Democratic California State Lawmaker Switches To Republican Party

 by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A California state lawmaker announced on Thursday that she’s switching affiliation to the Republican Party in a bid to save the state from heading in the wrong direction under a Democratic supermajority.

State Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil, who represents the state’s fourth Senate district, said she joined the Senate Republican Caucus and party after deep reflection and to help “in their fight to fix California.”

“I was elected to serve the public, not a political ideology,” Alvarado-Gil said in a statement. “The status quo under a supermajority Democratic rule in the legislature is simply not working for this state.”

Democratic state Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire said her decision would be disappointing for voters who elected her in 2022.

“They trusted her to represent them, and she’s betrayed that trust,” he said in a statement.

However, Alvarado-Gil, who represents a largely conservative-leaning rural district in northeast Central Valley, said the decision was “right for the constituents that voted me into office” and about putting them first.

California has a Democrat supermajority in both the Assembly and the Senate. After Alvarado-Gil’s defection, which gives Republicans nine votes in the 40-member Senate, Democrats will retain their veto-proof majority.

Despite Democrats having more power and ability in the state Legislature, Alvarado-Gil said that since she’s been elected, she’s had a front-row seat to watching the Democratic supermajority push California in what she characterized as a wrong direction.

Republicans’ nine votes still leaves them well under the majority they need to control the chamber. Democrats hold supermajorities in both the Assembly and Senate at the Capitol.

Alvarado-Gil is known for working with Republicans and has split from Democrats to vote on issues where she feels politics is being put over public safety.

State Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones, in a statement welcoming Alvarado-Gil to the GOP, said it takes courage for a lawmaker to stand up to the supermajority the way she has.

“Her record on tackling crime, protecting communities from sexually violent predators, and prioritizing her constituents speaks for itself,” said Jones, who has recently worked with Alvarado-Gil on a number of key Republican measures.

Alvarado-Gil, who is in her first term, has broken with Democrats on a number of bills, including gun legislation, caps on oil industry profits, and restrictions on homeless encampments over the last year. She was one of three state Democratic senators to co-author legislation led by Jones to restrict homeless encampments.

She said on Thursday that she will continue to aggressively advocate for fiscal responsibility, public safety, supporting veterans, tackling the homelessness crisis, and lowering living costs.

Alvarado-Gil has supported legislation addressing crime, fentanyl, human trafficking, child sex trafficking, sexual assault, and relocating sexually violent predators to rural communities.

“I look forward to collaborating with my Republican colleagues on their plan to Fix California and continuing to lead with a pragmatic approach on issues affecting my district and this great state,” she said.

California Republican Party Chairwoman Jessica Millan Patterson said, “Senator Alvarado-Gil has represented her community as an independent, fiscally-conservative voice in Sacramento, and we are honored to have her represent them going forward as a member of the Republican Party.”

Alvarado-Gil beat out a progressive Democrat by more than five points in the 2022 election. Registered Republican voters in her district have increased since 2022 to nearly 39 percent to Democrats’ 34 percent in 2024.

It’s uncommon for a member of a majority party to switch affiliation, according to California State Library legislative historian Alex Vassar.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/democratic-california-state-lawmaker-switches-republican-party

Now it's bombs turning up in Maui?

 By Monica Showalter

Someone not want the tourists and their money to come back to Maui?

There probably isn't a better way to achieve that then by leaving a lot of bombs lying around, disguised as common objects, which is the strange, sinister development in that fire-ravaged part of Hawaii.

According to the Beat of Hawaii, Hawai'i Travel News website:

Cherished Maui, on the first anniversary of the tragic Lahaina fire, is experiencing the report of significant safety concerns due to the discovery of potential explosive devices just reported by the FBI. There have been other suspected incidents reported on Maui since last year.

Update at 11:40 pm. There have been reports of an explosion about two hours ago in Pukalani. We don’t know yet if this is related to the earlier report.

The FBI and Maui Police Department are together investigating several incidents involving Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) found in public areas, and the Kahului and Pukalani regions were specifically mentioned. Although no injuries have occurred, this situation led to a public safety warning being issued this afternoon, which is important to both residents and visitors.

Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) are homemade bombs that can, by intention, cause harm, disrupt safety, and instill fear. The devices can be made using a wide range of materials, from simple household items to more sophisticated elements. IEDs can vary greatly in appearance, which can be a source of confusion. They might resemble common objects, including baskets or bags, making them difficult to recognize.

Sound like the kind of place you'd like to visit?

The travel website hastens to say that there's nothing for tourists to worry about, but obviously, it's all-in for tourism to Hawaii.

Tourists, though, are likely to have other ideas. After all, they have their choice of Hawaiian islands to visit, all of them wonderful, and if they have the cash and taste for it, other tropical island vacation paradises not that (wildly) far away from Hawaii as such things go, such as Tahiti, Fiji, the Cook Islands, and even Bali. There's plenty of competition.

Which makes this bomb stunt so horrible.

Random bombs in civilian places is the kind of thing Marxist narcoterrorists used to do in cities such as Medellin, Colombia. Terrorists also did that in Belfast, Northern Ireland during its time of troubles, same ones who trained the Colombians.

It took a long time for Medellin to recover its reputation once that nightmare started. People stay away from places like that.

It's hard to guess what the motive for this is, given that it harms the islanders' incomes as it keeps the tourists away. It was obviously someone driven by some kind of hatred.

But the government coverups associated with the fire that destroyed Lahaina, the failure to hold culpable officials accountable, the federal failure to deliver aid beyond the miserable $700 the islanders who lost their homes were given, the failure to rebuild based on the tangled blue-state regulations, the odd exceptions from greenie regulations that the rich get, and the developers moving to scoop up the prime beachfront property from residents burned out, has obviously set the groundwork for angry people and a lot of conspiracy theories. Good luck figuring it out with that.

The fact that the FBI is investigating adds to the atmosphere, too, given that they may as easily cover up the problem as solve it. We've seen that with the Trump assassination attempt, coming on the back of the shenanigans and crimes that came out of that agency directed at President Trump. Could that also happen to Maui? I really hope not.

It's probably too soon to figure out who a suspect might be  - a developer? an angry local? someone from the incompetent government? an angry Native Hawaiian militant?

But what is known is that it's bound to drive the recession hitting the island even deeper, and drive even more residents from the island than the many who have already felt compelled to leave as it is.

That's a terrible thing to do to the islanders who have already been battered enough and who just want to rebuild.

One can only hope that the bureau solves this one well, nabs the culprit, and gets the culprit punished to the fullest extent of the law, without regard to which party he belongs to, or what his ties to the power structure on the island might be. Otherwise, the problem will continue, or may even get worse.

Bombs are the last thing Maui needs. There is some kind of dark cloud over that island as incompetence and coverup builds upon incompetence and coverup and greed is the name of the game.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/08/now_it_s_bombs_turning_up_in_maui.html 

Election Integrity in Swing States

 By Robert A. Taft

There are seven states that are considered 'swing' states. They are critical to the outcomes of national elections and one would think that the election security processes in these states would be top-notch.

Unfortunately, they are anything but.

The seven states include: Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Georgia.

According to the Heritage Foundation election integrity scorecards, Georgia -- probably because of the pressure brought to bear on it from the questionable 2020 election results -- is the only one that scored well at 83 out of 100. The average of the other six is 59 percent. The average ranking for these seven is 29 out of the 50 states.

If you add other possible swing states – New Hampshire, Maine, Colorado, Minnesota, and Virginia -- they average 54 percent. It is interesting to note that all the states ranked in the lowest election integrity rankings and performance are blue states.

The foundation bases its findings on 14 criteria, six of which address voter ID, accuracy of voter registration lists, absentee ballot management, harvesting restrictions, access of election observers, verification of citizenship, private funding for election board members, and election audits.

Requirement to present ID for voting: This criterion calls for a photo ID for both in-person and absentee ballots. The average score of the swing states is 10 out of a possible 20 points, which means the requirement does not apply in all cases and/or ID identification is suspect or lax.

Voter List Accuracy: This criterion shows how rigorously election boards and secretaries of state monitor voter registration rolls. The average score of swing states is 18 out of 28, but this average is suspect for the following reasons: In the 2020 election, there were 29 million illegitimate voter registrations, according to United Sovereign Americans, of which 10 million resulting votes, throwing voting accuracy off by double digits. All of the swing states were involved in this voter list fraud.

