Politics

NEW YORK (AP) — An NBC News correspondent who interviewed Pennsylvania Senate candidate John Fetterman said Wednesday that her reporting should not be seen as commentary on his fitness for office after he suffered a stroke.

But reporter Dasha Burns’ on-air comment that Fetterman appeared to have trouble understanding a conversation while they were making small talk has attracted attention — and is being used by politicians looking for an advantage in the closely followed Senate race against Republican Mehmet Oz.

Fetterman, a Democrat, suffered a stroke on May 13, and his health has emerged as a major issue in the campaign.

Burns’ Friday interview with Fetterman, which aired Tuesday, was his first on-camera interview since his stroke. He used a closed-captioning device that printed text of Burns’ questions on a computer screen in front of him.

Fetterman appeared to have little trouble answering the questions after he read them, although NBC showed him fumbling for the word “empathetic.” Burns said that when the captioning device was off, “it wasn’t clear he was understanding our conversation.”

“This is just nonsense,” business reporter and podcaster Kara Swisher, who had a stroke herself in 2011, said on Twitter. “Maybe this reporter is just bad at small talk.”

Swisher recently conducted an interview with Fetterman for her podcast and said, “I was really quite impressed with how well he’s doing. Everyone can judge for themselves.” Swisher has called attacks on Fetterman because of his health “appalling.”

A New York magazine reporter, Rebecca Traister, who interviewed the candidate for a cover story titled “The Vulnerability of John Fetterman,” tweeted that his “comprehension is not at all impaired. He understands everything. It’s just that he reads it and responds in real time … It’s a hearing/auditory challenge.”

Burns said she understands that different reporters had different experiences with Fetterman.

“Our reporting did not and should not comment on fitness for office,” Burns tweeted on Wednesday. “This is for voters to decide. What we push for as reporters is transparency. It’s our job.”

Stories about the interview aired on “NBC Nightly News” and the “Today” show.

___

Associated Press correspondent Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, contributed to this report.

source

By Jack Queen and Jacqueline Thomsen

(Reuters) -Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones must pay at least $965 million in damages to numerous families of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook mass shooting for falsely claiming they were actors who faked the tragedy, a Connecticut jury said on Wednesday.

The verdict, which came after three weeks of testimony in a state court in Waterbury, Connecticut, far outstripped the $49 million Jones was ordered to pay in August by a Texas jury in a similar case brought by two other Sandy Hook parents.

The Connecticut verdict applies to both Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems LLC, the owner of Jones’ Infowars website. FSS filed for bankruptcy in July.

The plaintiffs in the Connecticut case included more than a dozen relatives of 20 children and six staff members who were gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012. Jones claimed for years that the massacre was staged as part of a government plot to take away Americans’ guns.

Jurors said the plaintiffs should also be awarded attorney’s fees, which are set to be determined in November.

During a live broadcast as the verdict was read, Jones vowed to appeal and said his company’s ongoing bankruptcy will protect Infowars in the meantime.

“We’re fighting Goliath,” he said.

Jones’ lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Christopher Mattei, a lawyer for the families, said outside the courthouse that the verdict was “against Alex Jones, his lies and their poisonous spread, and a verdict for truth and for our common humanity.”

Outside the courthouse, Robbie Parker, one of the plaintiffs in the case, thanked the jury for its verdict. “Everybody who took the stand told the truth,” Parker said. “Except for one. The one who proclaims that that’s what he does. But while the truth was being said in the courtroom, he was standing right here, lying.”

Jones was found liable in a default judgment last year after he failed to comply with court orders.

During closing arguments last week, Mattei said Jones cashed in for years on lies about the shooting, which drove traffic to his Infowars website and boosted sales of its various products.

Infowars’ finances are not public, but according to trial testimony the site brought in revenue of $165 million between 2016 and 2018. An economist in the Texas case estimated that Jones is personally worth between $135 million and $270 million.

The families suffered a decade-long campaign of harassment and death threats by Jones’ followers, Mattei said.

“Every single one of these families (was) drowning in grief, and Alex Jones put his foot right on top of them,” Mattei told jurors.

