(WASHINGTON) — Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, a Washington-based watchdog group, on Wednesday filed a lawsuit seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot in Colorado under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment based on his alleged involvement in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Trump has denied all wrongdoing and called the push to disqualify him under the 14th Amendment “election interference.”
Story developing…
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(WASHINGTON) — Former Vice President Mike Pence on Wednesday will call on Republicans to choose classic conservative principles over “the siren song of populism” he sees pervading the party, a movement largely inspired by his former running mate.
But he’ll do so without directly naming Donald Trump in what’s being called a “major” speech at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at St. Anselm College.
Campaign advisers told reporters on a preview call Tuesday that the speech was not directed at one candidate in particular, such as Trump or biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, whom Pence has recently hammered over a slate of policy differences, but is intended to address a broader movement Pence and his campaign see rising not only in the race for president but in Congress and other flagship conservative institutions.
“The former vice president will say that there’s a fundamental divide between … limited government conservatism and populism, and that divide is unbridgeable, that populism and liberalism are on the same road to ruin,” a campaign adviser said. “And for those who may mistakenly think this is targeted at Vivek, that would be much too small and interpretation of this speech.”
Pence on Tuesday, after a town hall in Barrington, repeated his warning against what he calls “the siren song of populism unmoored to conservative principles.”
“There’s positions that I take as a traditional conservative that are increasingly at odds with the frontrunner in this race and with others in this field. I really do believe that we are now, after Labor Day, engaged in an important debate over the future the party that will bear upon the future of America,” he said. “It’s really a debate about whether or not the Republican Party is going to continue to adhere to the common sense, conservative agenda that has defined our movement over the last 50 years, or whether we’re going to we’re going to heed the siren song of populism unmoored to conservative principles. And it isn’t any one candidate that’s doing that.”
The former vice president said he sees Trump and “some of his imitators” as “beginning to walk away” from traditional conservative positions, ticking through their differences on the war in Ukraine, entitlement reforms, the national debt, and anti-abortion policy, with Pence painting himself as the most Reaganesque in the race.
“I see not only my former running mate but other candidates in the field that are beginning to walk away from America’s commitment as leader of the free world, unwilling to talk about reforming entitlements and spending in ways that will save our country from a debt crisis facing children and grandchildren, and also trying to marginalize the cause of the sanctity of life, that’s been a central cause of our movement for generations,” he said. “So it’s about drawing that contrast and really laying out what I think will be really a very clear, clear choice in this campaign going forward.”
According to FiveThirtyEight’s presidential polling average, Trump continues to poll above 50%, while Pence remains in the low single digits, at 4.5%. Ramaswamy has jumped to 8.3%, appearing to experience a post-debate surge.
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(WASHINGTON) — Secretary of State Antony Blinken made an unannounced visit to Ukraine on Wednesday, his fourth trip to the country since Russia’s invasion, the State Department confirmed.
“Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken arrived in Ukraine today to meet with senior Ukrainian officials and demonstrate the United States’ unwavering commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and democracy, especially in the face of Russia’s aggression,” State Department spokesperson Mathew Miller said in a statement.
“The Secretary will address Ukraine’s energy, security, and humanitarian needs, and make announcements about how the United States can continue supporting Ukraine in these areas,” he continued.
While in the country, Blinken is expected to announce “more than a billion dollars in new U.S. funding for Ukraine,” according to a senior State Department official. The official said that the package was tailored to supporting Ukraine in its efforts to break through “really vicious lines of defenses” created by Russian forces, while adding that air defense “continues to be a high priority.”
Due to ongoing security concerns created by the active conflict, Blinken’s travel plans were kept private until after he arrived in Ukraine. The secretary’s delegation departed the Washington area late Monday night, touching down in Poland on Tuesday before journeying through the night by train and reaching Kyiv Wednesday morning local time.
Blinken’s schedule is stacked with meetings, including sit downs with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal, and Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba. Blinken and Kuleba are also scheduled to hold a news conference.
The secretary plans to stay in Ukraine for a second day, during which may visit cultural landmarks, but plans are fluid.
State Department officials say Blinken’s visit is meant to showcase Ukraine’s resiliency and perseverance, demonstrating how daily life vibrantly continues amid the bleakness of war.
The secretary’s visit comes as the Biden administration is waiting to see whether Congress will greenlight its request for an additional $24 billion in supplement aid for Ukraine.
