Latest news with #Mace
The Hill
2 days ago
- Climate
- The Hill
Texas ‘economic miracle' crashes into new reality of extreme weather
AUSTIN, Texas — Texas leaders' dreams of unlimited development and a rush of AI data centers are on a collision course with a new reality of extreme weather, as this month's flash floods hammer a landscape plagued by long-term drought. Heading into the summer, the region faced perhaps its worst drought on record, until the dregs of Tropical Storm Barry poured torrential rain over Central Texas. With Texans now facing both the aftermath of floods and a referendum that could release billions into new state water supplies and flood control projects, experts told The Hill, the state faces a critical question: Can it make the necessary investments in time to keep the economic miracle growing — and can it do so without either getting washed away or sucking the environment dry? When it rains, it pours The July 4 deluge funneled through limestone canyons, swelling rivers that tore through the Hill Country west of Austin and San Antonio and killing at least 132, with more than 100 others still missing — a death toll that makes the floods among Texas's deadliest weather disasters of the last century. Nor was that the end. Last Sunday, parts of the Hill Country that flooded Independence Day weekend were hit again by rainfalls that topped 10 inches, leading local leaders to call for mandatory evacuations. But all this, experts say, was not enough to definitively break the grip of drought. Instead, they point to a new reality of chronic scarcity of water — punctuated, but not broken, by its sudden, terrifying abundance. 'It's not a matter of 'if' there is another drought, but 'when,'' said Robert Mace, director of the Meadows Center at Texas State University, a regional mecca for the study of water. 'And the question is: Is that 'when' tomorrow? As soon as the rains stop, does the next drought start?' For Austin, at least, the prognosis for its water supply has become less 'scary,' Mace noted. The equivalent of more than 17,000 Olympic-sized pools worth of water thundering into the reservoir on Lake Travis took it from 41 percent full in April to 74 percent full by mid-July — inflows which have been matched or exceeded on the city's other reservoirs. But the rains, Mace noted, may have been less an end to the drought than a freak parentheses within it: a perfect storm of 'three firehoses of moisture colliding over the Hill County' amid a broader reality in which Texas is getting drier. Even after the floods, reservoirs on the San Antonio and Nueces rivers, critical for cities including San Antonio and Corpus Christi, remain near historic lows. Water fights On the eve of the floods, local attempts to stop the drawdown of Hill Country aquifers were stymied at the highest levels of the state. In late June, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vetoed a bipartisan law that would have allowed a Central Texas water district above the rapidly depleting Hays-Trinity Aquifer to begin charging fees for groundwater withdrawals. That veto came amid an array of water fights playing out across Texas, with a wave of more than two-dozen new data centers planned for water-stressed parts of the state and hundreds of thousands of new residents — on balance the most in the country — moving to the state each year. On the one hand, the state is 'looking into the abyss,' said Rice University environmental law professor Gabriel Collins. 'But what you see next to us is a partially assembled jetpack — where with a bit of tinkering we can fly out of here,' Collins said. In the Hill Country region west of Austin, rivers are at their lowest levels 'since record keeping began over 100 years ago,' Charlie Hickman, executive manager of engineering with the Guadalupe Blanco River Authority, told local station KXAN last month. In May, the Edwards Aquifer, a key source of water for San Antonio, dropped to its lowest level since the 1950s — driving local regulators to cut permitted pumping by nearly half. Driving this dynamic is, above all, a planet heated up by the uncontrolled burning of fossil fuels, which has created a hotter, thirstier atmosphere that sucks moisture from the land, and increasingly replaces soaking rains — which replenish soil and aquifers — with torrential storms that run right off them. Climate change has plunged the state into a new reality, said Mace. In the past when a drought ended, he said, 'You could say, 'Woohoo, it's over. We're not gonna have to do that again.'' But now, less than a decade after the worst drought in the region's history, 'here we are back in it.' Mace said that 'this is probably the new normal going forward: that we keep experiencing droughts worse than the previous drought.' The downstream effects are playing out in legal battles across Texas, including lawsuits in Bryan-College Station and East Texas over aquifer pumping rights. In the near term at least, that reality means shortage and conflict — at least regionally. In April, a private water supplier announced it was cutting off supplies to nine planned developments in Central Texas; in June, a municipality west of Austin considered banning bulk sales of water, a key lifeline to exurban residents whose wells have gone dry. In Montgomery County in East Texas — one of the 10 fastest-growing regions in the country — the cities of Magnolia and Conroe have halted the permitting of new commercial or residential wells. 