Schumer's Blue Slip for Jay Clayton
Sen. Chuck Schumer must really be worried about losing the Democratic base, because look at him this week pretending that Jay Clayton is a threat to the rule of law. Mr. Clayton is President Trump's nominee for U.S. Attorney in Manhattan, and he's a fine choice. Mr. Schumer is saying otherwise because he's trying to prove to furious Democrats that the old war horse still has fight in him.
Mr. Clayton served as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission from 2017-20, after spending a career at the white-shoe law firm Sullivan & Cromwell. He isn't a patsy, unlike some of Mr. Trump's nominees, and he has experience making enforcement calls, including when the SEC tangled with Elon Musk over Mr. Musk's tweet that he had 'funding secured' to take Tesla private. As far as appointees for federal prosecutor go, Mr. Clayton is about as good as Mr. Schumer could expect.
Yet the New York Democrat said Wednesday he would refuse to return his 'blue slip' for Mr. Clayton. This refers to a tradition, dating to at least 1917, of giving courtesy to Senators' views on the judges and prosecutors picked for their home states. By withholding his blue slip of approval, Mr. Schumer is hoping to bottle up Mr. Clayton's nomination, as well as that of Joseph Nocella Jr., chosen by Mr. Trump for U.S. Attorney in eastern New York.
'Donald Trump has made clear he has no fidelity to the law and intends to use the Justice Department, the U.S. Attorney offices and law enforcement as weapons to go after his perceived enemies,' Mr. Schumer said. He added that this has made him 'deeply skeptical' of Mr. Trump's 'intentions for these important positions.' Notice what the Senator doesn't mention? Anything at all about the nominees, whom he doesn't even bother to name.
Mr. Trump's meddling with the federal case against New York Mayor Eric Adams was an embarrassing episode that resulted in resignations from the Southern District of New York. Yet Mr. Clayton has the independent stature to be able to restore regular order. Does Mr. Schumer prefer to let the place be run by an unknown acting placeholder? That wouldn't be much of a counterweight to Mr. Trump.
Anyway, after Mr. Schumer withheld his blue slip, Mr. Trump said he will install Mr. Clayton as the interim U.S. Attorney. Such appointments are time limited under the law, but Mr. Clayton will get to set up his office. The optimistic scenario is that Mr. Schumer might quietly turn in his blue slip later, perhaps while saying that the nominee's interim tenure has provided evidence he will run the joint in good faith.
If not, expect renewed arguments in the GOP about ending this whole blue-slip business. It's a nonbinding tradition, and it can be dispensed with if it's being abused. Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said recently he intends to honor his colleagues' blue slips. But Mr. Grassley also ended their use as an ideological veto on appeals judges during Mr. Trump's first term.
That's something for Mr. Schumer to think about, as he blocks Senate confirmation for Jay Clayton without making any substantive complaint about Jay Clayton. The blue-slip tradition has a purpose, but it isn't to help Mr. Schumer avoid a primary challenge from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
8 minutes ago
- Politico
Bondi says violent LA protesters will face federal charges
At least nine people are facing federal charges for their involvement in protests against immigration enforcement in Los Angeles, Attorney General Pam Bondi said Monday. Demonstrators face charges for attacking police with Molotov cocktails, looting and spitting on law enforcement, Bondi said in a TV interview. 'We are going to prosecute them federally,' she said in an interview on Fox News. 'If California won't protect their law enforcement, we will protect the LAPD and the sheriff's office out there.' Sporadic but at times raucous protests broke out in several parts of the Los Angeles area in recent days, prompting President Donald Trump to deploy National Guard troops and Marines despite the fact that Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said the additional forces were not needed. Bondi said the Trump administration planned to take a hard line against demonstrators. 'You spit on a federal law enforcement officer no more,' she said. 'As President Trump said, you spit. we hit. Get ready. If you spit on a federal law enforcement officer, we are going to charge you with a crime federally. You are looking at up to five years maximum in prison.' Those charged already include David Huerta, president of the Service Employees International Union California, who was injured and arrested while protesting the arrest of workers in downtown Los Angeles. He was released Monday from federal custody on a $50,000 bond. The Trump administration's decisive treatment of demonstrators — and the president's focus on punishing those who assault police officers — stands in contrast to his sweeping pardons for roughly 1,500 people who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, seeking to overturn the election. Trump has deployed up to 4,000 soldiers from the California National Guard to help quell the demonstrations over the protests of Newsom and Bass — who say the moves are worsening tensions. The state has sued to reverse the deployments. The White House also ordered 700 Marines to join the National Guard, though it's unclear exactly what role they will play. The San Francisco Chronicle reported on Monday evening that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to direct military forces to arrest 'lawbreakers.' DHS did not immediately respond to request for comment from POLITICO, and the Department of Defense declined to comment on the story. 'You can run, you can't hide,' Bondi told Fox. 'We are coming after you federally. If you assault a police officer, if you rob a store, if you loot, if you spit on a police officer, we are coming after you.'