Although House Speaker Kevin McCarthy previously promised his Republican-controlled chamber wouldn’t hand over a “blank check” to Ukraine, the last spending bill that contained significant aid to Ukraine passed with broad bipartisan support. But now, for the first time since the war started, senior administration officials are privately expressing concern that support from Capitol Hill may be wavering.
Blinken’s agenda shines a spotlight on Ukraine’s recovery efforts and the administration’s overarching goal in Ukraine — moving the country towards the West and eventual membership in the European Union — rather than on the difficult realities of a conflict that many now describe as a war of attrition.
One official said the visit was a chance to “make the case” for additional funding to the American visit, as well as to ensure assistance was “maximally effective for the moment.”
The secretary’s trip also coincides with Ukraine’s highly-anticipated counteroffensive, which has resulted in modest gains compared to the country’s offensive last fall. Earlier this week, Zelenskyy visited frontline areas to tout his military’s successes, but American officials have been reticent to ascribe any kind of qualitative assessment to the counteroffensive — encouraging observers to instead look at the big picture regarding the conflict instead of any one push.
“I think it’s really important for us to step back and look strategically at the war. So although this is the current counteroffensive, what I would say in the big picture is that Ukraine has done in my view extraordinarily well, fighting off a much bigger, better equipped adversary since the beginning of the invasion,” one senior State Department official said recently.
An official traveling with Blinken said this visit to Ukraine would provide the U.S. the opportunity to “get a real assessment from the Ukrainians themselves” regarding the counteroffensive.
“It’s always important to come at a time when we are engaged together in a new push,” they said. “Now’s a good time to come and assess.”
The official also said the visit would allow the U.S. and Ukraine to align ahead of the upcoming United Nations General Assembly later this month.
Blinken previously visited Ukraine in April 2022, when he traveled to Kyiv with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and in September 2022, when he again stopped in Kyiv for meetings and toured Irpin in the Bucha district. He also stepped over the border into the country with Kuleba during the earliest days of the conflict, March 2022.
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(WASHINGTON) — While Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell’s health may have raised questions outside the Senate about his fitness to serve, most GOP senators on Tuesday stood by their leader, expressing confidence in his ability to carry out his job.
“We may expect that Mitch McConnell will check out for 20 seconds a day. But the other 86,380 seconds in the day, he does a pretty darn good job,” Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said. “I’m firmly behind his remaining as our leader.”
“He sounds good to me, so, I’m all good with Mitch,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., echoed to reporters.
Romney and Graham’s sentiments were shared by members of the Senate Republican leadership team, even those who are seen as possible successors to McConnell’s leadership role.
There are three men expected to jockey to become the GOP leader should McConnell step down: Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, John Barrasso of Wyoming and John Thune of South Dakota. Returning to Congress on Tuesday, all three expressed continued confidence in McConnell.
“I’m glad they were able to rule out some of the things that people had speculated might have happened, and it appears that it’s harder to recover from a concussion when you’re 81-years-old than maybe he thought, but he feels that he’s up to the task, and I think that’s the case,” Cornyn said. “I want him as long as he wants the job and can do the job.”
“He has my full support and the support of the conference,” Thune, the Senate GOP Whip, said.
Barrasso, a physician, said he was encouraged by the report put out by Capitol physician Brian Monahan that said he found no evidence of a seizure disorder or stroke.
“I’m really happy to see that the MRI was normal to see that the EEG was normal and that he’s had a neurological evaluation. The report put out today by Dr. Monahan was very encouraging and very good,” Barrasso said.
He added that he believes McConnell has the necessary support to remain atop the Republican conference.
Sen. Steve Daines of Montana, another member of the GOP leadership team, said McConnell called him following last week’s incident and was “as feisty and sharp as ever.” He said he still supports McConnell serving as party leader.
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, also said she spoke to McConnell the day after the incident.
“I feel that he is fully prepared and able to conduct his duties,” Collins said.
Multiple senators said they expect McConnell to address the conference Wednesday at their weekly closed-door policy lunch.
Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota said he has confidence in McConnell, describing him as being “on top of stuff,” but said he wants to hear more from him directly.
“I think any of us have at least concerns just as another member does but I talked to him personally. He shared with me what the doctors have said. But I think tomorrow Mitch will want to talk with all of us about it just to clear the air,” Rounds said.
