Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington Mariann Edgar Budde criticized President Donald Trump for visiting St. John’s Church Monday after he announced that he will dispatch U.S. Military where governors fail to enforce law and order amid growing violent riots across the country, in an interview with the Today Show Tuesday.
“Consider the context,” Budde said. “After making a highly charged, emotional speech to the nation where he threatened military force, his officials cleared peaceful protests with tear gas and horses and walked on to the courtyard of St. John’s Church and held up a Bible as if it were a prop or an extension of his military and authoritarian position, and stood in front of our building as if it were a backdrop for his agenda. That was the offense that I was speaking to.”
The Bishop added that she was “deeply disappointed” that the President didn’t enter the church to pray or to speak with anyone “grieving.” “It did not serve the spiritual aspirations or the needed moral leadership that we need. It served as an instrument of his own forceful presence in the nation and it did not address the grievous wounds that we are dealing with and the agony of our country,” she said.
The historic St. John’s church across from the White House has been set on fire: https://t.co/mWgtdkwBq3
— Alex Salvi (@alexsalvinews) June 1, 2020
St. John’s church is historically a symbol of the Presidents. It was partially set ablaze on Sunday night by rioters in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd. The last time the President visited the church before Monday was before he was inaugurated in 2016, according to the Bishop.
— The White House 45 Archived (@WhiteHouse45) June 2, 2020
You may like
Multiple states launch lawsuit against Biden’s student-loan forgiveness plan
Breaking Thursday, the states of Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, and South Carolina joined together to file a lawsuit against President Biden’s administration in order to stop the student loan-forgiveness program from taking effect.
“In addition to being economically unwise and downright unfair, the Biden Administration’s Mass Debt Cancellation is yet another example in a long line of unlawful regulatory actions,” argued the plaintiffs in their filing.
The attorneys general spearheading the legal challenge also submit that “no statute permits President Biden to unilaterally relieve millions of individuals from their obligation to pay loans they voluntarily assumed.”
Biden, however, has argued that he is able to unilaterally cancel student debt to mitigate the economic effects of the coronavirus pandemic. Specifically, writes National Review, a Department of Education memo released by his administration asserts that the HEROES Act, which passed in 2003 and allows the secretary of education to provide student-debt relief “in connection with a war or other military operation or national emergency,” provides the legal basis for the cancellation.
But, National Review notes that the plaintiffs point out that Biden declared in a recent 60 Minutes interview that “the pandemic is over.”
The legal brief also adds:
“The [HEROES] Act requires ED [Education Department] to tailor any waiver or modification as necessary to address the actual financial harm suffered by a borrower due to the relevant military operation or emergency… This relief comes to every borrower regardless of whether her income rose or fell during the pandemic or whether she is in a better position today as to her student loans than before the pandemic.”
Moreover, they argue that the HEROES Act was designed to allow the secretary to provide relief in individual cases with proper justification.
The first lawsuit against Biden’s executive order came Tuesday from the Pacific Legal Foundation:
“The administration has created new problems for borrowers in at least six states that tax loan cancellation as income. People like Plaintiff Frank Garrison will actually be worse off because of the cancellation. Indeed, Mr. Garrison will face immediate tax liability from the state of Indiana because of the automatic cancellation of a portion of his debt,” wrote PLF in their own brief.
The state-led lawsuit was filed in a federal district court in Missouri, and asks that the court “temporarily restrain and preliminarily and permanently enjoin implementation and enforcement of the Mass Debt Cancellation,” and declare that it “violates the separation of powers established by the U.S. Constitution,” as well as the Administrative Procedure Act.
You may like
Immigration3 days ago
IG Audit shows nonprofit wasted $17 million taxpayer dollars on hotels to not house illegal foreign nationals
Nation2 days ago
MD nuclear scientist, wife, face life in prison after pleading guilty in nuclear secrets case
War on Drugs2 days ago
‘Mass poisoning:’ Officials seize 15,000 fentanyl pills disguised as candy
Immigration4 days ago
Texas has raised over $55 million from private donations to secure border, build a wall