'So anxious for my cities' The downstream effects of shortages are playing out between cities as well. Last week, the city of Bryan-College Station — home of Texas A&M University — settled a lawsuit over a permit its groundwater authority had given to a landowner selling water from the aquifer to a rapidly growing suburb of Austin. Similar legal fights are playing out in Houston County and the city of Jacksonville, in East Texas. Making the picture more difficult for cities is a 2023 state law that makes it easier for residents — or developers of subdivisions or data centers — to remove themselves from a city's jurisdiction and tax base. That law could allow developers of data centers or real estate to effectively secede from city authority, allowing them to drill their own wells into the city water supply, without the city being able to charge them taxes or impact fees. While cities have the potential to get ahead of that problem by signing preemptive development agreements with new entrants — effectively getting them to help fund the new civic water infrastructure they need — the prospect of the new rush 'makes me so anxious for my cities,' environmental lawyer Toni Rask said. Most of the cities and water districts she represents, Rask said, 'are just tiny, and it's easy for them to get pushed around by big, fancy tech companies.' Floods mark the other extreme of development risk, as worsening rains meet a largely uninsured populace — raising the risk of financial death spirals, as totaled mortgages cut into the financial health of municipalities, which largely rely on property taxes for their financial lifeblood. The Independence Day floods brought at least $22 billion in property damage — losses that were largely uninsured, leading to risk of foreclosure and stark drops in the revenues of towns such as Kerrville. After the floods, 'it's hard to imagine how fundamentally altered these communities are going to be,' said Jayson O'Neill, who studies climate at the Focal Point Strategy Group. For small Central Texas towns where most residents are on the hook for damages, 'you just lost your entire property tax base. There's no value there anymore.' Only 1 to 2 percent of inland Texans have flood coverage — with permissive building codes that have allowed 5 million state residents to build their homes in floodplains. The state even allows citizens to build their homes in floodways — land immediately adjacent to a watercourse — leaving it up to municipalities to set stricter limits. Many may not be aware they are at flood risk — Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood maps are both outdated and incomplete, with large swaths of Texas, including many flood prone areas, with no flood data at all. Property owners can also challenge FEMA to have their properties removed from maps, which relieves them from the responsibility of buying federally subsidized flood insurance — as did the owners of Camp Mystic, the girl's camp where 27 died when the Guadalupe River spilled its banks. Voters get a say this November When it comes to water scarcity, rather than flood, Texas has taken some action. Like most experts interviewed by The Hill, Rice University's Collins argued that while Texas towns and cities have to wake up to a new reality of drought, the state is far from running out of water — and notes that it may be about to get a huge infusion of new resources. In November, voters will get a chance to approve a referendum advocates have billed as a generational investment in water infrastructure that would unlock a $20 billion public investment in new water supplies, conservation and recycling. Once federal, local and corporate investments are added in, that's a 'meaningful bite' of the approximately $154 billion the state needs to safeguard its water supplies, said Jeremy Mazur of Texas 2036, a nonpartisan think tank focused on the state's long-term future. This year, Mazur said, 'the legislature recognized that the water supply issue access is one of the more substantive policy issues informing the continuation of the Texas economic miracle.' The bill enabling the referendum wasn't unanimously popular in the legislature — conservative advocacy group Texans for Fiscal Responsibility urged members to vote 'no,' warning that it represented a new, permanent expense that risks 'growing government bureaucracy without guaranteeing outcomes.' A handful of members voted against it, including state Rep. Brian Harrison (R), who argued that Texas's budget surplus should instead be spent on property tax cuts. But it passed the state Senate unanimously and the House by a factor of more than 10 to 1. If voters approve the referendum in November, a new funding will head to water projects across the state, ranging from desalination of seawater and briny water to the reuse of wastewater and the repair of leaky pipes — as well as flood control projects, which have taken on new public importance in the wake of the July 4 disaster. The state's towns and cities, Collins said, should think about water not in terms of something to be mined and ultimately depleted — like copper or oil — but in terms of a shifting, balanced portfolio of supplies. The gold standard for this approach, he argued, is the city of San Antonio, which combines aquifer pumping, underground storage, desalination and the state's largest recycling program. But the state's municipalities face significant risk if they get the calculus wrong, Collins said. 'People and companies move to Texas,' he said, because it's 'attractive' and they want to, 'not because they have to.' 'And if we ever do something, have a set of circumstances emerge that changes that analysis, we will suffer for decades and generations as a result.'
