Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion released Tuesday, called for reversing decades of jurisprudence that has made it harder for public figures to sue media outlets and other organizations for defamation -- restrictions that were premised, he said, on a series of "policy-driven decisions masquerading as constitutional law."
Thomas' opinion comes against the backdrop of President Trump's repeated calls to make it easier to sue for defamation. Last weekend, Trump reacted to a "Saturday Night Live" skit about his southern-border emergency declaration by asking on Twitter, "How do the Networks get away with these total Republican hit jobs without retribution? Likewise for many other shows? Very unfair and should be looked into."
And last December, Trump wrote on Twitter: "Isn’t it a shame that someone can write an article or book, totally make up stories and form a picture of a person that is literally the exact opposite of the fact, and get away with it without retribution or cost. Don’t know why Washington politicians don’t change libel laws?"
Trump has sought elimination of the high "actual malice" standard that politicians must meet in order to prove they have been defamed by media organizations and other entities. In his opinion, Thomas argued at length that Trump's burden in such cases is indeed unfair.
Ordinarily, to prove defamation has occurred, a private individual only has to to show that a defendant negligently failed to exercise reasonable care in spreading a provable falsehood that has harmed his reputation. But in 1964, the Supreme Court ruled in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan that public officials must meet a higher "actual malice" burden. This means they must prove that the defendant spread a falsehood either intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth.
The high court's ruling, which came amid a surge of politically motivated lawsuits by Southern political officials, unilaterally struck down the common law on defamation that was employed by each of the states and inherited from Britain.
"The common law of libel at the time the First and 14th Amendments were ratified did not require public figures to satisfy any kind of heightened liability standard as a condition of recovering damages," Thomas wrote.
In finding a constitutional basis for its ruling superseding that common law, the Sullivan court relied heavily on opposition by the founding fathers, including James Madison, to the Sedition Act of 1798, which would have prohibited any "false" or "scandalous" writings against government officers.
Alec Baldwin as Donald Trump on "Saturday Night Live." Trump has suggested liberal media portrayals of him constitute defamation and contain falsehoods. (YouTube)
According to Thomas, though, the fact that the framers opposed criminal punishment for criticisms of public officials did not necessarily mean they opposed providing an accessible civil defamation remedy for those politicians. In fact, Thomas said, the founders consistently opposed using federal law to override state common law, which controlled defamation actions at the time.
"Far from increasing a public figure’s burden in a defamation action, the common law deemed libels against public figures to be, if anything, more serious and injurious than ordinary libels," Thomas wrote. "Libel of a public official was deemed an offense 'most dangerous to the people, and deserv[ing of] punishment, because the people may be deceived and reject the best citizens to their great injury, and it may be to the loss of their liberties.'"
Thomas added: "Madison seemed to contemplate that 'those who administer [the federal government]' retain “a remedy, for their injured reputations, under the same laws, and in the same tribunals, which protect their lives, their liberties, and their properties. ... In short, there appears to be little historical evidence suggesting that The New York Times actual-malice rule flows from the original understanding of the First or 14th Amendment."
In the absence of a compelling constitutional basis to override common law, Thomas said, the Supreme Court had no business getting involved in state-level defamation law in the first place.
Thomas' opinion came in an unrelated case in which the high court rejected an appeal from actress Kathrine McKee, who said comic icon Bill Cosby raped her in 1974. McKee sued Cosby for damaging her reputation after a lawyer for the comedian allegedly leaked a letter attacking McKee. Two lower courts ruled against her and dismissed the case, based largely on McKee's role as a public figure.
No other justice joined Thomas' opinion on Tuesday, and it appeared unlikely that the Supreme Court would agree to hear a challenge to the case.
But Thomas' opinion may have been an effort to signal to other groups to bring a lawsuit based on Sullivan, amid an increasingly changed media landscape in which information travels more quickly than ever, legal experts said. One of the key rationales for setting a higher bar for public officials to sue for defamation relates to their perceived ability to quickly quash misinformation on their own -- an ability that some observers say is fading in the age of blogs and around-the-clock news coverage.
