High court wades into clash over Trump-era immigration rule

By JESSICA GRESKO

People stand on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, Feb.11, 2022, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court waded into a political clash Wednesday between the Biden administration and Republican-led states seeking to defend a signature Trump-era immigration rule that the new administration has abandoned.

Conservative and liberal Supreme Court justices acknowledged during arguments at the high court that when a new administration comes in, it can change policy. That’s what the Biden administration did with the Trump-era “public charge” rule that denied green cards to immigrants who use food stamps or other public benefits.

The question for the court is not the legality of the now defunct Trump-era rule, just whether a group of states led by Arizona should be able to pick up the legal fight over it.

Justice Elena Kagan suggested to Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, arguing for the group of states, that allowing the group to intervene in a case “that’s completely dead that never applied to you in the first place” is not the answer. “Whoever the federal government is, there’s always going to be a state that thinks it’s done the wrong thing,” she said. Other justices suggested a limited right to intervene might be possible.

Kagan, for her part, did question whether the Biden administration had erred by maneuvering to quickly jettison the Trump-era rule rather than going through a longer process. Justice Samuel Alito said the administration had devised a strategy to quickly set aside the rule and he wasn’t “aware of a precedent where an incoming administration has done anything quite like this.”

Kagan and other justices suggested that if Arizona objected to the way the Biden administration ended the previous policy, however, it should have brought that issue to a court rather than attempting what Kagan described as a “quadruple bank shot” strategy to intervene in other cases.

Another issue for several of the justices: geography. Stephen Breyer, Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor were among the justices who questioned why Arizona belongs in a case that has its origins in California and Washington. “I’ve seen how Los Angeles has spread, but I don’t think it’s yet spread to Arizona,” said Breyer, who last month announced his plans to retire from the court.

At the center of the case before the justices is a federal law says that green card applicants can’t be burdens to the country or “public charges.” But the Trump administration significantly expanded the definition, saying the use of public benefits including food stamps or Medicaid could be disqualifying. That led to court challenges, but the Supreme Court allowed the policy to take effect while those continued.

The Biden administration rescinded the rule and has since announced new guidelines. The administration says that in practice, in the year the rule was in effect, it only affected about five out of some approximately 50,000 applications it was applied to. The Biden administration and immigration groups have said the bigger impact of the rule was scaring immigrants, causing them to drop benefits or not enroll in them because of fears doing so could affect their applications to become legal permanent residents.

Despite the political nature of Wednesday’s arguments, they did underscore one point of agreement between the Trump administration and the Biden administration. In the case of the public charge rule, a single federal judge in Illinois ruled to block the policy nationwide. The Trump administration had criticized similar nationwide injunctions by a single judge blocking a policy nationwide, calling them unlawful. Attorney Brian Fletcher, representing the Biden administration, said that view is shared by the new administration.

In addition to Arizona, the states involved in the case are Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and West Virginia.

THIRD WORLD USA
Study: Child poverty rising after tax credit expires

By ASHRAF KHALIL

A swing sits empty on a playground outside in Providence, R.I., March 7, 2020. Columbia University’s Center on Poverty and Social Policy estimates that the number of children in poverty grew by 3.7 million from December 2021 to January 2022, a 41% increase, just one month without the expanded child tax credit payments. 

(AP Photo/David Goldman, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of children in America living in poverty jumped dramatically after just one month without the expanded child tax credit payments, according to a new study. Advocates fear the lapse in payments could unravel what they say were landmark achievements in poverty reduction.

Columbia University’s Center on Poverty and Social Policy estimates 3.7 million more children were living in poverty by January — a 41% increase from December, when families received their last check. The federal aid started last July but ended after President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better bill stalled in the sharply divided Congress. Payments of up to $300 per child were delivered directly to bank accounts on the 15th of each month, and last week marked the second missed deposit of the year.

The Columbia study, which combines annual U.S. Census data with information from the Census Bureau’s monthly Current Population Survey bulletins, found that the monthly child poverty rate increased from 12.1% in December to 17% in January. That’s the highest level since December 2020, when the U.S. was grappling with high unemployment and a resurgence of COVID-19. Black and Latino children experienced the highest percentage point increases in poverty — 5.9% and 7.1% respectively.

Megan Curran, policy director for the Center on Poverty and Social Policy, said the sudden spike shows how quickly the payments became core to household financial stability for millions of families after only six months.