Int'l Business Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Int'l Business Times
Nancy Mace Sounds Alarm On Local Sex Trafficking Ring After Voting Against Epstein File Release
Days after Rep. Nancy Mace voted against efforts to force the Department of Justice to release documents related to Jeffrey Epstein, her call to question the prosecution of a local sex trafficking scandal is falling flat. On Tuesday, Mace (R-SC) voted with Republicans against a procedural motion that would allow the House to vote on a measure Rep. Rho Khanna (D-CA). The measure would have required Attorney General Pam Bondi to release and publish any records or evidence related to Epstein — a call that has gained increasing momentum amid backlash to last week's DOJ memo declaring that there was "no client list." Sharing a headline about an alleged Charleston County sex trafficking ring, Mace questioned the integrity of the justice system Thursday on social media. "The question is, will they ever be 'prosecuted'? South Carolina's 'justice' system is completely broken," Mace wrote. While Mace's bold social media assertions have previously invigorated her conservative MAGA base, her latest appeal to cast suspicion on the justice system drew immediate backlash. Will anyone ever be prosecuted for anything? 6 months into Trump's term, not one damn person has been arrested and charged for anything. — Texas Strong (@TX_Lone_Star) July 17, 2025 "As broken as the Republican controlled Congress that refuses to release the Trump Pedo Files," a user wrote in response to Mace's claim that the "'justice' system is broken." Mace was criticized for what users perceived as all talk and no action. "You have the presidency, the House, the Supreme Court, and the South Carolina state House, yet you're here tweeting instead of doing anything," one user noted, quipping, "Maybe another photo op will help?" Here's a thought - stop ranting about bathrooms and FIX THIS! — Matthew Causer (@drcauser) July 17, 2025 "You post all this and talk non-stop about it, then you go and vote to bury the Epstein file," another user said. "Where I'm from that's called bulls***!!!" "So are we calling out sex trafficking or not?" was a common refrain. One user added, "You don't seem to want to call out the Trump administration regarding Epstein. Just making general statements for show." You care about sex trafficking victims again? — Roger That (@darksidetimes) July 17, 2025 Hypocrisy was a central theme in dozens of replies, berating Mace for voting against the Epstein file release while continuing to present herself as a self-described advocate for women and children. "Too bad everyone sees you as one of the people who voted for the cover up of s*** like this," said another, with another adding, "You're part of the problem." "Nancy is against boys playing girls soccer, but she is protecting millionaires who molested and trafficked 14-year-old girls," a comment read, with another writing, "You are complicit in their crimes." Don't post this while you protect pedos. Hypocrite. — lorraine morabito (@lorrmora1002) July 17, 2025 Mace has faced an onslaught of criticism since Tuesday's vote. That afternoon she wrote, "All child r*pists should get the death penalty," which inspired the addition of a community note that said "Nancy Mace wrote this minutes after voting against the release of the Epstein files." All child r*pists should get the death penalty. — Nancy Mace (@NancyMace) July 15, 2025 Mace defended her vote, clarifying that it was a "routine, party-line procedural vote," accusing Democrats of playing games with the attempt. However, X users shot back with the addition of other community notes, calling her dismissal of the vote as merely procedural misleading. Community members also noted that Republicans repeatedly blocked efforts to get the files released. The uprising in Mace's replies highlights the rising tide of discontent among MAGA loyalists who expected the Trump administration to "drain the swamp." Originally published on Latin Times
The Hill
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
Justice Department steps in for Nancy Mace
President Trump 's Justice Department (DOJ) has the back of Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) in its attempt to use an obscure law to protect her from a libel lawsuit. The administration wants to largely step in for Mace against a man's defamation lawsuit concerning a House floor speech she gave that accused the man of being a predator. If successful, the move would protect Mace from paying any damages over the libel claims, leaving taxpayers on the hook for any award and the federal government's representation. The Justice Department invoked the Westfall Act, a 1988 law that increased protections for federal employees against lawsuits concerning things they did in the course of their employment. U.S. Attorney Bryan Stirling certified that law includes Mace's speech and social media posts as well as the work done by her congressional staff, who are also named in the suit. 