A few members raise concerns
While the overwhelming majority of Republicans remain comfortable with McConnell’s leadership status, a few raised concerns.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said that it’d be hypocritical to be concerned about President Joe Biden’s age without also being concerned about McConnell.
“I am concerned,” he said. “If you’re concerned about the president, then you gotta be concerned about other people in leadership. And I just — it’s a two-way street. It’s not one or the other.”
Hawley voted to support Florida Sen. Rick Scott’s bid to lead the party over McConnell in the last leadership election.
Following that contentious election last year, Senate leaders implemented a new rule that allows any five Republicans to call a special conference meeting to discuss the party’s leadership. It’s not yet clear if there would be five such senators to force this kind of conversation.
McConnell’s fellow Kentuckian, Rand Paul, meanwhile, said that while he still believes McConnell is fit to lead, he has questions about the diagnosis from Monahan. Paul is also a physician.
“I think it’s an inadequate explanation to say this is dehydration. The one thing that is very clear is that when someone has a seizure doesn’t always show up on the EEG,” Paul said. “My personal interaction with him has been fine. And I think he’s been up to the task. And so this isn’t a criticism of him or anything. It’s a criticism of the way it’s being handled publicly.”
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(KALISPELL, Mont.) — The day teenage brothers Lander and Badge Busse made history in the fight against climate change, they celebrated by fishing for trout under Montana skies clogged with smoke from wildfires.
“We’ve seen in our lives, particularly in the last five or six years, just kind of this infiltration of climate change and its effects into our own lives that we didn’t ask for,” said 18-year-old Lander.
“Nothing’s improving at all,” added Badge, 15. “It’s getting worse. The smoke is getting worse.”
The Busse brothers, not yet old enough to vote, joined 14 other young Montanans in suing their government for failing to protect them from the impacts of climate change. Last month, a judge ruled in their favor in a landmark decision that also found the state was complicit in the problem.
“We’re just normal Montana kids. We’re Montanans first,” said Lander Busse in an exclusive interview with his brother at their family’s home. “Although a lot of what we practice and preach are very rooted in what some might call environmentalist values, that’s just how all of us have been living our whole lives.”
Their victory in court — the first of its kind in the country — has been hailed as a turning point for the climate action movement.
State Judge Kathy Seeley concluded after a seven-day trial in May that a law forcing environmental regulators to ignore the impact of greenhouse gas emissions when evaluating permits for new energy projects violates the state’s constitution.
Montana is one of just three states whose constitutional bill of rights explicitly guarantees the right to a “clean and healthful environment.”
“We’re very lucky to have that, and it hasn’t been provided, and now frankly it’s going to be,” said Badge. “It’s huge that she finally declared it.”
Trial counsel Roger Sullivan, who represented the teens along with nonprofit advocacy group Our Children’s Trust, said the ruling will have a tangible impact on the environment.
“If our state agencies and our state legislature responds to this in good faith, then we will see a difference on the ground in terms of permitting decisions and in terms ultimately of the amount of CO2 that’s being discharged into our atmosphere,” Sullivan said.
The case is also lifting the spirits of young people in four other states — Hawaii, Virginia, Utah and Oregon — with similar lawsuits pending against their governments over the climate crisis.
“Seeing such a landmark case kind of produce such an awesome result was really inspiring,” said Layla Hasanzadah, one of 13 young plaintiffs suing the state of Virginia over climate change.
Isaac Vergun of Oregon, part of a long-running suit against the federal government for alleged failure to protect its citizens, said the Montana victory gives him hope.
“It’s pretty plain and simple: the federal government has only known about this issue with climate change and has only exacerbated the problem,” Vergun said. “This is all only going to create solutions.”
State and federal governments have long rejected claims they bear legal liability for climate change impacts.
The Montana Department of Justice called last month’s ruling “absurd” and a “publicity stunt,” saying in a statement to ABC News that “Montanans can’t be blamed for changing the climate.”
Montana environmental officials said there is a good reason greenhouse gas emissions have never been part of their assessments: the law doesn’t require it.
“The state legislature and the U.S. Congress have not said affirmatively, ‘You shall go this way in a climate analysis,'” said Chris Dorrington, director of Montana’s Department of Environmental Quality, which oversees permits for new oil, gas and coal projects in the state.
