US NATIONAL NEWS
Stymied by the Supreme Court, Biden wants voters to have the final say on his agenda
Published
3 years agoon
WASHINGTON (AP) — After major blows to his agenda by the Supreme Court, President Joe Biden is intent on making sure voters will have the final say.
When the court’s conservative majority effectively killed his plan to cancel or reduce federal student loan debts for millions of people, Biden said, “Republicans snatched away the hope that they were given.” When the justices ended race-based affirmative action in college admissions, he said, “This is not a normal court.” When they overturned Roe v. Wade and a national right to abortion last year, the president said, “Voters need to make their voices heard.”
As Biden heads into the 2024 election, he is running not only against the Republicans who control one-half of Congress but also against the conservative bloc that dominates the nation’s highest court. It’s a subtle but significant shift in approach toward the Supreme Court, treating it more like a political entity even as Biden stops short of calling for an overhaul.
That shift is becoming apparent in everything from the White House’s messaging to its legal strategy.
“The president respects the court’s authority, but if its judgments are going to be political and there are members of the court who are saying that, he owes it to voters to make it clear what his positions are and what he’s doing to address it,” said Ron Klain, his former chief of staff.
“Many members of the current court testified that Roe is settled law and still overturned it,” he added, referring to the court’s ruling on abortion. “That has its consequences.”
Biden, who once led the Senate Judiciary Committee, is focusing on the politicization of the court as a way to encourage voters to back him. Yet he has not embraced any effort to make big changes to the court.
Instead, Biden is increasingly vocal about his belief that the court is abandoning mainstream constitutional interpretation. He tells voters they need more Democrats in Congress and a Democrat in the White House to counter the impact of the conservative-leaning court.
Biden has won his share of cases, including on immigration, before a court where conservatives hold a 6-3 majority. But the student loan defeat capped a term when justices imposed significant roadblocks.
White House officials say Biden is keen to explore other ways to pursue the same priorities and explain to the American people about the obstacles.
“There’s only upside in running against the court as an institution because the court is doing things that are wildly unpopular and they’re preventing the president from implementing his agenda,” said Chris Kang, chief counsel of the progressive group Demand Justice and a onetime deputy counsel to President Barack Obama.
“I think that it’s important to make clear that the Supreme Court is making it impossible to implement and advance policies that should not have any controversy attached to them,” he added.
Republicans are working to portray Biden as overstepping his legal authority in pursuit of his agenda. They say the high court’s policies are in step with much of the country and they are trying to motivate their own voters by highlighting what the GOP has achieved through court rulings.
Former President Donald Trump, at the recent Faith and Freedom Coalition conference in Washington, praised the three justices he had nominated to the Supreme Court. “Exactly one year ago today, those justices were the pivotal votes in the Supreme Court’s landmark decision ending the constitutional atrocity known as Roe v. Wade,” Trump said.
He drew a standing ovation by noting that “conservatives had been trying for 50 years,” to overturn that ruling. “But I got it done and nobody ever thought it was a possibility.”
Other administration officials said the court’s conservative dominance has lowered the political cost to Biden when the justices scuttle some of his legally suspect actions such as on student loans and coronavirus mandates. On the latter, the Supreme Court struck down Biden’s attempt to require employees of large companies to get shots but left the requirement in place for health care workers, though by that time the pandemic had started to wane.
Klain insisted that everything Biden has put forward had a solid legal basis and was approved by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
“There was no sense of taking the legal issues lightly or just ‘do it and take whatever the court says,’’ he said.
Confidence in the Supreme Court fell to its lowest point in at least 50 years after the leaked draft opinion in the abortion case in 2022. Those who view the current court favorably are largely Republican.
According to the Pew Research Center’s September 2022 report, only 28% of Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents now view the court favorably, down nearly 40 percentage points since 2020. And people in the United States increasingly favor term limits.
Positive views of the court among Republicans and those who lean Republican has increased to 73%. As a result, the partisan gap is larger than at any other point in the 35 years of polling that Pew has done on the court.
