How President Bannon’s Whiteboard Sank Trump

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

Trump’s approval ratings are in the toilet compared to any other modern president at this stage of his presidency. At least some of that public disapproval comes from his repeated attempts to issue overly broad or discriminatory or otherwise unconstitutional executive orders. These were promptly blocked by federal courts, although Trump could yet prevail at the Supreme Court.

It turns out that these disastrous EO’s haven’t been The Tangerine One’s ideas at all. He’s just taking marching orders from President Bannon’s whiteboard checklist.

Let us underline that: Trump’s agenda is Breitbart, alt-Neo-Nazi agenda.

Alt-White-Supremacist Steve Bannon tried to do a whitewash of his smelly politics by taking a selfie with Rabbi Shmuly Boteach, but instead Bannon got whiteboarded – his neo-Fascist to-do list showed up in the background.

You know how in movies about paranoid conspiracy theorists they always show the guy with a bunch of wild items pinned all over his walls? Our country is being run by one of those.

According to WaPo and LA Times, these are the items on Bannon-‘s to-do list. For his failed policies I have quoted past Informed Comment articles explaining.

Things President Bannon wants to do that have been blocked by Federal courts:

Cancel all federal funding to sanctuary cities

District Judge William Orrick issued a stay on grounds like that Congress decides budgetary issues and that

“Further, the Tenth Amendment requires that conditions on federal funds be unambiguous and timely made; that they bear some relation to the funds at issue; and that the total financial incentive not be coercive. Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves.”

Suspend Syrian Refugee Program

This was part of Trump’s first attempted Executive Order on immigration. It was blocked by a federal judge in Seattle on grounds of being discriminatory and of harming the University of Washington:

“Robart wrote, according to the Seattle Times:

“The executive order adversely affects the state’s residents in areas of employment, education, business, family relations and freedom to travel,” Robart wrote, adding that the order also harmed the state’s public universities and tax base. “These harms are significant and ongoing.”

Suspend immigration from terror-prone regions

Implement new extreme immigration vetting techniques

These two also all got blocked by Federal courts:

Derrick Watson, US District Court judge in Honolulu, has issued a nationwide Temporary Restraining Order against Trump’s second attempt at an Executive Order excluding people from Muslim-majority countries from the United States. Watson found that the state of Hawaii, which brought the suit, was likely to prevail in its complaint that the president’s order would impose irreparable harm on the University of Hawaii and on the state’s tourism industry. He also found that it violates the constitutional rights of American Muslims. (I made the same argument soon after it was released).

Things he may actually get through (like, today):

Repeal and Replace Obamacare

Things pending:

Create a 10% repatriation tax

Build the border wall and eventually make Mexico …

Create support program for victims of illegal immigrants

Expand and revitilize the popular 287g partners

Issue detainers for all illegal immigrants who are … for any crime and they will be placed into …removal proceedings

End “catch-and-release”

Hire 5,000 more Border Patrol agents

Restore the Secure Communities Program

Triple the number of ICE agents

Sunset our visa laws so that Congress is forced to periodically revise and revisit them

Finally complete biometric entry-exit tracking

Propose passage of Davis-Oliver bill

The immigration bill, proposed by then Sen. Jeff Sessions in 2015, is named for two California police officers who were killed by immigrants living in the U.S. illegally.

…pass “Kate’s Law”

If Trump tries to push this Mussolini type agenda on the United States of America, I predict that his presidency will sink even faster.

—-

Related video:

The Young Turks: Steve Bannon leaks his own Master Plan

India’s Electric-Car Plans could Leave Trump & US in Dust

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

India’s announcement that it wants to have its automobile fleet go completely electric by 2030 is a bigger deal than it seems on the surface, if in fact the government follows through.

Power Minister Piyush Goya said Tuesday at the Confederation of Indian Industry,

“We are going to introduce electric vehicles in a very big way. We are going to make electric vehicles self- sufficient like UJALA. The idea is that by 2030, not a single petrol or diesel car should be sold in the country.”

Goya also said that the Indian government would be willing to subsidize electric automobiles as an infant industry, just as it had the Maruti car, which now is profitable.

The government is driven by several considerations. First, India is facing an extremely serious urban pollution problem. When I was there last year the mayor of New Delhi made a rule that cars even-numbered license plates had to alternate day by day with those with odd-numbered plates, to cut down on traffic and deadly emissions.

