32 Burst results for "Kate Shaw"

"kate shaw" Discussed on KTAR 92.3FM

KTAR 92.3FM

01:36 min | 2 weeks ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on KTAR 92.3FM

"Kate Shaw says Chief Justice John Roberts was the deciding vote on the court to change course basically to take a look at the exact same law that struck down four years ago. But hear differently constituted Supreme Court to uphold that law would just be to send the message that basically the court is no more than politicians in robes, and Robert even had a couple of lying to that effect. Corona virus cases on the rise in 32 states, including Texas, Arizona and Florida. Hospitalizations up in nearly two dozen today, Mayor Lenny Curry of Jacksonville, Florida, issuing a mandate to wear masks endure. Starting today, Governor Rhonda Santa says he supports the mayor and left it to the locals. T make decisions about whether they want to use coercive measures or impose any type of criminal penalties. You know, we're not going to do that statewide Florida Daily infection rates have surged in June cases nearing 9000 again in just the past 24 hours. New York City's reopening plans could be curved Phase three set to open Monday. The governor, though, says pictures showing people in crowded bars from this week could delay those plans. Grounded. Boeing 7 37 MAX Jets getting a run through on safety test certification flights have taken off the certification test flight for Boeing 7 37 Max, now underway with Federal Aviation Administration test pilots on board. That flight took off just before 10 a.m. Pacific time from Boeing Field in Seattle. It is expected to land at Grant County International Airport in Moses Lake Washington After about two hours. All 7 37 max planes have been grounded since last year after two deadly crash. Ashes. ABC is Lionel Boys, you're listening to ABC News. Arizona's new.

Supreme Court Mayor Lenny Curry Florida Boeing Chief Justice John Roberts Arizona Governor Rhonda Santa Boeing Field Kate Shaw Grant County International Air ABC ABC News New York City Jacksonville Moses Lake Washington Lionel Boys Robert Federal Aviation Administratio Seattle Texas
Has The Electoral College Outlived Its Usefulness?

Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates

06:24 min | Last month

Has The Electoral College Outlived Its Usefulness?

"Everybody I'm John Dan host and moderator of intelligence squared. Us debates for this episode. I got online with four debaters. Who argued over this resolution? The Electoral College has outlived. Its usefulness. This was a debate that we had originally planned to host with our partners at northwestern law school in Chicago. We were GONNA do it at the law school. Obviously that did not happen. What did happen was that we had instead of a great debate. Digitally has turned out to be incredibly timely topic. So let's get to it the Electoral College. It's this unique construct of indirect democracy that well. It's it's not a college as the term is commonly used but it sure is electoral in that its members who are currently maxed out at five hundred thirty eight have been the actual electors of every president we've ever had since we've had a constitution even those five times in our history when the popular vote went to someone else in recent memory that happened in the two thousand election happened in the two thousand sixteen election. So what were the founders thinking? That's a question that right now. The Supreme Court is considering in an electoral college case but why did the founders think? The Electoral College was needed. And what good has come of it and also what harm has come of it. Well in these questions we've been thinking. They're the makings of a debate. So we had it for really really good debaters said yes or no to this statement. The Electoral College has outlived. Its usefulness as always Our debate goes three rounds and our audience tuning it online voted to decide our winner. But you can still weigh in on this when yourself if you're just listening for the first time to this debate we are taking votes right now at Iq to us dot org that's q the number two US dot org. If you go there you can cast your first vote before you hear the arguments you can vote for or against or undecided on the resolution. You know what? I'll give you a test to do that right now. I'll wait for you. Remember you cast votes one now in one after you've heard the argument and it's the team that changes the most mind. Who will be our winner? So go do that. I'll wait for you. So let's meet our debaters. I up to speak for the resolution. The Electoral College has outlived. Its usefulness. Jim Bowie Jim. Thanks for joining us. Thank you for having me Djamil. You are in New York Times columnist and political analyst for CBS News. You are also an alumnus of our series. So it's great to have you back also arguing on your team for the resolution. I want to say hello to kate. Shaw Kate. Welcome to intelligence squared. He John Thanks so much for having me. And you're a professor at the Cardozo School of law and Co Director of the floor Shurmur Center for Constitutional Democracy. You're also a host of the very popular law. Podcast strict scrutiny. So that's the team arguing for the resolution. The Electoral College has outlived. Its usefulness. Now let's meet the team arguing against that very low resolution. I let's say hello to Tara Tara. Welcome to intelligence squared. It's great to have you with us on one folks to know that you are the author of a lot of books about the electoral college including why we need the Electoral College. You're also a former lawyer and editor of the Texas Review of law and politics and your partner. I WANNA welcome also to intelligence squared Bradley Smith. Bradley Hi Welcome to intelligence squared tie. Thanks John Pleasure to be here and you are a professor at Capital University Law School and you have served as Commissioner Vice Chairman and Chairman of the Federal Election Commission welcome. I want everybody to know that was always our debate will go in three rounds and then you those folks out in the world are online audience. Get to vote to decide who the winner is all right. I think we are ready to move. Onto round one opening statements from each debater and turn those statements will be formed. It's each our resolution is the electoral college has outlived its usefulness. And here I up to speak for that Resolution Jamal Buoy columnist for the New York Times. Djamil your time starts right now. I'm going to begin with a discussion of how we got to the Electoral College in the first place and the think he thing I want everyone to understand. Is that the electoral college that we have the one we will use. November's election is that not actually the one that was ratified in seventeen. Eighty eight gone. Electoral College fell out of use quickly. What we have is essentially an extra constitutional mechanism to deal with the exegesis of politics as they've developed from the beginning of the constitutional convention and specifically when they began thinking about the national executive the delegates for trying to balance four simply four competing things from came to Hal. Choose and national executive They wanted a voice for the People. They wanted a fair representation for slave states They wanted independence from the legislature in. May had to deal the very simple question of. How do you actually choose national executive? In a big large diverse country they cycled through a few things Several delegates including teams Madison Propose Popular Election Others propose choosing from Congress But by the time They came to a conclusion which was at the very last minute the convention. They decided they would do this. Elector based system that each state would choose. Electors would gather together as a kind of congress of it's filtered through candidates They would the majority whoever won the majority of electors would become president Sprout Vice President and if there was no winner at to the house would choose on the basis of the delegations. No one was really entirely satisfied with this when they came to the conclusion but everyone expected more or less at the president of the Convention George Washington would become the first chief executive and this was a a straightforward way to get George Washington took become President United States. No one was really too worried about it. There is debate over During the revocation debates. But it wasn't a big sticking point. No one was too worried about mob rule in these discussions. They weren't worried about excessive democracy. Usually when the founders talked about democracy they were talking but a Fenian style. Direct ASSEMBLY IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE ELECTIONS.

United States President Trump Northwestern Law School New York Times President Sprout Vice Presiden Partner John Dan Chicago Professor Floor Shurmur Center For Const Commissioner Vice Chairman And Federal Election Commission Cardozo School Of Law Bradley Smith Shaw Kate Executive Jim Bowie Jim Tara Tara
"kate shaw" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