Dorrington declined to say whether the recent court decision, which is being appealed, would force his agency to consider global warming as part of its impact reviews.
“There’s permits that have standards that are well vetted through really integrated stakeholder involvement of all sorts. We will permit according to those standards,” he said.
The state’s energy industry has downplayed the ruling, insisting it will do little to slow the development of Montana’s fossil fuel resources.
“We can’t just shut down the coal mines. We can’t just shut down the oil and gas production. We can’t just shut down the refineries. It’ll put us into a tremendous economic downturn,” said Alan Olson, executive director of the Montana Petroleum Association.
“The coal is still gonna be mined. We’re still going to produce oil and gas. But [the decision] is going to give [environmental activists] a little more impetus to start filing more lawsuits,” Olson said.
The court’s decision notably stops short of ordering Montana to cut support for the energy industry or take steps to remedy the impacts from fossil fuel emissions.
Still, climate advocates say the symbolism of the case alone is highly significant — a major validation of scientific evidence that climate change is real and that state policies make it worse.
“It really feels like the ball’s starting to roll now,” said Lander Busse. “There was a lot of skepticism about how much progress something like this would ever have in a place like Montana where fossil fuels dominate.”
Montana’s temperatures have been rising more than twice the global average, according to government climate data. And Judge Seeley’s decision cited scientific evidence — which went largely unchallenged by the state — linking the warming to the promotion of fossil fuels.
“This gives legal foundation to putting [carbon dioxide] and greenhouse gasses into the mix of analyzing any of the permits,” said Steven Running, a University of Montana climate scientist who won a Nobel Prize for his work on the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change and who testified against the state.
The oil, gas, and coal extracted in Montana led to the release of nearly 70 million tons of earth-warming carbon dioxide in 2019, Judge Seeley wrote, more than many major countries with substantially larger populations.
The decision declared Montana “a major emitter of greenhouse gas emissions in the world in absolute terms, in per person terms, and historically,” noting that there is still a “significant quantity of fossil fuels yet to be extracted.”
“It’s a validation that none of the old climate denier stuff from 10 years ago was ever put forward,” said Running. “I see the trial as a big step in giving people hope that we’re starting to pay attention. The big global ‘we.'”
The Busse family says they are embracing that hope. But as the state begins its appeal of the case, the brothers say they’re still grappling with the social costs.
“People in my school don’t genuinely believe in climate change,” said Badge Busse, who is entering tenth grade. “I’ll probably be put in like a little box. I probably won’t have that many friends this year.”
Sara Busse, the boys’ mom, says she and her husband Ryan, who’s running for governor, see a bigger lesson for teens everywhere — and their parents.
“We have to be willing to change. And, I mean, if we can’t learn that from our kids, you know, I don’t know who we can learn it from,” she said.
The Busse brothers say the entire experience has motivated them to try to inspire others to take action to protect the wilderness they love.
“Not only is this a big deal for the establishment of our rights, but it’s a big deal for the establishment of climate as a national problem,” said Lander Busse.
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(WASHINGTON) — Donald Trump is weighing in on a brewing legal battle over whether he should have access to the ballot in 2024.
While he has denied all wrongdoing, a growing number of conservative scholars have raised the constitutional argument that Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election make him ineligible to hold federal office ever again.
Here’s what to know from the campaign trail — from Trump to Alabama to Texas.
Trump dismisses 14th Amendment disqualification push
The former president is pushing back on arguments that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment can be used to remove him from the ballot in 2024.
He claimed in a new social media post, late Monday, that “almost all legal scholars have voiced opinions that the 14th Amendment has no legal basis or standing relative to the upcoming 2024 Presidential Election.”
However, some conservative scholars suggest otherwise, including two members of the conservative Federalist Society; William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen and retired conservative federal judge J. Michael Luttig. Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Laurence Tribe joined Luttig in making the case.
That argument boils down to how Trump’s behavior after the 2020 election and surrounding Jan. 6 relates to this section of the 14th Amendment: A public official is not eligible to assume public office if, while they were previously in office, they took an oath to support the Constitution but then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or [gave] aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” unless they are granted amnesty by a two-thirds vote of Congress.
Trump, in his new post, called any such legal challenges invoking the 14th Amendment simply “election interference.”