Second, India has little petroleum of its own and must import it, which is a drain on its economy.

Third, the Indian government genuinely believes that climate change is a danger to the country (which is correct; some climate models see India’s fertile Gangetic plain turning into a dustbowl as the global temperature warms).

Indian technology, with the possible exception of software, isn’t usually considered a world-changer. But Goya’s plan, if implemented really would alter the history of humankind. Technology falls in price and becomes more efficient through volume production. Moreover, the United States no longer rules the roost in the automobile industry, and what India and China do, with 2/5s of the world’s population between them, will have enormous impact on the cost and size of batteries.

India’s population is roughly 1.3 billion. That of the US is 320 million.

India has some 70 million motor vehicles on the road.

The United States has over 250 million cars and trucks on the road.

But, with over 3 times the population of the United States and with a population that is rapidly urbanizing and entering the middle class, the potential for future car sales in India is just enormous, dwarfing the US.

And if all those tens of millions of new cars are electric, that would change everything. Batteries would shrink and become more efficient.

In the US, some 540,000 electric cars have been sold.

But if India starts selling 5 million electric vehicles a year, in a decade that would be 50 million, 100 times as many as Americans have ever bought! I don’t care what Trump or Exxon-Mobile or the Koch brothers do, that would be game over for petroleum. Because if India can make an electric car ordinary Indians can afford, then all of Asia and Latin America will be interested.

Chinese consumers bought over 500,000 electric cars last year– as many as Americans have bought since the beginning of time. If Chinese consumers go on buying at that rate, in 10 years they will have purchased 5 million electric cars. The Chinese government is so far not as dedicated to the electric car as some Indian cabinet members are. But Chinese companies have designed and manufactured several practical EVs.

China may in fact lead the electric vehicle revolution. It has already made engineering advances in this field, and is working on electric SUVs, a model that might appeal to Americans.

If we take Asia into account, we can confidently predict that over the next decade and more several million electric vehicles will be sold, putting the American market in the shade.

The Chevy Bolt may catch on, and so might the Tesla 3. But if the US doesn’t get its act together and stop listening to Trump, the Kochs etc., people may end up driving Indian and Chinese electric cars

—–

Related video added by Juan Cole:

Mahindra e20 Plus City Smart electric car | First Impressions | Motown India

Trump’s Real sin in DC is not distinguishing between “Good” and “Bad” Dictators

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

Donald J. Trump’s peculiar comments about and relationship with dictators and loonies among foreign leaders have upset a range of observers, from sincere human rights activists to cold-blooded Think Tank Rats. First he welcomed the Philippines’ demagogue and possibly cold-blooded murderer Rodrigo Duterte to Washington. Then he said he understood the problems North Korea’s Kim Jong Un had battling off his bloodthirsty relatives.

But I would argue that the inside-the-Beltway Blob is mainly upset because Trump doesn’t seem to know the difference between the Bad dictators, whom you diss, and the Good dictators, whom you praise as strong allies. Trump just seems to like all the dictators.

Washington wants Trump to talk dirty about Vladimir Putin of Russia, Kim Jong Un of North Korea, and Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela. (Two of the three were elected and Putin seems genuinely popular). But the Establishment is fine with him praising Abdel Fattah al-Sisi of Egypt (Sisi strong-armed opponents into not running against him, intimidated the press, declared a major party a terrorist organization and killed hundreds of them, and won office with a shameful 97% of the vote).

No one in Washington stands up and gives speeches criticizing Thailand’s repressive military junta. And the US Establishment was positively giddy when the corrupt Brazilian oligarchy impeached the elected president of Brazil and replaced her with a corrupt Brazilian oligarch. We haven’t heard anything more about either Brasilia or Bangkok on television news. Move along, nothing to see here.

Saudi Arabia would be too easy a subject here.

You’ve heard less about Salva Kiir Mayardit of South Sudan, who helped plunge his country into a deadly civil war and wreck millions of lives. Why, South Sudan was a US project, aimed at breaking up and weakening Arab Sudan. Sudan’s dictator, Omar al-Bashir is in the Washington dog house as Bad Dictator. Kiir Mayardit isn’t brought up.

The Bad Dictators are arguably Bad, and some are war criminals. But Washington tends to deal with the pro-American dictators by just not bringing them up much, or by stressing their friendliness rather than their rapaciousness when they are brought up.