ANGUISHED TESTIMONY

Jones’ lawyer countered during closing arguments that the plaintiffs had shown scant evidence of quantifiable losses. The attorney, Norman Pattis, urged jurors to ignore the political undercurrents in the case.

“This is not a case about politics,” Pattis said. “It’s about how much to compensate the plaintiffs.”

Douglas E. Mirell, a lawyer and defamation expert who was not involved in the case, said the sizable verdict sent a clear message of “revulsion” from the jury.

“His refusal to own up to the mendacity and lies that he promulgated time and time again over many years has now caught up with him,” Mirell said of Jones.

The trial was marked by weeks of anguished testimony from the families, who filled the gallery each day and took turns recounting how Jones’ lies about Sandy Hook compounded their grief. An FBI agent who responded to the shooting was also a plaintiff in the case.

Jones, who has since acknowledged that the shooting occurred, also testified and briefly threw the trial into chaos as he railed against his “liberal” critics and refused to apologize to the families.

In August, another jury found that Jones and his company must pay $49.3 million to Sandy Hook parents in a similar case in Austin, Texas, where the headquarters of Jones’ Infowars conspiracy theory website is located.

Jones’ lawyers have said they hope to void most of the payout in the Texas case before it is approved by a judge, calling it excessive under state law.

Connecticut does not place caps on damages, though Jones could appeal the verdict on other legal grounds.

Mattei said the families would go to any court necessary to enforce the verdict “for as long as it takes, because that’s what justice requires.”

(Reporting by Jack Queen in New York, Tom Hals in Wilmington, Del., and Jacqueline Thomsen in WashingtonEditing by Noeleen Walder, Mark Porter and Matthew Lewis)

source

(Reuters) – Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones must pay at least $965 million in damages to numerous families of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook mass shooting for falsely claiming they were actors who faked the tragedy, a Connecticut jury said on Wednesday.

The verdict, which came after three weeks of testimony in a state court in Waterbury, Connecticut, far outstripped the $49 million Jones was ordered to pay in August by a Texas jury in a similar case brought by two other Sandy Hook parents.

The Connecticut verdict applies to both Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems LLC, the owner of Jones’ Infowars website. FSS filed for bankruptcy in July.

The plaintiffs in the Connecticut case included more than a dozen relatives of 20 children and six staff members who were gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012. Jones claimed for years that the massacre was staged as part of a government plot to take away Americans’ guns.

Jurors said the plaintiffs should also be awarded attorney’s fees, which are set to be determined in November.

During a live broadcast as the verdict was read, Jones vowed to appeal and said his company’s ongoing bankruptcy will protect Infowars in the meantime.

“We’re fighting Goliath,” he said.

Jones’ lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Christopher Mattei, a lawyer for the families, said outside the courthouse that the verdict was “against Alex Jones, his lies and their poisonous spread, and a verdict for truth and for our common humanity.”

Outside the courthouse, Robbie Parker, one of the plaintiffs in the case, thanked the jury for its verdict. “Everybody who took the stand told the truth,” Parker said. “Except for one. The one who proclaims that that’s what he does. But while the truth was being said in the courtroom, he was standing right here, lying.”

Jones was found liable in a default judgment last year after he failed to comply with court orders.

During closing arguments last week, Mattei said Jones cashed in for years on lies about the shooting, which drove traffic to his Infowars website and boosted sales of its various products.

Infowars’ finances are not public, but according to trial testimony the site brought in revenue of $165 million between 2016 and 2018. An economist in the Texas case estimated that Jones is personally worth between $135 million and $270 million.

FSS’s bankruptcy will limit the total money available to Sandy Hook families, but they could seek other assets from Jones if a judge rules his company deliberately harmed them, according to Brian Kabateck, a plaintiffs’ attorney who was not involved in the case.

“The underlying conduct was egregious, and that’s the kind of thing that could get you beyond the limits of the bankruptcy,” Kabateck told Reuters.

Jones has not personally filed for bankruptcy but the same principle would apply if he does, Kabateck said.

ANGUISHED TESTIMONY

The families suffered a decade-long campaign of harassment and death threats by Jones’ followers, Mattei said.

“Every single one of these families (was) drowning in grief, and Alex Jones put his foot right on top of them,” Mattei told jurors.