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senator Martin Heinrich calls for Torrance County ICE detention facility to be closed
Jun. 9—New Mexico's senior senator is calling for a New Mexico-based Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility to be closed, after his congressional staff observed troubling conditions during a visit in late May. "For years, detainees have been denied adequate access to legal services and medical care while being subjected to inhumane living conditions and continued instances of physical abuse," Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., wrote to Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons in a letter Thursday. The Torrance County Detention Facility is owned and operated by CoreCivic in Estancia. Heinrich has repeatedly pushed for CoreCivic's contract to be terminated, including in a December 2023 letter during the Biden administration. "CoreCivic is committed to providing safe, humane and appropriate care for the people in our facilities," CoreCivic spokesman Brian Todd said in a statement, pointing to the facility's overall "good" ratings in its 2024 and 2025 ICE Office of Detention Oversight audits. As the Trump administration has been trying to increase deportations, members of Congress have been attempting to conduct oversight of ICE detention centers around the country. When New Jersey Congresswoman LaMonica McIver and other Democratic officials tried to do an oversight visit to a Newark ICE center in May, she was charged with two counts of assault after a confrontation with officers trying to arrest the Newark mayor. On May 28, Heinrich's staff members were allowed to tour one housing unit at the Torrance County facility, but were denied access to two other housing units, after they heard at least 10 detainees file complaints of abuse, and lack of access to laundry and medical services. According to Todd, detainees have daily access to sign up for medical and mental health services, there are clinics staffed with licensed health professionals and medical personnel on site at all hours. "The agent claimed that a revised ICE visitation protocol prohibited congressional staff from visiting housing units with detainees present," the letter reads. "However, the document the agent cited made no mention of limiting congressional staff visitation to empty pods, and it in fact cited to a statutory authority explicitly forbidding ICE from denying congressional staff conducting oversight access." Congressional staff members found backed-up sinks, a drain in the middle of a common area backed up with sewage water, and non-functioning tablet devices — devices that people detained by ICE use to access legal services, according to Heinrich's letter. The conditions match those described by detainees and advocates, the letter says. Maintenance staff respond quickly to plumbing issues, Todd said in a statement, and the common area drain was backed up with water after debris collected in shower drains, not with sewage. CoreCivic is committed to providing detainees with access to counsel and courts, Todd said, although he did not respond to a question about the broken tablets. TCDF Warden George Dedos confirmed that the detention facility had no water from Estancia for three days, the letter says, and was unable to answer questions about the capacity of the facilities' two back-up water tanks or describe the contingency plan for when there is another water outage, "short of the total relocation of all the detainees." "He told my staff during their visit that the water shortage had not impacted their operations, but that runs contrary to what detainees said during that same visit," Heinrich wrote. His staff were told by detainees that "water was only turned on for one hour every three days for showers, they were provided only two bottles of drinking water per day, and they were unable to flush toilets for days at a time." CoreCivic was notified on April 29 that Estancia was having a water supply issue and tried to reduce its water consumption. Drinking water and bottled water were available, Todd said, and water was provided to help flush toilets "as an added measure to reduce water consumption." The laundry services and showers were placed on a schedule, but "those services were still available to all of those in our care," according to Todd. ICE did not respond to a request for comment.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sending money to family in foreign countries may be taxed more
Jun. 9—Families hoping to send money to loved ones in other countries may be hit with additional fees from a tax and spending bill proposed by the Trump administration that would slap a 3.5% tax on remittances sent by anyone who is not a U.S. citizen. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" passed through the House in May and is now being debated by the Senate. The budget bill has several proposed tax changes, which include taxing money sent from an estimated 40 million non-US citizens — including green card holders, temporary workers and undocumented immigrants — to family and friends in other countries. The bill had a 5% tax but was reduced to 3.5%. The bill is another way the Trump administration is hoping to dissuade immigrants, both documented and undocumented, from coming into the country and moving money out of the U.S. economy. Republicans believe the bill would increase the average take-home pay of U.S. citizens, while Democrats believe the bill and increased taxes are "a transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich," said Daniel Garcia, spokesperson for the Democratic Party of New Mexico. What is a remittance? Remittances refer to sending money from one person to another and is typically done between family members from one country to another. A person living and working in the U.S. would send money to family members typically living in a developing country, where this money is a source of income that contributes to the country's gross domestic product (GDP). Payments are typically sent using an electronic payment service or a money transfer app. Banks, credit unions and money transfer services charge a fee for processing remittances, and fees average 10%, according to the International Monetary Fund. Cryptocurrency exchanges are not as heavily regulated and can be a way to avoid additional taxes and surcharges. "Taxing remittances would amount to a form of double taxation, since migrants already pay taxes in the country where they work," Esteban Moctezuma Barragán, Mexican Ambassador, wrote in a statement. "Imposing a tax on these transfers would disproportionately affect those with the least, without accounting for their ability to pay," Barragán added. However, some believe the 3.5% tax fee would give financial support to public services and is the most "pro-worker, pro-family and pro-American legislation we've seen in decades," said Amy Barela, chairwoman of the Republican Party of New Mexico. "Let's be clear, this measure is not about targeting individuals," she wrote in a statement to the Journal. "It's about ensuring the 3.5% fee, although modest, would also have a very meaningful impact in helping offset costs associated with public services, border security, and community infrastructure — relieving some of the financial pressure on hardworking New Mexicans who continue to bear the burden of an imbalanced system." Crucial source of revenue Mexico is the second-largest receiver of personally wired money behind India, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In 2024, Latin America received $160.9 billion, with the U.S. accounting for 96.6% of all remittances to Mexico. They also make up 20-30% of GDP in countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti and Honduras. "Remittance is a very important source of revenue in our government," said Patricia Pinzón, consul of Mexico. "This would affect Mexican families and the economy in general, but I would say the basic needs of Mexican families is the most worrying thing." However, "whatever happens in one economy will affect the other," said Pinzón. "Our economies are so interrelated that everything that happens here has a consequence in Mexico," she said. "Mexicans will not stop sending money; they'll just look for alternative ways to send it." Mexican migrant workers sent 16.7% of their labor income back to their families, and more than 80% of the income remains in the U.S. economy. The average amount of remittance sent to Mexico is roughly $350 every one to two months, which "could seem like nothing for the U.S., but it's money that a whole family lives on and covers their basics in Mexico," Pinzón said.
