Friday, November 13, 2020

G20 declares framework to deepen debt relief for poor nations

AFP 

G20 nations declared Friday a "common framework" for an extended debt restructuring plan for coronavirus-ravaged developing countries, but campaigners cautioned that more was needed to alleviate a "wave of debt crises"
.
© - Saudi Arabia is the current president of the G20 group of nations which have declared a common framework for an extended debt relief for poor nations hit by coronavirus

G20 nations last month agreed a six-month extension to a debt suspension initiative until June next year, falling short of calls by the World Bank and campaigners for a full-year renewal.

The framework, also agreed by the Paris Club of creditor countries, goes beyond that initiative to reschedule or reduce debts of vulnerable nations on a "case-by-case approach", G20 finance ministers and central bankers said.

"In principle, debt treatments will not be conducted in the form of debt write-off or cancellation," they said in a statement following a virtual meeting hosted by the current G20 president Saudi Arabia.

"If, in the most difficult cases, debt write-off or cancellation is necessary... specific consideration will be given to the fact that each participating creditor shall fulfill its domestic approval procedures in a timely manner."

© Seyllou Seventy-three countries are eligible to have their debt restructured, including 38 in sub-Saharan Africa

French Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire hailed the agreement on the framework as "historic".

"For the first time, all the main bilateral creditors, members or non-members of the Paris Club, will coordinate the debt treatment of the low income countries," Le Maire said.

"It will bring more transparency in the debt relief process and involve private creditors, who will need to commit to at least comparable terms."

A senior US Treasury official said "the scale of the pandemic crisis" and the "deteriorating outlook" in many low-income countries had warranted the need for extended debt relief.

Seventy-three countries are eligible to have their debt restructured, including 38 in sub-Saharan Africa.

- 'Breathing space' -

The agreement marks a major step for China, a top creditor to poor countries that officials say has resisted attempts to write off debts.

Over the past two decades, China has financed projects in developing nations, including as part of its Belt and Road Initiative to build infrastructure to further expand trade.

The Treasury official blamed Chinese creditors for "a lack of full participation" and transparency.

"We have a political commitment to this common framework going forward," the official said.

"But we certainly will be monitoring closely exactly how it works in practice. And with a particular eye on Chinese participation."

Warning of a looming debt crisis across poverty-wracked developing nations, campaigners said the framework was far from sufficient.

"This announcement falls far short of what is needed to tackle the wave of debt crises in poorer countries," said Tim Jones, head of policy at Jubilee Debt Campaign, a British charity.

"With many countries facing debt crises... the G20 need to stop kicking the can down the road and build a transparent and inclusive system for cancelling debts to a sustainable level across private, bilateral and multilateral lenders."

Last month, the World Bank said the debt of the world's 73 poorest countries grew 9.5 percent last year to a record $744 billion.

The countries' debt burden owed to government creditors, most of whom are G20 states, reached $178 billion last year, and China is owed more than 63 percent of that.

"The debt service suspension initiative has provided much needed 'breathing space' to countries," said IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva.

"But there are countries where debt levels are not sustainable. This is where the timely common framework comes into play -- a coordinated approach to debt treatment, a standardised approach, but with case-by-case resolution."

Georgieva said it was "critically important" to bring the private sector on board.

In a letter to G20 chair Saudi Arabia, the Washington-based Institute of International Finance said private creditors were ready to take part in the extended debt relief initiative, but so far they have received few requests from eligible countries.

burs-ac/hkb
GOOD NEWS 
Feds to give $1.5 billion to help Canadians in hard-hit sectors train for new jobs

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the federal government will send $1.5 billion in job-training support to the provinces and territories to help Canadians in industries hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic.
© Provided by The Canadian Press

The funding will help laid-off workers in sectors like construction, transportation and hospitality re-enter the workforce by bolstering access to skills training and employment services, Trudeau said Friday.

“Now more than ever the labour market is evolving quickly and workers need to be able to develop new skills," Trudeau said.

The money comes at a critical time, with a new survey from Statistics Canada finding nearly one-third of businesses do not know how long they can keep going under existing conditions brought by the second wave of COVID-19.

Nearly 40 per cent of businesses have laid off staff since March and nearly one in five report they will be compelled to take drastic action in less than six months if cash flow does not improve.

Meanwhile the unemployment rate barely budged last month, sitting at 8.9 per cent compared with 9.0 per cent in September, to leave some 1.8 million people out of work.