Some of those Washington sees as Bad Dictators, however, are either not dictators or not bad, or not either one. Evo Morales of Bolivia was called “Taliban” by W.’s ambassador, presumably because he represents workers and the indigenous population rather than big business. I’m not aware that anyone has suggested he hasn’t been fairly elected, and he has been a good steward of the economy for workers and the middle classes.

Then of course above all you’re not allowed to bring up that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu rules millions of Palestinians by military force, keeping them occupied and stateless and stealing their land while depriving them of the most basic human and civil rights. No Palestinian was allowed to vote for or against Netanyahu even though he rules them with an iron fist.

So get this. Evo Morales Bad, Netanyahu Good.

Nor is this a new phenomenon. Gen. Franco of Spain was at least informally part of the Axis, but by the 1950s Washington had rehabilitated him as an ally. We never heard about Franco’s crimes against humanity or embarrassing Fascism when I was growing up in the 1950s and 1960s, but Communist leaders were constantly vilified. One’s attitude toward Capital seems to have mattered more than human rights considerations.

Is it as simple as American billionaires feeling threatened by some dictators but not by others, and instructing the US government accordingly? Be a popularly elected politician who talks socialism, and anything less than a perfect human rights record becomes a headline. Be a coup-maker who welcomes the foreign billionaires in to exploit your people, and you can sodomize prisoners of conscience with broomsticks all you like, and Washington won’t so much as cough politely in disapproval.

What the erratic Trump is doing in sucking up to people like Duterte is horrifying. But just keep in mind that he and his predecessors sucked up to people just as bad or worse, and it was never a headline if those dictators remained compliant with the wishes of America’s Chamber of Commerce.

—-

Related video:

CNN: “HRW slams Trump for Duterte invite”

Trump sends US Troops to Patrol Turkish-Syrian Border as Ankara Threatens US Allies

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

Only one fighting force in Syria is practically speaking taking on Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) on the ground, and that is the Syrian Democratic Forces, the bulk of whose fighters are leftist Kurds of the “People’s Protection Units” (YPG). They are joined by some rural Arab clans of Syria’s northeast, but I think the US Pentagon exaggerates the number of Arabs involved. The SDF is mostly Kurds, i.e. it is mostly YPG.

This weekend, the YPG fighters made another advance against Daesh, in the small town of Tabaqah due east of the Daesh capital, al-Raqqa. Tabaqah probably had a population of about 80,000 in 2011 when the Syrian civil war began.

The SDF announced that they had made enormous progress in Tabaqa, a strategic town that is key to controlling the biggest dam in Syria. The campaign there is called “Euphrates Fury,” which aims at liberating the town’s population from Daesh/ ISIL.

Communiques from the YPG claimed that they had almost completely taken the town by Sunday evening (yesterday), with the exception of a handful of villages in the

The YPG says that after Tabaqah is properly subdued, they hope to go on to Raqqa and take down the so-called ISIL “caliphate.”

Ironically, even as the YPG fighters were putting their lives on the line to take a key town away from Daesh, Turkey was threatening them.

On Daesh, Turkey hasn’t been all that interested, despite having been the victim of several Daesh bombings. Ankara has its eye instead on Kurdish separatism in Turkey itself, and fears a successful Syrian Kurdish mini-state could give Turkish Kurds ideas.

As I wrote for The Nation last Friday, last week Turkey bombed YPG positions and killed over 20 fighters (i.e. over 20 allies of the 500 US special operations personnel on the ground in Syria). Turkey views the YPG as a branch of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and thus as a terrorist organization. The United States government disagrees and has a close battlefield alliance with the Kurds against Daesh.

So Trump had to order US military personnel up to the Turkish-Syrian border to put themselves between the Turkish troops and the Syrian YPG. The US military is now protecting the YPG with its own bodies, from a NATO ally.

Turkey is nevertheless threatening to hit the YPG “at night and without warning.”

The Anadolu Agency is reporting that

“Ankara is gravely concerned by photos of U.S. soldiers attending the funerals of YPG terrorists in the wake of Turkish airstrikes against PKK/YPG targets in Syria and northern Iraq, said Turkey’s president Sunday.

“We are seriously concerned to see U.S. flags in a convoy that has YPG rags on it. We will mention these issues to President [Donald Trump] during our visit to the United States on May 16 . . .”