Thomas is not the only prominent conservative justice to voice disdain for the Sullivan decision. The late Justice Antonin Scalia publicly railed against the court's ruling in that case, saying it was abhorrent and constitutionally baseless.
Thomas has issued striking opinions in other cases that seemingly also served as signals. In support of Trump's reinstated travel ban, Thomas wrote that nationwide injunctions issued by individual federal judges “take a toll on the federal court system — preventing legal questions from percolating through the federal courts, encouraging forum shopping, and making every case a national emergency for the courts and for the executive branch.”
In Tuesday's opinion, Thomas suggested federal judges should similarly butt out of defamation cases.
Fox News' Bill Mears and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Mar 25, 2019; Washington, DC, USA; New York Yankees pitcher Stephen Tarpley (71) throws to the Washington Nationals during the first inning at Nationals Park. Mandatory Credit: Brad Mills-USA TODAY Sports
March 26, 2019
AMERICAN LEAGUE EAST CAPSULES (in projected order of finish)
NEW YORK YANKEES
To review: 100-62 in 2018, second in AL East, lost in ALDS
What’s new: Additions include LHP James Paxton, 2B DJ LeMahieu, SS Troy Tulowitzki and RHP Adam Ottavino. Gone are OF Andrew McCutchen and RHPs Sonny Gray and David Robertson.
Cause for concern: Ace RHP Luis Severino will miss at least all of April recovering from right rotator cuff inflammation, and SS Didi Gregorius is expected to be out until at least June after undergoing Tommy John surgery in October. Greg Bird and Luke Voit offer uncertainty at first base.
Projecting 2019: The Yankees begin the season with a few key players banged up, but full seasons of 2B Gleyber Torres (2018 All-Star) and 3B Miguel Andujar (27 HRs last year) give the team a sizable boost. LeMahieu and Tulowitzki provide valuable middle-infield depth while the trade for former Mariners ace Paxton (3.76 ERA, 208 K’s in 2018) and return of fellow LHP J.A. Happ help give the Yankees a deeper rotation than last season. Add a once-again overpowering bullpen, and New York appears to be the team to beat in the vaunted AL East.
BOSTON RED SOX
To review: 108-54 in 2018, first in AL East, won World Series
What’s new: No notable additions. Gone are RHPs Craig Kimbrel and Joe Kelly and LHP Drew Pomeranz.
Cause for concern: The Red Sox take a major hit in the bullpen with the loss of Kimbrel and Kelly, leaving RHPs Matt Barnes (3.65 ERA in 2018) and Ryan Brasier (1.60) as the front-runners for the closer role. Longtime 2B Dustin Pedroia (knee) is a question mark after missing all but three games last season.
Projecting 2019: Boston returns much of the offense from its World Series-winning roster. SS Xander Bogaerts and RHP Rick Porcello are free agents after the 2019 season, DH J.D. Martinez can opt out after this year and OFs Mookie Betts and Jackie Bradley Jr. hit the market in 2020, meaning the Red Sox’s prime contending window could close fast. Slugging third base prospect Michael Chavis has offered a glimpse at the future with four home runs in 22 at-bats this spring.
TAMPA BAY RAYS
To review: 90-72 in 2018, third in AL East
What’s new: Additions include C Mike Zunino, DH Avisail Garcia and RHP Charlie Morton. Gone are DH C.J. Cron, RHP Sergio Romo and OFs Mallex Smith and Carlos Gomez.
Cause for concern: How right-handed pitching prospects Brent Honeywell and Jose De Leon return from each undergoing Tommy John surgeries last spring is key to the future of the penny-pinching Rays, who open the season with the lowest payroll in baseball. Last year’s team surprised with its “opener” strategy, but the league won’t be caught off guard this time around.
Projecting 2019: Nobody could have predicted 90 wins last season from the Rays, who rode a second-half surge to standings relevance. LHP Blake Snell emerged to win the AL Cy Young Award while prized shortstop prospect Willy Adames experienced success upon making his major league debut. OF Austin Meadows is primed for his first full season, giving the Rays a key player who could have them once again turning heads this year.
