|
|
|
Senate rejects competing bills, increasing risk of shutdown on Oct. 1
Topics in Legal News |
2025/09/18 13:02
|
The Senate rejected competing measures on Friday to fund federal agencies for a few weeks when the new budget year begins on Oct. 1, increasing prospects for a partial government shutdown on that date.
Leaders of the two parties sought to blame the other side for the standoff. Democrats accused Republicans of not negotiating with them to address some of their priorities on health care as part of the funding measure, even though they knew Democratic votes would be needed to get a bill to the president’s desk.
Republicans said Democrats were making demands that would dramatically increase spending and were not germane to the core issue of keeping agencies fully running for a short period of time while negotiations continued on a full-year spending package.
It’s unclear how the two sides will be able to avoid a shutdown. Republicans are planning on what amounts to a do-over vote on their proposal close to the deadline in the hopes that more Democrats will have second thoughts. Democrats are repeating their demand that Republicans sit down with them and work on a compromise.
“The theater must end,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said after the vote. “Let’s sit down and negotiate.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., gave no indication of a change in course.
“All it takes is a handful of Democrats to join the Republicans in keeping the government open and funded, and to ensure we have a chance to get the appropriations process completed in the way it was intended,” Thune said.
The Senate action came after the House earlier in the day passed the Republican-led funding bill. The measure would extend government funding generally at current levels for seven weeks. The bill would also add about $88 million in security funding for lawmakers and members of the Supreme Court and executive branch in the wake of the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
The vote was 217-212. Rep. Jared Golden of Maine was the lone Democratic member to support the bill. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., also said she tried to vote for the bill but was not recognized by the presiding officer. She was listed officially as not voting.
House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana said he knew he had few votes to spare as he sought to persuade fellow Republicans to vote for the funding patch, something many in his conference have routinely opposed in past budget fights. But this time, GOP members saw a chance to portray the Democrats as responsible for a shutdown.
“The ball is in Chuck Schumer’s court. I hope he does the right thing. I hope he does not choose to shut the government down and inflict pain on the American people,” Johnson said.
President Donald Trump had urged House Republicans to pass the bill and put the burden on Democrats to oppose it. GOP leaders often need Trump’s help to win over holdouts on legislation.
Trump predicted Friday that there could be “a closed country for a period of time.” He said the government will continue to “take care” of the military and Social Security payments in a closure.
Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said that in opposing the continuing resolution, Democrats were working to protect the health care of the American people. He said that with Republicans controlling the White House and both branches of Congress, “Republicans will own a government shutdown. Period. Full stop.”
The Senate moved quickly after the House vote to take up the measure plus the Democratic counter. Both bills fell far short of the 60 votes required for passage.
The Democratic proposal would extend enhanced health insurance subsidies set to expire at the end of the year, plus reverse Medicaid cuts that were included in Republicans’ big tax breaks and spending cuts bill enacted earlier this year.
The Democratic measure actually received more votes than the Republican one due to absences. The 47-45 vote went strictly along party lines.
“The American people will look at what Republicans are doing, look at what Democrats are doing, and it will be clear that public sentiment will be on our side,” Schumer said.
The Republican measure gained 44 votes, including from Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. But 48 voted against it, including two Republicans, Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Labor Law Attorneys in Queens, NY - Seo Law Group, PLLC
Topics in Legal News |
2025/06/05 11:12
|
With years of experience representing both employees and employers, our firm has developed a comprehensive understanding of the legal challenges that arise in today’s workplaces. Our labor and employment attorneys provide strategic, personalized representation tailored to your specific circumstances.
We are passionate about protecting the rights of employees. If you’ve faced discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, or any other form of workplace injustice, we are prepared to stand by you and pursue the justice you deserve.
We also advise employers on navigating the complex landscape of labor and employment law. From drafting employment agreements and enforcing non-compete clauses to ensuring compliance and resolving disputes, we offer practical, results-oriented legal support designed to protect your organization.
Our attorneys have successfully represented clients in both the public and private sectors across a wide range of employment matters, including:
-Wrongful termination and layoffs
-Workplace discrimination and harassment
-Promotion and advancement disputes
-Disciplinary actions
-Employment contract and severance negotiations
-Non-compete and confidentiality agreements
-Disability accommodations and related claims
Whether you're an individual seeking justice or a business seeking clarity, we are here to help. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Justice Dept. moves to cancel police reform settlements reached with Minneapolis
Topics in Legal News |
2025/05/21 12:32
|
The Justice Department moved Wednesday to cancel a settlement with Minneapolis that called for an overhaul of its police department following the murder of George Floyd, as well as a similar agreement with Louisville, Kentucky, saying it doesn’t want to pursue the cases.
Following a scathing report by the Justice Department in 2023, Minneapolis in January approved a consent decree with the federal government in the final days of the Biden administration to overhaul its training and use-of-force policies under court supervision.
The agreement required approval from a federal court in Minnesota. But the Trump administration was granted a delay soon after taking office while it considered its options, and on Wednesday told the court it does not intend to proceed. It planned to file a similar motion in federal court in Kentucky.
