Latest news with #WashingtonStateStandard
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's birthright citizenship order lands in Seattle appeals court
Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, center, speaks to reporters alongside Solicitor General Noah Purcell, left, and Northwest Immigrant Rights Project Legal Director Matt Adams, right, outside a Seattle courthouse where federal appeals court judges heard arguments over President Donald Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship on Wednesday, June 4, 2025. (Photo by Jake Goldstein-Street/Washington State Standard) SEATTLE — Federal appeals court judges in Seattle on Wednesday questioned a Trump administration lawyer and Washington's solicitor general over the president's executive order restricting birthright citizenship. The three-judge panel in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals appeared more open to the Trump administration's arguments than a federal judge in Seattle who in January called the order 'blatantly unconstitutional.' Perhaps the most pointed question came after a lengthy back-and-forth over what the writers of the 14th Amendment meant when they enshrined birthright citizenship into the U.S. Constitution. Hawkins asked Department of Justice attorney Eric McArthur, who clerked for conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, what the late Justice Antonin Scalia would think of his arguments. Scalia, an ardent originalist, anchored the Supreme Court's conservative wing alongside Thomas. 'He was widely critical of looking at congressional history and statements of senators opposing or supporting a particular thing, and famously said 'just the words,'' said Hawkins, a Clinton appointee. McArthur said he thought Scalia would have been 'very open to looking at all of the historic evidence.' After McCarthur's arguments, Hawkins told the Justice Department attorney he did a 'terrific job.' Trump's executive action, signed on the first day of his second term, aims to end birthright citizenship for babies born to a mother and father who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. Since the aftermath of the Civil War, the country has automatically given citizenship to babies born on U.S. soil, no matter their immigration status. Wednesday was the first time the merits of Trump's order have come before a federal appeals court. The arguments from Washington's solicitor general, the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project and McArthur come a few weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court took up Washington's case on birthright citizenship and others. The justices focused on whether preliminary injunctions, like the one from Judge John Coughenor in Seattle at the center of Wednesday's hearing, should affect only the parties involved in a particular case or can be applied nationwide. The Trump administration contends such orders are judicial overreach. The Supreme Court's ruling-to-come could have implications far beyond the birthright citizenship case, potentially staunching the flow of temporary nationwide blocks that state attorneys general are relying on to stop what they see as the president's unlawful actions. In their May 15 hearing, the justices appeared wary of allowing different rules by state. On Wednesday, state Solicitor General Noah Purcell called Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship 'unconstitutional and unAmerican.' 'President Trump seeks to turn citizenship into a political football, denying that precious right to hundreds of thousands of babies born in this country simply because their parents are here to work, to study or to escape persecution or violence,' said Purcell, who argued successfully against the president's travel ban in court in 2017. As is customary, the 9th Circuit judges didn't rule from the bench Wednesday. They'll issue a written ruling in the coming weeks or months. Both sides told the judges it may be prudent to first wait for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the nationwide injunction question. Former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, appointed two of the three judges who oversaw Wednesday's hearing. The other is a Trump appointee from the president's first term. Several other cases are currently awaiting similar appellate hearings after lower courts awarded preliminary injunctions. The Supreme Court will likely have the final say on the merits of Trump's order. Speaking to reporters after the Wednesday morning hearing, Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said 'the judges had a lot of pointed and difficult questions for both sides to grapple with.' Still, he said he is 'really confident moving forward that this court, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will rule in the states' favors.' The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution codified birthright citizenship in 1868. The amendment begins: 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.' Trump's order, initially set to take effect Feb. 19, focused on the 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' phrase. 'The Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States,' Trump's executive order reads. 'The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof.'' Legal precedent, including an 1898 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, has long upheld birthright citizenship. That case dealt with a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents named Wong King Ark. The justices ruled he was a U.S. citizen. The two sides interpret this case differently. Much of Wednesday's arguments centered the Wong Kim Ark decision. McArthur noted the Supreme Court ruled 'every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States.' He focuses on the word 'domiciled,' arguing those here temporarily or without legal status don't fall under that umbrella. Matt Adams, legal director of the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, countered by reading further from the Supreme Court decision. 