TORONTO BLUE JAYS
To review: 73-89 in 2018, fourth in AL East
What’s new: Additions include SS Freddy Galvis, RHP Matt Shoemaker and first-year manager Charlie Montoyo. Gone are C Russell Martin, SS Aledmys Diaz, 3B Yangervis Solarte, RHP Marco Estrada and former skipper John Gibbons.
Cause for concern: RHPs Aaron Sanchez (4.89 ERA in 2018) and Marcus Stroman (5.54) enter make-or-break seasons after each endured struggles last year. The offense features several unproven names as the team looks to move on from the Josh Donaldson era.
Projecting 2019: All eyes are on baseball’s top prospect, 3B Vladimir Guerrero Jr., when it comes to the Blue Jays this season. The 20-year-old has been shelved by an oblique injury this spring, though a midseason debut seemed most likely for the phenom as Toronto looks to slow his free agency clock. Across four minor league levels last season, Guerrero hit .381 in 95 games. The Blue Jays are primed for a rebuild, with Stroman, Sanchez and 1B Justin Smoak (25 HRs in 2018) all representing attractive options for contenders.
BALTIMORE ORIOLES
To review: 47-115 in 2018, fifth in AL East
What’s new: Additions include first-year manager Brandon Hyde. Gone are OF Adam Jones, C Caleb Joseph, INF Tim Beckham and former skipper Buck Showalter.
Cause for concern: Slugging 1B Chris Davis retains one of the biggest albatross contracts in the sport after hitting .168 in 128 games last season. He’ll make $17 million this season (plus another $6 million in deferred salary) and is under contract at the same rate through 2022. Needing a bounce-back season, RHP Dylan Bundy has posted a 7.89 ERA through six spring starts.
Projecting 2019: After setting a franchise record for losses last season, the Orioles cleaned house, parting ways with Showalter and executive vice president Dan Duquette. New faces in Hyde and general manager Mike Elias will guide the team to a full-scale rebuild, starting with the No. 1 overall pick in this year’s draft. OF Yusniel Diaz, the headliner of last season’s Manny Machado trade with the Dodgers, could make his debut after spending all of 2018 at Double-A.
Mar 14, 2019; Las Vegas, NV, United States; UCLA Bruins guard Kris Wilkes (13) reacts to a call on the floor during the second half of a Pac-12 conference tournament game against the Arizona State Sun Devils at T-Mobile Arena. Stephen R. Sylvanie-USA TODAY Sports
March 27, 2019
UCLA sophomore wing Kris Wilkes is headed to the NBA draft and will hire an agent, he announced on social media Wednesday.
Wilkes averaged a team-high 17.4 points per game this season for the Bruins, who finished 17-16 in a season that saw them fire coach Steve Alford in late December.
“Ever since I was little, my dream has been to play in the NBA,” Wilkes wrote on Instagram. “To everyone at UCLA, especially to my teammates and coaches, I’m incredibly grateful for all your love and support these past two years. I can’t wait to see what the future holes for me, and I will forever be a Bruin!”
Wilkes (6-8, 215) averaged 4.8 rebounds and shot 33.7 percent from 3-point range as a sophomore.
In 66 career games (65 starts), he averaged 15.5 points and 4.8 rebounds at UCLA.
Wilkes participated in the 2018 NBA Combine but pulled his name out of draft consideration.
–San Diego State sophomore forward Jalen McDaniels is bypassing his final two collegiate seasons after averaging 15.9 points and 8.3 rebounds this season while earning second-team All-Mountain West honors.
“We appreciate the positive contributions Jalen made to our program and to the university,” San Diego State coach Brian Dutcher said in a statement. “Jalen now has the opportunity to pursue his life-long goal of playing in the National Basketball Association. We wish him and his family well.”
McDaniels flirted with entering the draft after averaging 10.5 points and 7.5 rebounds as a redshirt freshman. But on the day of the deadline, he decided to return to school.
He said he will hire an agent.