'Defendant Nancy Mace was acting within the scope of her office or employment as a Member of Congress at the time the alleged conduct took place,' Stirling wrote in a court filing made public Friday. Brian Musgrave, the plaintiff, is one of four men Mace named in the stunning February speech. The congresswoman made a series of allegations of sexual abuse and voyeurism, naming Musgrave, her ex-fiancé, and two other South Carolina men, all of whom deny wrongdoing. When reached for comment, Musgrave's attorney, Eric Bland, pointed The Gavel to his interview with Post & Courier. Bland told the South Carolina outlet that the Justice Department's move is 'ridiculous.' Mace's congressional office did not return requests for comment. The Justice Department points to a long list of examples in which courts have found Members of Congress act within the course of their office when they communicate with their constituents from the floor or on social media. The examples cross party lines. During the Biden administration, the Justice Department stepped in for Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) in a defamation lawsuit. A man arrested in Norman's district whose charges were dropped sued the congressman over statements on his Facebook page about the arrest. A judge dropped Norman from the lawsuit. The Bush administration became the defendant in a 2005 defamation suit initially against then-Rep. Nick Rahall, who was sued by a man he called a 'bigoted, right wing, redneck, racist wacko' to a television reporter. The Clinton administration came to the aid of late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), who while pushing for a law mandating buffer zones around abortion clinics said an anti-abortion group had a 'matter of national policy firebombing and even murder.' And even when the Justice Department hasn't stepped in on its own accord, judges have agreed with lawmakers that the law still protects them. Courts ruled a group of Covington Catholic High School students involved in a widely publicized incident with a Native American elder on the National Mall could not seek defamation damages from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and then-Rep. Deb Haaland (D-N.M.) over their posts on X, then known as Twitter. Paul Figley, a former deputy director of DOJ's Torts Branch, said that subbing in for lawmakers didn't happen often since the Westfall Act's passage but did come up here and there. 'The presumption was that anytime a member of Congress spoke, they were acting as congressmen,' Figley said. That's why it 'came as a surprise' when in the context of the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, some lawmakers were deemed not to have been acting within the scope of their official duties. DOJ, for example, declined to certify then-Rep. Mo Brooks (R- Ala.) claim he was acting officially when he delivered a speech to Trump supporters at the Jan. 6, 2021, 'Stop the Steal' rally. Figley said that, under the statute, a defendant can seek to have a judge certify that they were acting in their official capacity if the government declines to certify. But until cases like that percolate through the courts, the bounds of a federal employee's official duties remain loosely defined. 'It's still an open question,' he said. The Justice Department has been busy this year stepping in to defend a variety of government officials, not least of them the president. This year, DOJ has sought to step in on Trump's behalf in two civil matters: advice columnist E. Jean Carroll 's defamation lawsuit and several consolidated suits over Trump's actions on Jan. 6, 2021. (You might recall we wrote about it in April in The Gavel.) An appeals panel declined to let DOJ sub in for Trump in Carroll's case, and the question is still pending in the other consolidated suits. Welcome to The Gavel, The Hill's weekly courts newsletter from Ella Lee and Zach Schonfeld. Click above to email us tips, or reach out to us on X (@ByEllaLee, @ZachASchonfeld) or Signal (elee.03, zachschonfeld.48). Ryan Routh wants 'prisoner swap' The second man who attempted to assassinate Trump while he sought another term in the White House would like to be exchanged for prisoners held by a foreign adversary. In a winding and at times bizarre letter to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, alleged would-be assassin Ryan Routh said he had hoped that the government would swap him with prisoners held by Hamas, Iran, China or elsewhere 'so that I could die being of some use and save all this court mess.' 'But no one acts,' he wrote. 'Perhaps you have the power to trade me away.' Routh explained that the government should be thrilled to send him away. 'What an easy diplomatic victory for Trump to give an American he hates to China, Iran or North Korea or wherever as a gesture of peace in exchange for an unjustly held democratic prisoner – everyone wins,' he said. Routh also questioned 'why the death penalty is not allowed' in his case, claiming that his 'life of nothingness' should allow for it. The charges Routh faces carry a maximum penalty of life in prison. It comes as Routh seeks to drop his public defenders and represent himself in his federal criminal case for allegedly plotting to assassinate Trump. He suggests in the letter that his attorneys refuse to answer his questions and do not want his case. 'I will be representing myself moving forward; it was ridiculous from the outset to consider a random stranger that knows nothing of who I am to speak for me,' he wrote. 