Similar efforts against other Republicans have failed, but the campaign against Trump under the 14th Amendment has gained steam in a number of states, including the battlegrounds of Arizona, Michigan and New Hampshire.
Amid historic legal troubles, Trump’s grip on his party still strong in new poll
Until Trump, no president had ever been impeached twice — or criminally charged — let alone four times. He has dismissed all such cases as political persecution and has pleaded not guilty to each of his indictments, in Florida, Georgia, New York and Washington, D.C.
But while ABC News and Ipsos polls showed some problems for Trump in terms of public opinion on his mounting criminal charges amid his comeback bid for the White House — a new CNN poll shows he remains hugely popular with the GOP base who will be choosing their party’s next presidential nominee.
He continues to lead the 2024 Republican field, polling over 30 points ahead of his closest competitor, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis: 52% to 18%, according to the new CNN survey conducted by SSRS.
Surveyed over Aug. 25-31, the traditional Labor Day start to the campaign cycle, around 43% of GOP-aligned voters said they are definite Trump backers, with 20% saying they are firmly behind another candidate and 37% have no first choice or say they could change their minds.
Paxton goes on trial
Suspended Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton will soon learn his fate as his impeachment trial, expected to last several weeks, began Tuesday morning in the state Capitol in Austin.
The state’s top lawyer, Paxton, who has long fended off other scandals, has been accused of abuse of office by a bipartisan group of Texas House managers.
If found guilty, Paxton, a Republican, will be removed from his office and potentially permanently barred from serving in future public office in his state.
Paxton has denied any wrongdoing and has denounced the impeachment as a “sham.”
The trial has potential implications for one of the country’s biggest states, which sits at the heart of the Republican Party but which has, in some recent elections, been trending increasingly Democratic.
“I think that effort to focus or at least see Texas as a possibility operates apart from Paxton’s corruption and the effort to remove him,” Matt Angle, director of the Lone Star Project, a Democratic research and communications political group, told ABC News, “but it certainly helps.”
Court orders new map after Alabama failed to add district for Black voters
A three-judge panel on Tuesday unanimously struck down Alabama’s recently redrawn congressional map, finding that that the GOP-backed plan did not comply with the Voting Rights Act as it did not create a second district in which Black voters would likely be able to elect their preferred candidate.
Court-appointed experts will now draw a new map for the 2024 elections.
Alabama is expected to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The federal ruling that originally struck down Alabama’s map in 2022 ordered the Legislature to draw “two districts in which Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.”
But on Tuesday, the panel wrote that they were “deeply troubled” that Alabama lawmakers enacted a map that disregarded the findings in 2022.
Alabama’s congressional map could sway the odds for control of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2024. Republicans currently hold the chamber by only five seats, but Black voters in Alabama tend to vote for Democrats.
ABC News’ Tal Axelrod and Caroline Curran contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge on Tuesday sentenced former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio to 22 years in prison — the longest sentence to date handed down for any individual charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol.
Prosecutors had sought 33 years in prison for Tarrio, their harshest recommendation yet for someone charged in the Justice Department’s sweeping investigation into the Capitol assault — despite the fact that Tarrio wasn’t even present in Washington the day of the attack.
In their sentencing recommendation, prosecutors described Tarrio as a “naturally charismatic leader” and “a savvy propagandist” who used his influence over hundreds of followers to orchestrate an assault on democracy — for which he was convicted of seditious conspiracy and several other felonies.
“This defendant, and his co-conspirators targeted our entire system of government,” assistant U.S. Attorney Conor Mulroe said during Tuesday’s hearing. “This offense involved calculation and deliberation. We need to make sure that the consequences are abundantly clear to anyone who might be unhappy with the results in 2024, 2028, 2032 or any future election for as long as this case is remembered.”
Prosecutors argued Tarrio helped rally members of the far-right group to come to Washington in advance of Jan. 6 with the goal of stopping the peaceful transition of power, that he monitored their movements and egged them on as they attacked the Capitol, and continued to celebrate their actions in the days after the insurrection.
They also pointed to a nine-page strategic plan to “storm” government buildings in Washington on Jan. 6 that was found in Tarrio’s possession after the riot, as well as violent rhetoric he routinely used in messages with other members of the group about what they would do if Congress moved forward in certifying President Joe Biden’s election win.