Jones’ lawyer countered during closing arguments that the plaintiffs had shown scant evidence of quantifiable losses. The attorney, Norman Pattis, urged jurors to ignore the political undercurrents in the case.

“This is not a case about politics,” Pattis said. “It’s about how much to compensate the plaintiffs.”

Douglas E. Mirell, a lawyer and defamation expert who was not involved in the case, said the sizable verdict sent a clear message of “revulsion” from the jury.

“His refusal to own up to the mendacity and lies that he promulgated time and time again over many years has now caught up with him,” Mirell said of Jones.

The trial was marked by weeks of anguished testimony from the families, who filled the gallery each day and took turns recounting how Jones’ lies about Sandy Hook compounded their grief. An FBI agent who responded to the shooting was also a plaintiff in the case.

Jones, who has since acknowledged that the shooting occurred, also testified and briefly threw the trial into chaos as he railed against his “liberal” critics and refused to apologize to the families.

In August, another jury found that Jones and his company must pay $49.3 million to Sandy Hook parents in a similar case in Austin, Texas, where the headquarters of Jones’ Infowars conspiracy theory website is located.

Jones’ lawyers have said they hope to void most of the payout in the Texas case before it is approved by a judge, calling it excessive under state law.

Connecticut does not place caps on damages, though Jones could appeal the verdict on other legal grounds.

Mattei said the families would go to any court necessary to enforce the verdict “for as long as it takes, because that’s what justice requires.”

(Reporting by Jack Queen in New York, Tom Hals in Wilmington, Del., and Jacqueline Thomsen in WashingtonEditing by Noeleen Walder, Mark Porter and Matthew Lewis)

source

By Jack Queen

(Reuters) – A Connecticut jury on Wednesday ordered U.S. conspiracy theorist Alex Jones to pay $965 million for spreading falsehoods about the 2012 Sandy Hook mass shooting. Here is a timeline of what led up to the verdict.

Jones has since admitted that the shooting took place.

December 2012 – A gunman kills 20 children and six staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, using a Remington Bushmaster rifle. The shooting ends when the gunman, Adam Lanza, takes his own life.

April 2013 – Jones calls Sandy Hook a “government operation” with “inside job written all over it” during an Infowars broadcast, one of at least a dozen occasions when he and other Infowars contributors spread false claims about the shooting.

April 16, 2018 – Three parents of Sandy Hook victims file two separate lawsuits against Jones and the parent company of his Infowars site, Free Speech Systems LLC, in Texas state court.

May 23, 2018 – Fourteen relatives of Sandy Hook victims sue Jones and four entities connected to Jones in Connecticut state court.

Oct. 31, 2018 – Another Sandy Hook parent sues Jones and Free Speech Systems in Texas, where Jones’ radio show and webcast are based.

September 2021 – A Texas judge enters a default judgment finding Jones liable for defamation after he repeatedly flouted court orders and failed to turn over documents to the plaintiffs.

November 2021 – A judge presiding over the Connecticut case also enters a default judgment against Jones for failure to comply with court orders.

April 2022 – Five shell entities controlled by Jones file for bankruptcy protection in Texas, which would typically pause all lawsuits against them. The case was dismissed in June after the Sandy Hook parents intervened, arguing it was a stall tactic.

Aug. 5, 2022 – A Texas jury finds that Jones and Free Speech Systems must pay two Sandy Hook parents $49.3 million in total damages after a two-week trial.

Aug. 29, 2022 – Free Speech Systems agrees to face trial in Connecticut despite filing for bankruptcy in July, which would normally shield it from lawsuits.

Oct. 12, 2022 – A Connecticut jury orders Jones to pay at least $965 million in damages to numerous families of victims of the Sandy Hook shooting. Attorney fees will be determined in November.

(Reporting by Jack Queen in New York; Editing by Noeleen Walder, Mark Porter and Matthew Lewis)

source

(Reuters) – A Los Angeles city councilwoman resigned her seat on Wednesday, the Los Angeles Times reported, days after she stepped down as president of the body as pressure mounted after an audio recording of her making racist comments was made public.

Democrat Nury Martinez, who took a leave of absence from the role on Tuesday, faced calls to step down from local officials and President Joe Biden. She represented Los Angeles’ sixth district.

