Latest news with #AdamBonica
New York Times
05-08-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
The Supreme Court Has Finally Found a President It Likes
The six-member conservative majority on the Supreme Court has become a key enabler of President Trump's agenda. 'Since May, federal district courts have ruled against the administration 94.3 percent of the time,' Adam Bonica, a political scientist at Stanford, writes in a June 25 Substack essay. 'The Supreme Court, however, has flipped that outcome, siding with the administration in 93.7 percent of its cases. The Supreme Court is now in open conflict with the lower courts over cases involving the Trump administration.' District court judges 'who see the evidence firsthand and hear directly from those affected,' Bonica adds, 'overwhelmingly find the administration's actions unlawful. Circuit (Appeals) courts split more evenly (68.2 percent against Trump, 31.8 percent for Trump) but still lean against the administration. Then the Supreme Court — furthest from facts, closest to power — reverses almost automatically.' Mark Graber, a law professor at the University of Maryland, described the situation by email. 'Both Republican and Democratic judicial appointees have found numerous constitutional and statutory flaws with Trump Administration policies.' Faced with this surge of lower court rulings against Trump and his appointees, Graber continued, The Supreme Court almost without exception has been braking the lower federal courts rather than the Trump Administration. This has been done largely through rulings without accompanying reasons explaining why the lower federal courts were so wrong. The result is in some cases all lower federal courts have to guide them is a sense that the Roberts Court majority does not want lower federal courts interfering with the Trump Administration. 'Universities," Graber wrote, 'fear being tied up in litigation for years. Even if they eventually win every case in the Supreme Court, the costs are likely to be substantial. If the Supreme Court permits Trump to implement his version of the law for two to three years, universities that oppose him will be damaged significantly.' In addition, Graber said, 'The Roberts court's pro-Trump series of decisions creates reason for thinking that you might lose, even as every professor in your law school tells you the law is on your side.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
27-01-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The Topline: Minnesota's biggest spenders on lobbying
Getty Images Welcome to The Topline, a weekly roundup of the big numbers driving the Minnesota news cycle, as well as the smaller ones that you might have missed. This week: Minnesota's biggest spenders on lobbying; how our corporate tax rates stack up; billionaire political spending; quantifying executive actions; and how much taxes undocumented immigrants pay. MinnPost reported last week on the state's biggest lobbying spenders. Xcel Energy topped the list, according to data from the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, spending $1.4 million to influence state government as well as local governments. Education Minnesota, the state teacher's union, was the only other organization spending more than $1 million. Much of Xcel's spending went toward cases before the Public Utilities Commission, particularly on rate-setting efforts. Education Minnesota's lobbying was mostly directed toward bills in the Legislature, including bills on education funding and teacher pensions. Other top spenders include the pharmaceutical industry, a group opposing single-payer health care, labor unions, and FairVote MN, which advocated for ranked-choice voting. Last year, Minnesota's corporate income tax rate was the highest in the nation, at 9.8%. But recent changes in New Jersey have pushed that state's top rate above 11%, putting the Garden State in first place. The latest analysis from the Tax Foundation finds that Minnesota remains one of just four states with a top corporate income tax rate above 9%. Many states have top marginal corporate tax rates below 5%, and several don't tax corporate income at all. Stanford political scientist Adam Bonica finds that Republicans raised more than half of their total 2024 campaign funds from just 100 donors, a new record. Less than 20% of Democrats' funds came from their top 100 donors, meanwhile. The data includes contributions to candidates, political action committees and super-PACS, and comes from the Database on Ideology, Money in Politics and Elections. As recently as 2008 both parties raised less than 10% of their money from their top 100 donors. But the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision opened the floodgates for virtually unlimited election spending, with minimal restrictions. 'Trump's embrace of the billionaire class — and their embrace of him — will only supercharge this trend,' Bonica writes. He also argues that 'this isn't a competition Dems can — or should — try to win. Instead, the party should disavow contributions from billionaires and corporations. You can't credibly fight oligarchy while courting mega-donors.' USAFacts notes that the 26 executive orders signed by Donald Trump on the first day of his second term is the highest number going back to at least the Nixon administration, and likely beyond. The second-highest number was 9, notched by Joe Biden on the first day of his term in 2021. Prior to Biden, no president had signed more than two orders on their first day in office. Biden signed a total of 160 orders during his four years in power, a record low for the modern era and behind even fellow one-term presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush. Jimmy Carter signed an average of 80 executive orders per year, the most of any of the past 10 presidents. Historically, Republican presidents have been more inclined than Democrats to rely on executive orders. Trump's executive orders targeting undocumented immigrants may have the unintended consequence of putting a major dent in tax collections, according to this July 2024 report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a progressive think tank. In Minnesota alone, the undocumented paid more than $220 million in state and local taxes in 2022, according to the group's analysis. Nationwide, undocumented migrants pay close to $100 billion in taxes annually when including federal receipts. 'For every 1 million undocumented immigrants who reside in the country, public services receive $8.9 billion in additional tax revenue,' the organization's analysts write. In addition to payroll taxes, undocumented immigrants pay local sales and excise taxes. Conversely, they're often barred from receiving typical credits and reimbursements, and prohibited from relying on services like food stamps or unemployment benefits. In Minnesota, the undocumented contribute more than $80 million in sales and excise taxes, $59 million in property tax, and $75 million in personal and business income tax.
