Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerCharles (Chuck) Ellis SchumerSharpton: Trump has ‘particular venom’ for blacks, people of color McConnell under fire for burying election bills in ‘legislative graveyard’ Washington Post columnist accuses McConnell of doing ‘Putin’s bidding’ MORE (D-N.Y.) urged Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellThe Hill’s Morning Report – Trump’s new target: Elijah Cummings Juan Williams: Trump, his allies and the betrayal of America Largest Senate GOP group to run first ads for 2020 MORE (R-Ky.) to bring up election security legislation after the GOP leader lashed out at critics who targeted him for blocking two bills last week. 

“There’s an easy way for Leader McConnell to silence the critics who accuse him of blocking election security: stop blocking it. Leader McConnell doesn’t have to put the bills that we have proposed … or the bill the House has passed, there are bipartisan bills—and we can debate the issue,” Schumer said Monday from the Senate floor.

ADVERTISEMENT

Schumer’s comments came after McConnell hit back at high-profile critics, accusing them of “lying” and “modern-day McCarthyism” after they targeted the GOP leader late last week when he blocked two election security bills that are largely supported by Democrats. 

Schumer asked for consent to pass a House bill, supported by one Republican, that would require paper ballots, while Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) wanted to pass legislation that would require candidates, campaign officials and their family members to notify the FBI of assistance offers. McConnell blocked both of the bills. 

“These pundits are lying, lying when they dismiss the work that has been done. They’re lying when they insist I have personally blocked actions which, in fact, I have championed and the Senate has passed. They are lying when they suggest that either party is against defending our democracy,” McConnell said from the floor. 

McConnell added that Democrats knew their bills would get blocked from passing the Senate without a formal vote, calling the objections “routine.” 

Republicans argue that they’ve done plenty to help secure elections including passing two related bills and including $380 billion in funding in last year’s spending bills. They also credit with the administration with working to bolster the 2018 elections. 

But Democrats contend that falls short in the wake of warnings from multiple current and former officials that Russia and other foreign governments will try to meddle in the 2020 election. 

“If Leader McConnell doesn’t like being criticized on election security, I challenge him: let’s debate it on the floor with amendments. I challenge him: support additional appropriations for states to harden their election systems. In both cases, Leader McConnell has not done that,” Schumer said.

He added that if McConnell “takes such umbrage at his election security critics, I challenge him: prove them wrong.”  

Click Here: Liverpool Mens Jersey

A federal judge in Montana ruled on Tuesday that IRS guidance reducing donor disclosure requirements for certain nonprofits is unlawful and will be set aside.

The ruling is a win for two states with Democratic governors that challenged the guidance — Montana and New Jersey — and is likely to be cheered by Democrats in Congress who have criticized the guidance.

Montana Gov. Steve BullockSteve BullockRacked by schism, Democrats yearn for Obama The Hill’s Morning Report – Crunch time for 2020 Democrats in Detroit debate 2020 Democrats renew calls for gun reform after Gilroy shooting MORE is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, and the ruling was issued on the same day he appeared in the party’s presidential debate.

Click Here: Liverpool Mens Jersey

ADVERTISEMENT

The IRS and Treasury Department released guidance last year that ended a requirement for certain tax-exempt groups to report the names and addresses of major donors on annual forms.

Groups affected by the guidance included social welfare organizations such as the National Rifle Association and the American Civil Liberties Union, labor unions, and business leagues.

Republicans argue that the guidance was important to protect taxpayers’ privacy and First Amendment rights. But Democrats have strongly opposed the guidance, arguing that it could make it easier for foreign governments to influence U.S. elections through donations to “dark money” groups.

Bullock, the Montana Department of Revenue and the state of New Jersey filed a lawsuit challenging the IRS guidance, asking the court to set it aside because the IRS didn’t provide a notice and comment period before issuing the guidance. Both states said that they had utilized the donor information.

Treasury and the IRS said the lawsuit should be dismissed, arguing that the states lack standing to sue. They also argued that the guidance was an interpretive rule that didn’t need a notice and comment period.