“It is with a broken heart that I resign my seat for Council District 6, the community I grew up in and my home,” Martinez said in a statement, according to the Times.

(Reporting by Tyler Clifford; Editing by Chris Gallagher)

source

LAS VEGAS (AP) — Las Vegas police, prosecutors and defense attorneys must wait to access a slain investigative journalist’s cellphone and electronic devices, over concerns about revealing the reporter’s confidential sources and notes, a judge said Tuesday.

Clark County District Court Judge Susan Johnson said the pause will last until all sides craft a way for a neutral party to screen the records.

The judge granted a Las Vegas Review-Journal request to block immediate review of the records, which are expected to include source names and notes by reporter Jeff German.

Police and prosecutors say they need access to German’s records for evidence that Robert “Rob” Telles, a former Democratic elected county official, fatally stabbed German on Sept. 2 in response to articles German wrote that were critical of Telles and his managerial conduct.

The newspaper — with backing from dozens of media organizations including The Associated Press and The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press — maintains that confidential information, names and unpublished material are protected from disclosure under state and federal law.

Telles, 45, the Clark County public administrator, was arrested Sept. 7 and remains jailed without bail on a murder charge. Authorities say surveillance video, Telles’ DNA on German’s body and evidence found at Telles’ home connect him to the killing.

Johnson acknowledged that because it is rare for U.S. journalists to be killed allegedly because of their work, there was little legal precedent that could be followed to allow investigators to search German’s files.

German, 69, was widely respected for his tenacity and confidential contacts in 44 years of reporting on organized crime, government corruption, political scandals and mass shootings — first at the Las Vegas Sun and then at the Review-Journal.

Attorney David Chesnoff, representing the Review-Journal, said the judge needs to balance First Amendment rights of the media with the interests of police and prosecutors. He also acknowledged Telles’ defense team’s constitutional right to access to information about German’s killing, including identities of other people who might have had a motive to attack him.

“It will have a long-term and chilling effect on sources and journalists receiving information from sources,” Chesnoff said, “if it’s OK to kill a journalist so that then everything that journalist dedicated himself to” can be exposed. “That would be outrageous,” he said.

The Review-Journal argues that police should never have seized German’s cellphone, computers and hard drive. It cites Nevada’s so-called “news shield law” — among the strictest in the U.S. — along with federal Privacy Protection Act and First Amendment safeguards.

“We are dealing with something unique,” the judge observed from the bench. “Everybody in this room is probably on his phone as far as a contact, right? I may be in his contact list.”

Johnson said Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department homicide detectives should have access to relevant electronic information. She said German’s files and contact lists could first be reviewed by a three-person team appointed by the court.

“I’m leaning toward two trusted Metro officers that are higher-ups,” along with a respected former U.S. magistrate judge, Johnson said. She set an Oct. 19 date for ruling and added that she “wouldn’t be horrified” if the seven-member Nevada Supreme Court reviewed her decision to provide guidance about how to proceed.

Chesnoff, with Ashley Kissinger also representing the Review-Journal and media, said there was no way to know who in Las Vegas police ranks had ties to the slain reporter. Chesnoff urged Johnson to enlist police investigators from outside Las Vegas for the review panel.

Attorney Matthew Christian, representing the police department, acknowledged the issue might need state high court review.

But Las Vegas police “have a duty to run down a complete investigation, and the victim’s devices are always part of that,” he said.

source

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Democratic U.S. Rep. Elaine Luria and her GOP challenger, Virginia state Sen. Jen Kiggans, are set to face off Wednesday in the first debate of their closely watched race to represent the coastal 2nd Congressional District.

The swing-district race between the two Navy veterans is among the most competitive in this year’s midterms and will help determine whether Democrats maintain control of the U.S. House.

Luria and Kiggans will debate a range of issues important to the region, including infrastructure and military affairs, according to the Hampton Roads Chamber, which organized the event.

The debate runs from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m., and TV station WTKR will livestream it, according to the chamber. Chris Saxman, a former Republican member of the House of Delegates, will moderate.