So there you have it. Trump is in the position of trying to separate and make peace among two American allies, one of them a major military power and NATO member, the other a rag tag band of leftist Kurds. In the meantime, it is the ragtag band that is advancing on ISIL in Raqqa.

—-

Related video:

Al Jazeera English: “Turkey threatens further strikes on US-allied Syrian Kurds”

As Millions March for Climate, Stab in Back by EPA & NYT

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

An estimated 200,000 climate protesters rallied in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, braving record temperatures in the 90s, well above the average temperature for April 29 in the national capital. They were allowed to surround the White House from a distance. The protesters were pushing back against the pro-Warming policies of President Donald J. Trump, which favor burning massively increased amounts of coal, gas and oil, putting extra billions of metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere over time.

At the same time that protests were mounted in cities across the US and the world, the Trump Environmental Protection Agency under denialist, shyster lawyer, and generally miserable human being Scott Pruitt removed its Climate Change web page.. When the fox is in charge of the hen house, the first thing he does is to oil the hinges so the hens can’t hear him coming through the gate. So the climate marchers got stabbed in the back, predictably, by the very government agency that should be protecting their children from the ravages of pollutants like carbon dioxide.

State legislators, bought and paid for by Big Carbon, are plotting to try to stop the march to solar power and other renewables.

CO2 is a deadly greenhouse gas, which is responsible for having turned Venus into a scorching Gehenna where lead melts on the surface. Human beings evolved during the past 200,000 years, when carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have been low, roughly 270 parts per million. Since 1750 and the advent of the Industrial Revolution, human beings have increased CO2 in the atmosphere to 410 parts per million. This is the fastest accumulation of so many billions of tons of CO2 ever in the earth’s history. CO2 has fluctuated in the distant past, but over millions of years. A level of 410 ppm is consistent with massive warming and seas that are dozens of meters higher than now, which would submerge Florida, Louisiana, the Egyptian Delta, and most of Bangladesh, among other catastrophes. This warming and those disasters will happen over time rather than immediately, since the seas, for instance are cold and slow-moving and will take time to warm up consistent with the current greenhouse effect.

In order to muddy the waters and help Exxon-Mobil and the Koch Brothers, the New York Times sold out and hired climate denialist Bret Stephens, who abruptly tossed a set of old bromides about the uncertainty of climate change onto the editorial page.

Make no mistake about it. Bret Stephens is shamelessly purveying a falsehood. His like deliberately and skillfully deploy the techniques the cigarette companies used to deflect the science on lung cancer. It is known that liberals are open-minded, willing to concede the other person’s point of view, willing to entertain self-doubt. Denialists, like a criminal who profiles the victim before striking, have been trained to play on these traits.

But let’s get this straight. There is no more doubt in the scientific community about the reality of human-caused climate change than there is about the law of gravity. Perhaps Mr. Stephens and his ilk should step off their balconies every once in a while to test whether the arrogant Mr. Newton and his seventeenth century mathematics could not reasonably be debated on the certainty that they will fall to their deaths every time.

On climate change, there are no reasonable grounds for doubt about either the reality or the costs. An eighth-grade science experiment can prove that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Does Mr. Stephens think Venus is so hot because of the nitrogen in its atmosphere? Or could it be the massive amounts of CO2? Are there really grounds for a debate here?

I’m a historian, and have taught history and climate change. And, actually history is highly relevant here. Scientists have gathered ice cores and have developed proxies that allow them to estimate CO2 levels in past ages. And we can correlate those carbon dioxide levels with sea level, stationary massive storms and droughts, and other kinds of events that accompanied climate change in the past. Somebody tried to troll me that if CO2 levels fluctuated in the past naturally, how do we know that humans are causing today’s changes. That’s easy. Past fluctuations were mostly driven by volcanic activity– lots of it, over millions of years. There hasn’t been anything like that going on since 1750 (you would have noticed), and nor could volcanic activity change the levels so rapidly (they never have, ever before). Current volcanic activity is putting less that 1% as much CO2 into the atmosphere as human burning of coal, gas and oil.

Bret Stephens at the NYT is the essence of fake news.

The New York Times gave us the Iraq War with phony stories about aluminum tubes and Iraqi nuclear bomb projects, and biological weapons on bumpy Winnebagos on Iraq’s potholed roads. The paper has a lot of great and honest reporters, but a little bit of arsenic can ruin an otherwise fine meal.