Canadian Chamber of Commerce chief economist Trevin Stratton said the outlook for business owners is "grim" and called for sector-specific support to help the hospitality and arts-and-entertainment industries.

"The one-size-fits-all approach to support programs is not sustainable through 2022, and it may not be particularly useful at this stage of the pandemic," he said.

While the government has pledged to sit down with the airline industry to start hammering out a bailout deal, Ottawa has shied away from sector-specific support, instead preferring programs available across industries.

A revamped COVID-19 aid package now before the Senate as part of Bill C-9 would extend a federal wage subsidy until next summer, expand a popular business loan program and redo a program for commercial rent relief.

The rent subsidy, whose precursor was widely criticized for requiring an opt-in from landlords who tended to shy away from it, now cuts them out of the process.

However, the rejigged program includes a requirement that entrepreneurs pay their rent before applying, putting the subsidy out of reach for many cash-strapped stores.

Facing backlash from industry, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland promised Thursday to pass followup legislation that would scrap that stipulation, and to instruct the Canada Revenue Agency to disregard it in the interim.

While the rent subsidy will be retroactive to Sept. 27 — when the original Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy expired — Trudeau said he urges swift passage of the bill, with many business owners barely scraping by amid renewed local lockdown orders.

“I told the premiers last night that anything they can do to encourage the senators that represent their jurisdiction to move forward quickly on passing Bill C-9 will be a big relief to business owners," Trudeau said Friday.

Meanwhile, the $1.5 billion for job training — $614 million of it for Ontario — will flow to the provinces and territories under their workforce development agreements via a delivery network of employment service centres.

Employment Minister Carla Qualtrough highlighted manufacturing, retail, transportation, tourism and recreation as long-suffering industries where workers need support.

“I’m particularly concerned for those who already, even before the pandemic, face barriers to employment because of their race, gender or disability," she said.

The funding comes on top of the $3.4 billion Ottawa is transferring to the provinces and territories in 2020-21 under workforce and labour market development agreements.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 13, 2020.

Christopher Reynolds, The Canadian Press
Opinion: Anti-maskers: A group of people whining so much over something so little
Opinion by Daryl Austin 

I don't judge someone by whom they vote for, what team they cheer for or how they like their steak cooked. But few things make me lose respect for a person faster than learning they're an anti-masker. I have not arrived at this opinion lightly; as I write this, my home state of Utah just shattered a record by reporting 3,919 new cases of Covid-19.

© Jeff Dean/AFP/Getty Images 
An anti-mask protestor holds up a sign in front of the Ohio Statehouse during a right-wing protest "Stand For America Against Terrorists and Tyrants" at State Capitol on July 18, 2020 in Columbus, Ohio.

As tragic as that milestone may be, it doesn't surprise me. Everything I have witnessed from the anti-mask community in my state makes this all too predictable.

First came the embarrassing anti-mask protest in St. George, Utah, in August, which the rest of the nation thought was a real-life "Saturday Night Live" parody skit. Next came the visceral social media attacks against a Utah epidemiologist for pleading with people to wear a face mask: She was mocked in comments and across multiple social media platforms for saying that doctors "are very tired." Then came an announcement in October from Utah Gov. Gary Herbert saying law enforcement had to be deployed to protect public health officials after anti-maskers planned protests at state epidemiologist Dr. Angela Dunn's home. And finally, Herbert's own son, Brad Herbert, had to plead with people on Facebook to stop protesting in front of his father's personal residence after the governor declared a state of emergency and statewide mask mandate on Sunday night.

Every end-of-world movie has that character who refuses to accept the reality of their dire situation. (Think "Dante's Peak," "2012," "The Day After Tomorrow" or "Independence Day.") That character who has you jumping up and down screaming, "STOP LISTENING TO THAT GUY!" He's the character who argues against every practical countermeasure while the threat of destruction creeps closer and closer until every option previously on the table is gone.

Enter the modern-day anti-masker: The guy who not only forgets to thank public officials for working tirelessly to keep him and his loved ones safe but who also doesn't seem to grasp that local government leaders can only do so much.

And the options on the table for public officials are rapidly disappearing. If the hospitals in my home state reach capacity, it's game over. Schools and businesses will have to close. Lockdowns will become inevitable. What anti-maskers don't seem to understand is that debating how deadly Covid-19 is or is not isn't the point at all.