McDaniels also had an off-court issue to deal as he has been sued by two women who accused him of filming sex acts in 2016 while he was in high school in the Seattle area. Earlier this month, McDaniels called the lawsuits “a very serious situation.”
–BYU power forward Yoeli Childs will skip his senior season to pursue a pro career after he averaged 21.2 points and 9.6 rebounds last season. He shot 50.8 percent from the field and 32.3 percent from 3-point range (32 of 99).
Childs (6-8, 225) said he will hire an agent, precluding him from returning to play for BYU.
He averaged 16.1 points and 8.8 rebounds in 100 career games (92 starts) at BYU, shooting 52.8 percent from the field.
Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh tore into Democrat presidential loser Hillary Clinton, saying she is the person who colluded with Russia, not President Trump.
“Hillary Clinton is who tried to rig a presidential election…Hillary Clinton and her pals in the Obama Department of Justice and the FBI, they are the ones who colluded with the Russians. They colluded to produce this entirely bogus Steele Dossier,” Limbaugh said Monday on Fox News.
“Talk about irony,” he continued. “For Hillary Clinton to be talking about impeaching Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton needs to be investigated, she needs to be indicted and she needs to be in jail [with] many of her co-conspirators in this whole sordid affair.”
Limbaugh went on to say that Clinton’s attempts to overthrow Trump using the debunked Steele Dossier compiled with Russian intelligence amounted to the real collusion.
“Unelected people came close to pulling off what is a coup,” said the Republican host.
“Who’s working with Russians? Steele, Hillary’s guy! They are working with the Russians…the dossier traces right back to Hillary and her campaign in the DNC.”
“I think there is enough there that any other person who had engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted,” Clinton said Monday during the Time 100 conference.
Alex Jones and a caller discuss how President Trump must now go on the offense, after the democrats’ Mueller report led impeachment fail, to stop the deep state criminals before they organize another coup to remove him from office.
President Trump on Wednesday signed two executive orders that will make it harder for states to block the construction of oil and gas pipelines and other energy projects due to environmental concerns.
Coming on the heels of officials in Washington state and New York using permitting processes to stop new energy projects in recent years – and at the urging of some industry leaders – Trump’s executive order will speed up the construction of oil and gas pipelines across the country.
“My action today will cut through the destructive permitting and denials,” Trump said during the signing of the executive orders at the International Union of Operating Engineers International Training and Education Center, a union-run facility in Crosby, Texas. “Under this administration, we’ve ended the war on American energy.”
“It will take no more than 60 days,” Trump said of the approval process for new pipelines, “and the president, not the bureaucracy, will make the final decision.”
While the move was greeted warmly by members of the country’s oil and gas industries, it is likely to rankle some more traditional conservative lawmakers – including several Republican governors - worried about the federal government impinging on individual state rights and governance. The White House has sought to stave off any discord by arguing that the order is not meant to take power away from the states, but to ensure that state actions follow the intent of the Clean Water Act.
Trade groups representing the oil and gas industry applauded the orders and said greater access to natural gas benefits families and the environment.
"When states say 'no' to the development of natural gas pipelines, they force utilities to curb safe and affordable service and refuse access to new customers, including new businesses," said Karen Harbert, president and CEO at the American Gas Association.
Trump's move comes less than a week after nearly a dozen business groups told EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler that the environmental review and permitting process for energy infrastructure projects "has become a target for environmental activists and states that oppose the production and use of fossil fuels."
The groups said in an April 5 letter that individual states shouldn't be able to use provisions of the Clear Air Act "to dictate national policy, thereby harming other states and the national interest and damaging cooperative federalism."
Washington state blocked the building of a coal terminal in 2017, saying there were too many major harmful impacts including air pollution, rail safety and vehicle traffic.
New York regulators stopped a natural gas pipeline, saying it failed to meet standards to protect streams, wetlands and other water resources. Under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, companies must get certification from the state before moving ahead with an energy project.
One of Trump's planned executive orders calls for the Environmental Protection Agency to consult with states, tribes and others before issuing new guidance and rules for states on how to comply with the law.