What I can’t understand is why people don’t protest in front of coal plants and embarrass the utilities running them. They are the dirtiest, most dangerous things on the planet and all of them need to be closed down yesterday if we are to get a handle on climate change. Trump can’t promote coal mining if there aren’t any plants burning the noxious stuff (it is laced with mercury, a notorious nerve poison, quite apart from destroying the planet with CO2).

—-

Related video added by Juan Cole:

CGTN: “Thousands gather in protest at People’s Climate March”

On Day of Climate March, Remember advance of Solar globally

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

The US public may have to march today for our government to recognize the dangers of climate change. But in the rest of the world many governments are placing a large wager on clean solar energy.

The largest concentrated solar plant in the world is not in the United States, which once upon a time was at the vanguard of new science and technology. It is in Morocco, a coming green energy giant in Africa.

And it is out on the edge of the Sahara Desert at a largely Amazigh town called Ouarzazate. Ouarzazate retains some of its medieval architecture and is a favorite in Hollywood. It is where Khaleesi (Emilia Clarke) of The Game of Thrones has been hanging out lately.

But if old city walls and a fortress attract the interest of High Fantasy directors, the city has now become world famous as a generator of solar power. It only took 2 1/2 years for the first big solar farm to come on line.

World_Largest_Concentrated_Solar_Plant_Morocco_1

Morocco is planning to get 2 gigawatts of electricity from solar by 2020, and its total goal is 6 new gigawatts from green sources (another two from wind and two from new hydro). It hopes to get to 40% of its electricity generated by renewables in only 3 years! It is among the more ambitious projects in the world, but Morocco is pulling it off like clockwork. The country has almost no hyrdocarbons so that the alternative to free fuel from the sun and wind is to import expensive coal or natural gas at high prices.

Japan has dragged its feet on solar and wind, in part because of the fascination of its power elite with nuclear power and imported hydrocarbons like natural gas. But even there, Pacifico is building a 257 megawatt solar facility, and has more such plans elsewhere in Japan. New solar can increasingly be had for prices lower than coal, making it the environmental alternative energy.

But the really big solar projects are in China and India. India could see as much as 10 gigawatts of new solar in 2017 alone. That is a 130% increase!

China’s solar electricity generation capacity doubled in 2016. I don’t think it can be overestimated how huge that is. And it is only the beginning.

World Bank: “Young, Innovative, and Going Solar in Morocco”

Climate March: How many more atomic bombs is Trump setting off in our Atmosphere?

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

The People’s Climate March on Saturday will protest the Trump administration’s pro-Climate Change policies of increasing US carbon dioxide and methane emissions.

Just how bad will it be?

The US committed at Paris to reducing its emissions by 1/4 of 2005 levels by 2025. So far it has reduced its emissions by only about 8 percent, a third of what it needs to do.

The US put out 5.17 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2016, down a mere 1.7% from the previous year. Much of the slight reduction in greenhouse gas emissions the US has achieved has been through the closing of dirty coal plants (coal is the worst). If we could close all remaining 600 or so coal plants and turn instead to wind or solar for the electricity, that would have a major impact on emissions.

But guess who wants to try to float the otherwise failing coal industry?

Donald J. Trump.

David Bailey and David Bookbinder estimate that Obama could have gotten emissions down by 17% with his policies staying in place– about half what the US pledged at Paris.

If Trump follows through with his current plans and doesn’t add to them, the US emissions might still get to 10% below 2005 levels by 2025. Even Trump probably can’t stop Iowa and Texas from producing ever more wind energy, and he probably can’t stop a raft of coal plant closures already planned.

The problem is that he can do plenty of damage.

Climate scientist James Hansen estimated that our rate of emissions in 2013 was like setting off 400,000 small atomic bombs in the atmosphere every day of the year.

The United States, with 5% of the world’s population is responsible for about 15% of global emissions, or 60,000 atomic bombs a day worth of increased heat in the atmosphere.

Under Trump, we’ll still be setting off 54,000 atomic bombs a day in 2025.

Some estimates are that Trump will put out a billion more mt tons a year of this deadly poison gas than would have otherwise been the case.

Remember that emissions are cumulative. So if you warm up the atmosphere by that much this year, and then again next, you are doubling the effect.

Sometimes pundits talk about emissions being “flat” if they are the same as last year. No, no, no! That’s not “flat.” If you were trying to lose weight and put on 25 pounds this year instead, that would be bad. But if you put on another 25 pounds on top of that next year, that wouldn’t be flat at all, and neither would you.

