizations like the College Board, which offers information on neighborhood income and housing stability, will help guide which high schools the college sends representatives to visit and the recruitment events they attend.

Community-based organizations that identify local students who show academic promise and help them apply to college will be crucial partners for identifying and recruiting potential applicants from diverse backgrounds, the administrators said.

“They become extensions of our recruiting and admissions team in many ways, and we’re seeing each year a bigger and bigger percentage of our students come from those community-based organizations,” said Kent Devereaux, president of Goucher College in Maryland.

Administrators at schools located in or near major cities, including Pomona College near Los Angeles and Sarah Lawrence College in New York, said they would hope to draw more students from racially diverse local high schools and take more transfer students from local community colleges.

Colonel Arthur Primas Jr., the U.S. Air Force Academy’s admissions director, said his racially diverse recruiting team will continue to visit schools in U.S. congressional districts with heavy concentrations of minorities and will try to encourage more students to seek nominations to the academy from their local members of Congress.

“The Air Force Academy has had a long tradition of actively recruiting diverse candidates,” Primas said. “But we’re going to have to really be expansive.”

Reporting by Gabriella Borter; Additional reporting by Donna Bryson; Editing by Will Dunham and Colleen Jenkins

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Gabriella Borter

Thomson Reuters

Gabriella Borter is a reporter on the U.S. National Affairs team, covering cultural and political issues as well as breaking news. She has won two Front Page Awards from the Newswomen’s Club of New York – in 2020 for her beat reporting on healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and in 2019 for her spot story on the firing of the police officer who killed Eric Garner. The latter was also a Deadline Club Awards finalist. She holds a B.A. in English from Yale University and joined Reuters in 2017.

[ad_2]

Source link

May 24, 2023
U.S. Congress gears up for immigration overhaul as Title 42 ends

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON, May 4 (Reuters) – A fresh push for a bipartisan immigration overhaul, coupled with enhanced border security, is emerging in the U.S. Congress, as thousands of migrants amass across the border in Mexico ahead of the end of COVID-era border restrictions next week.

The latest among those efforts is a last-minute legislative push that would grant U.S. border authorities similar expulsion powers allowed under the expiring COVID restrictions – known as Title 42 – for a period of two years, according to a congressional office involved in the talks.

Title 42 began under Republican former President Donald Trump in 2020 at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and allows U.S. authorities to expel migrants to Mexico without the chance to seek asylum. The order is set to lift on May 11 when the COVID health emergency officially ends.

But many Republicans and some Democrats, particularly in border areas, fear the end of the order will lead to a rise in migration that authorities are poorly equipped to face. A top border official recently told lawmakers that migrant crossings could jump to 10,000 per day after May 11, nearly double the daily average in March.

Senators Kyrsten Sinema, an Arizona independent, and Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, are leading the effort to temporarily extend border expulsions. The pair view it as a short-term fix while they work on broader immigration reform, Sinema spokesperson Hannah Hurley said.

“This is squarely about the immediate crisis with the end of Title 42,” Hurley said.

Separately, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives plans to pass a package of border security measures next week to place tougher constraints on asylum-seekers, resume construction of a wall along the southwest border with Mexico, and expand federal law enforcement.

Many are seeking more sweeping change – but their hopes have been dashed in the past.

It has been 37 years since Congress passed significant immigration reform, but a persistently high volume of migrants and an acute labor shortage have galvanized lawmakers. Republicans also cite the flow of illegal drugs into the United States through ports of entry as reason to harden border security.

While some Democrats characterize the House border legislation as inhumane, several Democratic and Republican senators said they eagerly await such a bill.

Tillis, who is pushing both the short-term legislative fix for Title 42’s end and a wider package of reforms, said a House-passed bill would be “something we can build on.”

“It gives us some room to gain the support we need in the Senate” for broader legislation, he said, adding it could take two to three months to construct a compromise. But senators had no illusions this would be an easy task.

Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, said the House bill would provide clues on Republicans’ intent. He added that in conversations with fellow senators, “One of the first things they say is ‘well if the House starts the conversation I think we can get somewhere.’ We’ll see.”

Since a 1986 immigration reform package, which resulted in some 3 million immigrants winning legal status, Congress repeatedly has failed to update the nation’s policies.

Around 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States could have a stake in the outcome of this latest effort, along with U.S. businesses hungry for workers.

To succeed in the Democrat-controlled Senate, it would need 60 senators from across both parties to back it, as well as win the support of the Republican-controlled House.

“A high-wire act,” is how Republican Senator John Cornyn from border state Texas portrayed it, adding it was “the only path forward.”

STARS ALIGNING

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation’s largest business association, has launched a campaign urging Congress to act. It was endorsed by 400 groups, ranging from the American Farm Bureau Federation to the U.S. Travel Association.

Republican-controlled states see their farming, ranching, food processing and manufacturing businesses begging for workers, a void that immigrants could fill if not for Washington’s clunky visa system.

Finally, passage of an immigration bill coupled with beefed-up border security could boost President Joe Biden’s re-election campaign and give Republican candidates something to cheer, too.

The House bill would deal with some of the five “buckets” in the Tillis-Sinema effort, according to a Senate source familiar with their work.

Overall, they include a modernization of the plodding asylum system, improvements to how visas are granted, and measures to more effectively authorize immigrants, be they laborers and healthcare workers or doctors and engineers, to fill American jobs.

There is also the fate of 580,000 “Dreamers” enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, who were brought illegally into the United States as children.

Republicans have blocked their path to citizenship for two decades, arguing that would encourage more to take the dangerous journey to the border.

Senators acknowledge some of their goals might have to be abandoned to achieve a “sweet spot.” But which ones?

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, who won passage last year of the first major gun control bill in about three decades, did so in part by recognizing that a too ambitious bill is a recipe for failure.

Murphy was asked how the difficulty of winning immigration legislation stacks up to other recent battles, such as gun control, gay marriage and infrastructure investments.

“It’s an 11 on a scale of 10.”

Reporting by Richard Cowan; additional reporting by Ted Hesson; Editing by Mary Milliken and Diane Craft

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

May 4, 2023
Texas authorities arrest wife, friend of fugitive wanted in shooting

[ad_1]

May 3 (Reuters) – Texas authorities have arrested the wife and a friend of a man accused of killing five of his neighbors, saying the two helped the suspect evade capture for four days, a local prosecutor said on Wednesday.

Francisco Oropesa was apprehended on Tuesday after a manhunt conducted by local, state and federal officials. He was found in a closet under some laundry in a home in Montgomery County.

The bloodshed erupted on Friday in nearby San Jacinto County after neighbors asked the suspect to stop firing his semiautomatic rifle in his yard because it was keeping their baby awake. Instead, the 38-year-old man reloaded, entered the home of the neighbors and killed five, including an 8-year-old boy, officials said.

The suspect’s wife, identified as Divimara Nava, 52, was arrested Wednesday morning and was being held in Montgomery County, San Jacinto County District Attorney Todd Dillon said at a news conference.

“We believe that Nava was providing him with material aid and encouragement, food and clothes, and had arranged transport to this house,” Dillon said.

Nava was facing a felony charge of hindering apprehension and prosecution of a known felon, according to jail records.

[1/2] Francisco Oropesa, 38, suspected of shooting five Texas neighbors to death and leading multiple agencies on a four-day manhunt, is seen in an undated photograph released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). FBI/Handout via REUTERS 

A friend of the suspect was also arrested on a marijuana charge and will be charged with helping the suspect flee the neighborhood in Cleveland, Texas, where the crime took place, Dillon said.

A $5 million bond will be set for the suspected gunman when he appears later Wednesday before a judge in a local jail where he is being held on five counts of murder, San Jacinto County Chief Deputy Tim Kean said at an earlier news conference on Wednesday.