In his ruling, Judge Brian Morris, who was appointed by former President Obama, ruled that the states have standing to pursue their claim and that the guidance was a legislative rule that did need a notice and comment period.

Morris noted that the states argued they may need the donor information to determine whether an organization violates requirements for tax-exempt groups and to enforce limits on tax-exempt groups’ political activity.

“The Court agrees that these purposes support the need for the IRS to comply with the [Administrative Procedure Act]’s notice-and-comment provision when it amends a long-standing regulation that implicates the collection and sharing of this information,” Morris wrote.

Morris said that if the IRS wants to adopt a similar rule in the future, it needs to follow notice and comment procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Democratic presidential candidate Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegPoll: Beto O’Rourke leads 2020 Democrats in Texas by 3 points, followed by Biden Racked by schism, Democrats yearn for Obama Biden holds big lead over 2020 Democrats in two new national polls MORE expressed frustration Tuesday at Congress’s inability to pass legislation to stem gun violence.

Buttigieg said the United States has now “produced the second school shooting generation in this country.”

“We’re supposed to be dealing with this so you don’t have to,” Buttigieg said Tuesday evening at the second Democratic debate in Detroit. “High school is hard enough without worrying that you’re going to get shot.” 

Buttigieg, who is mayor of South Bend, Ind., said he was in high school at the time of the Columbine High School shooting in 1999 and that the current conversation about gun violence is the “exact same conversation” the country was having at that time.

“We have now produced the second school shooting generation in this country,” Buttigieg said. “We dare not allow there to be a third.” 

“This a conversation we have been having for the last 20 years,” Buttigieg said later. 

All candidates on stage Tuesday evening expressed outrage at the lack of progress on gun control.

Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharThe Hill’s Morning Report – Crunch time for 2020 Democrats in Detroit debate Yang qualifies for third and fourth Democratic debates Booker qualifies for fall Democratic debates MORE (D-Minn.) responded to Buttigieg by suggesting the problem isn’t Washington as a whole but the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) aggressive lobbying against reforms including universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.

Klobuchar said that gun control legislation is now “sitting on [Majority Leader] Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellDemocrats take another stab at preventing foreign election interference Collins is first GOP senator to back bill requiring campaigns report foreign assistance offers to FBI Trump says Washington Post should apologize to McConnell over ‘Russian asset’ column MORE’s [R-Ky.] doorstep” because of the NRA’s opposition to it, and said that she as president “will not fold” in the face of pressure from the NRA. 

Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersPoll: Beto O’Rourke leads 2020 Democrats in Texas by 3 points, followed by Biden Coalition to air anti-Medicare for All ads during Democratic debates Marianne Williamson: I am not a ‘wacky new-age nutcase’ MORE (I-Vt.) also took issue with the NRA and said he would have the “guts” to stand up to the organization. 

The candidates were asked Tuesday evening to explain how they would tackle the issue of gun violence in the wake of shootings in Brooklyn, Philadelphia and California.

Click Here: Celtic Mens Clothing

New York Attorney General Letitia James announced Tuesday that her office is opening an investigation into the Capital One data breach that resulted in the personal information of about 100 million American customers being illegally accessed.

“My office will begin an immediate investigation into Capital One’s breach, and will work to ensure that New Yorkers who were victims of this breach are provided relief,” James said in a statement. “We cannot allow hacks of this nature to become every day occurrences.”

Also on Tuesday, Capital One was hit with its first civil lawsuit in conjunction with the breach. According to The National Law Journal, one Connecticut resident filed suit against the company on behalf of all those impacted, claiming it failed to properly secure customer data. 

The beginning of the investigation comes one day after the Department of Justice announced that former Seattle-based software engineer Paige Thompson had been arrested in connection with the theft of personal information from servers storing Capital One data. 

Thompson posted on GitHub about her theft of the data earlier this month and another user who saw the post subsequently alerted Capital One of the issue, with Capital One then reaching out to the FBI, authorities said. Thompson was able to access the data due to a “misconfigured web application firewall,” according to the Justice Department. According to Capital One she had accessed the data over two days in March. 