Republicans have focused for years on remaking the federal judiciary and Supreme Court. When Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-K.Y., was the majority leader, he refused to even meet in 2016 with Obama’s pick for the high court — current Attorney General Merrick Garland, a federal judge at that time. The nomination stalled until a Republican president, Trump, took over.
Establishment GOP operatives backed Trump because of his pledge to name as many judges to the bench as possible. Their gamble worked. Trump ended up with three Supreme Court nominees and 54 federal appeals court judges, reshaping the courts for a generation.
Democrats are now finally understanding the power of judges as a voting tool, and Biden has made judicial nominations a priority, appointing a record number of judges for a president at this point in his first term, including some of the most diverse picks yet to the judiciary. Biden aides plan on highlighting those accomplishments during the reelection campaign, but acknowledge it’s only a small salve to their troubles at the high court.
Biden has taken to warning voters about what else the Supreme Court might do in the future, whether rolling back same-sex marriage rights or access to contraception.
“President Biden is being direct with the American people about the stakes these extreme decisions that jettison decades of longstanding precedent have for their fundamental freedoms and their daily lives,” said White House spokesman Andrew Bates.
Part of Biden’s unwillingness to go further to reshape the Supreme Court comes from a sense of history. Those pushing social change stood by the court after Brown v. Board of Education, a major civil rights case, and even Roe v. Wade, holding up its autonomy as a way to push forward. Backing away from that, particularly for an establishment Democrat like Biden, is not easy.
As Biden said in an interview with MSNBC, “I think if we start the process of trying to expand the court, we’re going to politicize it maybe forever in a way that is not healthy,”
Leah Litman, a professor of law at the University of Michigan and co-host of “Strict Scrutiny” podcast about the Supreme Court, said that while Biden was unlikely to go that far, “there are a variety of things that Democratic politicians could run on that would actually allow them to more explicitly push back against the court.”
Besides expanding the size of the Supreme Court and or the lower courts, she said, other options include stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain cases, setting term limits and implementing ethics changes.
All of them, she said, are things the party could embrace “as part of their recognition that the court has politicized itself.”
You may like
Politics
State Rep. Angie Nixon Condemns Deadly ICE Shooting, Calls for Independent Investigation
Published
5 days agoon
July 10, 2026JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (FNN NEWS) — Following the fatal shooting of 52-year-old father and construction worker Lorenzo Salgado Araujo by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent in Houston, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate and Florida State Representative Angie Nixon released the following statement:
Statement from Rep. Angie Nixon
“Lorenzo Salgado Araujo was a father who spent decades building homes and providing for his family. He was fatally shot in the street by an ICE agent operating from an unmarked vehicle. My heart breaks for his wife and three sons.
“Our nation faces a moral choice. We must stop investing billions of taxpayer dollars in an agency that, in my view, terrorizes communities, operates with too little accountability, and often conducts enforcement actions without body cameras or clear identification. Those resources should instead be invested in strengthening our communities and helping families meet their basic needs. I believe ICE should be abolished.
“I stand in full solidarity with Lorenzo’s family in calling for a fully independent and transparent investigation into his death. I also call for the immediate release of his brother and the other individuals who were detained during this incident if they are being held without legal justification.”
Key Points
- Rep. Angie Nixon expressed condolences to the family of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo.
- She called for a fully independent and transparent investigation into the fatal shooting.
- Nixon criticized ICE’s enforcement practices and renewed her call to abolish the agency.
- She urged the release of Lorenzo’s brother and others detained during the incident if their continued detention is not legally justified.
US NATIONAL NEWS
U.S. Expands Sanctions Targeting Iran’s Financial Networks and Regime Financiers
Published
5 days agoon
July 10, 2026WASHINGTON (FNN NEWS) — The Trump administration announced a new round of sanctions Friday targeting individuals and businesses accused of helping finance Iran’s ruling elite and facilitating international financial transactions on behalf of the Iranian regime.
The sanctions, announced by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, target a global financial network that U.S. officials say supports Iran’s Supreme Leader and other senior regime officials.