Preventive measures have always been about doing whatever it takes to avoid overwhelming our hospitals and frontline medical professionals and thereby saving lives. If we fail to take these measures, this story will have a terrible, tragic ending, with treatment no longer available to those suffering the worst symptoms. The consequences of our inaction will be catastrophic.



Gov. Herbert understands all of this, and he said as much when he declared a state of emergency in Utah.

He said my state is already turning away new out-of-state cases from Nevada, Idaho and Montana. He said Utahns are likewise being turned away from hospitals in surrounding states like Colorado. Hospital administrators know what the overwhelming number of new cases actually means, and they are planning accordingly. Over a month ago, Dr. Emily Spivak of the University of Utah's School of Medicine disclosed that the intensive care unit of the hospital she works at had already reached 95% capacity. "We are maximizing the system." she said, "It is a marker of things getting worse."

When she made that statement, Utah's number of new daily cases had just hit 1,501. That number has only climbed every day since then, surpassing 2,000 and 2,500 many times over and hitting nearly 4,000 new cases on Thursday.

The lava is flowing down the mountain, the final eruption could happen at any minute, and still the anti-maskers are marching on.

They find obscure videos "proving" that masks are dangerous and share them with their friends on Instagram. They take words out of context from a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report to try to show -- against all evidence -- that Covid-19 isn't that dangerous after all. They deny every study, disregard every credible doctor and disbelieve every scientific explanation. Like anti-vaxxers, anti-maskers become fixated on the 0.001% anomaly and make that the front-and-center issue of their anti-science campaign while ignoring everything else. Mask deniers remind me of when the "Friends" TV show character Ross freaks out after discovering that "condoms only work, like, 97% of the time!"

Of course, face masks don't provide the perfect protection against the novel coronavirus; no one ever said they did. But that doesn't mean it makes any sense to deny their effectiveness altogether.

Logic and reason have been replaced with misinformation and hysteria. No, wearing a mask is not going to deprive your brain of oxygen. No, wearing a mask in public for a few months longer is not giving up your rights as a free American. And no, wearing a mask is not only about protecting yourself against infection.

The CDC makes clear that masks are proven to protect the wearer, but they also say that "masks are meant to protect other people in case the wearer is unknowingly infected." In other words, wearing a face mask is about protecting both oneself and demonstrating a willingness to protect others nearby.

Wearing a mask is really no different than being willing to cough into your elbow or cover your sneeze with a tissue. Can you imagine someone actually protesting their right to be able to sneeze into the air while surrounded by other people? Ridiculous.

I've never known a group of people to whine so much over something so little. When I think of the sacrifices my father's and grandfather's generations had to make during WWII and compare them with the sacrifices my generation has been asked to make during this pandemic, it's laughable.

We're being asked to cover our mouths and noses around other people to protect ourselves and others because we know many of the people infected with the virus are asymptomatic. "COVID-19 can be spread by people who do not have symptoms and do not know that they are infected," says the CDC. Multiple clinical studies prove that face coverings reduce the transmission of droplets that may leave the wearer anytime they open their mouth or exhale through their nose.

It's really that simple. Wearing a mask is not a political statement and not wearing one doesn't mean you know something the rest of us don't. It's a sign of selfishness and proof of willful ignorance and nothing more.


© Courtesy of Brittain Tanner Daryl Austin




Breakthrough for women: Miami Marlins hire Kim Ng as GM
© Provided by The Canadian Press

MIAMI — Kim Ng started her Major League Baseball career as an intern, and three decades later she's still on the rise and shattering ceilings.

Ng became the majors' highest-ranking woman and Asian American in baseball operations when she was hired Friday as general manager of the Miami Marlins. She is believed to be the first female GM in a major professional sport in North America, the Marlins said.

Ng (pronounced Ang) won three World Series rings while spending 21 years in the front offices of the Chicago White Sox (1990-96), New York Yankees (1998-2001) and Los Angeles Dodgers (2002-11). She spent the past nine years with MLB as a senior vice-president.

“After decades of determination, it is the honour of my career to lead the Miami Marlins,” Ng said in a statement. “When I got into this business, it seemed unlikely a woman would lead a major league team, but I am dogged in the pursuit of my goals. My goal is now to bring championship baseball to Miami.”

Marlins CEO Derek Jeter played for the Yankees when Ng worked for them.


“We look forward to Kim bringing a wealth of knowledge and championship-level experience to the Miami Marlins,” Jeter said in a statement. “Her leadership of our baseball operations team will play a major role on our path toward sustained success. Additionally, her extensive work in expanding youth baseball and softball initiatives will enhance our efforts to grow the game among our local youth as we continue to make a positive impact on the South Florida community.”

