Politics

By Kanishka Singh

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward to block a subpoena by the congressional panel probing the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol attack, clearing the way for the committee to access her phone records.

Earlier this year, the panel said it had issued subpoenas to people who had knowledge of or participated in efforts to send false “alternate electors” to Washington for then-President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election. Ward, a former Arizona state senator and chair of the state Republican Party, was among them. Her husband also received a subpoena.

The House of Representatives committee’s request “relates to phone calls records from November 1, 2020, to January 31, 2021, from an account associated with a Republican nominee to serve as elector for former President Trump,” Arizona-based U.S. District Court Judge Diane Humetewa said in an 18-page ruling.

“That three-month period is plainly relevant to its investigation into the causes of the January 6th attack,” the judge wrote. “The court therefore has little doubt concluding these records may aid the select committee’s valid legislative purpose.”

It was not immediately clear whether Ward intended to appeal the ruling. She was not immediately available for comment. She has previously said the demand for the phone records violated her constitutional rights.

The committee is planning to hold its next hearing on Sept. 28, the panel’s chairman said on Tuesday.

The committee held eight hearings over six weeks in June and July, disclosing the findings of its more than yearlong probe of events surrounding the deadly assault on the Capitol by Trump supporters after weeks of false claims by him that he had won the 2020 election.

(Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Washington)

source

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — In-person voting for the midterm elections opened Friday in Minnesota, South Dakota, Virginia and Wyoming, kicking off a six-week sprint to Election Day in a landscape that has changed much since the pandemic drove a shift to mail balloting in the 2020 presidential contest.

Twenty people voted in the first hour as Minneapolis opened its early voting center, taking advantage of generous rules that election officials credit with making Minnesota a perennial leader in voter turnout. First in when the doors opened was Conrad Zbikowski, a 29-year-old communications and digital consultant who said he has voted early since at least 2017.

“I like to vote early because you never know what might happen on Election Day,” said Zbikowski, displaying his civic pride with a T-shirt that bore the sailboat logo of the City of Lakes. “You might get sick, you might get COVID, you might get in a car crash, there’s many things that can happen. But what you do have control over is being able to vote early and getting that ballot in.”

The start of in-person voting comes as the nation continues to grapple with the fallout from nearly two years of false claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from former President Donald Trump due to widespread fraud and manipulation of voting machines. Those conspiracy theories, promoted by a constellation of Trump allies in the campaign, on social media and at conferences held across the country, have taken a toll on public confidence in U.S. elections.

They’ve also led to tightening of rules that govern mail ballots in several Republican-led states as well as an exodus of experienced election workers, who have faced an onslaught of harassment and threats since the 2020 election.

But nearly two years since that election, no evidence has emerged to suggest widespread fraud or manipulation while reviews in state after state have upheld the results showing President Joe Biden won.

Saturday also is the deadline by which election officials must send ballots to their military and overseas voters. North Carolina started mailing out absentee ballots Sept. 9.

Early in-person voting is offered in 46 states and the District of Columbia, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. States may use different ways to describe it, with some calling it in-person absentee voting or advanced voting. In some cases, it mirrors Election Day voting with polling locations equipped with poll workers and voting machines. Elsewhere, it involves voters requesting, completing and submitting an absentee ballot in person at their local election office.

Early voting periods vary by state, with some offering as few as three days and others extending to 46 days. The average is 23 days, according to the conference of legislatures.

This year, voting will unfold in a much different environment than two years ago, when the coronavirus prompted a major increase in the use of mail ballots as voters sought to avoid crowded polling places. States adopted policies to promote mail voting, with a few states opting to send mail ballots to all registered voters and others expanding the use of drop boxes.

While some have made those changes permanent, others have rolled back them back. For instance, Georgia will have fewer drop boxes this year and has added ID requirements to mail ballots under legislation pushed by Republican state lawmakers.