Environmental groups described Trump's order as an effort to short-circuit a state's ability to review complicated projects, putting at risk a state's ability to protect drinking water supplies and wildlife.
"The Trump Administration's proposal would trample on state authority to protect waters within their own borders," said Jim Murphy, senior counsel for the National Wildlife Federation.
The private Center for Biological Diversity said Wednesday's actions would mark the fourth time Trump has used executive orders to streamline permits for fossil-fuel infrastructure.
"Trump's developing an addiction to executive orders that rubberstamp these climate-killing projects," said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the center.
The second executive order Trump signed on Wednesday streamlines the process for energy infrastructure that crosses international borders.
Currently, the secretary of state has the authority to issue permits for cross-border infrastructure such as pipelines. The executive order clarifies that the president will make the decision on whether to issue such permits.
The move follows Trump's decision last month to issue a new presidential permit for the long-stalled Keystone XL oil pipeline — two years after he first approved it and more than a decade after it was first proposed.
The U.S. House Judiciary Committee office is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., after Special Counsel Robert Mueller handed in his report to Attorney General William Barr on his investigation into Russia's role in the 2016 presidential election and any potential wrongdoing by U.S. President Donald Trump, March 22, 2019. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas
April 1, 2019
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. House Judiciary Committee on Monday said it will work this week on a resolution authorizing subpoenas for Special Counsel Robert Muller’s full report on his investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.
U.S. Attorney General William Barr has said he planned to make public a redacted copy of the nearly 400-page investigative report by mid-April or sooner. But House Judiciary Chair Jerrold Nadler and other top Democrats have called for the full report, without redactions, to be released to lawmakers and have given Barr until Tuesday to produce it.
(Reporting by David Morgan; Writing by David Alexander; Editing by Susan Heavey)
FILE PHOTO: A man rides a tricycle transporting Mobike shared bikes near Wangfujing Street, a pedestrianised shopping area, in Beijing, China October 15, 2018. REUTERS/Thomas Peter/File Photo
March 11, 2019
BEIJING (Reuters) – Chinese dockless bike-sharing company Mobike said on Monday it will pull out of some Asian countries and re-evaluate its units in other overseas markets amid a wide-scale contraction in the market and the bankruptcy of top competitor Ofo.
The Beijing-based firm, which is backed by Tencent Holdings Ltd, has launched its signature orange bikes in markets including Australia, Europe and the United States.
The company said it will layoff at least 10 staff as part of its restructuring plan.
“We are currently seeking to optimize our international business. On that principle, Mobike will close in some countries in Asia … At the same time, we will continue to evaluate other countries and regions,” the company said.
TechCrunch earlier reported that Mobike laid off its Asia Pacific operations team, including staff and contractors in Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, India and Australia.
The move comes as China’s bike-sharing industry – which once included multiple firms valued at over $1 billion each – is experiencing a sharp downturn, forcing several closures and acquisitions after years of breakneck growth.
Mobike was acquired by Beijing-based on-demand services company Meituan Dianping for $2.7 billion last April.
Alibaba Group Holding Ltd-backed Ofo, once Mobike’s top competitor, announced last year that it would consider applying for bankruptcy, leaving millions of customers demanding the return of their deposits.
(Reporting by Cate Cadell, Editing by Sherry Jacob-Phillips)
“Outdated laws” need fixing to deal with the surge in illegal immigrant families crossing the U.S. border with Mexico, a top Border Patrol official said Friday.
Historically 70 to 90 percent of apprehensions at the border were quickly returned to Mexico, Hastings said.
Now, 83 percent of those apprehended have come from the Central American northern triangle which includes Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, and of those 63 percent are “family units” and children who cannot be returned, he said.
“There are no consequences that we can apply to this group currently,” Hastings said. “We’re overwhelmed. If you look at agents there doing a tremendous job trying to deal with the flow.”
The law dictates children have to be released after 20 days of detention.
“Up to 40 percent of our agents are processing at any given time,” he said. “That should say that in and of itself is pulling from those border security resources.”