The suspect was arrested in the town of Cut and Shoot, Texas, roughly 17 miles (27 km) west of Cleveland. Both are about 50 miles (80 km) north of Houston.

Officials acted on a tip from an unidentified person who was eligible for an $80,000 reward offered for information leading to the arrest, San Jacinto County Sheriff Greg Capers said on Tuesday.

Most of the victims were shot in the head. All were from Honduras and among the 10 people living at the address, but they were not all family members, Capers said.

The suspect is a Mexican national who was deported from the United States four times since 2009, U.S. immigration officials said.

Reporting by Brendan O’Brien in Chicago; Editing by Mark Porter

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

May 4, 2023
Airman suspected of leaking secret US documents hit with federal charges

[ad_1]

BOSTON, April 14 (Reuters) – A 21-year-old member of the U.S. Air National Guard accused of leaking top secret military intelligence records online was charged on Friday with unlawfully copying and transmitting classified material.

Jack Douglas Teixeira of North Dighton, Massachusetts, who was arrested by heavily armed FBI agents at his home on Thursday, made his initial appearance in a crowded federal court wearing a brown khaki jumpsuit.

At the hearing, Boston’s top federal national security prosecutor, Nadine Pellegrini, requested that Teixeira be detained pending trial, and a detention hearing was set for Wednesday.

During the brief proceeding, Teixeira said little, answering “yes” when asked whether he understood his right to remain silent.

The judge said Teixeira’s financial affidavit showed he qualified to be represented by a federal public defender, and he appointed one.

After the hearing, three of Teixeira’s family members left the courthouse, with a group of reporters trailing them for several blocks. They entered a car without making any comments.

The leaked documents were believed to be the most serious U.S. security breach since more than 700,000 documents, videos and diplomatic cables appeared on the WikiLeaks website in 2010. The Pentagon has called the leak a “deliberate, criminal act.”

This leak did not come to light until it was reported by the New York Times last week even though the documents were posted on a social media website weeks earlier.

U.S. President Joe Biden said on Friday he ordered investigators to determine why the alleged leaker had access to the sensitive information, which included records showing purported details of Ukrainian military vulnerabilities and embarrassed Washington by revealing its spying on allies.

Fallout from the case has roiled Washington. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has requested a briefing for all 100 senators next week while Republican House of Representatives Speaker Kevin McCarthy vowed to investigate.

“The Biden administration has failed to secure classified information,” McCarthy said on Twitter. “Through our committees, Congress will get answers as to why they were asleep at the switch.”

FBI agents arrest Jack Teixeira, an employee of the U.S. Air Force National Guard, in connection with an investigation into the leaks online of classified U.S. documents, outside a residence in this still image taken from video in North Dighton, Massachusetts, U.S., April 13, 2023. WCVB-TV via ABC via REUTERS

Biden said he was taking steps to tighten security. “While we are still determining the validity of those documents, I have directed our military and intelligence community to take steps to further secure and limit distribution of sensitive information,” he said in a statement.

MORE CHARGES EXPECTED

A criminal complaint made public on Friday charges Teixeira with one count of violating the Espionage Act related to the unlawful copying and transmitting of sensitive defense material, and a second charge related to the unlawful removal of defense material to an unauthorized location.

A conviction on the Espionage Act charge carries up to 10 years in prison.

The charges are connected to just one leaked document so far, a classified record that described the status of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and included details about troop movements on a particular date.

Experts expect more charges as investigators examine each leaked document. Teixeira could also face more counts depending on the number of times he separately uploaded and transmitted each document.

“They are going to pick the ones (documents), I would imagine, that foreign governments have already seen,” said Stephanie Siegmann, the former national security chief for the U.S. Attorney’s office in Boston and now a partner with the Hinckley Allen law firm.

