Connect with us

Nation

Judicial Watch Sues DC Mayor For Ignoring Requests To Paint ‘Because No One Is Above the Law’ On Street

Published

on

Screen Shot 2020 07 03 at 10.48.49 AM

Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit against Washington D.C.’s Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser for ignoring the group’s request to paint “Because No One Is Above The Law!”, the group’s motto, on a City street after she allowed “Black Lives Matter” and “Defund the Police” to be painted on a city block.

“Mayor Bowser gave us the runaround rather than access, as the First Amendment requires, to a DC street to paint our timely message and motto: Because No One is Above the Law!” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Our message is especially relevant today because it applies equally to law enforcement and public officials as well as to protesters, looters, and rioters.”

Judicial Watch first submitted their request to Bowser’s office on June 10, giving her three days to respond. The watchdog group even offered to pay for the painting.

Three weeks later, the Mayor hasn’t responded to their request prompting JW to take legal action. The group alleges in their lawsuit that the D.C. government “denied timely, equal access to Judicial Watch to paint its own expressive message and violated federal civil rights law.”

On Tuesday, the group sent a similar request to paint their motto in New York City. Mayor Bill de Blasio has yet to respond to their inquiry.

You may like

Continue Reading

Nation

Multiple states launch lawsuit against Biden’s student-loan forgiveness plan

Published

on

Screen Shot 2021 05 13 at 3.33.02 PM scaled

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

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending Now

Advertisement

Trending

Proudly Made In America | © 2022 M3 Media Management, LLC