In Wyoming, a steady stream of voters filed into the lone early polling place in Cheyenne, which offered a refuge from winds that toppled a “Vote Here” sign. About 60 people had voted there by midday, Laramie County Clerk Debra Lee said.

“It’s less people and we don’t have to worry,” said one early voter, Brent Dolence of Cheyenne. “Things move faster and you don’t have to wait so much.”

Unlike elsewhere in the U.S., poll workers in Laramie County haven’t been subjected to threats and harassment, Lee said, but they’ve received plenty of questions from voters about machines and the county’s lone ballot drop box.

“They’re really looking at things and asking questions,” Lee said. “In a good way. You know, wanting information. They’re curious.”

Minnesota’s ballot includes races for governor and other statewide offices, with control of the Legislature at stake, too.

Zbikowski declined to say for whom he voted. But he said he doesn’t take the right to vote for granted, given that his family came to America from Russia when it didn’t have free elections. As a part-time poll worker — he was off-duty Friday— he said he’s seen Minnesota’s safeguards firsthand and has full confidence in the integrity of the process.

Other early voters included first-timers Ronald Johnson and his wife, Judith Weyl, who voted on Election Day in 2020. They both said they voted a straight Democratic ticket.

“It just feels like this election is so important, life is so busy, I just wanted to have closure on this as quickly as possible,” Johnson said.

Johnson, a 74-year-old mental health counselor, said he wanted to support candidates who will preserve a Minnesota election system that he said has integrity.

He said he “absolutely” supports the state’s chief elections officer, Secretary of State Steve Simon, over GOP challenger Kim Crockett, who has called the 2020 election a “train wreck” and has advocated for a return to voting mostly on Election Day. Simon, in contrast, calls the 2020 election “fundamentally fair, honest, accurate and secure,” and defends the changes that he oversaw to make voting safer in the pandemic.

“We really care about protecting democracy,” said Weyl, 73.

Aaron Bommarito, a 48-year-old teacher who also said he voted a straight Democratic ticket, said he has no concerns about his votes being counted properly and has “absolute confidence in the system.” He said voting early was a spur-of-the moment decision. He just happened to be driving by the voting center and seized the moment.

“I dropped my two kids off at school, and the ‘Vote Here’ sign was the next thing I saw,” he said.

___

Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press reporter Mead Gruver contributed to this story from Cheyenne, Wyoming.

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Joe Biden challenged Democratic voters on Friday that if they elect at least two more senators in November elections, it would open the possibility of Democrats removing the filibuster and restoring federal abortion rights for women.

At a Democratic National Committee rally, Biden suggested the two extra Democrats would allow the Democratic-controlled Senate to remove a legislative roadblock known as the filibuster that requires a 60-vote majority to overcome.

Democrats hold a bare majority in the Senate now, and two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema, have opposed ending the filibuster.

Biden’s remark suggests he would support a vote to end the filibuster, which can be decided by a simple majority. For any such move to be successful, Democrats need to retain control of the House and gain two seats in the Senate. Most forecasters suggest Republicans are likely to gain House control.

Biden has made restoring protections lost in the Supreme Court’s June decision to reverse the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case a central theme of his stump speeches in the lead-up to the Nov. 8 congressional elections.

“If you give me two more senators in the United States Senate, I promise you, I promise you, we’re going to codify Roe and once again make Roe the law of the land,” said Biden.

Biden exhorted women voters to help elect Democrats.

“I don’t believe the MAGA Republican have a clue about the power of American women. Let me tell you something, they’re about to find out.”

According to the Current Population Survey, 2020 voter turnout was 68.4% for women and 65.0% for men. About 9.7 million more women than men voted. Since the Supreme Court decision on Roe, there has been a surge in women registering to vote.

(Reporting by Jeff Mason and Steve Holland; Editing by Heather Timmons)

source

MILWAUKEE (AP) — Vice President Kamala Harris met with college students and Latino leaders in Milwaukee on Thursday, a visit meant to energize voters just under seven weeks before an election in which Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson are on the ballot.