Jeter became baseball’s first Black CEO after his group bought the Marlins in 2017. He then hired Caroline O’Connor, who as senior vice-president is one of the highest ranking women in professional sports.

Ng, 51, becomes the fifth person to hold the Marlins' top position in baseball operations and succeeds Michael Hill, who was not retained after the 2020 season.

The Marlins achieved surprising progress in Year 3 of Jeter’s rebuilding effort, reaching the playoffs for the first time since 2003 and sweeping the Chicago Cubs in the wild-card round. They were swept by the Atlanta Braves in the National League Division Series.

A virtual news conference for Ng is planned for Monday.

“All of us at Major League Baseball are thrilled for Kim and the opportunity she has earned with the Marlins,” baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred said in a statement. “Kim’s appointment makes history in all of professional sports and sets a significant example for the millions of women and girls who love baseball and softball. The hard work, leadership, and record of achievement throughout her long career in the national pastime led to this outcome.”

The Miami Dolphins' Brian Flores, one of four head coaches of colour in the NFL, was among those to applaud Ng's hiring.

“It's phenomenal,” Flores said. “Anyone who thinks a woman can’t manage or coach or lead, I think, is silly. Kudos to the Marlins.”


Ng started her baseball career as a White Sox intern and rose to become assistant director of baseball operations. She worked for the American League for one year and then joined the Yankees, becoming the youngest assistant general manager in MLB at 29, and only the second woman to attain that position with a major league club. She was the Dodgers' vice-president and assistant general manager.

With MLB, Ng directed international baseball operations, working with the front offices of the major league clubs and many other baseball leagues and entities around the world. She led a team that set policy for and enforced international signing rules, established MLB’s first system for registering international players for signing, managed protocols for signing international players, and negotiated agreements with international winter leagues.

Ng graduated from the University of Chicago, where she played softball and earned a degree in public policy.

Carter Center will monitor part of a US election for the first time by observing Georgia recount
By Veronica Stracqualursi, CNN 

The Carter Center announced Friday it will monitor the ongoing hand recount of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia to "help bolster transparency and confidence in election results" -- the first time the nonprofit, which has observed elections around the world, will monitor any part of an election process in the United States.
© Getty Images

The move comes after an extraordinary and prolonged effort by President Donald Trump and top Republicans to undermine confidence in the election's outcome by baselessly claiming fraud and refusing to recognize President-elect Joe Biden's victory. For more then three decades, the organization, founded by former President Jimmy Carter and former first lady Rosalyn Carter, has helped support democratic elections in countries during fragile and volatile times.

Georgia's Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger announced Wednesday that the state will conduct an audit of the race, which includes all counties recounting, by hand, the nearly 5 million ballots cast.

CNN has not yet projected a winner in the state. As of midday Friday, Biden led Trump by more than 14,000 votes.

The Carter Center said Friday it will dispatch monitors to several county audit boards across the Peach State to watch the recount. It did not monitor voters when they cast ballots last week and the organization said this review is "not part of a broader assessment of the election as a whole."

"What we're monitoring is what many people have been calling the hand recount. Because the margin in the presidential race is so close, this sort of audit essentially requires review of every ballot by hand," Paige Alexander, the Carter Center's CEO, said in a statement. "This is unusual, but it provides an opportunity to build trust in the electoral system prior to the state's certification of results."

Soyia Ellison, a spokesperson for The Carter Center, confirmed to CNN that Georgia will be the first time the organization has been involved in monitoring any part of a US election.

In August, in response to its view that Americans were losing faith in their country's electoral process, The Carter Center, for the first time in its history, launched a campaign in the US to "strengthen transparency and trust in the election process."

"We have prioritized countries with a significant potential to advance democratic transitions or places where democracy has been under threat. Most of these countries have weak institutions and are plagued by political polarization, a lack of public trust, ethnic or racial divisions, or a history of troubled elections. Often, there are fears that the election results won't be seen as credible or could trigger violence," Jason Carter, the Center's board of trustees chairman, and David Carroll, the head of the Center's Democracy Program, wrote in an op-ed in CNN.

"Unfortunately, much of that description now applies to the US. If ever there was a time to address democracy and elections in our country, it is now," they added.

The Carter Center has observed more than 100 elections in 39 countries, assessing the integrity of the process and helping the nations meet international standards for democratic elections.