All In with Chris Hayes

11:09 min | 5 months ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

"The lower courts even more rarely make up to the courts of appeals or or very rarely to the supreme court but most of the time these disputes get resolved through accommodation negotiation and practice and those practices kind of hardened into law at least players in these systems believe themselves to be bound to a degree. I mean sometimes times they will say we wanted definitive judicial ruling. But it's pretty rare that that happens and much of the time people conduct themselves under sort of the legal regime that is developed outside outside of course and so. I do think that there is important. Precedent setting function. Just the last couple of weeks of witness testimony has created. Well this is. What's so interesting about this showdown right now between the White House and Congress on a variety of fronts in terms of subpoenaing of witnesses and documents right so like it'd be be a funny metaphor medicine in this context but like the thing about marriage is Thing about marriages would make some marriage. Amazing also sometimes difficult. Is that like. There's no third branch just to go to like. It's just the two of you work it all out you don't you. Don't get to go for a ruling and if there's conflict your beef you gotta just like work it out. There's not like in a workplace where it's like maybe there's a boss or something like and in some ways it's like they're in a marriage in a weird way like the presidency and the Congress they have to work it out between each other and as it's breaking down there like running to this sort of third entity more and more because they can't work it out partly. I think because of how sort of implacable the obstruction has been from the White House but now now it is before the courts and there's not actually a huge body of law in this precisely for that reason right so when I said the Congress has sort of relinquish a lot of it's less formal authorities. One example of that is that I used to exercise what's referred to as its inherent contempt power so if a witness a refuse to show up to testify or produce documents it would directly hold hold that witness individual in contempt impose fines actually in prison in a cell underneath the capital individuals in the nineteen eighteen. Thirty thirty five thirty five and they had some dude in a hotel room. I'm just making that up later. We'll even and we'll take it out either. It is thirty five. I don't check to check. They don't do that anymore and I don't think anybody really thinks they should revive the practice of sending the sergeant at arms to actually actually sees witnesses but John Bolton with a handcuffed to a raider amazing there are people who are suggesting that Congress longer should really do I. I don't see it happening. But when they decided that they needed to go to court to enforce their subpoenas that that was an admission that they lacked the inherent authorities themselves to do it. They needed to get this referee. But that's part of the reason I think these last few weeks that have shown that Congress can actually do a lot without recourse to the courts have been important and and yet as you say there are these high stakes judicial disputes. That are playing out now so we have this ruling that this legal argument at the trump administration has made that certain high level White House officials officials enjoy absolute testimonial immunity. They don't even need to respond. To congressional subpoenas is you know without any real basis in law or logic that everything in our constitutional tradition and constitutional history and the limited Supreme Court precedent on. This question makes clear if the president is not above the law then his advisers visors and to be. And so that's the ruling out of District Court in this Don mcgann case and then there are a couple of rulings in you know these formally unrelated conceptually sort of related cases involving the president's taxes axes in which the lower courts have also said pretty categorically that these arguments that the rules don't apply at all that would ordinarily require document production of a third party that they don't apply at all because the president is involved and that's essentially the argument that the White House has been making too. There's so let's talk about. There's three cases one of them doesn't have to do with Congress it has to do with The Manhattan District Attorney who's seeking the president's taxes as part of the pursuit of an investigation the president's actual lawyer William Convoy as opposed to his like fake encrypted. Letter Rudy Giuliani but like convoy like actually gets I mean to the extent the president as anyone. I don't know but he actually gets paid me. Actually a rights legal brief does legal work. He's the one who made this insane. The argument that like shot someone Fifth Avenue. You can investigate him. Let's sort of take that aside for a second because it doesn't quite play this like direct institutional question about the two branches. There's there's judge Catania Brand Jackson's decision in the District Court which basically was over the matter of whether Don mcgann could be a lovely subpoenaed by Congress. She writes this hundred twenty page opinion. That's like absolute like he definitely can be an has to show up and I think this is an interesting conceptual point like she says. This idea of absolute immunity is nowhere in the constitution. There's nowhere in our legal tradition. The you can block people now. There are privileges that obtain and basically she clears the path for him to show up and say I'm not answering that question and invoke executive privilege but one of the things. I think that it's a technical point. Important one the White House hasn't even done that. Like there is executive privilege and the scope of executive privilege which is the subject of a lot of debate and it's unclear who adjudicates that in the end but they haven't gotten to that point because even before you get to that privilege they're just saying like no you can't talk to these people it's just inconsistent with. There's there's limited case law on it but none of these privileges are absolute and there's no real authority for the proposition that you don't have to show up at all to negotiate over. What are and are not permissible subjects of inquiry? And that's basically the the ruling there. Of course that's going to be appealed. Then there's the mazars which is now gone through two levels levels of the federal courts at District Court saying you have to hand over. The documents to the accounting firm writes the trump intervenes to stop the firm from handing it over. They say you have to hand it over for and then a three judge panel on the Circuit Court affirms that District Court opinion. That's also going to now be a petition to the Supreme Court which they're gonNA here in a few weeks they consider sitter whether to take those cases. There's a good chance they'll take at least the case and maybe even the New York as as well let's talk about the law there because it just seems to me like it. It just seems crazy to me in terms of the constitution that if Congress says we need to investigate the president's finances that the president can be like no you can't like that just seems to me as as just a basic question of I would personally like to know if like the Saudi Kingdom pays him fifty million lean dollars a year in bribes. I don't think that's the case but like I would like to definitively rule out same with the Turks like there's all sorts of things that I think I would like to definitively establish the presence finances finances and it just seems nuts to me. You set a precedent. The Congress cannot get those documents well so it's tricky because they haven't really explained what they're doing in those terms they haven't said were investigating investigating the president because we want to know if he's taking bribes because this whole power of oversight or inquiry that's the power that Congress has exercising when it is doing this sort of thing. It's not explicitly in the constitution and there is no over the word oversight. It's just not there and yet the Supreme Court from very early on has said the power of inquiry is an important important adjunct to Congress has numerous powers the sort of heart of which is lawmaking and so typically when it engage in some kind of fact-finding it explains it it is doing so in order to inform its consideration of passing laws or of overseeing agencies. You know it links up what it is doing often again to specific lawmaking so here it said something like thinking about passing some ethics laws that apply to the president and so we kind of want to know what these tax returns show to inform our consideration ratio lawmaking judge rouse had around that he circuit to sense from that majority opinion right. She is a trump appointee. Who Fill cabinet right like all these judges of Federalist Society Heidi Conservative judge? who went through with McConnell's stewardship yet and I think is now almost surely on Supreme Court shortlist in that Administration and she writes this long opinion opinion? That says basically what the what Congress is trying to do is. They're saying they're thinking about lawmaking really they're trying to investigate. And that's a law enforcement function and Congress is not a law enforcement entity that's law enforcement is executive an executive branch function and part of that proposition is true of course row and other sort of conservatives of her stripe stripe think that you can't have any kind of independent authority inside the executive branch that would investigate the president. So it's a little bit of sort of heads. The president wins tails. You lose especially fun. If she makes the argument that like Sivan's can have either. I probably would but so was weird about her. Descend does she says you know it's improper. They're thinking about laws. That's not really what they're trying to do here. And there's a constitutional mechanism for investigating presidential misconduct and that is impeachment. And so it's this weird opinion because she writes it a couple of weeks ago when we were already in this phase at the impeachment inquiry but the request stems from some months ago and so the kind of facts on the ground when this congressional committee ready made its request Tomase ours. Were very different from the facts. Now which is the one reason I think. The Supreme Court might not take skis because they would be arguing in the abstract about Congress power absent impeachment inquiry to request these kinds of. Maybe they refile a request. That explicitly ties the interest to the impeachment inquiry and not changes the calculus. But but those are the that's basically the universe of argument. I mean again i. I'm I'm playing sort of like ignorance blowhard here but it just seems to me like we're considering a law to make the president disclose his taxes. which we don't have in the books and good God? We should in has been having practice. We we should just do it like we should know what the president's income and accounts are we should know who is money to and who he gets payments from or she and we're going to do do that and like peers are doing the fact-finding for legislative purpose. Like do that it just seems like how could that you know again all this stuff at a certain level I'm really cynical about higher courts. Sort of vote counting and legal realism. And I think that ultimately we'll we'll see I mean I think it's like they think they can count to five on the Supreme Court for everything everything and that's why they're rushing to get up there and that's also why they're making frankly like pretty ludicrous arguments and a lot of these cases and that's not coming from me. That's coming from the the judges a first impression who keep getting the cases and being like they haven't been ruling like well. You've got a point here it's been like this is pretty ridiculous and not just judges but you you know kind of lawyers of all ideological thought that some of the arguments made by the administration by White House. Counsel pets have alone in some of his correspondence with Congress in in some of these briefs and in the New York case they're just not particularly defensible legal positions. And that's why I retain a little bit more idealism about the Supreme Court than you do but I it's hard for me to seat Pete trump cotton to five and either these cases. But that's eating these words well so that point about what the approach is here. I mean Charlie. Savage has a piece in the Times today. That basically says they keep losing in the courts. But they're winning because they're delaying right right. Like the key point is they keep getting the stays and it's hard to explain all this mechanisms and again like my mastery of civil procedure is terr- it. It's it's it's it's not good. Well I mean it's fine for a layman but but the point is it like they keep losing keep getting stays like it's it's just a nice..

Congress Supreme Court president District Court White House executive Don mcgann New York Rudy Giuliani Circuit Court Pete trump John Bolton Catania Brand Jackson Federalist Society Manhattan Savage Charlie
"kate shaw" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

All In with Chris Hayes

11:30 min | 5 months ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

"Knew how to get it for this microphone. My podcast is about what it takes to get the nomination. Six episodes six timeless themes that separate the few winners from the losers. The hope still lives and the dream shall never is so you want to be president with Chris Matthews and MSNBC podcast search. I now wherever you're listening and subscribe I two episodes available now. There's some fundamental existential sense in which members of Congress many people country too. The Guy is like just fundamentally of the office. And then there's an attempt to kind of find the correct procedural legalistic pretext or predicate. I guess for impeaching him and I think there's a little bit of that with trump happening even though I think what he did with Ukraine is one hundred percent impeachable. The context here is. It's like a deeper sense of the guys on fitness. There's also the sort of question about language there's also though and I think this is another place to go in this sort of history that like impeachment always has been pretty partisan like this idea that were in these polarized times and no one is persuadable like it was quite partisan in Johnson's case and it was obviously quite partisan in Clinton's case in the one exception to the rule is the one guy who it worked on exact equation yes and Nixon is is sort of hard to figure you know when we have the set this tiny little set a presidential impeachment and we've never removed the president and of course we didn't remove Nixon although it's almost certain that he would have been removed in the Senate because he decided to leave before even being impeach by the full House so it distorts the overall numbers I think. But yes that is an example of a moment in which history seems to suggest that the country in the congress transcended partisanship and it kind of uniformly condemned Nixon's conduct although the fascinating counterfactual. Think about which you see people at the margins of Republican conservative thinking talk about Nixon. In retrospect which is like yes should have stuck it out dude like call the bluff man you know make them count the votes make them whip against you. Tell them that they're going to destroy the party. And they're gonNA destroy their chances is the next election and like you know again to me what the theme here with impeachment is it. You're sort of at the edge of what the law is saying. You're in some zone of norms shame democratic legitimacy like all this sort of coming together. There's no like clear directive. No blueprint for any of this right like it does come down to politics and it does come down to the sort of like bunch of factors all operating in tandem. And I think it's true that that has always been the case right so it's one of the things I think that scholars of constitutional history tend to say about the framers as they get a lot right and they get some things quite wrong and one of the things they get wrong as feeling to anticipate the kind of rise I of partisanship right sort of importance of parties. There's this idea that if you separate power between the branches of government they're gonNA sort of by institutional role compete for power power and authority as opposed to align with their co partisans even across branches. And that's I think when you look at founding era writing but with impeachment they they seem actually always to have had a sense that it was going to be quite partisan and I think that's why they create the Super Majority requirement in the Senate for because they make the choice to include impeachment and. Yeah I think included for reason and they don't include it so that it will never be used right. I think they fully anticipate that. Under extreme circumstances it will be warranted but that actual removal should you'd be limited to conduct that is able to attract a very significant supermajority members of the Senate. I think there's a lot of things that are there are some serious flaws in American constitutional design. I think the arguments from political scientist one Lynn's about presidentialism and how dangerous that can be. I think we're seeing play out so all of that said. I do think they're right about that. You know it's a significant dramatic matic staff. I mean I had I had a republican congressman. Show a few weeks ago it was talking about how dramatic step was and it's like yeah it is it is it is it is dramatic but what you just said also sort of connects to another another sort of interesting theme to me. Institutionally which is about the relative balance of power between the two branches in the case of Johnson. You've got this very strange situation in which because The the south is not been admitted back into Congress there. These massive supermajority is for the Republican Party in both houses in their overriding veto after veto after veto. It's probably probably the absolute apex of congressional power in the history of the country right. I think that's right. We now live in this Erin which we have had the extreme growth the imperial presidency. Like how do you see this. In the context of sort of balance of power between the brand go back to Johnson for just a second. So yes I think it's right apex of congressional power and Obviously you have the Republican party dominating both houses of Congress congressional power domination and yet they still can't hint remove him a lot but I think there are a couple of important butts right so one is the constitutional design at that. Time is a little bit different. And there's there's kind of this odd gap when it comes to filling a vacancy in the office of Vice President Right. So Johnson becomes president when Lincoln's assassinated but until the twenty fifth amendment there's no mechanism for filling a vacancy in the office vice president until the next election so he does president so so the Congress Senate that is considering voting to remove him is Basically looking at him and looking under the succession laws at the time. The speaker of the House. I'm Ben I think his first name Wade Benjamin Wade who's a pretty radical article Republicans in the summer Stevens Phillips School and the Republican Party the time it's dominant but it is very right so there's a real spectrum there's a radical local wing of the party but they're not all at Stevens by any stretch and so some members of the Senate are sort of looking to that choice and it's such a dramatic choice that they decide they're not going to sort of totally upend the kind of organization of power in government by installing this entirely different figure. We have a really different system right. And I think that's something that gets a little bit lost right so in the original constitution before the Twelfth Amendment you know. The Electoral College cast two ballots. And the person who gets the most votes becomes the president. In the second most becomes the vice president and the Dayton should ever we'll be because it was so dumb choice But he may want to. Debunk that programming. Before you right and so right but of course what it meant was the person who is the number two could be your political rival could be a member of a different political a party and And so when they put impeachment in the Constitution. I think they did this knowing full. Well that the person to whom the power of the presidency would would pass if impeachment was successfully invoked and removal occurred was somebody who was picked. Totally separately was not the president's hand picked by the way the office functions today and then pre twenty Fifth Amendment in a circumstance like the Johnson case it would have been literally as though today if the president were removed from office. Nancy Pelosi became the president. That's not at all the world we live in a world in which the remedy is so much less dramatic because all that happens if the Senate votes to remove is power passes to the presents hand picked second command who has been handpicked precisely for the purpose of serving his or her term if he or she cannot serve up early so Johnson the gentler remedy today than it was under the original constitution. In this case it seems to me that there is a really interesting fight happening the so so. There's obviously a partisan fight. I think there's an ideological there's a political fight. I think there's a you know. I'm biased. Here I think but I think there's a fight over the actual substance and rule of law whether the president can do whatever. The halley wants like rigged the next elections that he wins. But there's also like an interesting Article One branch article two-branch Congress I the White House angle here. Her and as someone who sort of both studies scholar and also worked in. The White House is a lawyer. Like we're as a White House lawyer. You tend to be pretty like a jealous guardian of the president's power. How do you see what's playing out right now in that context? I think you're right that when anybody who has spent some time I'm inside the executive branch and maybe in particular in the White House. It certainly gets into your DNA. A little bit. This kind of reflexive defense of presidential power. And I think that I've been gone from government for a bunch of years now but I do still believe that it's important for all kinds of reasons to have a powerful president but that doesn't mean unchecked president and I think the only reason we haven't seen more sort of unilateral presidentialism in the last three years is because there has been just such chaos and disorder in that administration and the White House in particular but they have gotten gotten their act together to do enough big things. I think that Congress has through sort of inaction and paralysis relinquished a lot of. It's this less formal authorities in recent decades so congress passes laws. That's the core of its article one powers but it has many many other things right conducting oversight of the the executive branches one of them but obviously it appropriates hold hearings at the Senate confirms nominees. I mean it does many many things. I think that an important narrative of the last couple of decades has has been you know you've obviously seen in these kind of inverse trajectories of kind of innocent of presidential power and a decline in congressional power. And I actually think that whatever the next couple of months bring with respect to this impeachment and it does seem like unless something very dramatic shifts the most likely courses impeachment in the House and acquittal in the Senate it has still been an important reassertion of Congressional Authority that House has initiated and the way it has conducted these impeachment hearings so far I think that it has enormous symbolic consequence to impeach a president. Donald trump appreciates that right. So you saw this tweet. A couple of weeks ago go was it. I never thought my name would be associated with that. Ugly word impeachment The impeach me like a dog but he doesn't WanNa be impeached right. So people argue about whether this will help or hurt the president politically. I don't know the answer to that. But even if in some universe it helps him and politically he does not want to be impeached. Absolutely doesn't want to because this is going to be an asterisk next to his name forever right as the fourth president to have these series impeachment Proceedings begun in the third President American history to have been impeached. I also think that there was this unified position of noncompliance with Congressional subpoenas is and oversight requests during the early days of post two thousand eighteen right when the Democrats took control of the House. And you know it starts to normalize this idea that you can simply simply ignore requests from Congress if the White House and other executive branch agencies refused to respond to congressional enquiries and even congressional subpoenas I think just the last few weeks all of these officials acting on their conviction that law requires them to show up in response to a congressional subpoena. You know sort of hardens the lawn. uh-huh of congressional proof of the pudding is in the eating and that the practice the concrete example and the practice of people showing up even when they are political appointees not president which is in the case of Gordon somewhat remarkable that practice has a kind of legal effect where it has kind of effect about what Congress's authority is in a sort of precedent were norm setting. I think that's right. So there's you know the way law develops. I think this is true. Actually broadly but it is certainly true when it comes to disputes between the political branches between the Executive Branch and Congress is that it's very rarely courts that announced what the law is. There are disputes. That occasionally make their way..