The breach allowed Thompson to access information including consumers’ names, some Social Security numbers, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, and other personal data. Capital One estimated that, in addition to American customers, Thompson was also able to access the data of around six million Canadians. 

Specifically, Capital One noted that around 14,000 Social Security numbers of credit card customers were accessed, and about 80,000 linked bank account numbers of secured credit card customers were compromised. For Canadian customers, around one million Social Security numbers were compromised. 

Last week, James co-led a coalition of state attorneys general that reached what was described as the biggest data breach settlement in history in securing a settlement with credit agency Equifax in conjunction with its 2017 data breach that compromised the personal data of nearly half the U.S. population. 

In announcing the investigation into the Capital One breach, James noted, “It is becoming far too commonplace that financial institutions are susceptible to hacks, begging the questions: Why do these breaches continue to take place? And are companies doing enough to prevent future data breaches?” 

Capital One put out a statement on Monday, stressing that it had immediately fixed the system vulnerability that allowed Thompson access to the data and that the company believes it is “unlikely that the information was used for fraud or disseminated by this individual.”

“While I am grateful that the perpetrator has been caught, I am deeply sorry for what has happened,” Capital One Chairman and CEO Richard Fairbank said in a statement. “I sincerely apologize for the understandable worry this incident must be causing those affected and I am committed to making it right.” 

Some lawmakers immediately vowed action in response to the breach. 

Sen. Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenHillicon Valley: McConnell fires back at criticism over election security bills | GOP chair vows to move ‘swiftly’ on new intel chief | Georgia awards contract for new voting machines Democratic senator intervenes to help pregnant Mexican woman make asylum claim McConnell under fire for burying election bills in ‘legislative graveyard’ MORE (D-Ore,) the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, tweeted, “I’m sick of waking up to headlines revealing that millions of Americans had their information stolen because a billion-dollar company failed Cybersecurity 101. Corporations will only take Americans’ privacy seriously when CEOs are held personally accountable.”

A spokesperson for Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike CrapoMichael (Mike) Dean CrapoOvernight Health Care: Faith-based health clinics spurn contraceptives under Trump rule | Senate punts vote on bipartisan health costs bill | Azar calling GOP senators to back Grassley drug price plan Azar calling GOP senators to back Grassley drug price plan Pot banking bill supporters seek path to passage in skeptical Senate MORE (R-Idaho) told The Hill that the committee “is looking into the matter and will investigate it further, especially in light of Sen. Crapo looking at legislation on data privacy and safeguards.” 

Sen. Sherrod BrownSherrod Campbell BrownSenate Democrats introduce bill to combat foreign influence campaigns House passes bill requiring CBP to enact safety, hygiene standards Budowsky: Two big ideas for 2020 Democrats MORE (D-Ohio), the ranking member on the Senate Banking Committee, told The Hill on Tuesday that he would support his committee holding hearings to investigate the incident. 

“I support making them responsible and hopefully more contrite than Equifax was,” Brown added.

Click Here: Arsenal FC Jerseys

The Trump administration has separated more than 900 children from their families despite a judge ordering the administration to stop separations more than a year ago, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) alleged in a court filing Tuesday.

The ACLU asked a federal judge to block the administration from continuing with any separations, which they said defied the court order.

“The government is systematically separating large numbers of families based on minor criminal history, highly dubious allegations of unfitness, and errors in identifying bona fide parent-child relationships,” the ACLU said in a filing to a federal district court in San Diego.

The Trump administration has said officials will separate children only if the adults pose a danger based on their criminal record or suspected abuse.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, the filing alleges that the government’s position is that it may legally separate children from adults on the basis of any criminal history, no matter how minor.

The Hill has reached out to the Department of Homeland Security for comment about the court filing.

Lee Gelernt, lead attorney in the family separation lawsuit and deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, in a statement called the revelations “shocking.” 

“It is shocking that the Trump administration continues to take babies from their parents. Over 900 more families join the thousands of others previously torn apart by this cruel and illegal policy. The administration must not be allowed to circumvent the court order over infractions like minor traffic violations,” Gelernt said.