'That was foolish and ignorant, and I am sorry – a childish mistake.' The Hill requested comment from his public defenders. Routh faces five counts including attempted assassination of a major presidential candidate over accusations he pushed the muzzle of a rifle through the perimeter of Trump's West Palm Beach golf course last year while the former president was a hole away, prompting a Secret Service agent to fire. In a letter detailing his plans months before the Sept. 15, 2024, unsuccessful effort, he allegedly admitted to planning to assassinate Trump and apologized for failing. The plot to assassinate Trump was the second such effort last year. On July 13, 2024, a 20-year-old opened fire during a campaign stop in Butler, Pa., clipping Trump's ear and killing one of his supporters. The attempted assassin, Thomas Crooks, was killed by a Secret Service sniper. Cannon, who was appointed by Trump and oversaw Trump's federal criminal case in Florida before it was dismissed, has not yet decided if Routh may represent himself. He's set to go to trial on Sept. 8. Los Angeles at heart of immigration raid litigation The city of Los Angeles has emerged as a hot spot for critical litigation over Trump's immigration raids across the country. It's the only place the president has activated the National Guard without the governor's consent, and in the last week, judges have issued rulings blocking indiscriminate immigration sweeps and bolstering press protections at protests. Los Angeles's breakout role marks a critical juncture of the administration's raids and the ambitions of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat widely viewed as a possible 2028 contender for president. Newsom and the state's attorney general moved quickly to sue the Trump administration after the president sent thousands of National Guard troops to protect immigration officers amid protests in Los Angeles that have sometimes turned violent. A federal judge deemed Trump's deployment illegal and forced him to return control of the troops to Newsom, but a federal appeals court panel put that order on pause. As the appeal proceeds, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, the Clinton-appointed lower court judge, scheduled a three-day bench trial beginning Aug. 11. He's set to consider whether the troops' actions on the ground violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which limits the military from conducting civilian law enforcement domestically. … But the Trump administration said late Tuesday it's rescinding the deployment of some 2,000 guardsmen, making uncertain the case's future. The administration took another hit Friday to its efforts to conduct the widespread raids. U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, a Biden appointee, ordered the administration to halt immigration stops and arrests without reasonable suspicion in Los Angeles and six other California counties. A lawsuit accused the administration of targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California without regard for their immigration status. In fiery court filings, the government asked a federal appeals court to pause the order while the litigation plays out. Justice Department lawyer John Blakeley castigated the judge for giving the government just two days to respond to the plaintiffs' submissions and having 'largely rubber-stamped' the challengers' proposed order days later. 'The result is a sweeping, district-wide injunction that threatens to hobble lawful immigration enforcement by hanging a Damocles sword of contempt over every immigration stop,' Blakeley wrote. The appeals panel has not yet ruled on DOJ's request. Also on Friday, a federal judge temporarily blocked Los Angeles police officers from using rubber bullets and other less-lethal munitions against reporters covering protests of the immigration crackdown. The lawsuit, brought by the Los Angeles Press Club and an investigative reporting network, was filed last month over law enforcement's 'continuing abuse' against media covering the demonstrations. U.S. District Judge Hernán Vera, a Biden appointee, said the journalists are likely to face irreparable harm by continuing to cover the protests without court intervention. 'Indeed, given the fundamental nature of the speech interests involved and the almost daily protests throughout Southern California drawing media coverage, the identified harm is undoubtedly imminent and concrete,' Vera wrote. Abrego Garcia faces possible return to ICE Wednesday marks a decisive moment for Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the man mistakenly deported to El Salvador, as he faces a potential return to immigration custody. Ever since he was returned to the United States last month, federal authorities have detained him in Tennessee on his human smuggling criminal charges. But that could soon change. A magistrate judge ruled the government can't justify detaining him on the charges, and U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw, a former President Obama appointee, may order his release as soon as a hearing set for 1 p.m. CDT. If that occurs, Abrego Garcia will not go free. He is expected to immediately enter custody of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The