'His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory,' the justices continued in their Wong Kim Ark ruling, arguing that he is 'as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen.' Washington's case against Trump's birthright citizenship order, filed alongside Oregon, Arizona and Illinois, led to the second Trump administration's first judicial rebuke. The Reagan-appointed judge, Coughenour, later agreed to indefinitely block Trump's order while the case played out in court. Trump's Department of Justice appealed, leading to Wednesday's hearing. Two pregnant noncitizen women joined the states' litigation, fearful their children could be born stateless. One has since given birth to a baby born a U.S. citizen because of court action, said Matt Adams, legal director of the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project. In 2022, about 153,000 babies across the country were born to two parents without legal immigration status, including 4,000 in Washington, according to the plaintiffs. The states have said they stand to lose federal funding through programs like Medicaid that otherwise could help these children if they were citizens. Purcell told the judges that implementing the Trump administration's vision would be difficult, leaving hospitals to ask about immigration status and how long parents plan to remain in the United States. 'Doesn't that just show the injunction is premature?' asked Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee. 'We don't know how unworkable it is because they were not given a chance to implement it.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Washington's attorney general sees no signs of legal battles with Trump letting up
Attorney General Nick Brown, center, speaks to reporters alongside California Attorney General Rob Bonta, right, and Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, left, before an event at Town Hall Seattle on Monday, June 2, 2025. (Photo by Jake Goldstein-Street/Washington State Standard) SEATTLE — Washington state Attorney General Nick Brown warned in mid-April that the Trump administration's actions put the country near the 'precipice of a constitutional crisis.' His comments alongside fellow state attorneys general in Colorado came shortly after the White House defied court orders to return a Maryland man the federal government had wrongfully sent to El Salvador under the president's immigration crackdown. Six weeks later, Brown shies away from using that term, but says President Donald Trump's disregard for some court rulings, especially in immigration cases, has made the circumstances around how he is wielding executive power 'much more dangerous.' 'Whether or not we're in a constitutional crisis, you know, that's somewhat of an academic debate,' the Democratic attorney general told reporters before a town hall Monday alongside his counterparts from Oregon and California. 'In my mind, we are in a crisis. Call it what you want.' It's been a whirlwind few months for Brown, who took office in January. Later that month, the day after Trump took office, Brown sued over the president's executive order seeking to restrict birthright citizenship. Since then, he's filed 19 more lawsuits, over threats to gender-affirming care, election systems and cuts to a host of federal agencies and funding opportunities. Some of that litigation is playing out in federal courtrooms in Seattle. Those cases have led to court orders blocking Trump's actions, but are not fully settled. Oregon and California are plaintiffs in even more lawsuits than Washington. Brown guaranteed more litigation to come. At Monday's event in Seattle, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield recalled a meeting he had with his governor, Tina Kotek, in January. She didn't want him to be the next Bob Ferguson, who during Trump's first term served as Washington attorney general and brought dozens of lawsuits against the Trump administration. This raised Ferguson's profile before he was elected governor last year. 'During the first Trump presidency, I kept looking on the news all the time, and I kept seeing Bob Ferguson every single day,' Kotek told Rayfield. 'You're not going to do that to me, are you?' Rayfield told the crowd, 'I stand here in Washington to tell you I am the Oregon version of Bob Ferguson.' At the town hall, the trio of western states' top legal officials heard concerns from locals about cut public health funding, increasingly brazen immigration enforcement, disinvestment in climate policy, and congressional attacks on reproductive health care. California Attorney General Rob Bonta acknowledged that it's a heavy time for people opposed to Trump. 'We shouldn't feel hopeless, because we're not helpless,' he added. 'We have power.' Last month, Brown was in Washington, D.C., when the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments over challenges to Trump's order seeking to restrict birthright citizenship. The arguments focused on the legal issue of lower court orders blocking actions nationwide, versus only in the places from which plaintiffs are suing. The justices haven't yet ruled on the matter. Meanwhile, Brown's office will be in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle on Wednesday, arguing to maintain such a preliminary injunction indefinitely stopping the federal government from implementing the birthright citizenship order. The attorney general has also been at the forefront of defending so-called 'sanctuary' policies that states and cities have enacted to stop local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. Brown said his lawsuit against an eastern Washington county that aided immigration agents was 'the most difficult case that I have had to bring.' Last week, the Trump administration included Washington, about three dozen of the state's counties and a handful of cities on a nationwide list of sanctuary jurisdictions that it feels hinder the work of immigration enforcement. Listed on the inventory was the nonexistent 'Swinomish County.' The president has threatened to withhold federal funding from these state and local governments. Over the weekend, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security took down the list's webpage amid pushback from police officials. In a call Monday, Brown and other attorneys general laughed over the administration's sloppiness. 'We will survive Donald Trump,' Brown said. Still, he felt the need to knock on wood after saying Trump wouldn't be on the ballot in 2028. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
7 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Bishops sue to overturn new WA law requiring clergy to report child abuse