In a sworn statement, an FBI agent said Teixeira had held a top secret security clearance since 2021 and also had sensitive compartmented access to other highly classified programs.

Since May 2022, the FBI said, Teixeira has been serving as an E-3/airman first class in the Air National Guard and has been stationed at Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts.

Siegmann said one lingering question is why a 21-year-old National Guardsman held such a top-level security clearance.

“That’s an issue that Department of Defense needs to now deal with,” she said. “Why would he be entitled to these documents about the Russia-Ukrainian conflict?”

Reuters has reviewed more than 50 of the documents, labeled “Secret” and “Top Secret,” but has not independently verified their authenticity. The number of documents leaked is likely to be over 100.

Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch in Washington and Tim McLaughlin in Boston
Editing by Don Durfee and Alistair Bell

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Sarah N. Lynch

Thomson Reuters

Sarah N. Lynch is the lead reporter for Reuters covering the U.S. Justice Department out of Washington, D.C. During her time on the beat, she has covered everything from the Mueller report and the use of federal agents to quell protesters in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, to the rampant spread of COVID-19 in prisons and the department’s prosecutions following the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

[ad_2]

Source link

April 14, 2023
Trump hush money case: What is an indictment? An arraignment? A gag order?

[ad_1]

April 3 (Reuters) – Former U.S. President Donald Trump is scheduled to be arraigned at a Manhattan courthouse on Tuesday following his indictment on criminal charges after a probe into hush money paid to a porn star.

Below is an explanation of what it means to be indicted and arraigned, and other key terms related to Trump’s case.

INDICTMENT

An indictment is a court document containing charges that were voted on by a grand jury, a group of people who decide whether a prosecutor has enough evidence to pursue criminal charges.

An indictment formally charges a defendant with a crime and provides a basis for legal prosecution.

Following an indictment, a defendant is given formal notice of the charges, a right enshrined in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

A defendant can then be formally arraigned on whatever charges are brought. Law enforcement officials fingerprint and photograph most defendants facing arraignments.

ARRAIGNMENT

An arraignment is where a defendant is brought to court to hear charges and have a chance to enter a plea, which is generally guilty or not guilty.

A judge or prosecutor typically reads the charges aloud. A defendant is usually represented by lawyers, especially in cases that are high-profile or could lead to jail or prison.

If a defendant pleads not guilty, a judge will typically accept the plea and schedule the next court appearance, and perhaps a tentative trial date.

[1/6] A person uses a smartphone after former U.S. President Donald Trump’s indictment by a Manhattan grand jury following a probe into hush money paid to porn star Stormy Daniels, in New York City, U.S, April 3, 2023. REUTERS/Amanda Perobelli

If a defendant pleads guilty, the judge will impose punishment, typically at a later date.

Trump’s lawyers have said he will plead not guilty on Tuesday.

Lawyers for some defendants who plead not guilty may engage in plea bargaining, where they negotiate a guilty plea with prosecutors to avoid a trial. Defendants would typically plead guilty to some but not all charges they face.

BAIL

Judges in New York state criminal court have three options for bail: They can set bail, order a defendant released without bail, or order a defendant’s detention.

The purpose of bail in New York is to ensure that a defendant returns to court, without taking into account the risk a defendant may cause further harm. In 2019, New York ended cash bail for most cases involving misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies, such as Trump’s case.

GAG ORDER

A gag order is when a judge prohibits lawyers, parties and witnesses from talking about a case in public.

Gag orders are common in criminal cases. That is especially true when there is a risk that someone may make statements that could incite violence, be viewed as threatening to prosecutors or witnesses, or taint the jury pool.

A defendant who violates a gag order in New York can be held by a judge to be in criminal contempt, a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail. A judge will typically warn a defendant before issuing a contempt citation.

If a gag order is imposed against Trump, he can appeal and argue that it undermines his First Amendment right to free speech as he runs for president.