Absentee Ballot Management: This measures how well the state distributes absentee ballots, number of ballots one person can witness, signed request for an absentee ballot, receipt of all ballots by election day, etc. The average of the swing states is 10.5 out of 21. This exposes overall poor chain of custody of absentee ballots.

Restricting Ballot Harvesting: This measures how well the state deals with the practice of gathering absentee ballots and delivering them to polling places. The swing state average was 19 out of 24 possible points. In addition, five of the swing states either require or allow drop-boxes, including Arizona, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Wisconsin, and Michigan. 

Ensuring Citizenship: This measures how important states consider citizenship in the voting process. The average of the swing states is less than 1 out of 4. Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania have no requirement to prove citizenship.

In 1924 and again in 1996 Congress passed legislation to ban non-citizens from voting in federal elections. The new SAVE Act, passed by the House confirms that. Nonetheless, these laws are being routinely violated, especially in key swing states.

Based on a court case, Arizona had to prove citizenship but the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court ruled that Arizona must accept registrants who cannot prove citizenship prior to voting in state elections. Nevada gives drivers licenses to undocumented migrants and North Carolina gives such licenses to select undocumented migrants. But North Carolina, despite giving out drivers licenses, claims that a box on the ballot asking whether or not the voter is a citizen is sufficient to determine citizenship.

In Arizona, Maricopa’s Recorder claims that requiring U.S. citizenship verification for voting in federal elections is unlawful. This is because the county is relying on illegal immigrants to vote in November. The number of voters in that county who haven’t provided proof of citizenship and cannot be confirmed as citizens has increased by over 32 percent since last October and county officials are fine with this. 

Similar situations exist in Michigan, Virginia, Vermont, among others. The Biden-Harris administration is encouraging illegal immigrants to register to vote and obtain drivers licenses in states where they can. This has prompted the Republican National Committee to file lawsuits to reverse this problem. 

Election Observer Access: This shows the degree of access election observers to ballot observation. The swing states claimed they all give “full and complete” access to election observers, yet this was a major bone of contention in the 2020 elections, particularly in swing states Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia. 

Private Funding to Election Officials: This exposes whether or not states allow private funding of their election officials. Three of the swing states allow this practice, including North Carolina, Nevada, and Michigan.

Given the importance of the swing states' ballot counting, the mechanisms in place for ensuring accurate counts and preventing voter anomalies are suspect at best in these states. Despite volumes of sworn affidavits, video accounts, machine anomalies, the massive amounts of mail-in ballots, and the inconsistencies and operation of the voting machines, the 2020 elections were never adjudicated.

Today nearly two-thirds of Americans do not believe the 2024 election will be honest and secure. 

If the elections indeed will be decided in the swing states, isn't it particularly incumbent on the officials in those state to ensure honest elections? All these states have been approached to strengthen their election processes, but little if anything has been done to change the landscape of 2020.

Given their dismal election integrity state rankings and scorecards, doesn't the American voter deserve better?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/08/election_integrity_in_swing_states.html

'Democrats warn Harris must find right message on economy'

 Democrats are warning that Vice President Harris needs to solidify her economic message before former President Trump ties her to a narrative that plagued President Biden while he was the nominee.  

Before Biden’s withdrawal from the race last month, the economy was the dominant issue for voters, with a string of polls indicating Trump was winning on that matter. The surveys concluded that voters trusted Trump on economic issues more than they trusted Biden. 

But for the last six weeks, the news cycles have been dominated by a rash of political headlines including the uncertainty in the Democratic Party following Biden’s disastrous debate performance, an attempted assassination on Trump, the former president’s selection of Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate and the Republican National Convention.

Less than a week later, the transition from Biden to Harris overtook the headlines, followed by a two-week wave of enthusiasm for Harris, only accelerated by the attention around her own veepstakes. 

Democrats haven’t had to worry much about policy during that time, and Republicans have focused largely on identity politics, including Harris’s race and ethnicity. But Democrats say Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), must go on the offensive on the economy before Republicans bring it back to the forefront of the campaign. 