According to the filing, dozens of parents have been separated because of traffic violations, DUI offenses, drug possession, and fraud or forgery offenses. In many cases, the ACLU said, “it is unclear whether the parent was even convicted for the relevant offense, or merely charged.”

In one example, according to the ACLU, a parent was separated because of a conviction for “malicious destruction of property value $5,” for which the father received a six-day jail sentence with six months of probation.

The filing also alleged that separations are happening because of unsubstantiated allegations of abuse or neglect. In one example, a father was reportedly separated from his three young daughters because the father has HIV.

In another instance cited by the ACLU, a migrant father lost his daughter when a Border Patrol agent called him a bad father for allegedly failing to change is daughter’s diaper.

The ACLU urged the judge to clarify his previous ruling on when such separations were warranted. The government’s own statistics that were provided to the ACLU showed that 185 children — more than 20 percent — were younger than 5 years old. Thirteen of these children were younger than a year old at the time they were separated from their parents, the ACLU said. 

The filing alleges that from June 28, 2018, through June 29, 2019, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents separated 911 children — including numerous babies and toddlers — based on criminal history as well as “defendants’ unilateral, unsupported determination that the parent is unfit or a danger” or a mistake about the identity of the adult as the child’s parent.

The filing was part of an ongoing lawsuit over the administration’s “zero tolerance” policy, which resulted in about 2,700 children being separated from their parents over a six-week period from May to June 20 last year. 

The policy called for the criminal prosecution of all adult migrants who were detained after trying to cross the country’s southern border. Any children brought across the border were separated from their parents, deemed to be “unaccompanied,” and detained by the Department of Health and Human Services in separate facilities sometimes hundreds of miles from their parents.

The policy created a massive outcry, and the backlash forced the administration to walk it back just three months later. 

In his executive order ending the policy, President TrumpDonald John TrumpProfessor installs seesaws across US-Mexico border to form connection ‘on both sides’ What the world can expect from the Boris Johnson government Marianne Williamson: I am not a ‘wacky new-age nutcase’ MORE said it is the “policy of this Administration to maintain family unity” unless detaining a child with its parents “would pose a risk to the child’s welfare.” 

A ruling by a federal judge in San Diego forced the administration to reunite many of the children who were separated under the policy. 

The California Supreme Court last week unanimously overturned a white supremacist’s death sentence, citing the prosecution’s heavy emphasis on the defendant’s racist and Nazi tattoos.

Jeffrey Scott Young, 45, was found guilty of murder in a 2006 trial. But more than 10 years later, the court ruled on Thursday that his racist and anti-Semitic views weren’t relevant to his murder charge and that the jury shouldn’t have taken them into account when they were mulling over whether to assign him the death penalty, the court wrote in its opinion.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We affirm the judgment as to guilt,” wrote Justice Leondra Kruger in the ruling. “But we find the trial court erred at the penalty retrial by permitting the prosecution to make improper use of inflammatory character evidence for purposes unrelated to any legitimate issue in the proceeding.”

“The prosecutor openly and repeatedly invited the jury to do precisely what the law does not allow: to weigh the offensive and reprehensible nature of defendant’s abstract beliefs in determining whether to impose the death penalty,” Kruger wrote.

Click Here: Celtic Mens Clothing

Young’s body is covered in tattoos, including a swastika, a Confederate flag and the N-word. One tattoo referenced Adolf Hitler, while another said “California Skinhead” in red and black ink, the colors of Nazi Germany, according to court documents.

But the murder allegedly wasn’t racially motivated. In July 1999, 25-year-old Young and two others robbed a parking tollbooth in San Diego before fatally shooting the toll operator and parking lot manager, according to court documents. Young later told police that the group had forgotten to bring supplies to tie up the witnesses and that “panic and adrenaline” led him to open fire out of fear the victims might get away.

During Young’s murder trial, prosecutors brought in seven witnesses to talk about Young’s racist and anti-Semitic beliefs, and one described him as a “walking billboard of hate,” adding that “what you permanently put on your body says a whole lot about what you are thinking about and about who you are.”