administration has repeatedly declined to finalize what would happen next, saying they don't make those decisions until someone is in ICE's hands. But Abrego Garcia's lawyers are concerned a plane is gassed up and ready to deport him within hours. Here's a look at the administration's options heading into Wednesday's hearing: Lift order preventing El Salvador deportation: An immigration judge in 2019 protected Abrego Garcia from being deported to El Salvador over gang threats to his family's pupusa business, an order known as a 'withholding of removal.' The administration violated the order by deporting him there anyways in March. Now, the government is signaling it may try to re-open the proceedings so it can lift the order and validly deport him to El Salvador, again. Third-country deportation: The 2019 ruling does not protect Abrego Garcia from deportation to other countries. Last week, the Justice Department said their current plan was to remove him somewhere else, known as a third-country deportation. Once a country is identified, the administration's policy guidance could place Abrego Garcia on a plane in a matter of hours. If the third country assures a migrant won't face persecution and the State Department finds that credible, the migrant can be removed without any further procedures, the guidance states. According to a senior ICE official's testimony last week, Mexico has given assurances for migrants of certain nationalities and South Sudan appears to have done so as well. Otherwise, the guidance provides the migrant an opportunity to raise persecution claims with an immigration officer. Not swiftly deport him: It's possible the administration will not swiftly deport him and instead keep him in the country until he faces trial. Sidebar 5 top docket updates Birthright citizenship order blocked, again: A federal judge blocked Trump's birthright citizenship order for a nationwide class of babies who would be denied citizenship. RIFs resume: The Supreme Court allowed a wide swath of federal agencies to resume planning for large-scale reductions in force. Education Department gutting OKed: The Supreme Court allowed the Education Department to restart mass layoffs and other efforts to gut the agency. Dem AGs sue Trump: Washington, D.C., and 24 Democratic states sued the Trump administration for freezing $6 billion in after-school program funding. DOJ goes after California: The Justice Department sued California's education department for refusing to comply with Trump administration orders to ban transgender girls from girls' school sports teams. In other news Hill Nation summit: Join The Hill and NewsNation on Wednesday for the inaugural Hill Nation Summit, a full-day bipartisan gathering in Washington, D.C., featuring titans of government, business and policy. Watch interviews with Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and more at this link. Judges rebuff Trump prosecutor pick: Without explanation, the judges of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York declined to appoint John Sarcone as the district's chief federal prosecutor, putting his future in limbo. Trump named Sarcone as interim U.S. attorney in March. But federal law provides the interim appointment only can last for 120 days. The judges had the authority to keep him in the role indefinitely until Trump fills the vacancy, but they declined to do so. Epstein spillover: The Justice Department is opposing Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell's bid to overturn her conviction. It comes at an awkward time for the administration, which is actively beating back criticism for declining to release additional information about the disgraced financier and his death by suicide. Push intensifies to defeat Bove: Nearly 80 former federal and state judges sent a letter urging the Senate to reject Emil Bove's confirmation to a federal appeals judgeship. On the Docket Don't be surprised if additional hearings are scheduled throughout the week. But here's what we're watching for now: Today: A federal judge in Tennessee is set to consider whether Kilmar Abrego Garcia should be released before facing his criminal trial there, at which point he is expected to be transferred into immigration custody. Thursday: A federal judge in Massachusetts is set to hold a preliminary injunction hearing in two cities' challenge to the Trump administration's efforts to go after sanctuary cities. Friday: A federal judge in Texas is set to hold a preliminary injunction hearing in a lawsuit over Financial Crimes Enforcement Network's Geographic Targeting order which demands money services businesses in 30 zip codes report cash transactions over $200 to federal law enforcement to expose cartel crimes. Monday: The Supreme Court will announce orders. A federal judge in Massachusetts is set to hold a summary judgment hearing in Harvard's lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for revoking its certification that allows international student enrollment. Another Massachusetts federal judge is set to hold a hearing for injunctive relief in Planned Parenthood's challenge to the loss of much of its federal funding under Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' Tuesday: No notable hearings scheduled. What we're reading