Harris also spoke at a meeting of the Democratic Attorneys General Association, urging them to “fight back” for abortion rights and against those she called “extremist, so-called leaders” who were attempting to make it harder to vote.

Harris singled out Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul, who is up for reelection in November, for filing a lawsuit to challenge Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban that has no exceptions for rape or incest.

“Josh, our administration has your back,” she said to applause.

Harris also faulted Republicans pushing laws making it more difficult to vote and backing “sham audits” into the 2020 presidential election results.

Republicans in Wisconsin have passed numerous bills that would have made it more difficult to vote absentee, but Evers vetoed all of them. Republicans also approved an investigation into the 2020 election that did not turn up any evidence to question President Joe Biden’s victory in the state. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos fired the investigator, former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman, last month.

“Today, our nation faces many threats to our rights and to our freedoms and we must stand united,” Harris said.

The vice president also met with students and met privately with local Latino leaders at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee in an attempt to energize two groups that don’t always turn out to vote.

About 7.6% of Wisconsin’s population identifies as Hispanic or Latino, according to the 2020 census. The largest concentration is centered in Milwaukee and spills over into nearby Kenosha and Racine counties.

In 2020, however, Latinos made up an estimated 3% of Wisconsin voters, according to AP VoteCast. That figure suggests there are plenty of eligible Latinos not voting in support of either party.

This election cycle, both parties are focusing their efforts on gaining the support of Latino voters in Milwaukee, the state’s largest Democratic stronghold.

Before Harris’ visit, state GOP leadership and the party’s candidate for attorney general condemned the Biden administration for rising inflation and crime rates. They spoke at the Republican National Committee’s Hispanic Community Center on Milwaukee’s south side.

The RNC opened its Hispanic Community Center in Milwaukee more than a year ago as part of nationwide efforts to reach minority voters, and it’s been holding “election integrity” events there since June that are aimed at recruiting partisan poll watchers.

“The Hispanic community is very conservative both fiscally and socially,” said Preya Samsundar, the GOP’s communications director for the Midwest. She added that the community center’s door-knocking efforts and events have been successful so far in bringing Latino voters into the Republican Party.

But despite the party’s efforts, just a mile down the road in a small Puerto Rican café and restaurant on the south side, voters knew little of the Hispanic Community Center or who was on the ballot this year.

“I really don’t know the people who are running, and sometimes I think that nothing’s going to change,” said Juan Ortiz from behind a bakery display stocked with traditional Puerto Rican pastries.

Ortiz said he has cast ballots for Republicans and Democrats, but he only votes in presidential elections. His reason is simple and represents the challenge both parties face mobilizing voters this year: “I think whoever’s in the top controls the whole thing. It doesn’t matter what whoever wants to do if they’ve got to ask the big people.”

____

Associated Press writer Scott Bauer contributed to this report from Madison. Follow him on Twitter at https://twitter.com/sbauerAP and follow Harm Venhuizen at https://twitter.com/HarmVenhuizen. Venhuizen is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

source

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A referendum on the Montana ballot in November raises the prospect of criminal charges for health care providers unless they take “all medically appropriate and reasonable actions to preserve the life” of an infant born alive, including after an attempted abortion.

Supporters of the referendum say the proposed Born-Alive Infant Protection Act is meant to prevent the killing of infants outside the womb after failed abortions. That is already illegal.

Opponents argue the act could rob them of precious time with infants that are born with incurable medical issues if doctors are forced to try and treat them.

Americans United for Life, which has offered model legislation for state “born alive” laws, argues the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act of 2002 only applies at federal facilities and those that receive federal funding, and not at private clinics.

At least half of U.S. states have similar post-abortion born-alive laws in place, according to Americans United for Life, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that opposes abortion, aid in dying and infant stem cell research.