The 2nd district covers much of Virginia’s coast, including the Eastern Shore and the state’s most populous city — Virginia Beach. Although it no longer includes Norfolk, home to the world’s largest naval station, it is home to many military veterans. Luria flipped the district blue under its previous lines; under its new boundaries, GOP Gov. Glenn Youngkin would have won it by more than 11 points last year, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project.

The nonpartisan Cook Political Report considers the race a toss-up.

Millions of dollars have been raised and spent already on the race, including over $11.6 million on political ads, according to disclosures compiled by Kantar Media and published by VPAP.

Luria, a retired naval commander who served as a nuclear-trained surface warfare officer, has cultivated a congressional identity as a centrist since flipping the district blue under its previous lines in 2018. She serves as vice chair of the House Armed Services Committee, and is a member of the Jan. 6 committee investigating the 2021 attack on the Capitol.

Kiggans, who has represented parts of Virginia Beach and Norfolk in the state Senate since 2020, handily defeated three opponents in the June primary. A former Navy helicopter pilot and a geriatric nurse practitioner, Kiggans has struggled to overcome Luria’s sizeable fundraising lead. Luria did not face a primary challenger.

The two candidates have agreed to a candidate forum Oct. 17 in Smithfield and a televised debate Oct. 25, according to Luria’s communications director, Jayce Genco.

All of Virginia’s 11 U.S. House seats, which were redrawn last year during the once-a-decade redistricting process, are being contested in November. Along with the 2nd District, the 7th and 10th Districts in northern Virginia are considered the most competitive.

Early voting began in late September and runs through Nov. 5. Election Day is Nov. 8.

source

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) — While preparing to march in a Saturday morning parade through this fast-growing city’s westside, Democratic congressional candidate Hillary Scholten warned her staff that the area was traditionally very conservative and they should brace for possible booing.

But the crowd lining Fulton Street to mark the region’s Polish pride was friendly. Only one man bellowed what sounded to the candidate like “Go to hell, Hillary!” as she passed. But he also grinned and flashed a thumbs-up later.

He’d actually cried, “Give ’em hell, Hillary!”

It’s been 32 years since a Democrat won the House seat where Scholten is competing against Republican John Gibbs. But, its largest city, Grand Rapids, has turned steadily bluer lately, and redrawn congressional maps have converted it from a district that backed Donald Trump for president in 2020 to one that Joe Biden would have carried instead.

It’s one of 14 U.S. House seats nationwide that are held by Republicans but that Biden would have won under new maps.

As Democrats brace for midterm defeats that could erase their narrow, five-seat control of the House, a chance to limit the damage may lie in flipping Republican-held seats that voted for Biden to stanch the effect of losses elsewhere around the country.

Scholten, a former Justice Department attorney and Christian Reform Church deacon, lost the seat to Republican Rep. Peter Meijer in 2020. But Meijer was defeated in his Michigan GOP primary this year by Trump-backed challenger Gibbs, a former software engineer who falsely purports that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

Scholten is trying to become the first Democratic woman elected to the House from western Michigan and isn’t counting on more favorable boundaries to get her there, noting that it’s “hard for people to believe in what they’ve never seen before, and we feel that every day.”

But even Gibbs concedes the new maps have Democrats excited.

“In a year where they’re expected to have a very difficult time in the midterms,” he said, “for them, a pickup is something that they’re salivating over.”

The list of GOP-held Biden districts feature three Los Angeles-area seats and one in California’s Central Valley. Others are the territories of Republican Reps. Don Bacon in Omaha, Nebraska, and Steve Chabot in Cincinnati. Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, who represents the moderate swing battleground of Bucks County, north of Philadelphia, faces a similar test. On the other side are a dozen districts that voted for Trump but are held by Democrats. Retirements and redistricting mean many no longer have incumbents running.

Still, Democrats see high stakes in their efforts to flip seats won by Biden. When House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer recently predicted that his party would hold the chamber, he mentioned such territory in California and Illinois, as well as Bacon’s and Chabot’s districts, and the Grand Rapids race.

Not every incumbent is sweating toss-up races. Chabot says that, during his 26 years running for reelection in southwestern Ohio, he’s “had more challenging races, for sure, than anyone in the House.” But, as he competes for potential crossover voters, Chabot is not emphasizing Trump.

“I agree with most of his policies, but I’m running on my own record,” Chabot said. “People can make up their own minds.”