We’re putting up that 5.17 bn metric tons of gas every year in this country. That’s a mountain of greenhouse gases. It isn’t ‘flat.”

And under Trump the emissions will rise, and so will the damage to future generations.

——-

Related video:

VOA: “Trump Orders Review of Obama Climate Rule”

Planet Ravagers: How Trump & GOP are like Aliens in “Independence Day”

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

“They’re like locusts. They’re moving from planet to planet, their entire civilization. Once they consume every natural resource, they move on.”
— President Thomas Whitmore, “Independence Day”

You expect the Republican Party, when it wins a national election, to pass some laws benefiting the business classes. The GOP mainly stands for the interests of the 0.1% who are typically involved in business. It manages to get working people and the middle class to vote for it every other year, too, mainly by race-baiting, hypocritical Bible-thumping, and fear-mongering.

But the Trump administration isn’t even representing the interests of the business classes, which presumably include staying alive and having their money be worth something.

Trump and his cohort are Planet Ravagers. (This is a common Hollywood trope, but they are the real thing). They just want to suck the earth dry, and apparently they don’t in the slightest care what happens to people or even businesses after they go out of office. Their quest is for short term megaprofits.

So Trump said that he is going to cut corporate taxes to 15% from 35%. The US has a big problem with increasing economic inequality, and Reagan and subsequent tax policy is in large part to blame. Trump’s tax cuts will throw even more of the nation’s wealth to the super-rich. Think about tax policy as a snow blower that you angle so that all of the snow it spews out goes in one pile. After a while you have a little snow mountain in your yard, but your driveway has no snow at all. That’s what Trump is planning to do with our money.

Tax cuts do not create economic growth. That is a myth that Republicans keep pushing in the face of all the studies by economists. They actually advocated tax cuts in the 1930s to address the Great Depression, which their policies had created. It is just snake oil. Reagan cut taxes, and all it did was balloon out the government budget deficit.

The seriousness of the US debt should not be exaggerated. Spending a bit over budget often helps the economy grow, and governments are not like households that they go bankrupt. But the fact is that US debt is unhealthily high, basically equal to gross domestic product, and Trump’s tax cut will cause it to skyrocket. The world carries the US in the face of this weakness, but at some point they are going to prefer not to have an unstable reserve currency.

How can it be good for US business to have the US credit rating fall and have the dollar lose its reputation? I don’t understand.

Then Trump announced a study toward lifting the ban on drilling for hydrocarbons on Federal land.

It might be nice for some oil firms, but it risks blighting the landscape for the rest of us.

Then there is the gutting of environmental law. They increase the risk of algae blooms in places like Lake Erie, which can be deadly to human beings if they affect drinking water. He doesn’t care.

But really? Who profits from algal blooms?

They’re being self destructive in this White House, just as W. Bush was. And when the next economic crash comes, it won’t be the CEOs who most feel the pain.

Planet ravagers.

——

Related video:

. Independence Day (3/5) Movie CLIP – Nuke ‘Em (1996) HD

Trump Sanctuary Threat Quashed by Court – Is anything he does Constitutional?

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

US district judge William Orrick responded to a lawsuit by the county of San Francisco and by Santa Clara county against a Trump Executive Order conveyed to them by the Department of Justice, threatening to deny Federal funding to self-proclaimed sanctuary cities by striking down the DoJ. This is the third time a Trump policy connected to immigration has been struck down by lower courts on the grounds that it is unconstitutional, raising questions as to whether this administration has a grasp on the constitution.

The Trump administration acted with fury and called Orrick an “unelected judge.” Yes, but federal judges are appointed by the Federal government, which is . . . elected. And besides, the constitution doesn’t change with each election.

The Trump administration argued that the Executive Order only reaffirms existing law. There are three Federal grants in the Department of Justice and Homeland Security that already have a rider requiring county compliance with immigration law. Only Santa Clara has one of these grants, to the tune of a million dollars a year.

Judge Orrick, however, did not accept the Trump administration’s claim that the plaintiffs lack standing or that all the Executive Order did was to reinforce those three existing laws. He pointed out that the EO claimed to be able to block all Federal funds to the affected counties.