Montana law allows for homicide charges if a person purposely, knowingly or negligently causes the death of a premature infant born alive, if the infant is viable.

When presenting the bill in the Montana Senate last year, Sen. Tom McGillvray said the current state law “basically says ‘don’t kill it.’ This bill says ‘save it.’ That’s the difference.”

The legislation says its purpose is to protect the life of any infant born alive following an abortion. However the text says: “A born-alive infant, including an infant born in the course of an abortion, must be treated as a legal person under the laws of the state, with the same rights to medically appropriate and reasonable care and treatment.”

The difference in interpretation appears to be how to define “medically appropriate and reasonable care and treatment” and whether the proposed law would apply in cases where an infant is born with medical issues, such as undeveloped vital organs, that are not compatible with life.

“Unfortunately, there are limits to the medical interventions that can change these outcomes,” Tim Mitchell, a maternal fetal medicine physician in Missoula, said Wednesday in Helena at a news conference held by Compassion for Families, a campaign organization opposing the referendum.

If passed, the referendum will require physicians to try to resuscitate any live born infant regardless of gestational age and underlying medical conditions, and “will force physicians to attempt to place a breathing tube in a baby so small that it will not fit and there is no lung tissue that can receive breaths,” Mitchell said. “It will force them to provide chest compressions and place IV’s, and give medications even when the health care team and the family know that none of the interventions will have an impact on the tragic but inevitable outcome.”

Republican Rep. Matt Regier, the sponsor of the legislation, said Thursday the proposed referendum simply means that medical providers can’t intentionally take the life of an “independent, living, breathing infant.”

When asked if that was happening in Montana, Regier said: “Regardless of the numbers, we don’t want one to be intentionally taken.”

Taking extreme measures to save the life of an infant with fatal deformities “is not medically reasonable,” Regier said. “This has nothing to do with biology taking the life of the kid.”

Penalties for violating the proposed law include up to $50,000 in fines and up to 20 years in prison.

Montana’s Republican-controlled Legislature passed the bill that referred the measure to voters before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 decision recognizing federal rights to abortion.

The proposal will be up for a vote at a time when abortion is an increasingly important issue for voters.

A recent poll found a growing percentage of Americans listed abortion or women’s rights as one of up to five issues they want the government to work on.

Jenn Banna of Missoula spoke Wednesday about her daughter, who she knew was going to be born without a properly developed brain. The referendum, she said, might have robbed her family of the little time they were able to spend with her after her birth.

“We knew if she was born alive, we may only have a few minutes to snuggle her until she passed away,” Banna said.

“When Anna Louise was born, her heart was beating, but she was unable to breathe on her own,” she said.

She and her husband sang to the baby “while her heart slowly stopped beating,” Banna said.

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. House Democrats on Thursday released a framework for legislation that would restrict lawmakers and other senior government officials, including the Supreme Court, from trading in stocks.

The bill would also restrict lawmakers’ spouses and dependent children from trading stock and holding certain other investments, as well as require public officials to divest from such holdings or place them in a blind trust, according to the framework.

It would also toughen disclosure requirements and beef up penalties for officials who fail to complete those requirements in time, the framework said.

The legislation comes after U.S. media scrutiny of potential financial conflicts of interest in trading by officials and their families.

“These stories undermine the American people’s faith and trust in the integrity of public officials and our federal government. Members of the public may ask, are our public officials acting in the public interest or their private financial interest?” Zoe Lofgren, the chairwoman of the House Administration Committee, said in text accompanying the framework.

Lofgren said she would release legislative text “soon.”

The House may consider the legislation next week, according to a schedule announced by the House Majority Leader on Thursday.

It was not immediately clear what the bill’s chances of passage were in the Senate.

The White House has said President Joe Biden would leave it to Congress to decide the rules on members trading stocks.