Gov. Bob Ferguson, at podium, goes to shake hands with state Sen. Noel Frame, D-Seattle, at the signing of a bill to make clergy mandatory reporters of child abuse and neglect, on May 2, 2025 in Olympia. At center is Mary Dispenza, a founding member of the Catholic Accountability Project. (Photo by Jerry Cornfield/Washington State Standard) Washington's leading Catholic bishops filed a lawsuit Thursday contending the new state law requiring religious leaders to report child abuse or neglect, even when it is disclosed in confession, is unconstitutional and should be invalidated. They argue the law violates their First Amendment right to practice religion free of government interference, and is religious discrimination because it will force priests to violate their sacred vows or face punishment by the state. It also violates a provision of the state constitution guaranteeing 'freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment, belief and worship,' they assert. They want the law set aside and an injunction barring criminal investigations or prosecution of Roman Catholic clergy for not divulging information learned in confession. The new law 'puts Roman Catholic priests to an impossible choice: violate 2,000 years of Church teaching and incur automatic excommunication or refuse to comply with Washington law and be subject to imprisonment, fine, and civil liability,' the suit reads. Archbishop Paul Etienne of Seattle, along with Bishop Joseph Tyson of Yakima and Bishop Thomas Daly of Spokane, are the lead plaintiffs in the suit filed in the U.S. District Court in Tacoma. Gov. Bob Ferguson, Attorney General Nick Brown and the prosecuting attorney in each of Washington's 39 counties are named as defendants. Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty Institute, one of the groups representing the bishops, called the law 'a brazen act of religious discrimination.' 'For centuries, Catholic priests have been willing to die as martyrs rather than violate this sacred duty. A few politicians in Washington state won't break them. And the Constitution protects them,' he said in a statement. First Liberty Institute represented the Bremerton High School football coach who successfully challenged his firing for gathering with players to pray on the field following games. That case went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Mike Faulk, a spokesman for the Washington attorney general, said in an email that they are reviewing the suit. A Ferguson spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment from the governor. This legal fight centers on Senate Bill 5375, which Ferguson signed into law on May 2 and will take effect July 27. It adds clergy members to the state's list of individuals legally required to report suspected child abuse to law enforcement or the Department of Children, Youth and Families. Disclosures in confession or other rites where the religious leader is bound to confidentiality are not exempt. But under the law, they will retain their privilege to not be compelled to testify in related court cases or criminal proceedings. Catholic leaders assert in the suit that existing policies adopted by the dioceses in Seattle, Yakima and Spokane 'go further in the protection of children than the current requirements of Washington law.' They also iterate that confession of sins is one of the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church and is protected by the sacramental seal, which forbids sharing anything disclosed by a penitent. 'The use of a religious practice to further the State's policy goals violates basic constitutional principles prohibiting the excessive entanglement of church and state,' the suit reads. With the law in place, priests would be forced to choose between 'temporal criminal punishment and eternal damnation,' it adds. The Washington State Catholic Conference opposed the bill largely because it did not exempt disclosures heard in the confessional. 'This trust is sacred, and any law that jeopardizes it risks discouraging those who recognize the harm they have caused from seeking moral guidance,' said Jean Hill, the organization's executive director, in a statement. On May 5, the U.S. Department of Justice announced it had opened a civil rights investigation into the 'apparent conflict' of the new law with 'the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment.' Federal officials have provided no updates since the announcement. When he signed the bill, Ferguson said keeping the confessional in the bill did not give him pause. As a Catholic, he said, 'I'm very familiar with it. Been to confession, myself. I felt this was important legislation for protecting kids.'
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Red pen politics: 7 vetoes Gov. Bob Ferguson made in the Washington state budget
Gov. Bob Ferguson using a red pen to partially veto a bill on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. (Photo by Jacquelyn Jimenez Romero/Washington State Standard) Before Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson signed the next state budget on Tuesday, he vetoed a few dozen spending provisions scattered throughout its 1,366 pages. The plan he approved lays out $78 billion in spending over two years. The roughly 55 items he removed add up to around $22.3 million in savings. He zeroed out funding of contracts to nonprofits serving foster youth, college students, immigrants, and seniors. He canceled spending for studies and work groups. Ferguson's veto message, containing an itemized list, spans 15 pages. Here are some of the targets of Ferguson's veto pen. The Garage is a cafe where high school students can drop in after school and receive tutoring, counseling, or case management services. It will lose $300,000, or roughly one-fifth of its budget. If the dollars cannot be made up through private donations, the center will look at reducing its services for teens. The reduction would have a 'massive impact' in the community, said KayLee Jaech, the group's executive director. The governor wrote in his veto message that supporting programs and services for youth is important, but cited budget constraints. Mentor Washington has been recruiting, training and providing support for mentoring programs for at-risk youth in Washington using $1.55 million in contracts with the Department of Children, Youth and Families. About half is getting spent now on a pilot effort focused on foster youth. Lawmakers shaved $1 million of that sum in the budget they sent Ferguson. While he noted the significant reduction for the 'valuable' program, he axed the remaining $550,000. 