Tarrio’s attorneys contended that the government overstated his intentions with respect to Jan. 6, and that his real goal rallying members of the group to Washington, D.C., was to confront protesters from the far-left Antifa movement. They also argued he never directed any of his followers’ movements during the riot itself and that he otherwise had no ability to control members who became violent during the riot.
“My client is no terrorist. My client is a misguided patriot, that’s what my client is,” Tarrio’s attorney Sabino Jauregui said. “He was trying to protect this country, as misguided as he was.”
Tarrio also spoke at the hearing, apologizing profusely for his actions and heaping praise on members of law enforcement who he said have been unfairly mistreated and maligned after the Jan. 6 attack — which he called a “national embarrassment.”
“I will have to live with that shame and disappointment for the rest of my life,” Tarrio said. “We invoked 1776 and the Constitution of the United States and that was so wrong to do. That was a perversion. The events of Jan. 6 is something that should never be celebrated.”
As he did in the sentencings for Tarrio’s four other co-defendants, U.S. District Judge Tim Kelly departed significantly below what the federal guidelines called for in issuing his ultimate sentence — even as he accepted the government’s recommendation to apply the so-called ‘terrorism enhancement’ that effectively labeled Tarrio’s crimes as domestic terrorism.
Just before handing down his sentence, Judge Kelly reflected somberly on the events of Jan. 6 and its impact on democracy.
“I do think the evidence supports the inference that Mr. Tarrio was the ultimate leader [of the conspiracy],” Kelly said. “The people he assembled, the people that were there, again, played critical roles … they played important roles at breach after breach after breach.”
Judge Kelly also went well below the sentencing guidelines in his prison terms handed down last week to Proud Boys leaders Joseph Biggs, who was sentenced to 17 years in prison, Zachary Rehl, who was sentenced to 15 years in prison, and Ethan Nordean, who received 18 years in prison — matching the previous longest sentence to date handed down in connection with the Capitol attack to Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes. Dominic Pezzola, the sole defendant charged in the case who was found not guilty of seditious conspiracy but who was convicted of several other major felonies, was sentenced last Friday to 10 years in prison. Kelly has explained his decisions to sentence the Proud Boys below what the federal sentencing guidelines called for is based on his belief that previous decades-long sentences handed down to individuals convicted of seditious conspiracy was typically for cases where a defendant either intended or their actions directly resulted in loss of life.
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(MONGOMERY, Ala.) — A three-judge panel on Tuesday unanimously struck down Alabama’s recently redrawn congressional map, finding that that the GOP-drafted plan did not comply with the Voting Rights Act as it did not create a second district in which Black voters would likely be able to elect their preferred candidate.
Court-appointed experts will now draw a new map for the 2024 elections.
Alabama is expected to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The state Legislature had passed their latest congressional map in late July, after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled a month earlier that the previous map violated the civil rights law.
But the revised plan only included one majority-Black district, with a second district that had less than 50% Black residents — prompting swift outcry from Democrats and advocates who said that flagrantly violated the court’s instructions.
The federal ruling that originally struck down Alabama’s map in 2022 ordered the Legislature to draw “two districts in which Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.”
About 27% of Alabama residents are Black, according to census data. Only one of its seven districts is represented by a Black lawmaker.
Defenders of the now-rejected map argued they had achieved “something quite close,” as the court ordered. Under that plan, Black voters comprised 39.93% of Alabama’s 2nd District and 50.65% of the 7th District.
In their sharply worded opinion on Tuesday, the federal panel disagreed.
“Law requires the creation of an additional district that affords Black Alabamians, like everyone else, a fair and reasonable opportunity to elect candidates of their choice. The 2023 Plan plainly fails to do so,” U.S. Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus, U.S. District Judge Anna Manasco and U.S. District Judge Terry Moorer wrote.
The judges wrote that they were “deeply troubled” that Alabama lawmakers enacted a map that disregarded the findings in 2022.
“We are not aware of any other case in which a state legislature — faced with a federal court order declaring that its electoral plan unlawfully dilutes minority votes and requiring a plan that provides an additional opportunity district — responded with a plan that the state concedes does not provide that district,” the judges wrote.
Critics of the July plan celebrated the federal court’s decision on Tuesday.
“The court rightly stepped up and applied the law in order to protect the rights of all Alabamians. The state’s blatant defiance of both the court-and the Supreme Court-will be fought as long as necessary,” former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, wrote in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter.