The hand recount in Georgia began Friday morning and must be completed by Wednesday at midnight, just two days before the state's November 20 deadline to certify the results.

Aside from the presidential election, Georgia is also home to two high-stakes US Senate races that appear headed to runoff elections in January. Earlier this week, the state's two US senators who are both fighting for reelection, Republicans Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, demanded that Raffensperger resign, accusing him without evidence of failing to "deliver honest and transparent elections." Raffensperger swiftly rejected their calls.

Trump's final Fed pick is extremely unorthodox

By Anneken Tappe, CNN Business 

Nearly a year after being nominated, President Donald Trump's controversial Federal Reserve board nominee is now within striking distance of being confirmed by Senate Republicans, despite warnings from across the political spectrum about her unorthodox views.
© Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images

Judy Shelton has advocated a number of unusual policy ideas, including a return to the gold standard, which would link the US dollar's value to the price of gold. America abandoned it in 1971.

She has also attacked the Fed's independence. In 2011, she called the central bank "almost a rogue agency." This has been particularly problematic given the President's continued criticism of the central bank, which is headed by another Trump pick, Chairman Jerome Powell.

The Senate is expected to vote and confirm Shelton next week.

For months, Shelton's nomination lacked enough support for a full floor vote, even after the Senate Banking Committee approved her 13-12 along party lines in July. In September, Sen. John Thune, the Republican whip, told reporters Shelton didn't have the votes.

But on Thursday, Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski indicated she would support Shelton's nomination, all but guaranteeing her confirmation.

Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden, a Democrat, said the decision for next week's vote is "an effort to sabotage what little economic recovery we have by installing an unqualified, political pick at the Federal Reserve."

Wyden also called Shelton's ideas "wacky and outdated," and said in a statement Thursday that "giving her authority over the dollar would be like putting a medieval barber in charge of the [Centers for Disease Control.]"

Shelton would serve out the remainder of the 14-year term of former Fed Chair Janet Yellen, which expires in February 2024.

In August, dozens of former Fed officials blasted Shelton in a letter, calling her views "extreme and ill-considered" and urged the Senate to reject her nomination.

If Shelton is confirmed, Trump will have filled five of the the seven governor seats on the Fed's board.

"This would deny President-elect Biden the opportunity to fill seats," said Kathy Bostjancic, director of US macro investors services at Oxford Economics, in a note to clients.

That said, current Fed Gov. Lael Brainard is one of the candidates who could be Biden's pick to serve as Treasury Secretary in the next administration, which would leave her seat at the Fed vacant, Bostjancic said.

The Senate will also vote on the less contentious nomination of Christopher Waller as a Fed governor. Waller, currently the director of research at the St. Louis Fed, is considered a more conventional choice for the central bank.

CNN's Ted Barrett contributed to this story.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito suggests religious liberty is under threat by same-sex marriage and COVID-19 restrictions

insider@insider.com (John Haltiwanger) 

© YouTube Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito delivered a politically-charged speech to a conference of conservative lawyers. YouTube

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito expressed concern about religious liberty with regard to same-sex marriage and COVID-19 restrictions during a speech on Thursday.

"You can't say that marriage is a union between one man and one woman," Alito said. "Until very recently that's what a vast majority of Americans thought. Now it's considered bigotry."

Alito was heavily criticized by Democratic lawmakers and legal experts over the politically-charged nature of his remarks, which were delivered to a group of conservative lawyers.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito gave a politically-charged speech on Thursday night in which he suggested that religious liberty is under threat by same-sex marriage and COVID-19 restrictions.

Conservatives have a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court, but Alito's remarks implied that they're a marginalized group.

"It pains me to say this," Alito said while addressing a virtual conference of conservative lawyers (the Federalist Society), "but in certain quarters, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right."

Alito, who was appointed to the Supreme Court by Republican President George W. Bush, said the "question" the US faces is "whether our society will be inclusive enough to tolerate people with unpopular religious beliefs."

The conservative justice said the COVID-19 pandemic had led to "previously unimaginable" restrictions on individual liberty. He pointed explicitly to impositions on religious services.

"Think of worship services! Churches closed on Easter Sunday, synagogues closed for Passover in Yom Kippur," Alito said.

The Supreme Court justice said he was not diminishing the severity of the threat of the virus to the public, and was not commenting on the legality of the restrictions imposed.