'We need to find a way to regroup and reconfigure what service looks like moving forward,' said Jolynn Kenney, executive director of Mentor Washington. Centro Cultural Mexicano in Redmond provides services for low-income, immigrant, and Spanish-speaking residents in King and Snohomish counties. They will lose a $200,000 state grant, which helped connect clients with health care, financial coaching, small business assistance, internships, and home buying services — all at no cost. Free services like this help support communities, Ferguson said. But he said that due to the budget challenges, this program was something the state couldn't afford. Refugee Women's Alliance provides services to refugees and immigrants, including an ice skating lesson program for preschoolers from diverse and low-income families. They will lose the $200,000 the Legislature allocated for the skating program. They have previously received money from the state and have also partnered with the Seattle Kraken and One Roof Foundation. Political conservatives were sharply critical of this grant-funded program on social media. The governor said that while youth enrichment opportunities like this are beneficial, this one needed to be cut because of the budget deficit. A year ago, the state Board for Community and Technical Colleges received $257,000 'solely for the creation of a Hospitality Center of Excellence' at Columbia Basin College in Pasco. It launched in January with its leadership drawing up a game plan to strengthen ties between culinary programs on campuses with hospitality businesses and organizations. A key goal was to develop best practices and strategies for workforce education and training in the industry. Not now. It will close up shop in July. Though the Legislature did budget $408,000 for two years of operation, Ferguson deemed the 'worthwhile endeavor' not affordable and crossed it out. The state Department of Ecology won't get $816,000 of Climate Commitment Act proceeds to assess Washington's siting and permitting authority around potential wind energy projects in federal waters off the state's coast. The agency was also going to look into the ecological impacts of such undertakings as part of a broad analysis. 'Given the current federal administration's position on offshore wind, this work is less time sensitive,' Ferguson wrote in his veto message, adding he is 'committed to continued dialogue with coastal Tribes regarding the future of offshore wind projects.' Meanwhile, Ecology did receive $338,000 to develop 'planning, engagement, and evaluation tools for effective ocean management and offshore wind energy development.' And Ferguson left $500,000 in the budget to contract with 'a nonregulatory coalition' in Seattle that wants Washington to be able to receive power from future floating wind projects off the West Coast. How many places in Washington market themselves as 'senior independent living' communities for individuals aged 55 years and older? Lawmakers put $80,000 in the budget for the state Department of Commerce to come up with an answer. And, by July 1, 2026, the department was to make recommendations on creating a registry of senior living locations as a consumer protection move for residents and prospective residents. Not going to happen. 'Supporting our seniors is important to me but I am vetoing this item because of the state's significant fiscal challenges and funding cuts from the federal government,' Ferguson wrote to lawmakers in his veto message.
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Why is Washington's gas tax increasing? When does the gas tax go up?
Washington's gas tax is one of the highest in the nation. It's going up again. On July 1, 2025, the state's gas tax will increase by 6 cents per gallon, from 49.4 cents to 55.4 cents per gallon, the Washington State Standard reported. Starting on July 1, 2026, the gas tax will increase annually by 2%. It's the first gas tax increase since 2016, according to the Washington State Department of Revenue. The gas tax increase is part of a $3.2 billion transportation revenue package that Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson signed on May 20, the Washington State Standard reported. The gas tax will help fund a $15 billion transportation budget – also signed by Ferguson – that pays for things like public transit, road maintenance, and other infrastructure projects, the Seattle Times reported. Ferguson said at a news conference that "no one's excited" about raising the gas tax, but the state Legislature came together in a bipartisan fashion to address "serious challenges" with the transportation budget and declining revenue. "Our gas tax revenue is not what it was," Ferguson said, according to a YouTube video shared by KING 5 Seattle. "We have some structural challenges there that are well known to all of you." The state has been struggling with declining gas tax revenue as electric and more fuel-efficient vehicles have become more popular, KING 5 Seattle reported. The most popular car in Washington is the Tesla Model Y, according to Edmunds and a 2024 report from Car and Driver. Washington has one of the highest state excise taxes for gasoline in the country, according to a May 2025 report from ComplyIQ, a tax software company. California has the highest excise gas tax rate on gasoline at 59.6 cents per gallon, according to the report. Pennsylvania is second at 57.6 cents per gallon. Washington follows at 49.4 cents per gallon. Alaska has the lowest gas tax rate at 8.9 cents per gallon, according to the report. In addition to excise taxes, fuel prices are affected by state-specific sales taxes and fees, a 2024 Tax Foundation report said. The organization said it calculated these taxes and fees to find out the gas tax rates of each state. Washington still ranked near the top of the list at 52.82 cents per gallon, the fourth-highest rate in the U.S. This article originally appeared on Kitsap Sun: When is Washington's gas tax increasing? Why is the gas tax going up?