“It really had a huge impact right off the bat,” Curran said. “We saw food insecurity drop almost immediately as soon as the payments started ... all of that progress that we made could now be lost.”

Curran said the increase in children living in poverty could also partially reflect rising prices.

The new numbers represent a serious setback from the original goals of the child tax credit program, which ambitiously sought to cut nationwide child poverty in half. As part of Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 rescue package last year, the existing child tax credit program was massively reshaped, boosting the amount of the payments, greatly expanding the pool of eligible families and delivering the money in monthly installments designed to be incorporated into day-to-day household budgets.

The program extended payments of $250-per-month for children ages 6 through 17 and $300-per-month for those under 6 to most families in the country, at an annual cost of about $120 billion. The goal was to put discretionary cash in the hands of parents along with the freedom to spend it as they saw fit month-to-month.

Republican lawmakers are generally unified in opposition to the expanded tax credit — describing it as excessive, inflationary and a disincentive to work. But when it was originally passed, many Democrats openly declared their intention to make the payments a permanent anchor of the American social safety net.

The goal for the Democratic-held Congress was to keep the program running, and fight about its future months from now, armed with data and millions of anecdotes about the tax credit’s benefits.

Instead the 50-member Democratic bloc in the Senate collapsed from within, with West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin holding out on his vote for weeks before finally refusing to endorse Biden’s social spending package. Manchin cited his opposition to the child tax credit’s massive price tag among his reservations with the bill.

Earlier this month, Manchin called negotiations on Biden’s Build Back Better bill “ dead.”

Democratic New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich, one of the expanded child tax credit’s strongest advocates, said Wednesday in a statement to The Associated Press that nearly all the children in his state benefited from the credit and that letting it expire was “a moral failure.”

An informal survey conducted of families by the nonprofit advocacy group ParentsTogether Action found a similarly immediate impact to the lapsed child tax credit payments for respondents, with roughly 1 in 5 families surveyed reporting they could no longer afford housing or enough food for their kids.

Allison Johnson, the organization’s campaign director, said the child tax credit payments were designed so parents would “not have to make these really hard choices,” she said.

The end to the deposits makes it nearly impossible for needy families, who may be struggling to pay down debt or cope with major expenses, to develop financial stability or momentum, Johnson said.

“This lack of clarity is super difficult for people. It makes them unable to plan for things,” she said.

HE IS A LON CHANEY BULLY

The real reason Texas is leading the attack on trans kids and parental rights

Elvia Díaz, Arizona Republic
Wed, February 23, 2022

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has issued a directive penalizing parents who get care for their transgender minor children.

Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has ordered practically everyone in the Lone Star State to become viligantes against transgender kids – or else.

Under his new directive, parents who agree to gender-affirming medical care for minors will be investigated and prosecuted as child abusers.

Plus, doctors, nurses, teachers and anyone who comes into contact with a child is required to report parents or face criminal penalties.

Talk about turning the state into total vigilantism. That should be enough for everyone, especially freedom fighters and parental rights advocates, to rebuke Abbott’s government overreach.
It's no coincidence that Abbott is acting now

But don’t expect any of that from right-wingers hell-bent on prosecuting parents who dare decide what’s best for their child.

Anyone else on the fence about providing gender-affirming surgeries or other medical care, such as puberty blockers, to trans youths should consider Abbott’s political motives and the greater ramifications of government’s infringement on parental rights.

Abbott isn’t trying to protect vulnerable trans kids from their evil parents or the greedy doctors and nurses, as he claims. If he was, he would have done it already, since there are about 14,000 trans youngsters in Texas who could potentially seek such treatments.

He’s doing it now to help the Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, who’s facing a tough primary on Tuesday.

It’s no coincidence that Paxton just came out with his opinion that providing gender-affirming medical care is child abuse.
Don't use kids, attack parent rights to win votes

Abbott, who’s setting the stage to face Democrat Beto O’Rourke in November’s general election, immediately followed Paxton’s opinion by ordering the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to act against the parents.

Without directly addressing the trans kids, O’Rourke on Wednesday went after Abbott, saying he’s “cruelly and obsessively bullying children.”

“Foster kids have been forced to sleep on the floor in Abbott’s CPS system where harm to children is ‘overlooked, ignored or forgotten.’ Texas leads the nation in uninsured kids. Now @GregAbbott_TX is cruelly and obsessively bullying children,” O’Rourke said on Twitter.