"We have never before seen restrictions as severe, extensive and prolonged as those experienced for most of 2020," Alito added. He said the COVID-19 pandemic has served as a "constitutional stress test."

Alito also suggested that freedom of expression is under threat with regard to same-sex marriage. Freedom of speech is "falling out of favor," he said.

"You can't say that marriage is a union between one man and one woman," he said. "Until very recently that's what a vast majority of Americans thought. Now it's considered bigotry."

The conservative justice argued that the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, opened the door for discrimination against those with a traditional view of marriage. "I could see where the decision would lead," Alito said, echoing his past criticism of the 2015 same-sex marriage decision.

Alito garnered praise among conservatives for his remarks, which were tweeted out by President Donald Trump. But Democratic lawmakers and legal experts excoriated Alito over his comments, as Supreme Court justices are meant to be impartial and avoid appearing too political.

"Supreme Court Justices aren't supposed to be political hacks. This right-wing speech is nakedly partisan," Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said in a tweet.

Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island said Alito had outed himself as a "full-on partisan crusader."

"I'm not surprised that Justice Alito believes any of those things. One need only read his written opinions to see most of them. I'm surprised that he decided to *say* them in a public speech that was livestreamed over the internet—clips of which will now be recirculated forever," Steve Vladeck, a University of Texas law professor, tweeted.
 

Watch Alito's full remarks below:


  



Samuel Alito's viral speech signals where conservative Supreme Court is headed

There's no secret to what Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito wants for the law in America. He said it out loud Thursday night in an ireful speech to the conservative Federalist Society.

© MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images Associate Justice Samuel Alito poses for the official group photo at the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC on November 30, 2018.


Alito, who rarely speaks in public but has a way of going viral when he does, wants the high court to move further and faster on right-wing, anti-regulation interests, particularly for religion in a time of Covid, in the face of LGBTQ concerns, and when people simply, as he says, want to describe marriage as only between a man and a woman.

Alito, a 70-year-old appointee of President George W. Bush, has become an infuriated dissenter, even as his side of the bench has become fortified with appointments and will likely see greater majorities ahead.

"The pandemic has resulted in previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty," Alito asserted Thursday, highlighting the consequences for "worship services, churches closed on Easter Sunday, synagogues closed for Passover and Yom Kippur."

Alito said he was not minimizing the death toll of coronavirus nor commenting on "the legality" of pandemic-era rules, yet he emphasized, "We have never before seen restrictions as severe, extensive and prolonged as those experienced for most of 2020."

"The Covid crisis has served as a sort of constitutional stress test and in doing so, it has highlighted disturbing trends that were already present before the virus struck." He referred to agency regulation and a general "dominance of lawmaking by executive fiat rather than legislation."

The gnashing ideological tone of Alito's speech in such a prominent forum was striking and immediately ignited social-media commentary. Supreme Court justices have generally tried to recede from the hyper-partisanship throughout Washington today. In some respects, Alito's suggestion that government is infringing on Americans' freedoms echo the anti-mask, anti-restriction Trump talking points of the day.

Moreover, conservatism on the Supreme Court is in ascendance, along with tougher scrutiny for government regulation. The Supreme Court is now dominated by a 6-3 conservative-liberal majority, following the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and succession of Amy Coney Barrett. Her appointment marked the third for President Donald Trump on the nine-member bench.

Part of Alito's frustration may flow from a view that his conservative brethren have failed to be sufficiently vigilant. One his fiercest dissenting opinions last session came in response to a majority opinion by fellow conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and four liberal justices extending federal anti-discrimination law to LGBTQ workers.

He assaulted Gorsuch's legal reasoning, likening it to "a pirate ship" flying under a false flag and decried the opinions assertion of a modest move. "If today's decision is humble, it is sobering to imagine what the Court might do if it decided to be bold," Alito wrote.

A man with a shy nature who appears stiff -- as President Bush himself described in his memoir -- Alito now exhibits no reserve as he blasts the "intolerance" and "intimidation" of religious views. As his speech demonstrated, he also believes abortion rights wrongly win the day and liberals try to bully the justices to preserve gun regulations.

Alito has moved beyond the mere mouthing of "not true," in the 2010 memorable State of the Union moment that went viral on social media as he tried to counter President Barack Obama's criticism of the Citizens United campaign finance decision.

Alito, a New Jersey native who served as a federal prosecutor and US appeals court judge before taking his high court seat in 2006, usually cuts a low profile even with his most consequential votes.