“The big question is, ‘Can you win the message war there? Can you convince the hearts and minds, and win the conversation on what the future looks like?’” said Joel Payne, a Democratic strategist. “Obviously Republicans traditionally have an advantage on this. But while you’re litigating the last three years, you need to make sure you’re putting it into context about, “Who do you trust in the future” on the economy.

At the moment, Harris is “getting a free pass” when it comes to the economy and other top policy issues, one major Democratic donor said. “But they need to be ready to have a solid economic argument at their fingertips,” the donor cautioned. “Biden struggled to articulate that message.” 

The economy is gaining in urgency as an issue as it nears an inflection point following a period of interest rate hikes and quantitative tightening undertaken by the Federal Reserve in response to elevated postpandemic inflation.

A key recession indicator known as the Sahm Rule was triggered last week by an increase in the unemployment rate to 4.3 percent. Markets widely expect the Fed to cut interest rates at its next meeting in order to start stimulating the economy.

Polls taken after Biden dropped out show Harris has narrowed the gap with Trump on the overall handling of the economy. A Morning Consult poll out this month showed that 50 percent of voters said they trusted Trump on the economy, while 42 percent said they trusted Harris. It was a sizable difference from earlier this year, when 51 percent said they trusted the former president while 37 percent said they trusted Biden on the issue. 

A recent Marist poll revealed Trump still held a small lead over Harris on who would better handle the economy, 51 percent to 48 percent. 

Biden struggled to gain political momentum from the economy as it went through an exceptional period during his presidency. The aftermath of the pandemic shattered many conventional assumptions on economic performance.

Employment levels remained near record highs even as the Federal Reserve cranked interest rates and trimmed its balance sheet. The central bank and many economists predicted a recession for 2023 that failed to happen. Corporate profits surged to record highs, and economic growth blew past expectations in several quarters.

But Biden was unable to capitalize on those impressive metrics as a bout of high inflation weighed on consumers’ minds and his economic approval ratings. In May, just 38 percent of Americans had confidence in Biden’s handling of the economy — a number that fell as low as 35 percent in 2023, with only George W. Bush during the aftermath of the 2008 financial collapse coming in lower among recent presidencies, according to Gallup.

By contrast, Trump came in at a 46 percent economic approval rating in that poll, near numbers maintained throughout the course of his presidency. Trump presided over relatively low unemployment and inflation. His campaign has grabbed headlines on the economy with some drastic economic proposals, including a 10-percent general tariff on imported goods that could replace the income tax.

He’s also talked about serious restrictions on immigration as a way to increase domestic wages and employment, calling them in a recent interview with Bloomberg “the biggest [factor] of all” in his economic policy designs. Businesses could push back against their access to cheap labor, investors have told The Hill, and some researchers are concerned that Trump’s policies would be inflationary.

Trump advisors have even drawn up a plan, according to The Wall Street Journal, to limit the power of the Fed, the statutorily independent U.S. central bank with vast power over the economy. Trump regularly criticized Fed Chair Jerome Powell during his presidency and has blasted him on the campaign trail, as well.

Trump’s messaging on the economy and anti-globalization rhetoric has proven resonant with his supporters and even those that signaled support for other potential GOP candidates.

“Just take a step back and be honest,” JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said earlier this year at an economic forum. “He was kind of right about NATO. He was kind of right about immigration. He grew the economy quite well. Trade, tax reform worked. He was right about some of China.”

A source close to the campaign said Harris is working through an economic message and has brought in former Biden White House adviser Gene Sperling and others to help.

So far, the Harris campaign’s economic stances have stayed pretty much in line with those of the Biden campaign, hitting many of the same points on jobs, health care, and falling inflation, while knocking conservative proposals.

During a campaign stop in Philadelphia on Tuesday, Harris gave a broad-brush preview of her economic messaging. 

“We fight for a future where we build a broad-based economy, where every American has the opportunity to own a home, to start a business, and to build wealth,” she said. “We fight for a future where we bring down prices that are still too high and lower the cost of living for America’s families, so that they have the chance not just to get by, but to get ahead.”

Kevin Madden, a longtime Republican strategist who served as an adviser on Sen. Mitt Romney’s (R-Utah) 2012 presidential campaign, said the election is still “likely to be decided by the mood of the electorate related to the economy, and the mood has been sour due to concerns about inflation and rising costs.” 