Global Financial Network Targeted
According to the administration, the sanctions focus on Ali Ansari, a Dubai-based Iranian national accused of managing an extensive network of real estate and commercial holdings across multiple countries on behalf of Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of Iran’s Supreme Leader, and other regime insiders.
U.S. officials said the network includes assets and business interests in:
- Germany
- United Kingdom
- Spain
- Cyprus
- United Arab Emirates
- Other international jurisdictions
The administration alleges the network has been used to help Iranian regime officials maintain access to international financial markets.
Currency Exchange Houses Sanctioned
The Treasury Department also imposed sanctions on three Iran-based currency exchange firms and their associated leadership:
- Mohammad Darbani and Partners
- Lavasani and Partners
- Mohsen Khandan and Partners
The sanctions also extend to the firms’ managing partners and affiliated front companies.
According to the administration, these entities allegedly enabled Iran to obtain foreign currency and conduct international financial transactions despite existing U.S. sanctions.
Administration Cites Maximum Pressure Campaign
The White House said the latest designations are part of President Donald Trump’s broader strategy to increase economic pressure on Iran.
Administration officials said they will continue targeting individuals, businesses and financial institutions—including foreign entities—that facilitate illicit Iranian commerce or assist the regime in evading U.S. sanctions.
The administration maintains that the sanctions are intended to pressure Iran to end what it describes as destabilizing activities in the region and to hold accountable those who enable corruption within the Iranian government.
Authorities Used for Sanctions
The sanctions were imposed under multiple executive authorities, including:
- Executive Order 13902, targeting Iran’s financial and petroleum sectors.
- Executive Order 13876, focusing on Iran’s Supreme Leader and affiliated individuals.
- Executive Order 13224, as amended by Executive Order 13886, which provides counterterrorism sanctions authority.
Treasury officials said the latest designations build upon previous actions by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) targeting Iran’s shadow banking system and currency exchange networks.
US NATIONAL NEWS
White House: Trump Administration Deports Convicted Child Sex Offender After Minnesota Pardon
Published
5 days agoon
July 10, 2026WASHINGTON (FNN NEWS) — The White House announced Friday that the Trump administration deported a Laotian national convicted of sexually abusing a child after Minnesota officials granted him a pardon.
Conviction and Deportation
According to the White House, Tou Lue Vang, a Laotian national, was convicted in Minnesota of repeatedly sexually abusing a 10-year-old girl. An immigration judge ordered his removal from the United States in 2006.
The White House said Secretary of State Marco Rubio terminated Vang’s legal status, allowing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to carry out his deportation.
White House Criticizes Minnesota Leaders
The administration sharply criticized Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison, alleging they attempted to prevent Vang’s deportation by granting him a pardon.
In a statement, the White House accused the two Democratic leaders of placing the interests of a convicted child sex offender ahead of public safety and federal immigration enforcement.
The administration argued the deportation demonstrates President Donald Trump’s commitment to removing noncitizens convicted of serious crimes from the United States.
Administration Statement
The White House said the case underscores the administration’s immigration enforcement priorities.
“Under President Trump, criminal illegal aliens who rape children will be found, arrested, and removed,” the White House said.
The administration also asserted that state actions would not prevent federal immigration authorities from enforcing U.S. immigration law.
Political Dispute
The case has become part of the broader national debate over immigration enforcement and the relationship between state criminal justice decisions and federal immigration authority.
Minnesota officials have not been included in the White House announcement, and any response from Gov. Walz, Attorney General Ellison or their offices was not immediately available.
Trending
World5 days agoU.S., CARICOM IMPACS Sign Landmark Biometrics Data-Sharing Agreement to Strengthen Border Security
Florida5 days agoVilchez Santiago Wins Union Backing; Daisy Morales Says Voters — Not Political Endorsements — Decide Elections
Central Florida News5 days agoOrlando Police Arrest Three Following Shooting at West Lakes Apartment Complex
World5 days agoCARICOM Leaders Unveil Regional Measures to Combat Rising Cost of Living
US NATIONAL NEWS5 days agoU.S. Expands Sanctions Targeting Iran’s Financial Networks and Regime Financiers