Gibbs says that, despite Trump’s endorsement, he’s building appeal among independents and swing voters. He recalled one man approaching him in the lakefront city of Muskegon, northwest of Grand Rapids, and saying: “I voted for you. I’m a Democrat. Is that OK?”

“This race is not so much about Democrat vs. Republican. It’s more crazy vs. normal,” said Gibbs, pointing to high gas and food prices and ”what they’re trying to do to kids in school,” with modern curriculums and inappropriate material in campus libraries being especially outlandish.

But, echoing Trump, Gibbs left open the possibility that he may object to the results of his own election next month.

“If it’s fair and everything’s on the up and up, I’ll accept whatever the result is,” he said. But asked if he could define fair, Gibbs replied, “Not at this point.”

“We’ll just have to kind of see how it goes,” he said.

A Scholten win would cement this area’s political transformation from red to blue. Booms in health, university and technology jobs are attracting scores of college-educated workers — with new residents often importing Democratic voting preferences. Grand Rapids and its suburbs have also turned more diverse, including notable increases in Hispanic voters.

Such a change was long unthinkable in the home city of Gerald Ford and former Trump administration Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, which once epitomized pro-business, country club conservativism.

“I love to play golf. We play at public courses,” Scholten said, laughing. “I think that’s a pretty good analogy, actually.”

Despite Democrat-friendly lines, national Republicans see the district as a “checks and balances” area where voters might have shunned Trump but want to control Washington’s spending and potential federal overreach.

Meijer was one of 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump, prompting the former president to endorse Gibbs. The Democratic House campaign committee even financed a GOP primary ad proclaiming that Gibbs was “hand-picked by Trump to run for Congress,” believing he’d be beatable in November.

Trump once nominated Gibbs to head the Office of Personnel Management, but he wasn’t confirmed amid questions about past tweets, including one from 2016 in which Gibbs wrote, “Today’s Dem party: Islam, gender-bending, anti-police, ‘u racist!’”

Gibbs says Democrats have posted far more incendiary things. “I don’t apologize. I never have and will not,” he said.

Democrats hope that a question on Michigan’s ballot asking voters to put the right to an abortion in the state constitution energizes their base.

“The issue of choice is front and center in a way that it wasn’t before,” Scholten said. “It’s changed a lot of minds.”

Gibbs counters that his steadfast opposition to abortion is a winner. He’d only allow exceptions if a pregnant woman’s life is endangered. In instances of rape or incest, Gibbs said: “That baby, born in that case, is innocent. So I don’t see why an innocent person should have to perish.”

Raised in the Pentecostal church, Gibbs spent seven years as a missionary in Japan. But he converted to Catholicism in 2021 and now tries to go to Mass multiple times per week.

He has that in common with Biden, who is also a devout Catholic, though Gibbs isn’t seeking bipartisanship there. He retorted of the president’s frequent Mass attendance, “Yeah, I just wish he would accept the teachings.”

“If I ever saw him at Mass, I’d have a nice, frank conversation,” Gibbs said. “Give him a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church: ‘You oughta learn this.’”

___

Associated Press writer Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

source

By Andrew Chung

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Justice Department on Tuesday asked the Supreme Court to reject former President Donald Trump’s bid to again empower an independent arbiter to vet classified records seized from his Florida home as part of his legal battle against investigators probing his handling of sensitive government records.

Trump filed an emergency request on Oct. 4 asking the justices to lift a federal appeals court’s decision to prevent the arbiter, known as a special master, from vetting more than 100 documents marked as classified that were among the roughly 11,000 records seized by FBI agents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach on Aug. 8.

In a filing on Tuesday, the Justice Department urged the Supreme Court to reject Trump’s request because he has not pointed to any “clear error” in the lower court’s decision or shown how he is harmed by it.

Trump went to court on Aug. 22 in a bid to restrict Justice Department access to the documents as it pursues a criminal investigation of him for retaining government records, some marked as highly classified including top secret, at Mar-a-Lago after leaving office in January 2021. Trump at the time asked a judge to appoint a special master, as the judge later did, to vet the seized documents and review whether any could be deemed privileged and potentially withheld from investigators.

The Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices appointed by Trump.

The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Sept. 21 put on hold a decision by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who is presiding over Trump’s lawsuit. Cannon had temporarily barred the Justice Department from examining the seized documents until the special master she appointed, Judge Raymond Dearie, had identified any that could be considered privileged.

Cannon had tasked Dearie to review all of the seized records, including classified ones, to locate anything subject to attorney-client confidentiality or executive privilege – a legal doctrine that shields some White House communications from disclosure – and thus off limits to investigators.

The three-judge 11th Circuit panel gave the department access to the documents marked as classified for its ongoing criminal investigation, and prevented Dearie from vetting those, noting the importance of limiting access to classified information and ensuring the department’s probe would not be harmed.

‘UNWARRANTED INTRUSION’

Cannon, who was appointed to the bench by Trump, on Sept. 5 barred the Justice Department from reviewing all of the seized materials for its criminal investigation, and named Dearie to review the records.

In Tuesday’s filing, the Justice Department said Trump’s request should be denied because he has not shown that the 11th Circuit erred in its conclusion that Cannon’s order “was a serious and unwarranted intrusion on the executive branch’s authority to control the use and distribution of extraordinarily sensitive government records.”

Trump’s lawyers previously told the Supreme Court that Dearie should be able to vet the records to “determine whether documents bearing classification markings are in fact classified, and regardless of classification, whether those records are personal records or presidential records.”

The Justice Department has “attempted to criminalize a document management dispute and now vehemently objects to a transparent process that provides much-needed oversight,” Trump’s lawyers added.

The department’s investigation seeks to determine who accessed classified materials, whether they were compromised and if any remain unaccounted for. At issue in the 11th Circuit’s ruling were documents bearing classified markings of confidential, secret or top secret.

The department also is examining whether Trump tried to obstruct the criminal investigation. Trump has denied wrongdoing and has called the investigation politically motivated.

The document investigation is one of several legal woes Trump is facing as he considers whether to run again for president in 2024.

On Sept. 15, Cannon rejected the department’s request that she partially lift her order as it related to the classified materials because it impeded the government’s effort to mitigate potential national security risks from possible unauthorized disclosure.

The 11th Circuit put that decision on hold, noting that classified records belong to the U.S. government and that Trump had not shown that he holds an “individual interest in or need for” any of the classified documents.

The 11th Circuit also rejected any suggestion that Trump had declassified the documents – as the former president has claimed – saying there was “no evidence” of such action and that the argument was a “red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal.”

The three statutes underpinning the search warrant used by the FBI at Mar-a-Lago make it a crime to mishandle government records, regardless of their classification status.

In an interview on Fox News last month, Trump asserted that he had the power to declassify documents “even by thinking about it.”

(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)

source

By Ahmed Aboulenein

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Biden administration on Tuesday finalized a rule it said would fix the so-called family glitch in the Affordable Care Act that priced many people out of health insurance and would help over a million Americans.

The fix, first proposed by the U.S. Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service in April, addresses an element of the healthcare law that left family members of those with access to employer-provided health plans ineligible for certain subsidies.

“Now, the Treasury Department is finalizing that fix so that the law works the way Congress intended and the cost of coverage comes down for families all over the country. Starting next month, Americans can sign up to take advantage of this change,” President Joe Biden said in a White House statement.

“About 1 million Americans will either gain coverage or see their insurance become more affordable as a result of the new rule,” he added.

The problem was that employer-based health plans have been considered affordable as long as the coverage was within the financial means of an employee, regardless of whether it was too expensive for family members. As a result, the family members were not eligible for the subsidies they may have needed, the White House said.

The open enrollment period for health insurance plans under the Affordable Care Act starts on Nov. 1.

Also known as Obamacare, the law helps low and middle-income Americans who do not have access to affordable health insurance coverage through an employer.

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who like Biden is a Democrat, said in a statement the fix will bring down healthcare costs and expand access to affordable coverage.

Republicans say the remedy contradicts the text of the law and that it will significantly increase spending on Obamacare plans. They also say it would lead to a major shifting of people out of employer-based plans and into government-subsidized ones.

(Reporting by Ahmed Aboulenein in Washington; Editing by Matthew Lewis)

source