Harris, Madden said, “should own the policies and record of the Biden administration, but only if Trump makes sure of that. 

“The downside of Trump and Vance pushing on identity politics and culture issues in their initial contrast message against Harris, is that it squandered an opportunity to win over swing voters on their top issue, which is the economy.”

At a Thursday press conference, Trump hit the issue of the economy right off the bat, warning off the back of recent economic indicators that the U.S. could be on the verge of a serious downturn.

“We have a very bad economy right now. We could literally be in the throes of a depression,” he said, although depression warnings among economists are few and far between.

Investors and economists told The Hill that the Harris-Walz campaign should break free of familiar economic narratives and capitalize on the unexpectedly strong performance that Harris has helped to oversee.

Democrats should drown out the narrative of elevated inflation by focusing not on the well-known overperformance of the job market, Westwood Capital founding partner Dan Alpert told The Hill, but by playing up hard numbers on wage gains.

“They should remind the American people that the average weekly income for all private sector jobs in February 2020, the eve of the pandemic, was $979. Today it is $1,200,” Alpert wrote in an email.

“Stop talking about how many jobs were created. Americans know that is skewed by post-pandemic re-employment. Focus on the dollars in their pockets,” he continued.

Beyond individual metrics and talking points, Alpert also said that Harris should extend the working-class vision for the economy evident in Biden’s ardent support for organized labor and depart from recent bigger-picture policy norms.

“[This is] the issue that will re-elect Trump if Harris and Walz ignore it: the economic and physical precarity of the bottom three quintiles of our population,” he said. “This is both Trump’s strength and, as a Republican, his Achilles’ Heel. The Democrats need to firmly disavow Clinton era support for neoliberalism that resulted in greater polarization of wealth and income.”

https://thehill.com/business/4819601-harris-economic-message-trump-tie/

Tester keeps Harris at arm’s length amid tight Senate race

 Democratic Sen. Jon Tester (Mont.) is keeping his distance from the newly formed Harris-Walz ticket as the vulnerable incumbent stares down a tight race for reelection that could determine control of the upper chamber.

Tester praised Vice President Harris when she became President Biden’s running mate back in 2020, but he has kept her 2024 presidential bid at arm’s length. Last week, he reportedly abstained when Montana’s Democratic delegates joined a virtual roll call to vote for Harris to become the party’s official nominee. He’s also expected to skip the Democratic National Convention this month, even as party energy builds behind Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D).

At the same time, the embattled senator this week launched a “Republicans for Tester” group to rally support from across the aisle. His actions underscore the difficult political landscape he faces in Big Sky County, which former President Trump won by more than 16 points in 2020.

“In a state like Montana, it’s not advantageous to be seen with what your opponent will label as a San Francisco liberal, who’s paired up with a Minnesota liberal, and open yourself up to the social/culture wars that this ticket brings,” Democratic strategist Fred Hicks said.

“You have the thinnest of margins possible [in the Senate]. There’s no margin for error. And so you absolutely have to allow people to do what’s best if you’re going to hold control,” Hicks added. “It makes total sense, very smart, for Tester, even though he’s a Democrat and no one doubts that, to not give his opponents any additional fodder.” 

Democrats are espousing optimism about their efforts to keep control of the Senate, where they currently hold a two-seat majority. The party can’t afford to lose Tester’s seat, which Republicans see as a prime pickup opportunity along with seats in West Virginia — which they’re virtually guaranteed to win — and Ohio.

Tester’s the last-standing Montana Democrat elected statewide, and polling shows him locked in a tight race against Republican businessman Tim Sheehy, a political newcomer backed by the GOP establishment, including Trump.

Millions have poured into the race, with Tester having the fundraising edge. But the incumbent is still facing political headwinds given the state’s red lean. A new Emerson College Polling/The Hill survey of Montana voters found Sheehy leading Tester by 2 points, a shift from earlier this spring when the Democrat narrowly led.

A forecast from Decision Desk HQ (DDHQ) looks grim for Tester, giving Sheehy a 77 percent chance of winning the race. DDHQ’s map labels the Montana contest as “lean Republican” while the nonpartisan election handicapper Cook Political Report rates it a “toss up.”