(Reporting by Makini Brice; editing by Richard Pullin)

source

By Jonathan Allen and Ted Hesson

NEW YORK (Reuters) – New York City will open two emergency centers to house migrants arriving on buses sent by the Republican governor of Texas in a political dispute over border security, Mayor Eric Adams said on Thursday.

The centers will provide shelter, food and medical care while working to connect migrants with family and friends inside and outside New York City, according to the mayor’s office.

The emergency relief centers are part of efforts by Democratic mayors to deal with thousands of migrants being bused from the Republican-led border states of Texas and Arizona. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican seeking reelection in November, has bused more than 11,000 migrants to Washington, D.C., New York City and Chicago since April.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis last week flew about 50 migrants from Texas to Massachusetts.

The governors, who oppose the more lenient border policies of U.S. President Joe Biden, a Democrat, say they want to shift the burden to Democratic areas and have focused on the issue in the run-up to November midterm elections.

“While other leaders have abdicated their moral duty to support arriving asylum seekers, New York City refuses to do so,” Adams said in a statement.

New York is bound by a decades-old consent decree in a class-action lawsuit to provide shelter for the homeless.

A center for single adults will open in the Bronx in the coming weeks, the mayor’s office said, with the second site being finalized. More could follow if needed.

The centers for single adults will be climate-controlled tents with rows of cots akin to those used after natural disasters, the mayor’s office said.

The Legal Aid Society and Coalition for the Homeless said in a joint statement that they were “deeply concerned” that families with children could be placed in congregate settings, but were willing to work with the city.

(Reporting by Jonathan Allen in New York and Ted Hesson in Washington; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

source

MONONGAHELA, Pa. (AP) — Republican leader Kevin McCarthy is heading to Pennsylvania on Friday to directly confront President Joe Biden and the party in power, unveiling a midterm election agenda with sweeping Trump-like promises despite the House GOP’s sometimes spotty record of delivering and governing in Congress.

McCarthy, who is poised to seize the speaker’s gavel if Republicans win control of the House in the fall, hopes to replicate the strategy former Speaker Newt Gingrich used to spark voter enthusiasm and sweep House control in a 1994 landslide.

The House GOP’s “Commitment to America” gives a nod to that earlier era but updates it for Trump, with economic, border security and social policies to rouse the former president’s deep well of supporters in often-forgotten regions like this rusty landscape outside Pittsburgh.

“We have a plan for a new direction for America,” McCarthy told The Associated Press.

On Friday, the House Republican leader will stand with other lawmakers to roll out the GOP agenda, offering a portrait of party unity despite the uneasy coalition that makes up the House minority — and the Republican Party itself. The GOP has shifted from its focus on small government, low taxes and individual freedoms to a more populist, nationalist and, at times, far-right party, essentially still led by Donald Trump, who remains popular despite the deepening state and federal investigations against him.

Propelled by Trump’s “Make America Great Again” voters, the Republicans need to pick up just a few seats to win back control of the narrowly-split House, and replace Speaker Nancy Pelosi. But even so, McCarthy’s ability to lead the House is far from guaranteed.

While Republicans and Trump did pass tax cuts into law, the GOP’s last big campaign promise, repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, collapsed in failure. A long line of Republican speakers, including Gingrich, John Boehner and Paul Ryan, have been forced from office or chose early retirement, often ground down by party infighting.

“House Republicans are really good at running people out of town,” said Matt Schlapp, chairman of the Conservative Political Action Coalition, or CPAC.

McCarthy, first elected to office in 2006, is among the remaining political survivors of those House Republican battles, and he’s a new style of leader who has shown more ability to communicate than to legislate.

A key architect of the Republican “tea party” takeover in 2010, the California Republican personally recruited the newcomers to Congress — many who had never served in public office and are long gone. McCarthy was an early Trump endorser, and has remained close to the former president, relying on his high-profile endorsements to propel GOP candidates for Congress. He abandoned an earlier bid to become speaker when support from his colleagues drifted.

