List of All Articles with Tag 'me'

Ohio concludes a hastily called and highly charged special election Tuesday, a contest that could determine the fate of abortion rights in the state and fuel political playbooks nationally heading into 2024. On the ballot is Issue 1, a proposal to raise the threshold for passing future changes to the state's constitution from a simple majority to 60%. But more passionately in the sights of the proposal's backers — including Republican officeholders — is a proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot that calls for enshrining access to reproductive care in the state's foundational document. The measure was clearly resonating with voters, who turned out in huge numbers during the early voting period, which ended Sunday. The number of advance ballots cast — a combination of mail and early in-person ballots — hit nearly 700,000, more than double the early vote during the state's two previous midterm primary elections in 2022 and 2018. Ohio's August elections have historically focused on local issues and been plagued with chronically low turnout. The Republican lawmakers who backed Issue 1 maintained that the measure was not about thwarting the fall abortion amendment, despite reinstating an August special election just like the ones they had only recently voted to eliminate. Raising the bar for passing citizen-led constitutional amendments could make it difficult, if not impossible, for the fall proposal to succeed, based on polling figures. Voters in several states, even deeply conservative ones, have affirmed abortion rights since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, though usually with less than 60% of the vote. AP VoteCast polling last year found that 59% of Ohio voters say abortion should generally be legal. Out-of-state money has poured into both sides of the contest over the 60% threshold, even as both supporters and opponents say one of their main goals is to keep special interests from having more influence over state policy than average Ohioans. The campaign in favor of Issue 1, Protect Our Constitution, has told voters that raising the threshold will keep deep-pocketed interest groups from pushing redistricting, gun control and minimum wage policies on Ohio. One Person One Vote, the opposition campaign, argues that raising the threshold for passing future amendments would prioritize the interests of Ohio's increasingly conservative GOP supermajority at the statehouse over those of everyday voters. But abortion rights are at the epicenter of the fight, as Ohio and other states have been given control of their own abortion policies following the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade last summer. Ohio's ban on most abortions had been placed on hold under Roe and then allowed to take effect briefly after the court overturned it. Since then, it has been frozen again while a challenge alleging it violates the state constitution plays out. The abortion amendment would give individuals the right to make their own reproductive health care decisions, including on contraception, fertility treatment, abortion and miscarriage care, until a fetus is viable outside the womb. At the same time, a broad bipartisan coalition opposes Issue 1 for other reasons. Former Ohio governors and attorneys general of both parties have come out against the constitutional change, calling it poor public policy. If passed it would reverse 111 years of direct democracy that has the potential to affect future citizen-led ballot efforts. Protect Women Ohio, the campaign against the fall abortion question, has spent millions on the August election — airing ads suggesting the measure not only codifies abortion, but could pressure children into receiving gender-affirming care and undercut parental rights. Several legal experts have said there is no language in the amendment supporting the ads' claims, but it follows a pattern through this election cycle of misinformation and fear-mongering being used to sway voters. Issue 1 opponents have aired ads and mobilized a large coalition, including voting rights, labor, faith and community groups, as well as the state Democratic Party. It was because of chronically low turnout that lawmakers voted just last year to scrap summer elections, prompting an unsuccessful lawsuit alleging this year's August special election violated the new law and calling further into question if it was brought back solely to thwart abortion rights for Ohioans. ___ The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content. ___ Samantha Hendrickson is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Read More Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Attacks at US medical centers show why health care is one of the nation's most violent fields Ohio election that revolves around abortion rights fueled by national groups, money Taylor Swift bracelet-trading trend makes way to Women’s World Cup in Australia

The eight countries who share the rainforest are meeting in Brazil for a "milestone" summit.

Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office accused Donald Trump of trying to “litigate this case in the media,” after the former president objected on Monday to a proposal to limit public discussion of the discovery evidence against him for allegedly conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. "The defendant’s principal objection to it—as defense counsel stated publicly yesterday, and in conference with Government counsel—is that it would not permit the defendant or his counsel to publicly disseminate, and publicise in the media, various materials obtained from the Government in discovery," the the office wrote in a Monday night filing. “But there is no right to publicly release discovery material, because the discovery process is designed to ensure a fair process before the Court, not to provide the defendant an opportunity to improperly press his case in the court of public opinion." The filing came just hours after Mr Trump’s legal team asked the judge overseeing the criminal case for permission to use a large swath of discovery materials while he campaigns for the Republican nomination in next year’s presidential election. In a 13-page response to the government’s original motion for a protective order barring him from disclosing any of the materials that will be turned over by prosecutors as part of the pre-trial discovery process before he is tried on charges of conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding, Mr Trump’s defence team claimed that the standard protective order requested by prosecutors would mean Judge Tanya Chutkan would be a “censor” who would impose “content-based restrictions” on the ex-president’s “political speech”. Prosecutors, citing Mr Trump’s penchant for “public statements on social media regarding witnesses, judges, attorneys, and others associated with legal matters pending against him,” had asked Judge Chutkan to impose an order barring the former president from disclosing discovery materials “directly or indirectly to any person or entity other than persons employed to assist in the defense, persons who are interviewed as potential witnesses, counsel for potential witnesses, and other persons to whom the Court may authorize disclosure”. The government also cited social media posts made by the ex-president on his Truth Social platform, including one recent social media post in which he appeared to threaten to “come after” anyone he believes to have been “after” him. In a more recent post on Monday, the ex-president also claimed that he “shouldn’t have a protective order placed on [him] because it would impinge upon [his] right to FREE SPEECH”. Mr Trump’s attorneys largely echoed this claim in their court filing, and said the government had to demonstrate a “compelling reason” with “no narrower alternative” before the court could impose the restrictions requested by prosecutors. While the ex-president’s legal team did concede that the government does have some interest in “restricting some of the documents it must produce,” including secret grand jury materials and documents pertaining to the identities of witnesses, they said those needs did not require a “blanket gag order over all documents produced by the government”. They also complained that Special Counsel Jack Smith and his team did not explain why it would be insufficient to impose restrictions only on materials deemed “sensitive” by the government, and asked Judge Chutkan to impose an order which only restricts “sensitive” materials from use by Mr Trump in his political campaign. Additionally, the ex-president’s attorneys asked Judge Chutkan to impose an order which allows them to “bring on ... volunteer attorneys or others without paid employment arrangements” as Mr Trump prepares for trial, and argued that the government “cannot preclude the assistance” of such volunteers or require Mr Trump to ask permission before allowing them access to discovery materials. “Such a limitation or requirement would unduly burden President Trump and impede the efficient preparation of his defense. Indeed, the defense cannot predict its future needs for the case, especially for a case of this magnitude and complexity,” they said. They did add, however, that they would not object to an order restricting those volunteers from accessing materials deemed “sensitive”. Read More Trump and Biden tied in hypothetical 2024 rematch, poll finds Pelosi doubles down on ‘beautiful’ Trump indictments after attracting ex-president’s ire ‘HUGE WIN!!’: E Jean Carroll praises legal team as judge dismisses Trump defamation lawsuit against her Judge tosses Trump's defamation suit against writer who won sexual abuse lawsuit against him Trump insists he isn’t a ‘scared puppy’ in defiant attack on Nancy Pelosi Jeff Gunter, a dermatologist who was Trump's ambassador to Iceland, is running for Nevada Senate Judges halt a Biden rule offering student debt relief for those alleging colleges misled them Pelosi doubles down on ‘beautiful’ indictments after receiving Trump’s ire

ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE U.S. President Joe Biden on Tuesday plans to name a new federal monument covering

President Tinubu is facing strong opposition to any deployment of troops to oust Niger's junta.

The scheduled game between the Cubs and Mets looks in danger of being impacted by weather. Check here for updates on a possible Mets rain delay.The Cubs and Mets are due to face off on Monday for the first of a three-game series.It'll be Drew Smyly on the mound for the Cubs against Koda...

China last week unleashed some of its strongest criticism against Russia since Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine. Yet any

By Leonardo Benassatto BELEM, Brazil (Reuters) -"The Amazon brings people health," said Brazilian merchant Edison Rosa, holding out a handful

Acting Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland met with the some of the leaders of the military junta in Niger Monday, she told reporters on a call.