“He really wants Montanans to focus on his record for the state,” Hicks said of Tester. “He doesn’t want this to be a national campaign. And so the best way to avoid it being nationalized is to avoid the national events and the national candidates, and say ‘This is about Montana.’”

Tester was the second Senate Democrat to call for Biden to withdraw from the 2024 race. And when Montana delegates cast ballots to help Harris secure the Democratic nomination on a virtual roll call vote, NBC Montana and Montana Public Radio reported that Tester was the only one of the state’s delegates to withhold support. 

That abstention was an inside-baseball move that isn’t likely to draw a lot of attention, but it was a defensive play, said Montana-based Republican strategist Erik Iverson, a former chair of the Montana Republican Party and a pollster for Sheehy’s campaign. If Tester had cast a pro-Harris ballot, Republicans would’ve seized on it, he said. 

Senate Republicans have already been hammering Tester for encouraging Harris to run for the Senate in 2015, when he was chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Sheehy has also re-upped Tester’s 2020 social media endorsement when Harris became Biden’s vice president pick, calling his rival “two-faced.” 

National Republican Senatorial Committee Executive Director Jason Thielman contended in a recent column that Tester “has been doing everything he can to avoid telling Montanans where he stands on the upcoming presidential election.”

In a similar vein, Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf argued some vulnerable Senate incumbents are planning to pass on the Democratic convention, which kicks off in Chicago later this month, in order to avoid giving Republicans ammo. 

A campaign spokesperson told The Associated Press that Tester will be “farming and meeting face to face with Montanans” during the convention. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who is also battling a Trump-backed challenger in an increasingly red-leaning state, told CNN he will skip the gathering. 

“It’s the photos of them being there that are more dangerous than the act of being there itself,” Sheinkopf said, regarding their decision to skip the event. 

Although many Democrats seem euphoric about the top of the ticket after the presidential race shake-up last month, it’s still early, Sheinkopf said, and “no one really knows what the impact of the Harris nomination will be.” 

Tester hasn’t been to the convention since 2008, according to the AP, when former President Obama came just a few points short of flipping Montana. 

Brian Darling, a GOP strategist and former Senate aide, argued that “boycotting the convention and not appearing with a candidate” isn’t enough to help Democrats like Tester sway voters. 

“These candidates are doing their best to run away from the Harris-Walz ticket, but there’s only so far they can run,” Darling said. 

Tester’s actions make for a vivid contrast with Sheehy, who has embraced the top of the ticket, touting his alignment with Trump. 

The former president was headed Friday night to Bozeman to campaign with the Republican candidate. Though the state is all but guaranteed to vote Trump’s way in the presidential race, after he won by big margins in both 2016 and 2020, he’s reprising his 2018 efforts to oust Tester.

Meanwhile, Tester is reaching out to Republican Montanans, pitching himself as a lawmaker who can represent both ends of the state’s political spectrum. His “Republicans for Tester” group has more than 100 GOP members, including former Montana Gov. Marc Racicot and former Secretary of State Bob Brown, his campaign said. 

“I’ll work with anyone, regardless of party, to do right by Montana,” the senator wrote on social platform X earlier this week.

“I get what Tester’s trying to do, ’cause he has to,” said Iverson, the GOP strategist. “He is desperately trying to make Montana voters believe that he’s a moderate.”

“But right now, voters in the state are going, ‘Well, if I want a Republican in the U.S. Senate, I might as well just vote for a Republican.’” 

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4821264-tester-keeps-harris-at-arms-length-amid-tight-senate-race/

Judge says CDC email policy likely violates federal law

 A federal judge ruled Friday that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has likely been breaking federal law by deleting former employees’ emails soon after they leave the agency.  

The ruling was issued by District Judge Rudolph Contreras on a lawsuit filed by Trump-aligned conservative group America First Legal Foundation in April. 

Contreras found that the CDC was following a records-retention policy that had not been approved by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and allowed former low-level employee emails to be deleted within about three months of them leaving the agency.  

“The court concludes that CDC’s policy and practice of disposing of former employees’ emails ninety days after the end of their employment is likely unlawful,” the 36-page-long opinion reads.  

Contreras determined that the CDC and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) agreed to abide by the NARA protocol called Capstone, which requires senior officials’ emails to be kept permanently and low-level employee emails to be retained for three to seven years.  