Reporting by Rami Ayyub and Jonathan Stempel; editing by Noeleen Walder and Jonathan Oatis

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

April 4, 2023
In victory for labor unions, Michigan governor repeals ‘right-to-work’ law

[ad_1]

March 24 (Reuters) – Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer on Friday signed a package of bills repealing the state’s so-called “right to work” law that allowed workers to opt out of unions, a long-sought victory for labor organizers facing an era of diminished power.

Whitmer became the first governor since the 1960s to roll back right-to-work legislation. Twenty-six other U.S. states and the territory of Guam still have right-to-work laws on the books, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

“Michigan workers are the most talented and hard-working in the world and deserve to be treated with dignity and respect,” Whitmer, a two-term Democrat, said in a statement.

Michigan House Bills 4004 and 4007 and Senate Bill 34 passed the Democratic-controlled state legislature earlier this month. House Bill 4007 requires that contractors hired by the state pay a so-called prevailing wage, the amount used when hiring union workers.

The Michigan state legislature, controlled at the time by Republicans, in 2012 passed a right-to-work law over the objections of union activists. It was signed into law by then-Governor Rick Snyder, also a Republican.

Republicans opposed repealing that law this year, arguing that it would hurt businesses and make the state less attractive to companies.

Union membership has declined sharply in the United States since its peak in the 1950s, when more than a third of workers belonged to a union.

Membership dropped to an all-time low of 10.1% in 2022 despite a surge in organizing during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to data released in January by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Reporting by Dan Whitcomb; editing by Grant McCool

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 25, 2023
U.S. FDA allows abortion pills to be sold at retail pharmacies

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON, Jan 3 (Reuters) – The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will allow retail pharmacies to offer abortion pills in the United States for the first time, the agency said on Tuesday, even as more states seek to ban medication abortion.

The regulatory change will potentially expand abortion access as President Joe Biden’s administration wrestles with how best to protect abortion rights after they were sharply curtailed by the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the landmark Roe v Wade ruling and the state bans that followed.

Pharmacies can start applying for certification to distribute abortion pill mifepristone with one of the two companies that make it, and if successful they will be able to dispense it directly to patients upon receiving a prescription from a certified prescriber.

The FDA had first said it would be making those changes in December 2021 when it announced it would relax some risk evaluation and mitigation strategies, or REMS, on the pill, that had been in place since the agency approved it in 2000 and were lifted temporarily in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The changes included permanently removing restrictions on mail order shipping of the pills and their prescription through telehealth.

The agency finalized the changes on Tuesday after reviewing supplemental applications from Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro, the two companies that make the drug in the United States.

“Under the Mifepristone REMS Program, as modified, Mifeprex and its approved generic can be dispensed by certified pharmacies or by or under the supervision of a certified prescriber,” the agency said on its website on Tuesday.

Mifeprex is the brand name version of mifepristone which, in combination with a second drug called misoprostol that has various uses including miscarriage management, induces an abortion up to 10 weeks into a pregnancy in a process known as medication abortion.

Abortion rights activists say the pill has a long track record of being safe and effective, with no risk of overdose or addiction. In several countries, including India and Mexico, women can buy them without a prescription to induce abortion.

“Today’s news is a step in the right direction for health equity,” Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson said in a statement.

“Being able to access your prescribed medication abortion through the mail or to pick it up in person from a pharmacy like any other prescription is a game changer for people trying to access basic health care,” Johnson added.

NO EQUAL ACCESS

The regulatory change will, however, not provide equal access to all people, GenBioPro, which makes the generic version of mifepristone, said in a statement.

Abortion bans, some targeting mifepristone, have gone into effect in more than a dozen states since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to terminating pregnancies when it scrapped the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling last year.

Women in those states could potentially travel to other states to obtain medication abortion.

The president of anti-abortion group SBA Pro-Life America, Marjorie Dannenfelser, said the latest FDA move endangers women’s safety and the lives of unborn children.