In a statement, the Alabama Republican Party called the decision “disappointing.”
“While we respect the Court, we are disappointed in its decision, and we trust that the State will ultimately prevail in this litigation,” the party wrote.
ABC News’ Caroline Curran contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(WASHINGTON) — Jill Biden was last with President Joe Biden on Monday, her press secretary Vanessa Valdivia said Tuesday, the same day the first lady tested positive for COVID-19.
“She’ll be monitored by the White House medical team and follow their advice on when to return to the White House,” Valdavia said in an update on Biden’s health.
She was isolating at her home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, away from husband, who returned to the White House on Monday.
“She is currently experiencing only mild symptoms,” Elizabeth Alexander, her communications director, said in a statement issued Monday night.
Following the first lady’s positive test, President Biden took a COVID test on Monday evening and tested negative, his press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.
“The President will test at a regular cadence this week and monitor for symptoms,” Jean-Pierre noted.
Valdavia said Tuesday the first lady is working with Northern Virginia Community College, where she is an English professor, to ensure her classes are covered by a substitute and her office will adjust her public schedule accordingly.
President Biden is sticking to his public schedule for now.
He will award the Medal of Honor to a Vietnam War veteran Tuesday afternoon and is still expected to depart the U.S. on Thursday for a trip to India and Vietnam.
ABC News’ Selina Wang and Justin Gomez contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
(WASHINGTON) — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell referenced Tuesday the moment last week when he seemed to freeze for more than 30 second last week — but he did not discuss the incident in detail.
“Now, one particular moment of my time back home has received its fair share of attention in the press over the past week, but I assure you: August was a busy and productive month for me and my staff back in the commonwealth,” McConnell said in remarks welcoming senators back to Capitol Hill after the August recess.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., also alluded to McConnell’s return in his remarks.
“I was here for the presentation by the Republican leader, and I’m happy he returned,” Durbin said just after McConnell finished speaking. “I told him it was great to see him back and I couldn’t wait to disagree with him, and I’m sure I’ll have that opportunity in the near future.”
Earlier Tuesday, McConnell’s office released a letter from the Capitol physician stating McConnell did not appear to suffer a stroke or seizure when he seemed to freeze for more than 30 second last week.
Dr. Brian P. Monahan wrote in the letter that he examined McConnell after he froze and that after reviewing a “brain MRI imaging, EEG study and consultations with several neurologists for a comprehensive neurology assessment,” he found that “there is no evidence that you have a seizure disorder or that you experienced a stroke, [transient ischemic attack] or movement disorder such as Parkinson’s disease.”
“There are no changes recommended in treatment protocols as you continue recovery from your March 2023 fall,” Monahan wrote to the 81-year-old McConnell.
The letter marks the most comprehensive information McConnell’s office has released about his condition or the medical treatment he is receiving since he suffered a concussion and broken rib from a fall in Washington earlier this year. The letter’s publication also comes the same day as the Senate’s return from the August recess, when speculation over McConnell’s health mounted.
McConnell’s freeze-up last week added to concerns after a similar incident occurred in late July, when he was escorted away by colleagues from a press conference on Capitol Hill after he stopped speaking mid-sentence.
He stayed to answer another question last week, while in July he eventually returned to answer more questions from the press after he was helped away.
McConnell’s allies have maintained that they believe the Kentuckian can continue his tenure as the longest-serving Senate party leader in history, insisting he hasn’t lost a step.
“Mitch is sharp, and he is shrewd. He understands what needs to be done,” South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds said Sunday on CNN. “I will leave it up to him as to how he wants to discuss that with the American public. But there’s no doubt in my mind that he is perfectly capable of continuing on at this stage of the game.”
President Joe Biden also said last week that “I don’t” have concerns about McConnell’s ability to lead Senate Republicans.
Still, other Republicans have voiced concerns about McConnell and other elderly lawmakers like Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who is 90 years old and whose physical and mental health are also widely discussed on Capitol Hill.
“At what point do they get it’s time to leave?” former South Carolina Gov. and presidential contender Nikki Haley said on CBS News after McConnell’s incident. “They need to let a younger generation take over. We want to go and start working for our kids to make sure we have a strong national security, to make sure we have a stronger economic policy, to make sure that America is safe.”
Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.