The CDC argued in the suit that it did not adopt the full protocol but rather chose to adopt it “in part.” 

But Contreras found that the CDC committed to adopting the NARA policy in full noting that “there is nothing in the record that suggests NARA ever approved of an alternate records-disposal schedule.”  

“The available evidence suggests that CDC did indeed commit to manage and dispose of its employees’ emails pursuant to the schedule established by GRS 6.1,” the opinion reads.  

Under the ruling, the CDC has been ordered to stop deleting or otherwise destroying emails of lower-level employees for at least three years after they leave the agency for the time being.  

Contreras also ordered the NARA to work with U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland to recover and properly preserve prematurely deleted emails of former CDC employees.  

A CDC spokesperson did not have immediate comment on the ruling and the HHS did not respond to a request for comment from The Hill.  

America First Legal Foundation filed the April lawsuit after it requested records from the CDC last year in regard to the agency’s publication of a document called “LGBTQ Inclusivity in Schools: A Self-Assessment Tool.”  

A CDC Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) analyst eventually identified three employees who had worked on publishing the document but that only one of those employees still worked at the agency, according to the opinion.  

The FOIA analyst stressed that this was significant to America First Legal Foundation’s request because of the CDC’s practice of deleting former lower-level employees’ emails and email accounts within as little as 30 days after their departure from the agency.  

As a result, the analyst told America First Legal Foundation that “potentially response emails belonging to the two former employees would have already been destroyed.”  

America First Legal Foundation sent a letter describing the predicament to the HHS office of inspector general out of concern that the agency was “willfully disregarding” its “duties and obligations” under the Federal Records Act eventually challenging their record-keeping practices.  

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4821251-judge-cdc-email-policy-likely-violates-federal-law/

RNC asks Supreme Court to revive Arizona voter registration law

 The Republican National Committee (RNC) asked the Supreme Court to take emergency action to revive an Arizona law requiring voter registration applicants show proof of citizenship when using a state form. 

The request, docketed Friday, also asks to reinstate Arizona’s prohibition of voting in presidential elections or by mail if someone has not met the proof-of-citizenship requirement, regardless of whether they used the state or federal form.

The RNC’s application seeks to implement the law for November’s election, when Arizona is expected to be a critical swing state in the race between former President Trump and Vice President Harris. 

Currently, Arizona’s provisions are on hold under rulings issued by lower courts.  

“The district court’s injunction is an unprecedented abrogation of the Arizona Legislature’s sovereign authority to determine the qualifications of voters and structure participation in its elections,” the RNC, joined by state lawmakers, wrote to the justices.  
 
By default, their application was sent to Justice Elena Kagan, a member of the court’s liberal wing who handles emergency appeals arising from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. She could act on the request alone or refer it to the full court for a vote. 

The motion draws attention to Republicans’ emphasis on voter integrity efforts, though a Brennan Center for Justice study of 23.5 million tabulated votes in the 2016 election found only 30 suspected cases of noncitizen voting.

The case follows a 2013 Supreme Court ruling that federal voting laws preempted Arizona from requiring citizenship proof for voter registrants applying using a federal form.  

Two years ago, among other reforms, Arizona began mandating officials reject state-level voter registration forms if the person did not provide citizenship proof. 

At issue is whether that requirement violates a 2018 consent decree the state signed with the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the oldest and largest Latino civil rights group in the country. 
 
It provides that applicants who submit state forms without citizenship proof will still be fully registered if citizenship can be confirmed with information on file with the state’s transportation department. 

The RNC also wants to revive Arizona’s requirement that voters must have provided proof to vote in presidential elections or by mail. A lower court found it, too, was preempted by federal law. 

The application further cites the Purcell principle, referring to the courts’ practice of not blocking election rules too close to an election, saying the lower courts went too far. 

“The Arizona Legislature enacted the relevant statutes more than two years ago. But the Ninth Circuit order stopped state officials from enforcing the law. Since the Ninth Circuit erroneously enjoined a valid state election statute, this Court ‘should correct that error,’” the application reads. 

The RNC and state lawmakers asked for a ruling by Aug. 22, saying that was the deadline to resolve the litigation before ballots are printed.  

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4820940-republican-national-committee-supreme-court-arizona-voting-law/