president Congress Senate Vice President Right Johnson White House vice president Republican Party President American history Executive Branch MSNBC Congress Senate Ukraine Nixon Chris Matthews executive Wade Benjamin Wade Nancy Pelosi
"kate shaw" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

All In with Chris Hayes

04:33 min | 5 months ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

"The criminal offense sized raised because they've already been either charged convicted investigated for engaging in this bribery type conduct and so it makes sense that impeachment language would look like the criminal context context language but of course that's not the case presidents so the set of impeachments is a small one man. We've got four impeach an increase of presidents and we've only got two actual impatience happen the first one we did a whole podcast about it with Brenda Wine Apple. Who wrote that book which you and I have both read? And there's a bunch of stuff that's interesting about ended on one. Is that like they have to figure out the procedure. They have to figure out like they're doing all of it for the first time. There's very little for them to work off of for precedent. Even though there's been other impeachments there hasn't been a president but but there's one article of impeachment. That is the most interesting to me that gets the least historical attention. I think which is what you've been sort of writing about. Yeah so I really don't feel like going to hijack this podcast is like a little advertisement for my law review article. No yeah that's what you're here for but so right so I'm writing this Article Real Division. Promotion uh-huh flushing. I'm writing this article about the role of speech in previous impeachment efforts so I started just kind of reading about impeachment history over the summer or which is obviously fortuitous. Because I'm pretty steep at least the secondary literature and I'm not a historian so I've read someone up all of the primary sources but I was just curious how the Congress's that have considered and then actually taken steps impeach. Previous presidents have thought about the president's speech and the role of presidential speech in those impeachment effort so they Andrew Johnson impeachment. Effort was on its surface largely about in the articles focused on Johnson's violation of the statute called the tenure of office act which required him. MM to obtain Senate consent before firing cabinet secretary so he in violation of the statute fired. His worst secretary who he had inherited from. Lincoln had been Lincoln's War Secretary Edwin Stanton and so ten of the twelve articles against Andrew. Johnson really focus on that violation but then two of them and in particular. The tenth article are totally different and the tenth article is really about Johnson's public speeches and in particular his attacks in public on Congress is accused of these intemperate harangues that are peculiarly indecent and unbecoming the Chief Magistrate of the United States in article ten intemperate harangues the peace. Tim for intemperate harangues literally. They did Among other things so one of Oh I think kind of deep points that Brenda wine making this book. The teacher's is the conduct described in article. Ten and article eleven and so ten is about his public speech in eleven is really kind kind of more broadly about his kind of thwarting of reconstruction right. That's a little bit more explicit. An article eleven but that those are the things he was really impeached for that. The tenure of office act was an excuse abuse and it was an error in misstep on the part of the Republican Congress to try to sort of execute this narrow and formalistic legalistic impeachment meant rather than sort of forthrightly. Tell the country why they believe Johnson was unfit to remain in office. But there are glimpses of maybe the true motivations nations that you can sort of find an article ten and eleven and ten is really the thing I focus on in that part of and some of the speech I mean just to be clear like he was by all accounts drunk. He was a demagogue he would get up in front of crowds in his staff would try to stop him from getting crowds because he will get worked up and say anything including when he did this disastrous tour around the country for the midterms which is famously called the swing around the circle you've gotten from crowds and they would yell at him about the massacres that had happened in the South Against Union loyalists and African Americans and they would say you know Hang Jefferson Davis. He would yell back then. Why don't you hang thaddeus Stevens like that Stevens? A sitting member of Congress and the President of the United States yelling at a mob. Like why don't you hang that Stevens is like I would say even by the Donald Trump standards probably more extreme than anything. Donald Trump has said more explicit. I think that's right. I mean it does feel like incitement and reform a legal terms right sort of you. You know that kind of encouragement gohmert action and so he does this at couple of stops on this swing around the circle. Interestingly and I've never been able to figure this out those those sentences like those particular statements are Actually Not specifically enumerated in article ten. It's kind of the more general anti-congress rhetoric that he has brought Congress right. This coequal branch took government into disrepute and the sort of unpresidential tenor of his rhetoric is very much. What is being described in article so those beaches are very much encompassed within? I WanNa talk about the parallels between the first presidential impeachment of Andrew Johnson. And what we're seeing now with trump right after we take this break. If you don't know your numbers you don't Know Your Business. Most most companies don't have a clear picture of their business.

Andrew Johnson Congress president Donald Trump United States Republican Congress bribery thaddeus Stevens Secretary Edwin Stanton secretary Senate Brenda Lincoln Tim Jefferson Davis Chief Magistrate South Against Union
"kate shaw" Discussed on Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