The “Commitment to America” reflects the strength of McCarthy’s abilities, but also his weaknesses. He spent more than a year pulling together the House GOP’s often warring factions — from the far-right MAGA to what’s left of the more centrist ranks — to produce a mostly agreed upon agenda.

But the one-page “commitment” preamble is succinct, essentially a pocket card, though it is expected to be filled in with the kind of detail that is needed to make laws.

“They talk about a lot of problems,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. “They don’t have a lot of solutions.”

In traveling to battleground Pennsylvania, a state where Biden holds emotional ties from his early childhood, McCarthy intends to counter the president’s fiery Labor Day weekend speech, in which he warned of rising GOP extremism after the Jan 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, with a more upbeat message.

The event is billed as more of a conversation with the GOP leader and lawmakers rather than stirring address in a uniquely contested state.

Along with many as five House seats Republicans believe they can pick up in Pennsylvania in November, the state has one of the most watched Senate races, between Democrat John Fetterman and Trump-backed Mehmet Oz, that will help determine control of Congress. Top of the ticket is the seismic governor’s matchup between the GOP’s Doug Mastriano, who was seen outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, and Democrat Josh Shapiro.

“If you are a hardline, populist, and you really want anger, Kevin’s a little frustrating because he’s not going to be angry enough for you,” Gingrich said. “On the other hand, if what you want is to have your values implemented and passed in the legislation, he is a really good leader and organizer.”

Gingrich has been working with McCarthy and his team to craft the style and substance of the proposal. The former speaker, who has been asked by the Jan. 6 committee investigating the Capitol attack for an interview, was on hand Thursday in Washington, joining McCarthy as he unveiled the plans privately to House Republicans, who have been mixed on the approach.

Mostly, the GOP pocket card hits broad strokes — energy independence, security and an end to liberal social policies, particularly in schooling.

Conservative Republicans complain privately that McCarthy isn’t leaning hard enough into their priorities, as he tries to appeal to a broader swath of voters and hold the party together.

Many are eager to launch investigations into the Biden administration and the president’s family, with some calling for impeachment. Legislatively, some House Republicans want to fulfill the party’s commitment to banning abortion, supporting Sen. Lindsey Graham’s bill prohibiting the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

In a sign of the pressures ahead for McCarthy, dozens of House GOP lawmakers signed on to plans from Trump-aligned Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene to prevent many gender reassignment procedures for minors, celebrating the Georgian as courageous for taking such a hardline approach.

She and others were invited to join Friday’s event, as McCarthy seeks their backing.

Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, has advocated for withholding federal funds as leverage for policy priorities, the tactic that engineered past government shutdowns.

“Putting out like, you know, principles about, ‘Well, we’ll secure the border.’ I mean, okay, but what are we gonna do about it?” Roy said. “The end of the day, I want specific actionable items that’s going to show that we’re going to fight for the American people.”

It’s notable that McCarthy alone has proposed a plan if Republicans win control of the House chamber. In the Senate, Republican leader Mitch McConnell has declined to put forward an agenda, preferring to simply run against Biden and Democrats in the midterm election.

“Kevin’s done a very good job of being in position to become the speaker. And then the question is, what do you do with that? Schlapp said. “This helps as a road map.”

__ Associated Press writer Kevin Freking contributed to this report.

source

By Nate Raymond

(Reuters) – An LGBT student group has agreed to hold off on forcing Yeshiva University to formally recognize it while the Jewish school in New York City appeals a judge’s order requiring it to do so – an action the institution said would violate its religious values.

Yeshiva last week halted all student club activities after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to block New York state court judge Lynn Kotler’s June order requiring the university to recognize the Y.U. Pride Alliance.

Y.U. Pride Alliance said it made the “painful and difficult decision” to agree to stay the judge’s order while the Yeshiva pursues its appeals because it did not want the school to “punish” other students.

“At the same time, we will continue our lawsuit in the New York appellate courts and our fight for YU to stop violating our civil rights and respect our equal dignity as Yeshiva students,” the club said.