“State lawmakers and Congress must stand as a bulwark against the Biden administration’s pro-abortion extremism,” she said in a statement.

FDA records show a small mortality case number associated with mifepristone. As of June 2021, there were reports of 26 deaths linked with the pill out of 4.9 million people estimated to have taken it since it was approved in September 2000.

Retail pharmacies will have to weigh whether or not to offer the pill given the political controversy surrounding abortion, and determine where they can do so.

A spokesperson for CVS Health (CVS.N) said the drugstore chain owner was reviewing the updated REMS “drug safety program certification requirements for mifepristone to determine the requirements to dispense in states that do not restrict the dispensing of medications prescribed for elective termination of pregnancy.”

A spokesperson for Walgreens (WBA.O), one of the largest U.S. pharmacies, said the company was also reviewing the FDA’s regulatory change. “We will continue to enable our pharmacists to dispense medications consistent with federal and state law.”

Reporting by Ahmed Aboulenein; Additional reporting by Eric Beech in Washington, Shivani Tanna, Rahat Sandhu, and Kanjyik Ghosh in Bengaluru; Editing by Himani Sarkar

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Ahmed Aboulenein

Thomson Reuters

Washington-based correspondent covering U.S. healthcare and pharmaceutical policy with a focus on the Department of Health and Human Services and the agencies it oversees such as the Food and Drug Administration, previously based in Iraq and Egypt.

[ad_2]

Source link

January 3, 2023
Police testify about attack on U.S. House Speaker Pelosi’s husband

[ad_1]

Dec 14 (Reuters) – A San Francisco police officer testified on Wednesday that he witnessed the attack on U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband when the suspect in the assault hit Paul Pelosi with a hammer in late October.

Prosecutors at the preliminary hearing for suspect David Wayne DePape, 42, played a recording of Paul Pelosi’s 911 call during the hearing and showed video of the attack from police body cameras, USA Today reported.

“My partner said, ‘Drop the weapon’ …. He started to pull the hammer, Mr. Pelosi let go and the man lunged and hit Mr. Pelosi in the head,” San Francisco Police Officer Kyle Cagney testified on Wednesday, adding the House speaker’s husband was struck “very hard,” according to the USA Today report.

Prosecutors say the suspect, demanding to see the House speaker, had broken into her San Francisco home and attacked her 82-year-old husband in an assault that stoked fears about political violence in the United States in the run-up to the midterm elections.

San Francisco Police Sergeant Carla Hurley, who interviewed DePape on the day of the attack, testified to the hearing on Wednesday that the assailant had told her he wanted to target other people too, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, actor Tom Hanks and President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, CBS News reported.

“There is evil in Washington,” DePape told Hurley, according to her reported testimony. DePape is due back in state court on Dec. 28, CBS News said.

San Francisco Superior Court Judge Stephen Murphy conducted the hearing on Wednesday to establish if there was enough evidence to bring the suspect to trial.

After the attack, Paul Pelosi underwent surgery for a skull fracture and injuries to his right arm and hands. He was released from hospital in early November. DePape, a Canadian, was arrested at the scene and faces charges of attempted murder and other felonies.

DePape threatened to take the House speaker hostage, prosecutors said. He has pleaded not guilty to federal criminal charges last month.

Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Washington
Editing by Alistair Bell and Sandra Maler

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

December 14, 2022
Trump defied Jan 6 committee subpoena, panel says

[ad_1]

Nov 14 (Reuters) – Former President Donald Trump did not show up for deposition testimony before the congressional committee investigating his supporters’ attack on the U.S. Capitol last year, the panel said on Monday.

In doing so Trump defied a subpoena issued by the panel in October, Chair Bennie Thompson, a Democrat, and co-Chair Liz Cheney, a Republican, said in a joint statement.

“The truth is that Donald Trump, like several of his closest allies, is hiding from the Select Committee’s investigation and refusing to do what more than a thousand other witnesses have done,” Thompson and Cheney said.