10:25 min | 8 months ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

"Like funny metaphor to say in this context but like the thing about marriage is Think about marriages would make some marriage amazing and also sometimes difficult was it like. There's no third branch to like. It's just the two of you you work it all out you don't you. Don't get to go for a ruling and if there's conflict you're like beef you gotta just like work it out. There's not like in a workplace where it's like maybe there's a boss or something like and in some ways it's like they're in a marriage in a weird way like the presidency and the Congress they have to kind of work it out between each other and as it's breaking down there like running to this sort of third entity more and more because they can't work it out partly. I think because of how sort of implacable the obstruction obstruction has been from the White House. But now it is before the courts and there's not actually a huge body of law in this precisely for that reason right so when I said the Congress has sort of relinquished a lot of it's less formal authorities authorities one example of that is that it used to sort of exercise what's referred to as an inherent contempt power so if a witness a refused to show up to testify or produce documents agreements. It would directly. Hold that witnesses were individual in contempt. Impose fines actually in prison in a cell underneath the capital individuals. The House in the nineteen twenty five thirty five and they had like some dude in a hotel room. I think that's what I'm just making that seconds later we'll leave it in. We'll take it out. It is thirty five. I don't think that's too good to Jack to Jack. They don't do that anymore. I don't think anybody really thinks they should revive the practice of sending the sergeant at arms to actually sees witnesses but John Bolton with a handcuffed to a radiator amazing image I there are people who are putting earth suggesting that Congress really. I don't see it happening. But when they decided that they needed to go to court to enforce their subpoenas that that was an admission that they that they lacked the inherent authority to do what they needed to get this referee. But that's part of the reason I think these last few weeks that have shown that Congress can actually do a lot without recourse to the courts. Let's have been important And yet as you say there are these high stakes judicial disputes. That are playing out now. So we have this ruling that this legal argument that the trump administration has made that certain high level White House officials enjoy absolute testimonial immunity that they don't even need to respond. To Congressional. Subpoenas is without any real basis in law or logic that everything in our constitutional tradition and constitutional history and the limited Supreme Court precedent on. This question makes clear if the president is he's not above the law then his advisers and to be. And so. That's the ruling. Out of a district. Gordon Don mcgann case and then there are a couple of these formerly unrelated conceptually sort of related cases involving the president's tax in which the courts have also said pretty categorically these arguments that the rules don't apply at all that would ordinarily require document production of a third party that they don't apply all because the president is involved and that's essentially the argument that the White House has been making. There's so let's talk about. There's three cases one of them doesn't have have to do with Congress it has to do with The Manhattan District Attorney. WHO's seeking the president's taxes as part of the pursuit of an investigation? The president's actual lawyer William Convoy as opposed to his like fake drifter Rudy Giuliani but like contemplate like. Actually I mean to the extent the president pays anyone I don't know but he actually gets paid me actually a rights rights legal briefs and does legal work. He's the one who made this insane argument. That like you know if you shot someone in Fifth Avenue you can investigate him. What's sort of take that aside for second because it doesn't quite play this like direct institutional institutional question about the two branches? There's there's judge Catan. Jebron Jackson's decision in the District Court which basically was over the matter Don mcgann could be lawfully subpoenaed by Congress. She she writes this one hundred and twenty page opinion. That's like absolute like he definitely can be an has to show up and I think this is an interesting conceptual point like she says. This idea of absolute community is nowhere in the constitution and our legal tradition. The idea you can block people now. There are privileges that obtain and basically she clears the path for him to show show up and say I'm not answering that question and invoke executive privilege but one of the things. I think that it's a technical point but important when the White House hasn't even done that. Right like there is a the privilege and the scope of executive privilege is the subject of a lot of debate. And it's unclear who adjudicates that Nian but they haven't gotten to that point because even before you get to that privilege they're just saying like no you can't talk to these people right it's inconsistent with. There's a there's limited case law on it but none of these privileges are absolute and there's no real authority for the proposition. So you don't have to show up at all to negotiate over what are and are not permissible subjects of inquiry and that's basically the the ruling there. Of course that's going to be appealed. Then there's the mazars which is now gone through. Two levels of the federal courts Went District Court saying you have to hand over the documents to the accounting firm rights trump intervenes to stop the firm from handing it over over. They say you have to hand it over. And then a three judge panel on the Circuit Court affirms that disaccord opinion. That's also now be petitioned the Supreme Court which they're going to here in a few weeks reconsider whether to take those cases in a couple of weeks. Yeah there's a good chance they'll take at least the DC case and maybe even the case as well let's talk about the law there because it just seems to to me like it just seems crazy to me in terms of the constitution that if Congress says we need to investigate the presence finances that the president can. I'd be like no you can't like it just seems nuts to me as as just a basic question of like I would personally like to know if like the Saudi kingdom pays him fifty million dollars a year in bribes. I don't think that's the case but like I would like to definitively rule that out same with the Turks like there's all sorts of things that I think I I would like to definitively establish about the president's finances and it just seems nuts to meet you set a precedent. The Congress cannot get those documents. Well so it's tricky because they haven't really explained what they're doing in those terms they haven't said we're investigating the president because we want to know if he's taking bribes because this whole power of oversight or inquiry that's the power of the Congress's exercising when it is doing this sort of thing thing it's not explicitly in the Constitution and There is no oversee the word oversight. It's just not there and yet. The Supreme Court from very early on has said the power of inquiry. Kore- is an important adjunct to Congress's enumerated powers the sort of heart of which is lawmaking and so typically when it engages in some kind of fact-finding and it explains it it is doing so in order to inform its consideration of passing laws or of overseeing agencies links up what it is doing often again to specific to lawmaking so here it said something like we're thinking about passing some ethics laws that apply to the president and so we kind of want to know what these tax return return shows up to inform our consideration of lawmaking judge row so drowned that he circuit to sense from that majority opinion right. She is a trump appointee. who filled cavenaugh seat right like all these judges of Federalist Society Conservative judge who went through with McConnell Stewart? John Yeah and I think now almost surely on Supreme Court shortlist in that Administration attrition and she writes this long opinion that says basically what the what Congress is trying to do is. They're saying they're thinking about lawmaking but really they're trying to investigate. And that's a law enforcement function and Congress is not a law enforcement entity that's law enforcement is executive is an executive branch function and part of that proposition is true of course row and other sort of conservatives of her stripe think that you can't have any kind of independent authority inside the executive branch that would investigate the president so it's a little bit heads. The president wins tails. You lose if it'd be especially fun. If she makes the argument that like Sivan's can have either probably would but so was weird about her descended. She says it's improper thinking about laws like that's not really what they're trying to do here. And there's a constitutional mechanism for investigating presidential misconduct and that is impeachment. And so it's this weird opinion because she writes it a couple of weeks ago when we were already in this phase of the impeachment inquiry but the request stems from some months ago and so the kind of facts on the ground when this congressional committee made its request Tomase ours. We're very different from the facts. Now which is the one reason I think. The Supreme Court might not take this because they would be arguing in the abstract about Congress's versus power absent and impeachment inquiry to request these kinds of so. Maybe they refile a request. That explicitly ties the interest to the impeachment inquiry and that changes the calculus. But those are that's basically the universe of arguments in that I mean again. I'm I'm I'm playing like ignoramus blowhard here but it just seems to me like we're considering a law to make the president disclose his taxes which we don't have in the books and good God we should in has. It's been habit in practice. We should just do it. We should know what the president's income and accounts are we know who he is due and who he gets payments from or she. And we're going to do that and like peers are. That's what we're doing. Is the factfinding for our legislative purpose to do that. It just seems like how could that you know again and all this stuff at a certain level I'm really cynical about higher courts sort of vote counting and legal realism and I think that ultimately will will see I mean. I think it's like they. You think they can count to five on the Supreme Court for everything. And that's why they're rushing to get up there and that's also whether making frankly lake pretty ludicrous arguments and a lot of these cases and that's not coming thing for me that's coming from the. The judge is the first impression who keep getting the cases and being like they haven't been ruling like well. You've got a point here. It's been like this is pretty ridiculous. Yeah and and not just judges but lawyers of all ideological thought that some of the arguments made by the administration by what has council pets have alone in some in his correspondence with Congress in some of these briefs and in the New York case. They're just not particularly defensible legal positions. And that's why I retain a little bit more idealism about the Supreme Court than you do but I it's hard for me to see trump cotton to five in either these cases but that's reading these words well so the point about what the approach is here. I mean Charlie savage a piece in the Times today that basically says they keep losing the courts but they're winning because they're delaying right right. Like the key point they keep getting the stays and it's hard to explain all this mechanisms and again like my mastery of civil procedure is terrible. It's it's it's not good. Well I mean it's fine for a layman but but but the point is that like they keep losing keep getting stays like it's just and that's why our taxes yet ten teach meant that early on..

Congress Supreme Court White House Went District Court District Court Circuit Court Charlie savage Manhattan District Rudy Giuliani Gordon Don mcgann John Bolton trump Nian Jack John Yeah Jebron Jackson
"kate shaw" Discussed on Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

07:25 min | 8 months ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

"It's funny too because I feel like these thought. Experiments on some level there hypotheticals but they're also kind of the conceptual L. Region that we now inhabit all the time. which is you know during the hearing they were talking about answering who was a career foreign service official who had been dispatched to the Ukrainian embassador and everyone everyone was saying correctly? The president can hire and fire ambassadors. They can president can recall ambassador absolutely but then my response was right but if it was because she refused to sleep with him then I mean yes constitutionally could but that would be an abuse of power like you have to have romantic relations with me or calling you we would all be like okay. I guess constitutionally has the power to do that but that's not cool. Yeah and in some ways. It's like everything that fits in this category of like a thing that's unthinkable or thing that like you constitutionally have the power to do but shouldn't or it violate something deep about the trust of the office is the category that we end up having impeachment. Deal right well. That's true about presidents residents right so the impeachment language in the constitution applies to the president vice president and all civil officers of the United States. So we have very small set of presidential impeachments in our history and a pretty small set of impeachments overall but the overall says of course larger. So we've impeached Supreme Court justice and a cabinet secretary and actually a senator. Although it's now very much the position that you have to expel senator if you want to elect a senator in the house not removed in the Senate then expelled him but yeah no. It's one of the president's started. We're talking about how Adam Schiff should be impeached. Everyone's like adult. You can't impeach a member of Congress it was one of the few moments now. I was like well. You know he has kind of a point which is at least the founding generation. We need the same mistake. They thought well like yeah. That's how you get rid of an office anyway. So no he's wrong. By the way there's an amazing little snapshot of the Digital Labor in our household were like I have opinion. That kid has knowledge. That's that's wild. So they actually did. There was a senator impeached And a a cabinet secretary and a bunch of federal judges and so I think there've been something like nineteen impeachments over. Also you know fourteen or fifteen of them have been federal judges. A lot of them have engaged in bribery type crimes crimes but they typically get charge as high crimes misdemeanors but back to your point about why we go so often to the criminal code to the president can't be criminally charged right. At least that's the sort of largely really settled understanding but judges can and so some of these judges get charged criminally and then impeached. And so the way you described their misconduct tracks. The criminal offense sized raised because they've already been either charged convicted investigated for engaging in this bribery type conduct and so it makes sense that impeachment language would look like the criminal context context language but of course that's not the case of presidents so the set of impeachments is a small one man. We've got four impeach an increase of presidents and we've only got to actual impatience happen the first one we did a whole podcast about it with Brennan Wine Apple. Who wrote that book which you and I have both read? And there's a bunch of stuff that's interesting about ended on one. Is that like they have to figure out the procedure. They have to figure out like they're doing all of it for the first time. There's very little for them to work off of for precedent. Even though there's been other impeachments there hasn't been a president but there's one article of impeachment. That is the most interesting to me that gets the least historical attention I think which is what you've been writing about. Yeah so I really don't feel like going to hijack this podcast is like a little advertisement for my law review article. No yeah that's what you're here for. But so right. So I'm writing this article. Real Division self-promotion uh-huh. I'm reading this article about the role of speech in previous impeachment efforts so I started just kind of reading about impeachment history over the summer which was obviously fortuitous. Because I'm pretty steep at least the secondary literature and I'm not a historian so I read someone up all of the primary sources but I was just curious how the Congress's that have considered and then actually taken steps impeach. Previous presidents have thought about the president's speech and the role of presidential speech in those impeachment effort so they Andrew Johnson impeachment. Effort was on its surface largely about in the articles focused on Johnson's violation of the statute called the tenure of office act which required him. MM to obtain Senate consent before firing cabinet secretary so he in violation of the statute fired his worst secretary who he had inherited from Lincoln. You've been Lincoln's War Secretary Edwin Stanton and so ten of the twelve articles against Andrew Johnson. Really focus on that violation but then two of them and in particular. The tenth article are totally different and the tenth. The article is really about Johnson's. Public speeches and in particular has attacks in public on Congress is accused of these intemperate harangues peculiarly indecent and unbecoming the Chief Magistrate of the United States in article. Ten intemperate harangues. He's Tim for intemperate harangues literally. They did Among other things so oh I think kind of deep points that Brenda wine making this book. The teacher's is the conduct described in article. Ten and article. Eleven and so ten is about his public speech in eleven is really kind one of more broadly about his kind of thwarting of reconstruction right. That's a little bit more explicit an article eleven but that those are the things he was really impeached for that the tenure of office act was an excuse abuse and it was an error in misstep on the part of the Republican Congress to try to execute this narrow and formalistic legalistic impeachment meant rather than sort of forthrightly. Tell the country why they believe Johnson was unfit to remain in office. But there are glimpses of maybe the true motivations nations that you can find an article ten and eleven and so ten is really the thing I focus on in that part of and some of the speech I mean just to be clear like he was by all accounts drunk. He was a demagogue he would get up in front of crowds in his staff would try to stop him from getting crowds because he will get worked up and say anything including when he did this disastrous tour around the country for the midterms which is famously called the swing around the circle. You you've gotten from crowds and they would yell at him about the massacres. That had happened in the South Against Union loyalists and African Americans and they would say you know. Hang Jefferson Davis. He would yell back then. Then why don't you hang thaddeus Stevens like that Stevens. A sitting member of Congress and the President of the United States yelling at a mob. Like why don't you hang that Stevens is like I would say even by the Donald Trump standards probably more extreme than anything. Donald Trump has said more explicit. I think that's right. I mean it does feel like incitement and reform a legal terms right sort of you. You know that kind of encouragement gohmert action and so he does this at a couple of stops on this swing around the circle. Interestingly and I've never been able to figure this out those those sentences like those particular statements are Actually Not specifically enumerated in article. Ten kind of the more general anti-congress rhetoric that he has brought Congress. Right this coequal branch. The government into disrepute and the sort of unpresidential tenor of his rhetoric is very much. What is being described in article ten and so those beaches are very much encompassed within it? I WanNa talk about the parallels between the first presidential impeachment of Andrew Johnson. And what we're seeing now with trump right after we take this break the meet the press. Chuck Todd Cast. It's an insider's take on politics. The two thousand election more candid conversations with some of my favorite reporters about things. We usually discuss off camera. Listen for free. Wherever were you? Get Your podcast. Hey Everyone Steve Kornacki here. We have heard explosive testimony from key witnesses in the public impeachment hearings. So what's next as the case for impeachment Ben made could the president count on Republican support in a Senate trial. And how could it affect the twenty twenty election..