Yeshiva on Thursday said it agreed to a stay.

The university is appealing Kotler’s finding that it is subject to a city anti-discrimination law. The dispute hinges in part on whether Yeshiva is a “religious corporation” and thus exempt from the New York City Human Rights Law, which bans discrimination by a place or provider of public accommodation on the basis of sexual orientation, religion, race, gender, age, national origin and some other factors.

The Supreme Court, with four of its six conservative justices dissenting, declined in a 5-4 decision on Sept. 14 to put Kotler’s order on hold, saying the school could ask New York courts to expedite its appeal and seek relief from them.

Yeshiva’s lawyers at the conservative legal group Becket Fund for Religious Liberty said the club’s decision would allow it to pursue its appeals “without being forced to violate its religious identity.”

Hanan Eisenman, a Yeshiva spokesperson, said that the university is now planning to resume club activities following the upcoming Jewish holidays when students return to campus and had sent the club’s lawyers a signed agreement to stay Kotler’s order.

Y.U. Pride Alliance formed unofficially in 2018 but Yeshiva determined that granting it official status would be “inconsistent with the school’s Torah values and the religious environment it seeks to maintain.”

The Modern Orthodox Jewish university, based in Manhattan, has roughly 6,000 students enrolled in undergraduate and graduate programs.

(Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Will Dunham)

source

By Sharon Bernstein

(Reuters) – Voters in five states will consider abortion-related ballot measures in the Nov. 8 election, initiatives that have taken on new urgency after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

In August, voters in conservative Kansas defeated a ballot measure aimed at eliminating abortion rights from the state’s constitution. Here is a look at the upcoming votes:

CALIFORNIA

A proposal backed by the Democratic-led state legislature and reproductive rights advocates would enshrine the right to an abortion in the state’s constitution.

The measure would cap a years-long effort by advocates in the left-leaning state to protect abortion rights, including recent funding to help people who live in states where the procedure has been limited or banned seek care in California.

VERMONT

Vermont residents also will vote on a constitutional amendment to protect abortion rights. As required by state law, the ballot measure has already been approved twice by the Democratic-controlled legislature.

It is the culmination of actions to shore up abortion rights, including a new state reproductive rights law, that began in 2019 after the appointments of Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court cemented its conservative majority.

MICHIGAN

In the battleground state of Michigan, a proposed constitutional amendment would declare abortion as a right.

Reproductive rights groups say such protections would ensure future abortion access in the state, which has a Republican-controlled legislature and a Democratic governor up for re-election in November.

Conservative Republicans in the state had sought to allow a 1931 abortion ban to be enforced once Roe v. Wade was overturned. But a judge ruled on Sept. 7 that the ban, which made no exceptions for rape or incest, violated the state’s constitution and could not be enforced.

A recent poll commissioned by the Detroit News and WDIV-TV showed 60% of likely voters in Michigan said they would support a constitutional amendment guaranteeing abortion rights.

KENTUCKY

A measure in conservative Kentucky would establish that the state constitution does not protect or recognize a right to an abortion.

As of Sept. 13, state campaign finance records show opponents of the measure had raised about $1.5 million, while supporters brought in $350,000.

MONTANA

In Montana, voters will be asked about a so-called “born alive” law, which would require medical care to be provided to infants born alive after a failed abortion.

Based on the belief among some anti-abortion activists that babies have been left to die after abortion, labor or “extraction,” such as a cesarean section, the measure affirms that all infants born alive are considered legal persons in the state.

Doctors who fail to care for such living infants would be fined up to $50,000 and face imprisonment of up to 20 years. There is limited data on these types of abortions but what data exists suggests it is rare and likely to involve fetuses with severe conditions that may make them unlikely to survive.

Other conservative states have enacted similar legislation in recent years.

(Reporting by Sharon Bernstein; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Josie Kao)

source