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Hypocrisy? Nancy Mace calls for death penalty for child rapists; X Community Notes reveal she said it moments after voting against Epstein files release
Just minutes after voting against a Democratic-led effort to release the long-awaited Jeffrey Epstein files, Congresswoman Nancy Mace took to social media with a bold statement: 'All child r*pists should get the death penalty,' according to Axios, as noted by X community notes on her post. Her post has since drawn intense backlash, with critics accusing her and fellow Republicans of protecting abusers. Mace's post came shortly after the House voted 211–210 to block a procedural move that would have triggered debate on forcing the justice department to release the Epstein documents within 30 days, according to the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives All 211 votes against the motion came from Republicans. Just one Republican crossing over would have tipped the outcome. Although Mace is not on the House Rules Committee, she was among the 211 GOP members who voted against the move to bring the matter to the floor, leaving many on social media questioning her sincerity. Procedural or political? Democrats had sought to advance the amendment, first introduced by Representative Ro Khanna, via a procedural manoeuvre. The attempt followed the Rules Committee's decision to strike down the amendment the previous evening. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Cách giao dịch ETH/USD mà không cần nắm giữ Ether IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo Representative Mary Gay Scanlon introduced the motion on Tuesday to force a vote, but it failed narrowly. The measure would have forced the release of files related to the Epstein case, which is still a hot topic for both Republicans and Democrats, especially among supporters of US President Donald Trump. Many in the MAGA movement have long demanded more transparency about Epstein's network and connections. Even outspoken Republican figures such as Marjorie Taylor Greene, who have previously voiced support for releasing the Epstein files, voted against the motion. Mace defends her vote In a follow-up post on X, Mace attempted to clarify her position, saying the vote in question was being misrepresented. 'There was no vote on the Epstein files today... despite Democrats best efforts to trick the FAKE NEWS and YOU into thinking otherwise,' she wrote. She argued that the vote was simply a routine procedural action known as the 'Previous Question' (PQ), not about Epstein or any specific issue. 'If it fails, the minority takes over. In today's GOP-led Congress, Democrats have no shot at defeating the PQ. So they played games – knowing it would fail – and then falsely claimed Republicans voted against releasing the Epstein files,' Mace posted. She continued, 'Don't fall for it. A TOTAL and COMPLETE LIE. This was a routine, party-line procedural vote. Nothing more. In fact, a PQ hasn't failed since the 1980s.' However, another X Community Note said, 'Misleading. GOP twice blocked efforts to get Epstein files released,' citing Politico.
Axios
11-07-2025
- Business
- Axios
Ro Khanna plans South Carolina visit for "benefits over billionaires" tour
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) is taking his "benefits over billionaires" tour to South Carolina next week, holding town halls in GOP districts in the deep south. Why it matters: It's a subtle and strategic sortie to a key Democratic primary state, all under the cover of winning the House in 2026. For Khanna, who co-chaired Sen. Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign, it's also an opportunity "to test out this fresh economic vision with Black voters," he told Axios. "Black voters are the base of our party," he said. Khanna will also use the trip to troll Republicans and talk directly to some of their voters, including those who rely on Medicaid. Driving the news: Khanna will participate alongside Rep. Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.) in town hall meetings in the districts of Republicans Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and William Timmons (R-S.C.). Khanna has held previous town halls in GOP districts in California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Zoom in: Timmons' district is more solidly Republican, but Democrats are eyeing Mace's seat. "The Mace one is a winnable district, light red," Khanna said. "That's exactly the type of district which we could win if we put in the effort, but it's not a give-me." Zoom out: Democratic lawmakers are starting to make trips to early primary and caucus states, raising speculation that they are testing the waters for a potential 2028 run. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) hit New Hampshire on Friday. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) visited GOP territory in South Carolina earlier this week. Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) will visit Iowa in August, with former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel planning to hit an Iowa fish fry in September. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg held a town hall in Iowa that focused on veterans.