He succeeded centrist conservative Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, and his new fifth vote on the right immediately meant more conservative high court decisions on reproductive rights, job discrimination measures and campaign finance regulations.

Chief Justice Roberts often assigned Alito the majority opinion in 5-4 disputes, for example, over contentious labor protections and religious freedom. He could speak for a fivesome that included now-retired centrist-conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy and Justice Clarence Thomas at the rightward pole.

As the court has become more conservative with Trump appointments, Alito has aligned more with Thomas in high-profile cases. Many revolve around social policy dilemmas, but Alito and Thomas also separated themselves from the seven-justice majority that compromised last July for resolution of two Trump document subpoena disputes.

In October, Alito joined Thomas in a case involving a Kentucky municipal clerk who refused to give gay couples marriage licenses. The justices contended religious liberty was being compromised by the court's 2015 decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, that found a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

Thomas and Alito agreed that the high court should not hear the clerk's appeal, yet they used the case to lament what they described as "this Court's cavalier treatment of religion" and "assaults on the character of fairminded people."

In a Covid-related conflict, Alito drew Thomas, as well as Justice Brett Kavanaugh, as he wrote a dissenting opinion last summer when the majority rejected an appeal from a Nevada church challenging a 50-percent limit on attendance during the pandemic.

Referring to varying state rules for churches and casinos, Alito wrote that the "Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion. It says nothing about the freedom to play craps or black-jack, to feed tokens into a slot machine, or to engage in any other game of chance."

In his keynote address to the Federalist Society, Alito invoked that case and other Covid-related dilemmas. Equally prominent was his commentary related to gay rights.

At one point, he riffed on the late comedian George Carlin's "seven dirty words" routine. Calling them a "quaint relic" of another time, Alito said today's disfavored words, on campuses and in corporations, are of a new variety.

They are also too abundant to list, he said. Still, the jurist who continues to protest the court's decision affirming same-sex marriage offered this example:

"You can't say that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. Until very recently that's what the vast majority of Americans thought. Now," said Alito, "it's considered bigotry."


Critics decry Supreme Court Justice Alito's 'nakedly partisan' speech on COVID-19 measures, gay marriage

William Cummings, USA TODAY

Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito delivered candid takes on several divisive issues facing the U.S., from the measures put in place to address the COVID-19 pandemic to tensions between gay rights and religious freedom, during an address to the conservative Federalist Society on Thursday. 

Alito said the restrictions imposed by political leaders in order to contain the coronavirus pandemic have "resulted in previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty" and denounced recent Supreme Court decisions holding up orders he believed discriminated against religious groups. He argued the pandemic highlighted a wider assault on religious freedom as conservative views are increasing equated with "bigotry." 
© Jack Gruber/USA TODAY NETWORK Associate justice Samuel Alito, Jr.

The conservative justice insisted he was not "diminishing the severity of the virus' threat to public health," or "saying anything about the legality of COVID restrictions" or "whether any of these restrictions represent good public policy." 


"I'm a judge, not a policymaker," he said. 

Alito went on to say the "severe, extensive and prolonged" restrictions imposed in response to the pandemic represented an unprecedented curtailment of rights that would clearly be protected by the First Amendment under normal circumstances, creating "a sort of constitutional stress test." 


He said the restrictions "highlighted distinct trends that were already present before the virus struck" such as "the dominance of lawmaking by executive fiat rather than legislation."

Alito painted the use of executive orders as the culmination of a dream held by "early 20th century progressives" and "the New Dealers of the 1930s" in which "policymaking would shift from narrow-minded elected legislators to an elite group of appointed experts." And he warned that after "the pandemic has passed, all sorts of things can be called an emergency or disaster of major proportions" to justify similar measures. 

He also said the pandemic restrictions were evidence that "in certain quarters, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right." Alito decried the Supreme Court's decision to let restrictions stand in California and Nevada that he said "blatantly discriminated against houses of worship."

Regarding Nevada's restrictions limiting religious services to 50 people while allowing casinos to open at 50%, Alito said, "The state's message is this: 'Forget about worship and head for the slot machines, or maybe a Cirque du Soleil show.'" 

Alito also claimed the pandemic revealed the already "growing hostility to the expression of unfashionable views" because some of the "restrictions are alleged to have included discrimination based on the viewpoint of the speaker." He said many conservative social views were now prohibited speech at most institutions of higher education and major corporations. 

"You can't say that marriage is a union between one man and one woman," Alito cited as an example. "Until very recently, that's what the vast majority of Americans thought. Now it's considered bigotry." 