E Jean Carroll praised her legal team after a judge dismissed former President Donald Trump’s counter-lawsuit against writer E Jean Carroll. Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote in an order made public on Monday that Mr Trump hadn’t proven that Ms Carroll’s statements on CNN the day after a civil trial jury found that the ex-president had sexually abused Ms Carroll and subsequently defamed her were false or “not at least substantially true”. Mr Trump sued Ms Carroll in June following her CNN appearance the previous month. Ms Carroll was asked about the verdict – the jury found that while Mr Trump sexually abused her, they didn’t state that Mr Trump had raped her under New York state law, to which Ms Carroll said, “Oh, yes he did”. Judge Kaplan wrote: “Indeed, the jury’s verdict in Carroll II establishes, as against Mr Trump, the fact that Mr Trump ‘raped her’, albeit digitally rather than with his penis. Thus, it establishes against him the substantial truth of Ms Carroll’s ‘rape’ accusations.” “In consequence, there is no merit to Mr Trump’s argument that the jury’s finding on Penal Law ‘rape’ question established that Ms Carroll’s statements were false even if her statements reasonably could be construed as referring to ‘rape’ in that specialized Penal Law sense, a subject on which this Court now expresses no view,” he added. Ms Carroll praised her attorney, writing on her Substack on Monday that “while the world was fixated on a certain bloke’s latest indictments, Robbie Kaplan was making moves”. “We rely upon the law to bring us justice. As I type these words my heart swells with gratitude for my attorneys,” she added. “I refer, of course, to that famous fly-fishing maven Robbie Kaplan,” Ms Carroll, 79, wrote on Monday. She went on to share her appreciation for “the unreasonably hot Shawn Crowley, the swashbucklingly smart Mike Ferrara, the omnipotently shrewd Joshua Matz, the ingeniously even-tempered Matt Craig” as well as “the consummately quick Trevor Morrison, the eternally elegant Helen Andrews, the affectionately ferocious Emmy DeCourcy, the deliciously crafty Donya Khadem, and the paralyzingly penetrating Kate Harris”. She concluded with “a special salute to Ms. Rachel Tuckman who is enjoying a hellaciously HOT mom summer!” Judge Kaplan had already rejected Mr Trump’s request for a new trial, CNN notes. Mr Trump is set to go on trial against Ms Carroll again in January on a separate defamation lawsuit filed by the writer in 2019 for statements Mr Trump made while occupying the White House. The case has been delayed by the legal battle that ensued. The lawsuit brought under the New York Adult Survivors Act, known as Carroll II, went to trial in May of this year, leading to the writer being awarded $5m. Mr Trump had appealed that verdict as well as other “adverse” rulings. Ms Carroll’s legal team have claimed that the only issue that the jury should settle in January is how much Mr Trump should pay the writer. The ex-president’s lawyers have said that there should be a limit to the amount of damages he can owe to avoid doubling up from the jury’s verdict in Carroll II. Ms Kaplan said in a statement: “We are pleased that the Court dismissed Donald Trump’s counterclaim. That means that the January 15th jury trial will be limited to a narrow set of issues and shouldn’t take very long to complete. Mr Trump is set to face his challengers in the Republican primary in the Iowa caucuses on the same day. Ms Kaplan added: “E. Jean Carroll looks forward to obtaining additional compensatory and punitive damages based on the original defamatory statements Donald Trump made in 2019.” Trump lawyer Alina Habba told CNN: “We strongly disagree with the flawed decision and will be filing an appeal shortly.” Read More How Donald Trump finally met his match in Jack Smith Bill Barr says ‘of course’ he’ll testfy against trump in Jan 6 case if asked Trump lawyer says Jack Smith is ‘afraid’ and playing ‘victim’ over protective order Judge tosses Trump's defamation suit against writer who won sexual abuse lawsuit against him Rudy Giuliani selling $6.5m NYC apartment as legal woes pile up Trump insists he isn’t a ‘scared puppy’ in defiant attack on Nancy Pelosi

Chris Christie presented Ukraine’s president with a uniquely New Jersey-themed gift when he arrived last week on a surprise visit that aimed to draw a line between the candidate and other Republicans in his party who have resisted calls to aid Ukraine’s military. Mr Christie presented Volodymyr Zelensky with handwritten lyrics to It’s My Life from Jon Bon Jovi, the song’s author. The gift was a gesture in recognition and admiration of a now-viral group of videos shot by residents of Odessa, Ukraine depicting civilians assisting with preparation for a Russian attack while a band plays the song for them nearby. An official with Ukraine’s foreign ministry first tweeted a video of siege preparation in March, urging supporters of Ukraine to tag Bon Jovi in the hopes that the bandleader would see. The videos were viewed millions of times and were soon celebrated by the band itself: “[The song] served as an inspiration for a lot of the citizens in Odessa, as they were preparing for the invasion by the Russians,” Mr Christie said during a CNN interview. “Jon wrote it out in his own hand, got it framed, and I brought it to President Zelensky,” he continued, adding that he told the Ukrainian leader that the song was also “representative of many of the American people and what they feel about the cause that’s being fought for in Ukraine.” Jon Bon Jovi’s personal political leanings are thought to be more towards the left — he has campaigned with a handful of Democratic politicians throughout the years, including Joe Biden in 2020. But his band is known to have given Mr Christie, formerly the governor of New Jersey, approval to use the Jerey-borne group’s music on the campaign trail. Mr Christie’s visit comes as Republican opposition to further military aid to Ukraine continues to bubble, particularly among the far-right. The ex-governor and others who find themselves aligned with the GOP and Washington foreign policy establishments have resisted those inclinations with public shows of support for Ukraine and Mr Zelensky. One of Mr Christie’s rivals for the GOP nomination, Mike Pence, visited Ukraine and met with Mr Zelensky in late June as Kyiv has become a sort of de facto campaign stop in the 2024 US presidential race. Read More Pence and Trump lawyer share opposite stories of what Trump said ahead of January 6 Chris Christie meets Volodymyr Zelensky in surprise Ukraine visit GOP presidential hopeful Chris Christie says 'inhumanity' of war is palpable during visit to Ukraine

In his four and a half years in office, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has placated Pemex