By using this argument, the prosecutors focused on the beliefs “for the very sake of highlighting their offensiveness” rather than showing how they might be connected to the crime or whether Young was likely to murder again, Kruger wrote.

Prosecutors will now either reduce his sentence to life without the possibility of parole or hold a new trial over whether to impose a death sentence.

Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisFormer public defender: DOJ plan to resume federal executions a ‘recipe for problems’ New York governor signs bill decriminalizing marijuana use 2020 Democrats renew calls for gun reform after Gilroy shooting MORE (D-Calif.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezAlexandria Ocasio-CortezOvernight Energy: Harris, Ocasio-Cortez unveil first step of Green New Deal | Inslee proposes environmental justice office | Democrat pushes FDA to act after ‘forever chemicals’ found in bottled water Climate policy is expensive, but so is climate change Harris, Ocasio-Cortez unveil first step of Green New Deal MORE (D-N.Y.) on Monday unveiled legislation that would be the first step toward implementing the Green New Deal.

Click Here: Celtic Mens Clothing

The draft bill is designed to address what the lawmakers describe as the third pillar of the Green New Deal — ensuring no community gets left behind.

Dubbed the Climate Equity Act, the legislation lays out steps for Congress and the White House to “guarantee that the policies comprising a future Green New Deal protect the health and economic wellbeing of all Americans for generations to come.”

“Climate change is an existential threat — it’s critical we act now to achieve a cleaner, safer, and healthier future. But it is not enough to simply cut emissions and end our reliance on fossil fuels. We must ensure that communities already contending with unsafe drinking water, toxic air, and lack of economic opportunity are not left behind,” Harris, a 2020 presidential candidate, said in a statement.

The Green New Deal, championed by Ocasio-Cortez, would push for a massive shift in the economy away from fossil fuels and toward more environmentally friendly sources of energy, something she said will spur economic development along the way.

The legislation introduced Monday would require the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to evaluate how new environmental bills would impact low-income communities. Projects pushed by the executive branch would face a similar review under the measure.

The legislation could help make Harris more competitive in a 2020 Democratic field full of candidates eagerly sharing their plans for tackling climate change.

Harris has yet to release a sweeping proposal of her own, and other candidates have put forth plans that target what’s known as environmental justice, which focuses on how environmental issues affect poor communities and communities of color.

Washington Gov. Jay Inlsee (D) rolled out such a plan Monday, and Sen. Cory BookerCory Anthony Booker2020 Democrats renew calls for gun reform after Gilroy shooting Booker qualifies for fall Democratic debates Most oppose cash reparations for slavery: poll MORE (D-N.J.) previously unveiled his own environmental justice proposal.

The draft bill from Harris and Ocasio-Cortez would create an Office of Climate and Environmental Justice Accountability to help represent the views of “frontline communities.”

The office would be tasked with measuring the cost and impact of policy decisions on affected communities.

“The Climate Equity Act ensures that as we go forward to solve our climate crisis, we are focusing on communities most impacted by the crisis and the transition to renewable energy,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a statement.

Updated at 3:42 p.m.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard BurrRichard Mauze BurrHillicon Valley: Senate Intel releases election security report | GOP blocks votes on election security bills | Gabbard sues Google over alleged censorship | Barr meets state AGs on tech antitrust concerns Senate Intel finds ‘extensive’ Russian election interference going back to 2014 McConnell says he has no plans to watch Mueller testimony MORE (R-N.C.) said Monday he would work “swiftly” to begin the confirmation process for Rep. John RatcliffeJohn Lee RatcliffeThe Hill’s 12:30 Report: Trump, Sharpton feud over Baltimore attacks The Hill’s Morning Report – Trump’s new target: Elijah Cummings Juan Williams: Trump, his allies and the betrayal of America MORE (R-Texas), President TrumpDonald John TrumpSharpton: Trump has ‘particular venom’ for blacks, people of color Trump signs 9/11 compensation fund bill alongside first responders Trump continues assault on Fed: It ‘has made all of the wrong moves’ MORE’s choice to be the next director of national intelligence.