The panel did not say what next steps they might pursue against Trump. Thompson told the New York Times in an interview that he would not rule out seeking contempt of Congress charges against the former president.

“That could be an option. And we’ll have to wait and see,” Thomson told the Times. “The first thing we’ll do is see how we address the lawsuit. At some point after that, we’ll decide the path forward.”

Trump filed a lawsuit on Friday seeking to avoid having to testify or provide any documentation to the Jan. 6 committee.

The congressional committee has held a series of hearings as it seeks to make its case to the public that Trump provoked his supporters into storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, while lawmakers met to formally declare his loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

The subpoena ordered Trump to submit documents to the panel by Nov. 4 and for him to appear for deposition testimony beginning on or about Nov. 14.

On Nov. 4, it said it had agreed to give Trump an extension before producing the documents but the Nov. 14 deadline remained in place.

Republicans are expected to dissolve the panel if they win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the mid-term elections.

Reporting by Tyler Clifford and Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Leslie Adler

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

November 14, 2022
Democrats seek vote reform, gay marriage, debt ceiling in ‘lame duck’ Congress

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON, Nov 14 (Reuters) – Democrats in the U.S. Congress aim to pass bills protecting same-sex marriage, clarifying lawmakers’ role in certifying presidential elections and raising the nation’s debt ceiling when they return from the campaign trail on Monday.

President Joe Biden’s party got a boost over the weekend when it learned it would keep control of the Senate for the next two years, while control of the House of Representatives is still up in the air as votes are counted after Tuesday’s midterm election.

But Democrats escaped a feared midterm drubbing and will look to make the most they can of their current thin majorities in both chambers before the new Congress is sworn in on Jan. 3, a period known as the ‘lame duck’ session.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen both signaled that addressing the nations’ looming debt ceiling would be a priority during the session.

Some Republicans have threatened to use the next hike in the $31.4 trillion debt ceiling, expected in the first quarter of 2023, as leverage to force concessions from Biden. Yellen in a Saturday interview with Reuters warned that a failure to act would pose a “huge threat” to America’s credit rating and the functioning of financial markets.

Pelosi, who would lose her position as speaker if Republicans win a majority in the House, told ABC News on Sunday that the best way to address the debt ceiling was “to do it now.”

“My hope would be that we could get it done in the lame duck,” Pelosi said. “We’ll have to, again, lift the debt ceiling so that the full faith and credit of the United States is respected.”

Biden told reporters over the weekend he would wait to speak to Republican leadership before deciding any priorities, adding he planned to “take it slow.”

Congress has a long to-do list in the coming weeks. It faces a Dec. 16 deadline to passing either a temporary funding bill to keep government agencies operating at full steam until early next year, or a measure that keeps the lights on through Sept. 30, the end of the current fiscal year. Failure to enact one of those would result in partial government shutdowns.

[1/5] Members-elect from the upcoming 118th congress arrive at the U.S. Capitol building for orientation in Washington, U.S., November 14, 2022. REUTERS/Leah Millis

The House already has passed legislation legalizing gay marriage and the Senate was poised, as soon as this week, to approve its slightly different version of the “Respect for Marriage Act.” The bill is intended to ensure that the U.S. Supreme Court does not end gay marriage rights, which conservative Justice Clarence Thomas mused was possible when the court in June ended the national right to abortion.

Another high-priority item is a bipartisan bill reforming the way Congress certifies presidential elections, intended to avoid a repeat of the violence of the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol by supporters of former President Donald Trump who wanted to stop lawmakers from certifying Biden’s win.

Democratic leaders also aim to pass legislation speeding permits for energy projects and provide more financial and military support for Ukraine in its fight against Russia’s invasion.

Some Republicans have expressed reluctance to provide more financial support for Ukraine.