Congress Andrew Johnson Donald Trump Senate United States Secretary Edwin Stanton Republican Congress bribery Adam Schiff Supreme Court thaddeus Stevens Jefferson Davis Chuck Todd Cast Steve Kornacki Brenda
This week's Trump impeachment inquiry developments

Kim Komando

01:00 min | 10 months ago

This week's Trump impeachment inquiry developments

"Or president trump says a whistleblower complaint over his contact with the leader of Ukraine was improperly filed because the documents based on secondhand information A. B. C.'s David Wright at the White House is a new development could undermine that argument after reports that a second whistleblower is coming forward to corroborate the initial complaint against president trump the White House is pushing back it doesn't matter how many people decide to call themselves whistle blowers about the same telephone call a call the president already made public the press secretary said it doesn't change the fact that he has done nothing wrong and she says the White House doesn't intend to come cooperate unless a formal vote to begin the inquiry is held constitutional law expert an ABC news contributor Kate Shaw says impeachment does not have to involve a criminal I think that impeachment is really about abuse of authority right political misconduct and so I think the house would be well served to focus on that as opposed to getting caught up in these debates about quid pro quo show on

Donald Trump Ukraine A. B. C. David Wright White House President Trump Press Secretary Kate Shaw ABC
"kate shaw" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030

WBZ NewsRadio 1030

01:58 min | 1 year ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030

"Sixty seven degrees in boston right now he's sunshine at four o'clock good afternoon i'm laurie kirby and here's what's happening the supreme court rules the census bureau for right now cannot add a citizenship question but this is not a done deal the justices kicked the case back to a lower court in the southern district of new york we're getting reaction today for mayor walsh he calls it a win that should be celebrated saying everyone counts just read the constitution we also heard today from kate shaw what the supreme court said today was the record that we're looking at suggests that the administration wasn't honest about the reasons that it wanted to add a citizenship question and we're not going to just accept at face value this justification that doesn't seem to match the conduct of the administration we don't know why they wanted to add to citizenship question and they certainly have the power to make discretionary policy judgments about all kinds of things including what is on the centers but they have to go through a process that considers evidence and they have to provide some sort of explanation that is a._b._c. news corp contributor kate shaw we are standing by still for the to make a decision in the boston marathon bombing case jars are naive appealing his death penalty conviction he believes the case against him was rigged when the judge refused to move his trial out of the city of boston the defense admitted from the outset of his trial covered extensively here on w._b._z. that's our knife in his older brother carried out the marathon attack which killed three and wounded more than two hundred sixty as brother died in a gun battle with authorities in watertown organizers of boston's plan straight pride parade august thirty first can expect pushback w._b._z.'s karyn regal reports organize a forty thousand people strong counter march and rally in response to the two thousand seventeen free speech rally revving up again for the straight pride parade monica cannon grant cambridge's black lives matters has a straight pride parade is a little nuts.

boston laurie kirby new york mayor walsh supreme court cambridge kate shaw watertown karyn regal Sixty seven degrees
"kate shaw" Discussed on KOMO

KOMO

02:37 min | 1 year ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on KOMO

"Komo news one thousand FM ninety seven seven. The legal road ahead may be a bumpy one with President Trump's declaration of a national emergency along the southern border shirt end up in the courts ABC's Aaron Katersky spoke with legal contributor, Kate Shaw or the courts want to weigh in on that debate of second guessing, the president of the United States on what constitutes emergency, historically. They are very reluctant to do that, right? They don't view themselves as experts in mashed matters of national security and defense, they want the political branches right chosen by the people to make those kinds of judgement calls, but they're not gonna stay totally hands off either. If they think there are clear violations of law that are being alleged by people who are going to challenge this declaration. And I think we're gonna see challenges, you know, as soon as the ink is dry on the actual declaration. And then there's a declaration the emergency declaration in particular. Authorities that the president is able to invoke once he actually starts invoke those in order to redirect money. I think we're not challenges almost immediately. And I think courts ordinarily would be really reluctant. But I think that these are fairly extraordinary circumstances. So I think it is quite possible. That courts, even reluctantly are gonna get drawn into the question of assessing how much of an emergency really exists to what extent can a president basically declare an emergency. Anytime he wants, you know, the statute that allows the president to declare an emergency really doesn't have a lot of limitations in it. So he can I think it's basically right that he can declare an emergency. Anytime. He wants the things the declaration itself doesn't actually do anything. Right. It's just a statement. What happens next there once the president, declares an emergency? They're all of these legal authorities the president essentially unlocks and a lot of those statutes that create those powers in the president, those statutes have particular standards written into them. So even though it's basically standard his ability to declare the emergency. Once he tries to actually do things because of this new state of emergency there. I think he does have to ordinarily satisfy are often satisfy particular legal requirements things like an objective showing of necessity or military need, and I don't think he can just sort of say, I think it's necessary. I think there's a military need there. I think the courts are going to probably take a look at the kinds of arguments that he makes in defense of the necessity of these particular moves, and I don't know which way they're going to come down didn't get enough of the snow this week. Komo's Brian Calvert has an offer that may be hard to refuse when the snow fell around here earlier this week. Former resident Diane mcferrin recalled her days of dealing with the snow in Seattle..

president President Trump Komo Kate Shaw Aaron Katersky United States ABC Diane mcferrin Seattle Brian Calvert
"kate shaw" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

All In with Chris Hayes

02:24 min | 1 year ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

"Irv Donald Trump, featuring the greatest lawyer for generation Kate Shaw along with having worked at the White House under President Obama clerked on the supreme court for Justice seasons seat. Stevens also happens to be my wife. You can listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. It's been a week. And it's only Wednesday here to talk through it all with me Betsy Woodruff politics Daily Beast watch hot elite contributing op Ed writer for the New York Times and curb della former spokesperson and senior adviser for the Republicans in the house oversight committee, Kurt let me start with you, you you used to work at Breitbart before you left, and I've been thinking about the ways in which is like Breitbart, FOX. News and others are really pulling calling the shots. Like, we if not an overstatement to say that we are in a government shutdown now because Rush Limbaugh and Coulter Breitbart and Fox News were upset that the president didn't get his wall. We had a deal the Senate passed unanimously a deal to avert a government shutdown and as soon as the bright parts and the and cultures and the rush Limbaugh's went EPA plastic over it Donald Trump blinked he backed down from that deal. And then he precipitated the shutdown because he has such a narrow group of support right now, Chris he can't afford to lose any of those people because feels any part of that coalition that he has left. It's over from. There's nothing that would stand in the way between him and impeachment, and Betsy that's clear that what he's I think he's thinking about I think exactly right. But I also think it's part of a broader phenomenon which is that Republicans are just much more scared of their base than Democrats are and I think partly that's the immediate environment. There's interesting reporting about the last shutdown were Democrats were worried about how the mainstream media would cover it and Republicans weren't because it's like, they're based doesn't. Watch that doesn't believe even anyway. And so what they are scared of is they're scared of their base and the media environment that their base listens to I think that's accurate. Another piece of this. That's important and interesting as context here is that the way that the shutdown played out also points to the ascent of very conservative House Republicans having the president's ear, remember senators, Mark meadows, and Jim Jordan were out front loud and clear saying that the president would essentially be be failing were he to backtrack on demanding money for the wall from congress. And what we're seeing is a shift in terms of who the president is listening to rather than listening to sort of more traditional Republican voices who almost got him across the finish line of keeping the government open at the last moment, Trump change and instead to for to the Mark meadows of the world..

Irv Donald Trump president Coulter Breitbart Rush Limbaugh Betsy Woodruff Stevens White House Chris Kate Shaw Mark meadows Obama Fox News Jim Jordan Senate New York Times Kurt FOX senior adviser
Trump orders FBI investigation of Kavanaugh, as McConnell says nomination is 'moving' forward

Mark Levin

01:25 min | 1 year ago

Trump orders FBI investigation of Kavanaugh, as McConnell says nomination is 'moving' forward

"President Trump has ordered the FBI to conduct a supplemental FBI investigation into sexual assault allegations against supreme court nominee. Brett Cavanaugh ABC's. Mary Bruce reports that comes after Arizona's Jeff flake requested to delay. The vote Senator Jeff flake was on his way to the judiciary committee planning to back Brett Kavanagh's confirmation. Children in your. Children Anna Archie, LA and Maria Gallagher, both victims of sexual assault. Imploring? The Senator to take a stand. ABC's Terry Moran says the FBI investigation will likely start with Christine Blasi Ford's allegations, her testimony contained several vivid and precise details, for instance. She says she made I contact during the alleged attack with Brett Kavanagh's friend. Mark judge who she says was in the room. Dr Ford also offered facts that could be checked easily including that she saw Mark judge shortly after the alleged attack working at a local supermarket news legal analyst Kate Shaw. I do think that reopening. This FBI investigation is an extremely positive development from the perspective of trying to make sure that the supreme court is as removed from politics as possible the court has actually never I totally apolitical body. But it's important that it tried to remain above and apart from politics majority leader, Mitch McConnell, advanced the nomination Cavanaugh is one of the most qualified and most impressive supreme court nominees in the history of our country. Setting up a vote next week after the

FBI Brett Cavanaugh Abc Senator Jeff Flake Christine Blasi Ford Brett Kavanagh Assault Senator ABC Mitch Mcconnell Mary Bruce Terry Moran Donald Trump Anna Archie President Trump Kate Shaw Arizona Mark Maria Gallagher Analyst
Trump orders FBI probe into sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh

Brian Kilmeade

01:25 min | 1 year ago

Trump orders FBI probe into sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh

"Sivertsen. President Trump has ordered the FBI to conduct a supplemental FBI investigation into sexual assault allegations against supreme court nominee. Brett Cavanaugh ABC's. Mary Bruce reports that comes after Arizona's Jeff flake requested to delay. The vote Senator Jeff flake was on his way to the judiciary committee planning to back Brett Kavanagh's confirmation. Children in your. Children Anna Maria, Archie, LA and Maria Gallagher, both victims of sexual assault. Imploring? The Senator to take a stand. ABC's Terry Moran says the FBI investigation will likely start with Christine Blasi Ford's allegations, her testimony contained several vivid and precise details, for instance. She says she made I contact during the alleged attack with Brett Kavanagh's friend. Mark judge who she says was in the room. Dr Ford also offered facts that could be checked easily including that she saw Mark judge shortly after the alleged attack working at a local supermarket ABC news legal analyst Kate Shaw. I do think that reopening. This FBI investigation is an extremely positive development from the perspective of trying to make sure that the supreme court is as removed from politics as possible the court has actually never I totally apolitical body. But it's important that it tried to remain above and apart from politics. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell advanced the nomination Cavanaugh is one of the most qualified and most impressive supreme court nominees in the history of our country. Setting up a vote next week after the

Brett Cavanaugh Abc FBI Senator Jeff Flake Christine Blasi Ford Brett Kavanagh Assault ABC Senator Abc News Mary Bruce Anna Maria Mitch Mcconnell Terry Moran Donald Trump Maria Gallagher Kate Shaw Senate Arizona President Trump
Matt Cooper, Steve Bannon and Rhett Cavanaugh discussed on Sean Hannity

Sean Hannity

00:11 sec | 2 years ago

Matt Cooper, Steve Bannon and Rhett Cavanaugh discussed on Sean Hannity

"The New Yorkers dropped plans to. Interview former Trump strategist Steve Bannon during, its festival next month and the editor. Says reaction to the Bannon interview on. Social media was critical and even. Members of his. Staff

Matt Cooper Steve Bannon Rhett Cavanaugh ABC Judiciary Committee Miami Aaron Demont Florida Kate Shaw Victor Oquendo Shoplifting Covington Donald Trump Senate Georgia Officer Fleming Sean Editor
"kate shaw" Discussed on WSB-AM

WSB-AM

01:55 min | 2 years ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on WSB-AM

"The senate already the lines are drawn as democrats joined protesters outside the supreme court new york senator kirsten gillibrand says roe v wade is on the line freedom jamaica own decision abc's kate shaw says rose is not the only key issue this new court may decide recission of dhaka right the deferred action program percolating in the lower courts that can be before the supreme court core presidential power questions if the muller investigation really does sort of turn more front and center to the president himself and oregon senator jeff merkley is concerned what this means for the muller investigation since cavenaugh has argued that a sitting president should not face criminal or even civil prosecution the president trump's nominee a member of the court who will protect me when issues come up regarding my abuse of presidential power abc's meghan hughes says kavanagh's gonna hit the ground running he's already got meetings on capitol hill today senator john kyle is going to act as what's known as the sherpa kyle will help the candidate navigate the nomination process tour capitol hill and sit in on lawmaker meeting abc legal analyst royal oakes says democrats will play for ties in a democrats are going to sift through literally millions of pages of documents searching for evidence of what kind of justice brett cabinet would make and democrats make no secret of the fact that this is a process that should not be rushed they hope to push the confirmation vote passed the midterm abc's jonathan karl says this is the fight republicans hope will rally their base gives the base of the party something to rally around on what was for many of them the most important issue the control of the courts control of the supreme court democrats including senator cory booker believe it may rally their base to especially if labor gay and women's rights are on the line go backward ten twenty thirty forty fifty years the margin is razor thin the white house has already wooing red state democrats none accepted an invite.

brett cabinet royal oakes analyst meghan hughes oregon muller rose roe york supreme court white house senator cory booker jonathan karl senate senator john kyle kavanagh trump cavenaugh
New Jersey Woman on Oxygen Dies After Electric Company Shuts Off Her Power

John and Ken

02:21 min | 2 years ago

New Jersey Woman on Oxygen Dies After Electric Company Shuts Off Her Power

"He's just hours away abc's kate shaw says it will be difficult for the democrats the minority party to totally derail the nomination but i think they could slow it down i mean there this long tradition of senatorial courtesy so if the democrats explain that there are particular documents that they need to review or you know interviews they need to conduct trump's announcement will be made starting at six our time in kfi will be carrying it live thousands of dwp customers still don't have power and so cal edison says about fourteen hundred customers in l a county are without power along with about four hundred more in orange county officials say the outages were largely the result of overloaded power stations and aging equipment that could not keep up with demand during the heat wave the scent temps soaring into those triple digits a prosecutor in san bernardino county has been put on leave over some controversial comments on social media district attorney mike rama says his office learned of the post by deputy district attorney michael selyem just about a week and a half ago i was offended by the comments not just as the district attorney but as a prosecutor one of the comments he used expletives to describe congresswoman maxine waters sings she should have been shot by now for her loud mouth san bernardino county district attorney's office does not condone hate discrimination or incitement of violence rama says celje will be on leave while his office investigates and selling them could be fired at the end of the investigation chris ancarlo kfi news eight boys have been brought to safety from the cave they have been stuck in thailand abc's dr jennifer ashton says being trapped for more than two weeks will have mental consequences for the boys there's going to be short term acute effects longterm effects that will be continuing long after the cameras go away and that's just as important as what's going on physically for more boys and their soccer coach still waiting in the cave to be rescued two divers have been escorting each boy out of that cave through two and a half mile escape route most of the boys don't know how to swim a woman in new jersey has died because the power company cut off her electricity even though she adjusts made a payment two days beforehand the woman had congestive heart failure in needed an electric power to oxygen tank to breathe the woman's daughter says the told the company of moms medical issues the power company says they were not aware of them police newark are investigating senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has been followed by protesters outside a restaurant in louisville.

New Jersey Senate Soccer Chris Ancarlo Deputy District Attorney Orange County Cal Edison DWP ABC Louisville Mitch Mcconnell Kate Shaw Dr Jennifer Ashton Thailand Celje Maxine Waters Michael Selyem
Trump prepares to announce Supreme Court pick

Mandy Connell

02:42 min | 2 years ago

Trump prepares to announce Supreme Court pick

"Of sunshine this afternoon and it will be hot will be up around ninety eight degrees we get their that will tie daily record high for denver set in nineteen eighty nine tonight down to about sixty four degrees with clear skies and light win it's a hot one again tomorrow right back to around ninety six we stay in the nineties for the rest of the week from cbs four i'm meteorologist chris spears on koa newsradio eight fifty am and ninety four one fm is how we've got ninety two degrees at aurora the heat record for denver on this day is ninety eight and we could get there again today in the meantime cbs sports crispier says this summer has a chance to be the hottest on record in denver today will be day number twenty eight with temperatures at ninety or higher in denver at this point in two thousand twelve we were at twenty five days so we're currently outpacing that record hot year back in two thousand twelve denver hit ninety degrees or higher seventy three times between the months of may and september from cbs four i'm meteorologist chris beers on koa newsradio local company is on the front line of the cave rescue in thailand inter map technologies have douglas county created a three d map and model of the flooded cave where rescuers are racing to bring out the soccer players and their coach supporting them with this intelligence that they can't otherwise you know make really efficient decisions without so things like the depths things like the flow factors where water is likely to go as these water levels rise the companies patrick blots so far eight of the boys have been rescued crews are preparing to go back into the cave to bring out the remaining four boys and their coach president trump is said to announce his nominee to the supreme court this evening abc supreme court reporter kate shaw says judge amy coney barrett is the conservative favourite at this point she's young she can easily serve on the court for four decades she's viewed as very conservative probably the most conservative of the four finalists and she does seem to be the safest vote to overturn roe versus wade if in fact that's what the president wants in his nominee as he promised repeatedly during the campaign and you can hear the supreme court announcement on koa newsradio at seven o'clock at the lake christine fire nearby salt the citations issued a two people accused of accidentally started the fire by shooting tracer amunition have now been upgraded to felony arson warrants fires burn close to six thousand acres and it is thirty one percent contained the dow industrials closing up today three hundred twenty points s and p five hundred gaining twenty four the nasdaq up sixty eight this news is brought to you by armor roofing our next news updates at two thirty i'm susan witkin koa newsradio eight fifty am and ninety four one fm.

Ninety Eight Degrees Ninety Two Degrees Six Thousand Acres Sixty Four Degrees Thirty One Percent Twenty Five Days Ninety Degrees Four Decades
Is Roe v. Wade Is Hanging by a Thread?

"News

03:05 min | 2 years ago

Is Roe v. Wade Is Hanging by a Thread?

"To transform the rule of law and our country during the campaign trump promised to only pick a prolife judges i am putting prolife justices on the court itchy abortion activists are calling it a pivotal moment while abortion rights defenders are saying they are in dire immediate danger the senate should reject on a bipartisan basis any justice who would overturn roe v wade or undermine key healthcare protections democrats insist there should be no confirmation vote at all until after the midterm elections they point to the fact that republicans blocked brock obama's last pick for ten months before the two thousand sixteen presidential election but republican leader mitch mcconnell says there must be no delay republicans are dealing with a razor thin one vote majority in the senate that means they can afford to lose only one that's why you can expect republicans to put intense pressure on three democrats three democrats who voted for neal gorsuch his choice last time around and who are now this year up for reelection it states that trump won big george stephanopoulos and cecilia vega spoke with abc's chief legal analyst dan abrahams san abc supreme court contributor kate shaw looking to answer the question so many are asking after justice kennedy's resignation why now robie wade that's where all the early energy is going to be that's right but let's be clear there's no question that roe v wade could be in jeopardy but that doesn't mean it's going to get overturned everyone's talking about overturned overturned as a practical matter justices liked to show deference to previous opinions meeting it's unusual to say we're simply going to overturn a decision because we now disagree with if it happens on occasion but it's very rare more likely what you see is an opinion effectively get gutted meaning states that want to restrict abortion will increasingly make laws that are more restrictive and more restrictive and then have those laws challenged in the hope that those laws are able to move forward and ineffective would mean that it becomes nearly impossible for women in a number of states to get and you can be sure that whoever president trump nominates is going to do his or her best not to show their hand on roe wade during the confirmation you don't want to admit you know what your position is on any case in the confirmation process the rule is when you're asked about a particular case you say this could come in front of me and as a result i'm night i'd have to see what the facts of the case were but you've got to believe that the president is going to know a lot about any candidate that he considers justice kennedy didn't make from the bench where you surprise you were there we all knew it was a possibility but i don't think anyone in that building really believed he was going to do impart because you know he seemed to send a message with his travel ban separate writing that he had some concerns about some of president trump's conduct and rhetoric he wrote separately to sort of say you need to acting ways that respect constitutional values like equality but in the end you know i think he did want to be replaced by republican president and this was the surest way to see that.