President Trump on Friday blasted liberal billionaire activist Tom Steyer for his continued push to impeach Trump — with Trump claiming Steyer is “trying to remain relevant” and doesn’t have the “guts” to run for the White House himself.
“Weirdo Tom Steyer, who didn’t have the ‘guts’ or money to run for President, is still trying to remain relevant by putting himself on ads begging for impeachment,” the president tweeted. “He doesn’t mention the fact that mine is perhaps the most successful first 2 year presidency in history & NO C OR O! [Collusion or Obstruction]”
Trump and his allies have pointed to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report’s conclusions that there was no evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign and its decision not to make a conclusion on obstruction of justice as a vindication for the president.
Steyer has been one of the leaders backing a push to impeach Trump and founded “Need to Impeach” and has kept up that push since the report’s release. He announced on Thursday that he was calling on Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to support impeachment proceedings.
On Friday he responded to Trump’s tweet, calling him “angry and scared.”
“I know you want it all to go away. But for the sake of the country you must face your transgressions. Rage away, but that anger doesn’t matter,” he said in a tweet. The truth and the people will prevail.”
Impeachment hearings have been backed by a number of House Democrats, as well as 2020 presidential hopefuls Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Kamala Harris, D-Calif. However, Pelosi has long been skeptical of impeachment proceedings against Trump.
“I’m not for impeachment,” Pelosi told The Washington Post in an interview last month. “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”
A Florida measure that would ban sanctuary cities is set for a vote Friday in the state’s Senate after clearing its first hurdle earlier this week.
The bill would effectively make it against the law for Florida’s police departments to refuse to cooperate with federal immigration officials.
“The Governor may initiate judicial proceedings in the name of the state against such officers to enforce compliance,” a draft version of the Senate bill reads.
A House version of the bill, which passed by a 69-47 vote Wednesday, adds that non-complying officials could be suspended or removed from office and face fines of up to $5,000 per day. Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to sign off on the measure, although it’s not clear which version.
Florida Rep. Carlos Guillermo Smith (D-Orlando), during a press conference at the Florida Capitol in Tallahassee, speaks out against bills in the House and Senate that would ban sanctuary cities in the state. (AP)
Florida is home to 775,000 illegal immigrants out of 10.7 million present in the United States, ranking the state third among all states.
Nine states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, North Carolina, Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee and Texas — already have enacted state laws requiring law enforcement to comply with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Florida doesn’t have sanctuary cities like the ones in California and other states. But Republican lawmakers say a handful of their municipalities — including Orlando and West Palm Beach – are acting as “pseudo-sanctuary” cities, because they prevent law enforcement officials from asking about immigration status when they make arrests.
“There are still people here in the state of Florida, police chiefs that are just refusing to contact ICE, refusing to detain somebody that they know is here illegally,” Florida Republican Rep. Blaise Ingoglia said earlier this month. “So while the actual county municipality doesn’t have an actual adopted policy, they still have people in power within their sheriff’s department or police department that refuse to do it anyway.”
Florida’s Democratic Party has blasted the anti-Sanctuary measures, while the Miami-Dade Police Department says it should be up to federal authorities to handle immigration-related matters.
“House Republicans today sold out their communities to Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis by passing this xenophobic and discriminatory bill,” the state’s Democratic Party said Wednesday after the House passed their version of the bill. “It’s abhorrent that Republican members who represent immigrant communities are now turning their backs on their constituents and jeopardizing their safety.
“Florida has long stood as a beacon for immigrant communities — and today Republicans did the best they could to destroy that reputation,” they added.
Fox News’ Elina Shirazi contributed to this report.
FILE PHOTO: Supporters of the Spain’s far-right party VOX wave Spanish flags as they attend an electoral rally ahead of general elections in the Andalusian capital of Seville, Spain April 24, 2019. REUTERS/Marcelo del Pozo/File Photo
April 26, 2019
By John Stonestreet and Belén Carreño
MADRID (Reuters) – Spain’s Vox party, aligned to a broader far-right movement emerging across Europe, has become the focus of speculation about last minute shifts in voting intentions since official polling for Sunday’s national election ended four days ago.