Not only did the EO say that, Orrick pointed out, but Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions both publicly made such claims:

“And if there was doubt about the scope of the Order, the President and Attorney General have erased it with their public comments. The President has called it “a weapon” to use against jurisdictions that disagree with his preferred policies of immigration enforcement, and his press secretary has reiterated that the President intends to ensure that “counties and other institutions that remain sanctuary cites don’t get federal government funding in compliance with the executive order.” The Attorney General has warned that jurisdictions that do not comply with Section 1373 would suffer “withholding grants, termination of grants, and disbarment or ineligibility for future grants,” and the “claw back” of any funds previously awarded. Section 9(a) is not reasonably susceptible to the new, narrow interpretation offered at the hearing. ”

In other words, if Trump wants to keep trying to push unconstitutional executive orders, he has to at least pretend in public that they are constitutional. Orrick flatly dismissed the government’s new interpretation of the order [as narrow] “not legally plausible.” But he noted that the government attorneys had more or less admitted that Trump’s overly broad interpretation of his own EO would be unconstitutional.

Orrick points out that Congress decides on funding issues, not the executive, so that the president can’t just wake up in the morning and put restrictions on Congressionally mandated funding.

In addition, “Further, the Tenth Amendment requires that conditions on federal funds be unambiguous and timely made; that they bear some relation to the funds at issue; and that the total financial incentive not be coercive. Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves.”

Trump’s lawyers also argued that the counties did not have standing to sue, since nothing had actually yet been done to them.

Judge Orrick pointed out that the EO had caused budgetary uncertainty, since it threatened to deprive them of hundreds of millions of Federal dollars. Moreover, he said, the Trump EO caused them ongoing constitutional injuries. It violates the separation of powers doctrine and deprives them of their Fifth and Tenth Amendment rights.

He went even further and rejected the whole legal logic of Trump’s demand that local jurisdictions that arrest undocumented persons hold them in jail so that ICE can come by and deport them.

He wrote, “Several courts have held that it is a violation of the Fourth Amendment for local jurisdictions to hold suspected or actual removable aliens subject to civil detainer requests because civil detainer requests are often not supported by an individualized determination of probable cause that a crime has been committed.”

Moreover, ICE does not reimburse local jurisdictions for the cost of keeping a Federal suspect locked up for a long time.

So the takeaway is that Trump attempted through his EO to make a coup. He tried to take spending decisions away from Congress, violating the separation of powers clause of the constitution. He also tried to throw out the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process. And, he tried unilaterally to abrogate the Tenth Amendment, which says “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Trump was attempting to hijack local government for Federal purposes, in the absence of even the slightest statutory guidance from the states.

It is frightening that this administration (it isn’t just Trump) is perfectly OK with pissing all over the constitution to get what it wants.

For the moment, the courts are holding the line.

——-

CBS in LA: “Courts Hand Trump Another Setback In Dealing With ‘Sanctuary Cities'”

The Last time there was this much CO2 in the air, Florida was under Water

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –

The Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii has reported that in April, for the first time in human history the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has exceeded 410 parts per million (ppm). Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a powerful greenhouse gas that prevents the sun’s heat from radiating back out into space once it strikes the surface. It is because Venus’s atmosphere is mainly CO2 that the planet is a torrid hell-hole where metals melt on the surface.

New scientific estimates are that the last time there was this much carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere may have been the Pliocene, some 4.5 million years ago. Some earlier estimates suggested that it had been 24 million years since we had this much CO2. In past eras, carbon dioxide levels tended to go up mainly because of volcanic eruptions. The CO2 gradually gets scrubbed back out of the atmosphere by going into the ocean or by binding with igneous rock, over hundreds of thousands or millions of years. In the meantime, more CO2 means more heat.

Although the Pliocene was cooler than the preceding era, the middle Pliocene was still substantially hotter than the earth is today.

There were dire wolves and camelops and giant armadillos.

Sea levels 4.5 million years ago were as much as 131 feet feet [40 meters] higher than today.

Here are the coastal communities in the US at risk just from a four feet ocean level rise:

h/t Climate Central

It will be much more.

As the video below makes clear, our climate models are likely overly conservative. 410 ppm of carbon dioxide had a much bigger effect on the Pliocene than we would have thought, according to new analyses of ocean temperatures. It got hot, and ocean temperatures were unaccountably torrid. That dried out East Africa and may have affected the evolution of early hominids there.

—-

Related video:

UCLTV: “Climate models questioned by Pliocene ocean temperatures”