“After an extensive review by current Department of Justice and Civil Rights Division leadership, the United States no longer believes that the proposed consent decree would be in the public interest,” said the Minnesota motion, signed by Andrew Darlington, acting chief of the special litigation section of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The United States will no longer prosecute this matter.”
The Justice Department announced its decision just before the five-year anniversary of the murder of George Floyd. Then-officer Derek Chauvin used his knee on May 25, 2020, to pin the Black man to the pavement for 9 1/2 minutes in a case that sparked protests around the world and a national reckoning with racism and police brutality.
However, no immediate changes are expected to affect the Minneapolis Police Department, which is operating under a similar consent decree with the Minnesota Human Rights Department.
Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara reiterated at a news conference Tuesday that his department would abide by the terms of the federal agreement as it was signed, regardless of what the Trump administration decided.
The city in 2023 reached a settlement agreement with the state Human Rights Department to remake policing, under court supervision, after the agency issued a blistering report in 2022 that found that police had long engaged in a pattern of racial discrimination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Officers plead guilty in DWI police corruption probe in Albuquerque, NM
Topics in Legal News |
2025/02/09 20:23
|
Two former Albuquerque police officers pleaded guilty Friday to federal charges of racketeering, extortion and accepting bribes in a sweeping corruption investigation into a scheme that allegedly allowed people arrested for driving while intoxicated to evade conviction, according to court records.
The former officers worked under the Albuquerque Police Department’s driving while intoxicated unit and acknowledged conspiring with attorney Ricardo Mendez in a yearslong scheme. Federal investigators say that Mendez’s law firm offered gifts and thousands of dollars in bribes to officers in exchange for having his clients’ cases dismissed.
Officers Joshua Montaño and Honorio Alba signed agreements to plead guilty and cooperate with investigators in exchange for leniency on charges that might otherwise result in lengthy prison sentences. Attorneys for Montaño and Alba did not immediately respond to phone and email messages.
Mendez last month pleaded guilty to a slew of federal charges that include racketeering and bribery.
Clients would pay Mendez or his associate an attorney retainer fee in cash, court records said. Then Mendez would pay officers in cash — $5,000 or more — or in the form of gifts or legal services to not appear in court as a necessary witness to the driving incident, resulting in the dismissal of the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pentagon chief loses bid to reject 9/11 plea deals
Topics in Legal News |
2025/01/01 19:59
|
A military appeals court has ruled against Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s effort to throw out the plea deals reached for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and two other defendants in the 9/11 attacks, a U.S. official said.
The decision puts back on track the agreements that would have the three men plead guilty to one of the deadliest attacks on the United States in exchange for being spared the possibility of the death penalty. The attacks by al-Qaida killed nearly 3,000 people on Sept. 11, 2001, and helped spur U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq in what the George W. Bush administration called its war on terror.
The military appeals court released its ruling Monday night, according to the U.S. official, who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
Military prosecutors and defense attorneys for Mohammed, the accused mastermind of the attacks, and two co-defendants reached the plea agreements after two years of government-approved negotiations. The deals were announced late last summer.
Supporters of the plea agreements see them as a way of resolving the legally troubled case against the men at the U.S. military commission at Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba. Pretrial hearings for Mohammed, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi have been underway for more than a decade.
Much of the focus of pretrial arguments has been on how torture of the men while in CIA custody in the first years after their detention may taint the overall evidence in the case.
Within days of news of the plea deal this summer, Austin issued a brief order saying he was nullifying them.
He cited the gravity of the 9/11 attacks in saying that as defense secretary, he should decide on any plea agreements that would spare the defendants the possibility of execution.
Defense lawyers said Austin had no legal authority to reject a decision already approved by the Guantanamo court’s top authority and said the move amounted to unlawful interference in the case.
The military judge hearing the 9/11 case, Air Force Col. Matthew McCall, had agreed that Austin lacked standing to throw out the plea bargains after they were underway. That had set up the Defense Department’s appeal to the military appeals court.
Austin now has the option of taking his effort to throw out the plea deals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Separately, the Pentagon said it had repatriated one of the longest-held detainees at the Guantanamo military prison, a Tunisian man who U.S. authorities approved for transfer more than a decade ago.
Ridah bin Saleh al-Yazidi’s return to Tunisia leaves 26 men at Guantanamo. That’s down from a peak population of about 700 Muslim men detained abroad and brought to the prison in the years after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Al-Yazidi’s repatriation leaves 14 men awaiting transfer to other countries after U.S. authorities waived any prosecution and cleared them as security risks.
The Biden administration, pressed by rights groups to free remaining Guantanamo detainees held without charge, transferred out three other men this month. The U.S. says it is searching for suitable and stable countries willing to receive the remaining 14.
In a statement, the U.S. military said it had worked with authorities in Tunisia for the “responsible transfer” of al-Yazidi. He had been a prisoner at Guantanamo since 2002, when the U.S. began sending Muslim detainees taken abroad there.
Al-Yazidi is the last of a dozen Tunisian men once held at Guantanamo.
Of those remaining at Guantanamo, seven — including Mohammed and his 9/11 co-defendants — face active cases. Two others of the 26 total have been convicted and sentenced by the military commission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
