Displaying posts published in

January 2019

POLITICS Comments turned off

Kamala Harris’s Outrageous Assault on the Knights of Columbus By Matthew Continetti

By on January 12th, 2019

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/kamala-harris-knights-of-columbus-religious-test/

No longer is the debate over Christianity in the public square. It is over Christians in the public square.

Kamala Harris is set to announce her candidacy for president sometime around Martin Luther King Jr. Day. What sort of chief executive would she be? Well, here’s your first clue: On December 5, Harris posed a series of written questions to Brian Buescher, President Trump’s nominee for district court in Nebraska. The third question reads as follows:

Since 1993, you have been a member of the Knights of Columbus, an all-male society comprised primarily of Catholic men. In 2016, Carl Anderson, leader of the Knights of Columbus, described abortion as “a legal regime that has resulted in more than 40 million deaths.” Mr. Anderson went on to say that “abortion is the killing of the innocent on a massive scale.” Were you aware that the Knights of Columbus opposed a woman’s right to choose when you joined the organization?

Harris wasn’t finished. Follow-ups included “Were you aware that the Knights of Columbus opposed marriage equality when you joined the organization?” and “Have you ever, in any way, assisted with or contributed to advocacy against women’s reproductive rights?”

Buescher, a Nebraska native and graduate of the Georgetown Law Center, replied that he joined the Knights when he was 18 years old; that his involvement includes charitable work; and that his job as a judge is to apply the law regardless of his personal convictions. Strong answers. That he had to offer them is a disgrace.

Continue reading →
IMMIGRATION, NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

National Emergencies and the Long-Lost Legislative Veto By Andrew C. McCarthy

By on January 12th, 2019

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/trump-national-emergency-declaration-constitutional-twilight-zone/

The prospect of Trump declaring a national emergency to fund construction of a border fence puts us in a constitutional twilight zone.

When the subject of the president’s potential declaration of a national emergency arose during our recording of The McCarthy Report on Wednesday, Rich Lowry rightly chuckled in mock amazement when I observed that there was a difference between what should happen and what will happen. He’s right — isn’t there always?

We were discussing the position ardently held by several smart commentators, not least our friend David French, that such a declaration would be illegal: the manufacture of an emergency in order to justify — or, if you prefer, as a pretext for — repurposing Defense Department funds for the construction of physical barriers (are we still calling it “the wall”?) along the southern border.

National Emergencies and Congress

As I hope I made clear in my post on Tuesday about executive legislating through the hocus-pocus of national emergency declarations, I am with David, Charlie Cooke, Jonah Goldberg, and the rest of my fellow editors on the “ought” question. In our constitutional system, Congress is supposed to do the legislating, which includes determining the conditions — emergency or otherwise — that call for legislation. Unfortunately, that fundamental “ought” question is not the one on the table today.

The presumption in our law, whether we agree with it or not, is that this power to declare emergencies and, in effect, legislate measures to deal with them has been delegated to the president by Congress in numerous statutes. With the rise of progressivism and the consequent expansion of executive power in the 20th century, this wayward practice became such a staple of federal law that Congress eventually enacted a regulatory scheme for it: the 1976 National Emergencies Act (codified in Chapter 34 of Title 50, U.S. Code). While the NEA was actually an attempt to rein in executive lawmaking, it explicitly endorsed it. As Rich and I discussed in the podcast, regardless of whether this is right, it is routine.

If I had my druthers, the whole concept would be revisited. Alas, that is a more fundamental question for another day. For now, Section 1621 authorizes the president to declare national emergencies and invoke any powers Congress has delegated by statute for such emergencies.

Continue reading →
WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Europe: More Nifty Censorship from the EU by Judith Bergman

By on January 12th, 2019

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13520/eu-censorship

Sadly, the main victims of many of the abuses that the European Commission seemingly wishes to silence are often Muslims, often women and children, and often too scared to speak out.

One of the foremost tools used by the EU is its “Code of conduct on countering illegal hate speech online,” including hate speech against Muslims. By signing up to the Code, the major technology and social media corporations have committed themselves to censoring the internet on behalf of the EU.

Apparently, it is no longer enough, as “each offense to a religion” is now “an offense to all”, that members of one religion are offended. Now, it seems, according to the OSCE, every European is supposed to be offended in solidarity with them, as well.

On December 3, the European Commission hosted a “high-level conference to address intolerance, hate speech and discrimination affecting Muslims in the EU”. According to the EU press release, “By sharing good practices, the aim of the event is to identify key actions at all levels to address intolerance, racism and discrimination against Muslims in the coming years”. The event brought together over 100 “representatives of national authorities, civil society, academia, the religious community, EU agencies and international organisations.”

There is, according to the European Commission, a “need for action”, as “unfavourable views of Muslims appear to have surged in the past few years”. The European Commission does not, of course, offer up the possibility that such unfavorable views might be due to the fact that an overwhelming majority of all terrorist attacks on European soil in recent years have been committed primarily by one group, among several other signs of transformation on the European continent. Examples include preaching jihad against “infidels” in mosques; the rise of rape, as well as rape grooming gangs — not exclusively, but overwhelmingly run by the same group in countries such as the UK, the Netherlands and now also apparently Finland; brutal misogynist practices such as female genital mutilation (FGM), honor killings, forced marriages and polygamy — in addition to an exponential rise in anti-Semitism, especially in France. Sadly, the main victims of many of the abuses that the European Commission seemingly wishes to silence are Muslims, often women and children, and often too scared to speak out (here, here and here).

Continue reading →