No single party is anywhere near securing a majority, and chances of a deadlocked parliament and a second election are high.
Leaders of the five parties vying for a role in government get final chances to pitch for power at rallies on Friday evening, before a campaign characterized by appeals to voters’ hearts rather than wallets ends at midnight.
By tradition, the final day before a Spanish election is politics-free.
Two main prizes are still up for grabs in the home straight. One concerns which of the two rival left and right multi-party blocs gets more votes.
The other is whether Vox could challenge the mainstream conservative PP for leadership of the latter bloc, which media outlets with access to unofficial soundings taken since Monday suggest could be starting to happen.
The right’s loose three-party alliance is led by the PP, the traditional conservative party that has alternated in office with outgoing Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s Socialists since Spain’s return to democracy in the 1970s.
The PP stands at around 20 percent, with center-right Ciudadanos near 14 percent and Vox around 11 percent, according to a final poll of polls in daily El Pais published on Monday.
Since then, however, interest in Vox – which will become the first far-right party to sit in parliament since 1982 – has snowballed.
It was founded in 2013, part of a broader anti-establishment, far-right movement that has also spread across – among others – Italy, France and Germany.
While it is careful to distance itself from the ideology of late dictator Francisco Franco, Vox’s signature policies include repealing laws banning Franco-era symbols and on gender-based violence, and shifting power away from Spain’s regional governments.
TRENDING
According to a Google trends graphic, Vox has generated more than three times more search inquiries than any other Spanish political party in the past week.
Reasons could include a groundswell of vocal activist support at Vox rallies in Madrid and Valencia, and its exclusion from two televised debates between the main party leaders, on the grounds of it having no deputies yet in parliament.
Conservative daily La Vanguardia called its enforced absence from Monday’s and Tuesday’s debates “a gift from heaven”, while left-wing Eldiario.es suggested the PP was haemorrhaging votes to Vox in rural areas.
Ignacio Jurado, politics lecturer at the University of York, agreed the main source of additional Vox votes would be disaffected PP supporters, and called the debate ban – whose impact he said was unclear – wrong.
“This is a party polling over 10 percent and there are people interested in what it says. So we lose more than we win in not having them (in the debates),” he said
For Jose Fernandez-Albertos, political scientist at Spanish National Research Council CSIC, Vox is enjoying the novelty effect that propelled then new, left-wing arrival Podemos to 20 percent of the vote in 2015.
“While it’s unclear how to interpret the (Google) data, what we do know is that it’s better to be popular and to be a newcomer, and that Vox will benefit in some form,” he said.
For now, the chances of Vox taking a major role in government remain slim, however.
The El Pais survey put the Socialists on around 30 percent, making them the frontrunners and likely to form a leftist bloc with Podemos, back down at around 14 percent.
The unofficial soundings suggest little change in the two parties’ combined vote, or the total vote of the rightist bloc.
That makes it unlikely that either bloc will win a majority on Sunday, triggering horse-trading with smaller parties favoring Catalan independence – the single most polarizing issues during campaigning – that could easily collapse into fresh elections.
(Election graphic: https://tmsnrt.rs/2ENugtw)
(Reporting by John Stonestreet and Belen Carreno, Editing by William Maclean)
LANCASTER, Pa. – The Amish population in Pennsylvania’s Lancaster County is continuing to grow each year, despite the encroachment of urban sprawl on their communities.
The U.S. Census Bureau says the county added about 2,500 people in 2018. LNP reports that about 1,000 of them were Amish.
Elizabethtown College researchers say Lancaster County’s Amish population reached 33,143 in 2018, up 3.2% from the previous year.
The Amish accounted for about 41% of the county’s overall population growth last year.
Some experts are concerned that a planned 75-acre (30-hectare) housing and commercial project will make it more difficult for the county to accommodate the Amish.
Donald Kraybill, an authority on Amish culture, told Manheim Township commissioners this week that some in the community are worried about the development and the increased traffic it would bring.
Click below to consent to the use of the cookie technology provided by vi (video intelligence AG) to personalize content and advertising. For more info please access vi's website.