Ten Months
Despite Trump's promise to end family separations, officials have yet to issue a plan to reunite children with parents

Nick Digilio

01:11 min | 2 years ago

Despite Trump's promise to end family separations, officials have yet to issue a plan to reunite children with parents

"Immigrant children with their parents lorella freely of the american civil liberties union is willing to take their word for it the us government pan mobilized its resources if there is a sense of urgency and a commitment to carrying this through a protest involving thousands in brownsville texas was meant to keep the pressure on the government to reunite immigrant families jim ryan abc news on the us mexico border with the announcement of supreme court justice anthony kennedy's retirement president trump's expected to draw a court nominee from a list circulated during his campaign abc news supreme court contributor kate shaw looks at issues the court could face in the very near future not impossible and maybe not even unlikely that some kinds of disputes around the constitutionality of the special counsel who is looking into the activities of the trump campaign and to some degree the president's time in office i dispute about the authority of that special counsel requirements at the president or senior staff members turnover documents those kinds of disputes could very well end up in the federal courts in the very near term and potentially in the supreme court list of twenty five names now reportedly down to just five and all toys r us.

United States Texas Anthony Kennedy Donald Trump Kate Shaw Special Counsel President Trump Brownsville Mexico Senior Staff
Supreme Court rules for Texas redistricting plans

News, Traffic and Weather

02:40 min | 2 years ago

Supreme Court rules for Texas redistricting plans

"And businesses fell as investors sold some of the best performing shares salmon shed more than three percent net flicks tumbled six and a half percent michelle franzen abc news here are your political insights from abc news president trump flooded twitter monday pushing his quote tough stance on immigration while in the oval office the president criticized calls to hire thousands of immigration judges to handle a backlog of migrant cases where do you find five thousand people to be judges this comes as thousands of children who were separated from their parents at the us mexico border have yet to be reunited with their families democratic senator bill nelson of florida says he visited one of the facilities housing those undocumented kids after days of trying to get in nelson says he wasn't able to speak to the kids nor has been able to reach the staffer in charge of reuniting migrant families they are petrified that the rest of the president is going to come down on their head if they do anything that they think displeases the president nelson says if that's not it there either hiding something or have no real plan to reunite migrant families those are your political insights stephanie ramos abc news washington the us supreme court overturns a lower court ruling that found texas congressional district map was racially discriminatory abc news supreme court contributor kate shaw has more from washington lower courts agreed with this and struck down this legislative map and the supreme court today five four reversed those lower courts in opinion by justice alito essentially allowed those maps disdain effect the map combines two legislative districts into one heavily hispanic district pay t and t is accused of helping the national security agency collect data for spying purposes the set for the dallas based telecommunications giant allows the nsa to have eight peering hubs to look at internet traffic through a project called fairview of former at and t technician says the nsa can collect the data from at and t and other companies networks the hubs are reportedly in atlanta chicago dallas los angeles new york seattle san francisco and washington dc and at and t spokesperson says the company is required by law to give information to the government by complying with court orders and subpoenas that's tom roberts reporting komo aaa traffic every ten minutes on the four sitting a report of a collision on southbound highway one six seven at two seventy seven looks like it's mostly after the right shoulder though and it looks like we're clearing in the u district on the southbound make that the northbound i five off ramp to northeast fifty a disabled vehicle partially blocking that ramp is being removed from the scene and your next report is up.

Tom Roberts San Francisco Seattle New York Los Angeles Chicago Atlanta T Alito Texas ABC Michelle Franzen Technician Dallas Washington Kate Shaw Florida Senator Bill Nelson United States
"kate shaw" Discussed on Newsradio 700 WLW

Newsradio 700 WLW

02:13 min | 2 years ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on Newsradio 700 WLW

"Hey we're back my gallon in a monday night and united states supreme court today a really good chance that the head end the practice of gerrymandering in creating and changing legislative districts both congressional and state representative and the way it works is when the party in power in the state legislature draws the districts that can look a little crazy district lines i remember one case actually ran down an interstate and then into a community that was favorable to the party in power and wait a situation here a few years back in the first congressional district where warren county was awarded into the first congressional district made it a very republican district anyway two cases today before the united states supreme court from wisconsin and maryland and the united states supreme court decided that they weren't gonna decide they potted and chief justice roberts said that this court is not responsible for vindicating generalized partisan preferences and that was what the chief justice said here to talk about it today is kate shaw from abc news kate thanks for calling in to be here was that a pretty accurate summary of what happened today and what the supreme court found the needs to cases kate yeah i think i was very accurate summary you know what i'd say is the word that the court is very dry legal term that the court uses to avoid deciding the cases it's standing so you described the kind of dynamics on the ground really well so you have legislatures so where the party in power has the control of the district the math drawing process and whether it's democrats or republicans who hold the kind of mapdrawing pen they basically use it to kind of entrench themselves in power everyone knows this happens and even the chief justice in the rest of the court seems to agree that it might be a problem but the the question is what courts can do about it you know courts don't sort of stand in judgement on every problem in our democracy there has to be a concrete dispute be a party whose injured and they have to be asking the corporate specific redress and.

warren county united states wisconsin maryland justice roberts kate shaw state representative supreme court abc
Warren County, United States and Wisconsin discussed on The Rocky Boiman Show

The Rocky Boiman Show

02:13 min | 2 years ago

Warren County, United States and Wisconsin discussed on The Rocky Boiman Show

"Hey we're back my gallon in a monday night and united states supreme court today a really good chance that the head end the practice of gerrymandering in creating and changing legislative districts both congressional and state representative and the way it works is when the party in power in the state legislature draws the districts that can look a little crazy district lines i remember one case actually ran down an interstate and then into a community that was favorable to the party in power and wait a situation here a few years back in the first congressional district where warren county was awarded into the first congressional district made it a very republican district anyway two cases today before the united states supreme court from wisconsin and maryland and the united states supreme court decided that they weren't gonna decide they potted and chief justice roberts said that this court is not responsible for vindicating generalized partisan preferences and that was what the chief justice said here to talk about it today is kate shaw from abc news kate thanks for calling in to be here was that a pretty accurate summary of what happened today and what the supreme court found the needs to cases kate yeah i think i was very accurate summary you know what i'd say is the word that the court is very dry legal term that the court uses to avoid deciding the cases it's standing so you described the kind of dynamics on the ground really well so you have legislatures so where the party in power has the control of the district the math drawing process and whether it's democrats or republicans who hold the kind of mapdrawing pen they basically use it to kind of entrench themselves in power everyone knows this happens and even the chief justice in the rest of the court seems to agree that it might be a problem but the the question is what courts can do about it you know courts don't sort of stand in judgement on every problem in our democracy there has to be a concrete dispute be a party whose injured and they have to be asking the corporate specific redress and.

Warren County United States Wisconsin Maryland Justice Roberts Kate Shaw State Representative Supreme Court ABC
"kate shaw" Discussed on KOMO

KOMO

02:17 min | 2 years ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on KOMO

"Kate shaw summer driving season is near and gas prices are declining in recent weeks oil prices have leveled out and even declined to bid on word that opec may increase supply that in turn has allowed gas prices to drop a few cents now nationwide the average price of regular unleaded sits to ninetyone a gallon down three cents in the past week but still fifty five cents higher than a year ago according to new numbers out from the energy department abc's alec stone on wall street the dow closed up six points the nasdaq gained fourteen you're listening to abc news komo news one thousand fm ninety seven seven number one for news good afternoon it is five oh two on a mostly sunny monday afternoon in seattle where we currently have sixty seven degrees i'm elisa jaffe with tom glasco and here are the top stories from the komo twenty four seven news center as early as tomorrow the seattle city council is expected to overturn the head tax that was recently passed into law in a surprising turnaround council president bruce herald says he's heard from a lot of voters recently across the board advocates liberals conservatives moderates they've all questioned a few things question number one whether this is the right strategy to impose a jobs tax if you will for the future varsity number one and number two whether we have convinced the public that we are even spinning spinner money wisely and strategically to address the issue of homelessness mayor jenny durkan says she'll sign a bill to repeal the tax council members shabbat awan calls this announcement of the trail and says she was never notified about the move president trump and kim jong hoon about to meet face to face komo's charlie harger spoke with an expert about the stakes of this meeting this is the highest profile summit between an american president and another world leader in years and harvard university's dr john park is watching with great interest he's the director of the school's career working group from the united states side they wanna to get north korean commitment on denuclearization the north korean perspective they wanna make sure that there is a very strong emphasis on the united states committing to the security of north korea in what is technically viewed as a negative security assurance and that is a north korea us commitment not to attack north korea the.

kim jong Kate shaw north korea united states director dr john park harvard university president charlie harger komo trump jenny durkan bruce herald seattle city council tom glasco elisa jaffe seattle abc
"kate shaw" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030

WBZ NewsRadio 1030

02:19 min | 2 years ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030

"Us supreme court says it's okay for states to clean house when it comes to purging the names of inactive voters from voter rolls the justices ruling in a narrow five four decision that ohio's practice is legal abc supreme court contributor kate shaw walks us through this ruling five four decision the conservative justices sided with ohio finding that its practices were lawful and the four liberal justices descending essentially arguing that ohio is violating federal law and in particular justice sotomayor arguing that this practice will have serious adverse effects on low income and minority voters who the federal government has tried to protect in making it hard for states to drop people from wbz news time five twenty one a federal appeals court could be about to put nebraska county very close to bankruptcy the court is upholding twenty eight million dollar judgment awarded to six people wrongfully convicted of murder in one of the nation's largest ever false confession cases the socalled beatrice six were convicted in the nineteen eightyfive rape and killing of a sixty eight year old woman they spent several years in prison before dna evidence cleared them all a decade ago he was the talk of the tonys end twitter last night and today actor robert deniro appearing in canada is not backing down after a verbal assault on president trump on broadway's big nights exciting project after a short greeting and thank you to his business partners really really terrific people robert deniro's comments quickly turned political it's a disgrace apologized for what he calls the idiotic behavior of his president also apologizing to prime minister justin trudeau who has been openly criticized by donald trump on social media other people the g seven it's disgusting justin love for cbs news toronto singapore some watershed moment as the world watches the us had north korea some of the white house says talks with north korea are moving more quickly than expected this is truly emission of people transpire in this historic meeting kim jong un is leaving very far forward waking news traffic and weather together wbz newsradio ten thirty wbz news time five twenty three we check traffic and weather together.

prime minister toronto cbs nebraska county wbz kate shaw kim jong un white house north korea us donald trump justin trudeau ohio president assault canada robert deniro twitter tonys
Orlando, Fisher Investments and United Nations discussed on Howie Carr

Howie Carr

02:02 min | 2 years ago

Orlando, Fisher Investments and United Nations discussed on Howie Carr

"Thanks that the means verifiable the white house says it wants to see a complete verifiable irreversible denuclearization by north korea karen travers abc news traveling with the president in singapore through children are hospitalized after an suv fleeing police crashed into a playground in minneapolis suspect fled on foot after crashing in the park and was apprehended by two state troopers both of those state troopers received minor injuries during the confrontation captain jason bartell says the chase started with a routine traffic stop on the interstate police in orlando say a man has been holding four children hostage including two of his own for nearly fifteen hours they say the suspect shot an officer who was responding to a domestic violence call the supreme court ruled ohio can purge inactive voters from their registration databases in five four decision the conservative justices siding with ohio finding that its practices were lawful and the four liberal justices descending essentially arguing that ohio it's violating federal law that's abc supreme court contributor kate shaw spain is offering to take ship of more than six hundred migrants rescued at sea after italy and malta refused i have always been extremely concerned with the fact that the space for refugee protection in europe bite me shrinking that's the united nations secretary general antonio gutierrez at the close on wall street the the dow gained six points you're listening to abc news all money managers may seem pretty much the same but while some money managers may recommend high commission investment products fisher investments avoids them some money managers may have hidden and layered fees fisher investments never does and while some money managers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better in other words we're structured to be on your side maybe that's why most of our clients come to us from other money managers talk with us and find out why so many experienced investors are switching to and staying with fisher investments fisher investments clearly better money management investments in securities involve the risk of loss visit us at fisherinvestments dot com to find out what we can do for you.