Progressive Democrats have bridled at the prospect of the government stepping up the energy permitting process, thus encouraging the flow of fossil fuels to market even as Biden attempts to meet stringent goals to reduce the impact of climate change.

Biden has suggested permitting reform could be included in the National Defense Authorization Act, the annual bill funding the military that usually gets strong bipartisan support.

But keeping the Senate majority for the next two years means that there will be less pressure on Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to confirm as many of Biden’s nominees for federal judgeships as possible before the end of the year.

There are 57 judicial nominees pending before the Senate, with 25 already approved by the Judiciary Committee and awaiting action by the full chamber.

The Senate has already confirmed 84 of Biden’s judicial nominees, allowing him to essentially keep pace with the near-record number of appointments Trump made during four years as he worked to move the judiciary rightward.

Reporting by Moira Warburton and Richard Cowan; Additional reporting by David Lawder in New Delhi, Nandita Bose in Phnom Penh and Trevor Hunnicutt, Doina Chiacu and Susan Heavey in Washington; Editing by Scott Malone, Alistair Bell and Daniel Wallis

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[ad_2]

Source link

November 14, 2022
U.S. Supreme Court’s Barrett again declines to block Biden student debt relief

[ad_1]

Nov 4 (Reuters) – U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Friday again declined to block President Joe Biden’s plan to cancel billions of dollars in student debt, this time in a challenge brought by two Indiana borrowers, even as a lower court considers whether to lift a freeze it imposed on the program in a different case.

Barrett denied an emergency request by the Indiana borrowers, represented by a conservative legal group, to bar the U.S. Department of Education from implementing the Democratic president’s plan to forgive debt held by qualified people who had taken loans to pay for college.

Barrett on Oct. 20 denied a similar request by a Wisconsin taxpayers organization represented by another conservative legal group. The justice acted in the cases because she is the justice assigned to handle certain emergency requests from a group of states that includes Indiana and Wisconsin.

The St. Louis-based 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 21 put the policy on hold in yet another conservative challenge by six Republican-led states while it considered their request for injunction pending their appeal of their case’s dismissal. That request remains pending.

Biden’s plan, unveiled in August, was designed to forgive up to $10,000 in student loan debt for borrowers making less than $125,000 per year, or $250,000 for married couples. Borrowers who received Pell Grants to benefit lower-income college students would have up to $20,000 of their debt canceled.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office in September calculated that debt forgiveness would eliminate about $430 billion of the $1.6 trillion in outstanding student debt and that more than 40 million Americans would be eligible to benefit.

The policy fulfilled a promise Biden made during the 2020 presidential campaign to help debt-saddled former college students. Democrats hope the policy will boost support for them in Tuesday’s midterm elections in which control of Congress is at stake.

Friday’s case was filed by two borrowers, Frank Garrison and Noel Johnson, represented by the conservative Pacific Legal Foundation, and claimed they would be irreparably harmed if some of their student loans were automatically forgiven because they would face increased state tax liabilities.

Soon after they sued, the Department of Education created an opt-out option for borrowers. U.S. District Judge Richard Young on Oct. 21 dismissed the case, finding that the debt forgiveness program did not injure Garrison and Johnson.

The Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 28 declined to block the plan while Garrison and Johnson pursued an appeal, noting that the program is “not compulsory” and that the plaintiffs could avoid tax liability simply by opting out.

Caleb Kruckenberg, a lawyer at the Pacific Legal Foundation, in a statement expressed disappointment that Barrett declined to block the plan while his clients pursued their appeal but said they will “continue to fight this program in court.”

“Practically since this program was announced, the administration has sought to avoid judicial scrutiny,” he said. “Thus far they have succeeded. But that does not change the fact that this program is illegal from stem to stern.”

Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Rosalba O’Brien

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Nate Raymond

Thomson Reuters

Nate Raymond reports on the federal judiciary and litigation. He can be reached at nate.raymond@thomsonreuters.com.

[ad_2]

Source link

November 4, 2022