Alito, 70, joined the court in 2006. He was nominated by former President George W. Bush and confirmed by a 58-42 vote in the Senate. 

Many Democrats and Supreme Court watchers criticized Alito's comments as too openly political for a Supreme Court justice.

"Supreme Court Justices aren't supposed to be political hacks," tweeted Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. "This right-wing speech is nakedly partisan. My bill to #EndCorruptionNow restores some integrity to our Court by forcing Justices to follow the ethics rules other federal judges follow." 

Human Rights Campaign President Alphonso David tweeted, "Last night, Justice Alito shed any pretense of impartiality in a politically charged speech." 

“If you thought Joe Biden’s victory would end the Trump Era, think again," said Aaron Belkin, director of Take Back the Court – a group that seeks to expand the Supreme Court – in a statement. "Justice Alito’s wildly inappropriate speech is a reminder that Republicans have packed the Supreme Court with extremist politicians in robes – and they’re planning a partisan revenge tour." 

Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, which promotes ethics and transparency, said Alito's remarks were "more befitting a Trump rally than a legal society." Fix the Court advocates for Supreme Court reforms such as term limits and televised proceedings, as well as making the public more aware of when the justices speak in various forums and what they say at those events. 

"What's more, Alito's decision to speak about COVID's impact on religious exercise is unconscionable at a time when cases concerning this very topic remain active at the Supreme Court and across the federal judiciary," Roth said in statement on Friday. "If there were enforceable recusal standards at the high court, this would be a ripe opportunity for a motion to disqualify." 

Roth said Alito's address demonstrated the need for the Supreme Court to adopt a formal code of conduct that "would encourage them to think twice before making political speeches to partisan organizations and further eroding the public's trust in their impartiality."

Others came to Alito's defense amid the objections to his statements. 

On Friday, President Donald Trump tweeted without comment a link to a Breitbart article about Alito's remarks. 

"Justice Alito is a hero. Protecting religious liberty and freedom of speech in America is paramount," said Trump campaign lawyer Jenna Ellis. 

Though it was unusual for a Supreme Court justice to lay out his or her views so explicitly, Alito's remarks did not reveal thoughts he hadn't expressed before in his legal opinions.

Edward Whelan, president of the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center, said in a statement that the speech "broadly reiterates what Alito has already spelled out in his written opinions." 

"It’s one thing for a justice to speak publicly about an open issue on which the justice hasn’t yet ruled (as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did with respect to same-sex marriage and President Trump’s tax returns). It’s a very different – and much less remarkable – thing for a justice to restate positions that he has already formally adopted," Whelan said. 

For example, Alito's opposition to the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized same-sex marriage, is well documented. He and Justice Clarence Thomas both dissented in that decision, along with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia. 

Same-sex marriage ruling at 5: Acceptance, advancement, but opposition remains

Last month, when the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from Kim Davis – a Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples – Alito and Thomas said her case was not the right one to consider further the issue of religious freedom in an era of expanding LGBTQ rights. But the two conservative high court jurists also called Davis "one of the first victims of this court’s cavalier treatment of religion in its Obergefell decision" and warned "she will not be the last." 

"Obergefell enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss," wrote Thomas in the statement that was joined by Alito

In Thursday's remarks, Alito did not directly address recent calls from some Democrats and progressives to expand the Supreme Court in order to change the 6-3 conservative majority. But he strongly objected to a recent brief from five Democratic senators regarding a gun rights case in which they said the "Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it."

More: Senate GOP writes letter to the Supreme Court, pledging not to allow Dems to 'pack the Court'

The senators cited a Quinnipiac University poll that found a majority of Americans think the court should be "restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics." 

In his Federalist Society address, Alito called the remarks written by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., a "threat" and "an affront to the Constitution and the rule of law." 

"The Supreme Court was created by the Constitution, not by Congress," he said.

"We exercise the judicial power of the United States. Congress has no right to interfere with that work any more than we have the right to legislate. Our obligation is to decide cases based on the law, period. And it is therefore wrong for anybody, including members of Congress, to try to influence our decisions by anything other than legal argumentation."

Alito said "that sort of thing has often happened in countries governed by power, not by law." 

"Alito outs himself as full-on partisan crusader. At Federalist Society, no less," tweeted Whitehouse in response to news of Alito's comments. 

Contributing: Richard Wolf 


Tweet

Conversation