While he did not offer an explicit endorsement of Ratcliffe, Burr said he called the Texas Republican on Sunday to “congratulate” him on the pending nomination.

ADVERTISEMENT

“When the White House submits its official nomination to the Senate Intelligence Committee, we will work to move it swiftly through regular order,” Burr said in a statement.

Burr noted that he looks forward to working with outgoing Director of National Intelligence Dan CoatsDaniel (Dan) Ray CoatsThe Hill’s Morning Report – Trump’s new target: Elijah Cummings Juan Williams: Trump, his allies and the betrayal of America READ: Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats’s resignation letter MORE’s deputy, Sue Gordon, describing her as “a trusted partner to our Committee.”

He also praised Coats, recognizing him for making “significant progress” in addressing foreign election interference during his tenure and sounding the alarm over “growing aggression” from Russia, China and Iran.

“America is better prepared for the threats we face thanks to Dan Coats’ leadership of our Intelligence Community,” Burr said, praising the former Indiana senator for his “integrity and sound judgment.”

Trump announced Coats’s resignation in a series of tweets Sunday evening, saying the intelligence chief would leave the administration on Aug. 15. Coats clashed with Trump on a number of fronts, including Russian election interference and intelligence assessments about Iran and North Korea, during more than two years on the job.

The president also revealed Sunday that he would nominate Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor and one of the president’s fierce defenders in the House, for the position.

Gordon had been expected to fill the role in the interim, but Trump didn’t immediately announce an acting director, saying he would do so “shortly.”

Trump said he would name an acting director of national intelligence “shortly,” suggesting Gordon will not fill the role in the interim since he didn’t tap her on Sunday.

Ratcliffe had been rumored as a potential candidate for various administration posts. He played an integral role in GOP efforts to investigate the origins of the probe into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.

More recently, Ratcliffe attracted attention for his stern questioning of Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerTrump calls for probe of Obama book deal Democrats express private disappointment with Mueller testimony Kellyanne Conway: ‘I’d like to know’ if Mueller read his own report MORE during congressional testimony last week, when he accused the former special counsel of not complying with Justice Department rules by declining to exonerate Trump on allegations of obstruction of justice.

Ratcliffe, a member of the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees, is likely to face questions about his qualifications during his confirmation process, as critics have argued he does not have extensive experience in the area.

Still, he’s more likely than not to be confirmed by the Senate barring major controversy, since Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the chamber. 

Ratcliffe will need to attend a conformation hearing and be approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee before his nomination goes to the Senate floor for a final vote.

Senate Republicans expressed disappointment at Coats’s resignation in public statements; few have weighed in on Ratcliffe’s nomination, though Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamThis week: Senate races to wrap up work before recess Trump allies spike ball after Supreme Court decision on border wall McConnell under fire for burying election bills in ‘legislative graveyard’ MORE (R-S.C.) tweeted that the congressman “will be a worthy successor and has my full support.”

Sen. Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsOvernight Health Care: Oversight chair plans to call drug executives to testify on costs | Biden airs anti-‘Medicare for All’ video | House panel claims Juul deliberately targeted kids Collins says she hasn’t decided on 2020 run, criticizes ‘dark money groups’ Progressive media group launches ‘Get Mitch or Die Trying’ campaign to flip Senate MORE (R-Maine), another Intelligence Committee member, described Coats’s departure as “a huge loss to our country.”

Meanwhile, Ratcliffe has come under criticism from Democrats. Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerCharles (Chuck) Ellis SchumerSharpton: Trump has ‘particular venom’ for blacks, people of color McConnell under fire for burying election bills in ‘legislative graveyard’ Washington Post columnist accuses McConnell of doing ‘Putin’s bidding’ MORE (D-N.Y.) asserted that he was selected for the role “because he exhibited blind loyalty to President Trump with his demagogic questioning of” Mueller.

“If Senate Republicans elevate such a partisan player to a position that requires intelligence expertise and non-partisanship, it would be a big mistake,” Schumer said.

Updated at 1:58 p.m.