Orlando Fisher Investments United Nations Europe Malta Italy Spain Kate Shaw Officer White House North Korea Antonio Gutierrez Ohio Supreme Court Jason Bartell Minneapolis
Sonya Sotomayor, Nebraska and Kate Shaw discussed on All News, Traffic and Weather

All News, Traffic and Weather

02:28 min | 2 years ago

Sonya Sotomayor, Nebraska and Kate Shaw discussed on All News, Traffic and Weather

"In the wbz newsroom the boston globe no longer suing former employees hillary sorry to accuse the newspapers top editor of sexual harassment they asterix summit between president trump and north korean leader kim jong own in singapore begins in just a few hours and rhode island is now taxing big trucks the state says most of the damage to its crumbling infrastructure caused by the big rigs and needs the toll money to repair the roads and we are off to a pretty decent start on wall street less than an hour to go in the trading day and all three major indexes are headed higher new hampshire fifth grader is fighting back against bullies without raising her fists delanie marcotte of plastow went before the school board and told members what she's facing has been threatened get shot ak47 and buried in my backyard and many other things i ask you what are you going to do to protect me and my classmates against bullying delaney says her parents contacted the board bought the bullying continues to this day the district superintendent says her concerns now have the district's undivided attention a wedding reception turns into a barroom brawl and salem new hampshire a fight breaks out someone had been choked police arrested colby dion of north andover after he was confronted by several guests at the wedding dion was picked up in the woods after a short search is charged with domestic violence and resisting arrest it's okay for states to clean house when it comes to purging the names of inactive voters from st voter rolls us supreme court justices synod five four ruling today that the state of ohio practice is legal abc supreme court con contributor kate shaw walks us through the ruling five four decision the conservative justices siding with a high finding that its practices were or lawful and the four liberal justices descending essentially argument ohio is violating federal law and in particular justice sotomayor arguing that this practice will have serious adverse effects on low income and minority voters who the federal government has tried to protect in making it hard for states to drop people from voter rolls dissenting justice sonya sotomayor says the practice will have serious adverse effects on how low income and minority voters a federal appeals courts could be about to put a nebraska county close to.

Sonya Sotomayor Nebraska Kate Shaw Andover Salem Kim Jong President Trump Hillary Boston WBZ Editor Federal Government Ohio Colby Dion Superintendent Delaney Plastow
"kate shaw" Discussed on Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

05:29 min | 2 years ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

Kate Donald Trump Cardozo school of law president Barack Obama supreme court New York MSNBC United States Chris White House Illinois wrestling Robert Muller executive Larry America
Chris Hayes talks to lawyer, Kate Shaw about Trump and the rule of law

Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes

05:29 min | 2 years ago

Chris Hayes talks to lawyer, Kate Shaw about Trump and the rule of law

Kate Donald Trump Cardozo School Of Law President Trump Barack Obama Supreme Court New York Msnbc United States Chris White House Illinois Wrestling Robert Muller Executive Larry America
NFL wants Congress to enact sports betting framework

Rush Limbaugh

02:00 min | 2 years ago

NFL wants Congress to enact sports betting framework

"Today lockenfora spoke with wfan's e effectively a done deal firing something just completely unforeseen bizarre happening which really in this case is is scared to nil but anything can happen because this guy can literally pay with cash lockenfora says if tepper becomes the owner he does not intimate a lot of changes on the football operations side of things you've done a lot of work or mardi hardy ron rivera those guy he's repeated we caucus steelers people to rooney's the highest ranking people in the steelers organization about those die he's received sperling sterling feedback on all them he's not coming in there to crack heads right away for anything like that one of the things he liked about this franchise is that it's been up to win right now with a lot of those particulars already in play lockenfora also says he does not see the team moving anywhere else if temper becomes the owner the supreme court has struck down a federal law that bars gambling on football basketball baseball and other sports in most states giving states the goahead to legalise betting on sports more from kate shaw uhhuh couldn't use here which is basically intel states they can't pass her kinds of laws but if congress wants to regulate in a uniform way for the whole country it can still do that so i guess there is a question about whether congress will move to say try to prohibit sports betting nationwide doesn't seem very likely but the opinion leaves open that possibility gambling market researcher says the market for legal sports betting could be more than fifty seven billion dollars nationwide the nfl says it plans to ask congress to enact a core regulatory framework for legalize sports betting following the court's ruling and margot kidder who starred as lois lane opposite christopher reeve in the superman film franchise in the late seventies and early eighties has died she died yesterday at her home in montana at the age of sixty nine your wbz money watch the dow is up seventy three points at twenty four thousand nine hundred four the nasdaq is up twelve while the s and p five hundred is ahead by two this news brought to you by huntersville ford and online at huntersville ford.

Huntersville Ford Margot Kidder NFL Researcher Intel Basketball Sperling Steelers Ron Rivera Mardi Hardy Football Lockenfora Montana Christopher Reeve Congress Kate Shaw Uhhuh Rooney Tepper
"kate shaw" Discussed on KTRH

KTRH

01:54 min | 3 years ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on KTRH

"Case against president trump's expired travel ban that was the original one directing the fourth circuit to vacate his opinion and the case to it means that the high court is not going to rule on the merits of that case it's expired anyway and that the fourth circuit opinion which include some really strong language get since the president's motivation n attributing it to antimuslim animus is why from the books it's not there it's not part of the whole long lexicon now here's abc news supreme court contributor kate shaw it would have been very helpful for the challengers to this third executive order if that language about sort of the improper the nation's that lay behind the second order was still something that they can pointed that they can't site that opinion anymore can't cite the opinion can side the law the high court concluded the bans expiration in september is what effectively ended any potential for a lawsuit our news time now 735 2017 it continues to be the year of the roaring bowls on wall street the dow is seen more than forty new record highs this year the nasdaq more than 50 but does that mean a correction is coming michael smith with sta wealth management says you should be prepared have you done to crash scenario have you done what a garden variety fiber set correction we used to get through five percent corrections i what do you think the next five percent is going to look like if you know what is going to look like when it happened you don't freak out but he believes the bull market will continue if congress passes meaningful tax cuts that is going to be a big boost to many companies pass so yes i think you'll get a big boost the market conversely any conflict with north korea could drag the markets down core you'll said these radio seven forty ktrh president trump threatening to remove the massive tax breaks for the nfl over the continuing national anthem protests controversy present tweeted wisey nfl getting massive tax breaks while at the same time disrespecting our anthem flag country change the.

trump travel ban president kate shaw michael smith north korea nfl executive nasdaq congress five percent
"kate shaw" Discussed on WINS 1010

WINS 1010

01:52 min | 3 years ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on WINS 1010

"The ones breaking traffic alerts whenever they happen i'm greg rice on tend to wins news time one out to face supreme court as agreed to hear the case involving president trump's ban on travel for people in six moslem a mostly muslim countries and the high court as lifted part of the lower courts stay corresponded kate shaw has more what the court did today we say those bears personally del into effect for individuals who had no connection to the united states for people have a bonafide connection to the united states have family members theor they've been admitted to a university if you if you have a job or a job offer with an american company that's a connection to the united states and you can't be banned by this order president trump calls today's action a clear victory for national security the court won't hear the case until the fall on his final day of the current session the court left in place a lower court ruling that upheld san diego's strict limits on issuing permits for carrying concealed weapons it also ruled for samesex couples in arkansas who complained that birth certificate the law they're discriminated against them and the and the court agreed to take up the case of a baker who refused to make a wedding cake for samesex couples saying it went against his religion justice anthony kennedy did not clear the air of all the speculation that he may retire kennedy turns eighty one next month of course he still could announce his retirement at any time but it seemed like the the day of the current session ending might be the appropriate time wins news time one o4 of violent home invasion robbery put a woman in the hospital last night police say the thirty one year old victim was stabbed multiple times in a report on avenue be in the east village she told police.

greg rice trump united states san diego arkansas anthony kennedy robbery president kate shaw thirty one year
"kate shaw" Discussed on WTVN

WTVN

01:47 min | 3 years ago

"kate shaw" Discussed on WTVN

"Greenhouse gas emissions but thursday at the white house president trump explain why he's taking the us out of the deal this agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the united states the leaders of italy france and germany say there will be no renegotiation of the deal criticism of president trump in the us was swift from seattle mayor ed murray i've joined with mayors from sixty others cities today to announce that we will honour our commitments to the paris accords now abc serena marshall in washington says there could be another policy change coming from the white house president obama's historic rapprochment with cuba could come to an end multiple sources telling abc news the trump administration is likely to roll back the opening possibly limit getting how americans are allowed to travel to cuba adding more regulations on us businesses wanting to work in cuba and even reinstating those caps on bringing back cigars and rahm the white house is only a review was underway while the justice department has mistakes were made by a lower court and blocking the president's ban on travel from six predominantly muslim country it's the doj now asking the supreme court to review that decision abc supreme court analysts kate shaw breaks down the government's request for the administration is saying is clinton district court opinion on hold until the ninth circuit rules and then of course the ninth circuit role against them so they would then after sitting in a new request this screen court in the philippines thirty six people are dead authorities said they all died of smoke inhalation after a gunman set fire to a resorts world casino in manila during a robbery police chief oscar all by all day says the gunman committed suicide ignited the himself set himself on fire than the bug which he set himself thirty say.

manila police chief robbery clinton kate shaw abc paris ed murray seattle germany italy white house oscar Greenhouse gas emissions smoke inhalation philippines justice department cuba rapprochment obama washington serena marshall france united states the deal president