Click Here: Celtic Mens Clothing

A federal judge on Monday struck down Medicaid work requirements that had been approved by the Trump administration in a state.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, struck down New Hampshire’s work requirements less than a week after hearing oral arguments.

Boasberg is the same judge who has twice rejected the administration’s approval of similar requirements in Kentucky, and also blocked Arkansas from implementing its Medicaid work requirements. 

“In short, we have all seen this movie before,” Boasberg wrote in his opinion.

ADVERTISEMENT

Just as in Kentucky and Arkansas, Boasberg ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) failed to take into account how many people subject to the work requirements would lose Medicaid coverage.

HHS did not offer its own estimates of coverage loss, nor did it address the many comments projecting that the proposal would lead to a substantial number of residents being taken off the Medicaid rolls, Boasberg ruled.

“For the fourth time, HHS has fallen short of this fundamental administrative law requirement,” Boasberg wrote.

While not surprising, the ruling is a blow to the Trump administration and to red states that want to implement work requirements. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma has long touted state flexibility and has made approving work requirements a priority.

Click Here: Arsenal FC Jerseys

The ruling also comes on the heels of the administration’s decision not to approve Utah’s request for full federal funding of a partial Medicaid expansion. 

Work requirements have now been struck down or blocked in three states. The administration, though, hasn’t been slowed by the litigation, and has approved Medicaid work requirements in eight other states. 

The Trump administration was sued in March by four low-income New Hampshire residents. The state had originally proposed that Medicaid beneficiaries need to work or volunteer 100 hours a month to maintain coverage.

The state required beneficiaries to begin tracking their hours June 1, but GOP Gov. Chris Sununu recently pushed back implementation of the program’s penalties until the end of September amid fears of massive coverage losses. 

State officials found nearly 17,000 people failed to provide proof to the state that they met the new Medicaid work rules, despite months of outreach by state officials, including mailings, and TV and radio ads.

Nearly everyone who gained coverage through the state’s Medicaid expansion would have been required to meet the work requirements, with some exemptions for pregnant women, caretakers and people with serious illnesses.

“On their face, these work requirements are more exacting than Kentucky’s and Arkansas’s,” Boasberg wrote. “Yet the agency has still not contended with the possibility that the project would cause a substantial number of persons to lose their health-care coverage.”

Boasberg also noted the similarities between New Hampshire’s proposal and the work requirements that he struck down in Arkansas and Kentucky. 

“CMS’s [Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] approval letter mirrors the one in [Kentucky], with numerous key paragraphs matching it word for word,” Boasberg wrote. “And New Hampshire’s proposed project presents, if anything, greater coverage-loss concerns than Kentucky’s and Arkansas’s, given the hours requirement and the age range to whom it applies.”

The administration argues that “able-bodied” adults should instead be working, and that Medicaid should be reserved for children, women who are pregnant, adults who are disabled and residents with very low incomes.

Director of National Intelligence Dan CoatsDaniel (Dan) Ray CoatsSeize the opportunity to make real intelligence reform Trump met with Nunes to discuss potential replacements for Dan Coats: report The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by JUUL Labs – Trump attack on progressive Dems draws sharp rebuke MORE on Sunday announced his plans to step down in a letter to President TrumpDonald John TrumpIlhan Omar defends Cummings after Trump attacks: He ‘wants to distract with his racism’ Donald Trump: ‘The Great Divider’ De Blasio: Democratic debates should address ‘why did we lose and what do we do differently’ MORE.

Trump announced the decision in a tweet on Sunday afternoon, noting that Coats would end his time as the U.S.’s top intelligence official on Aug. 15. Coats is set to be replaced by Rep. John RatcliffeJohn Lee RatcliffeConservatives call on Pelosi to cancel August recess The Hill’s 12:30 Report — Presented by Farm Credit — Dems grapple with Mueller fallout Winners and losers from Robert Mueller’s testimony MORE (R-Texas).

Read Coats’s resignation letter here.

Coats Resignation Letter by blc88 on Scribd

Click Here: Arsenal FC Jerseys