Other critics called Abbott’s order “trans genocide,” a legal maneuver to “separate kids from their parents” and “unconscionable” political move.

It’s that.

And a blatant attack on parents’ rights and medical freedom just to win votes.

Elvia Díaz is an editorial columnist for The Republic and azcentral.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Why is Gov. Greg Abbott attacking transgender kids, parental rights?

Related: Trans Kids, Supporters Say New Texas Law Will Keep Them Out of School Sports

Abbott orders state agencies to investigate gender-affirming care for trans kids as child abuse



Erin Doherty
Wed, February 23, 2022

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) on Tuesday ordered state agencies to investigate gender-affirming care for transgender kids as child abuse.

Driving the news: "The Office of the Attorney General has now confirmed in the enclosed opinion that a number of so-called 'sex change' procedures constitute child abuse under existing Texas law," Abbott wrote in a letter to the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services.

The letter said doctors, nurses, teachers and anyone who comes into contact with a child has a requirement to report parents or face "criminal penalties."

Abbott's letter was CC'd to several agencies, including the Health and Human Services Commission, Texas Medical Board and Texas Education Agency, according to The Dallas Morning News.

State of play: The order's immediate impacts on transgender children's access to treatments remain unclear, Kate Murphy, senior policy associate for child protection at Texans Care for Children, told The Dallas Morning News.

"Since this is a nonbinding opinion by the attorney general right now, it’s unclear what will happen next," Murphy said, adding, "right now, we have more questions than answers."

The order comes one day after Attorney General Ken Paxton said that gender-affirming health care for transgender kids is child abuse, per the Morning News.

Zoom out: 2021 saw a record number of anti-trans bills introduced in state legislatures. Medical experts and doctors fear an increase in mental health crises among transgender kids due to the dozens of bills introduced to criminalize gender-affirming health care.

"I see multiple patients daily that are suffering with depression and suicide ideation and suicide attempt and anxiety, and my fear is that if we deny them this evidence-based treatment, we’re only going to see massive more patients come to the emergency room," Jesse Martinez Jr., a doctor of psychiatry at Children’s of Alabama, told Axios last year.

Studies have shown that doctors who give children the ability to socially transition, access puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones encounter lower rates of suicide and mental illness.

Data: UCLA/Williams Institute; Chart: Sara Wise/Axios

Between the lines, via Axios Austin's Asher Price: Some district attorneys in Texas's large urban counties are saying they won't follow the guidance set out by the Texas attorney general that underpins Abbott's new order.


The order could position Abbott favorably among Republicans ahead of a potential primary for president in 2024, but may risk alienating voters ahead of a general election.

What they're saying: "Texas parents who support their trans kids should be applauded, not prosecuted," Amit Paley, CEO of The Trevor Project, which provides crisis intervention and suicide prevention services to LGBTQ youth under 25, said in a statement to Axios.

Paley said The Trevor Project's research shows that "trans youth who feel accepted by the adults in their lives — including family members, teachers, and doctors — are less likely to attempt suicide."

"Further, our research found that gender-affirming hormone therapy has been linked to lower rates of depression and suicide risk among trans youth who wanted it," Paley added.

"The government should not be involved in personal decisions that force doctors and families to act against the medical community's standards of care for transgender young people."

"This smoke & mirrors attempt to place targets on parents who love & support their kids is meant to distract you from the issues that actually impact you," Adri Pèrez, policy and advocacy strategist for LGBTQ equality at the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, wrote on Twitter about Paxton's opinion.

"Trans kids and their parents are not a threat to you. Politicians that use them to distract you from their failures are," Pèrez said.

Go deeper:

Doctors fear next steps if states ban care for trans youth

2021 sees a record number of bills targeting trans youth

Poll: Most LGBTQ kids' mental health negatively impacted by anti-trans legislation

Texas governor order treats gender-confirming care as abuse

By PAUL J. WEBER

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott speaks at a news conference in Austin, Texas on June 8, 2021. Abbott, has ordered the state's child welfare agency to investigate reports of gender-confirming care for kids as "child abuse" in a directive that opponents say is a first by any governor over GOP efforts to restrict transgender rights. (AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has ordered the state’s child welfare agency to investigate reports of gender-confirming care for kids as abuse, a directive that opponents say is a first by any governor over GOP efforts to restrict transgender rights.

The immediate impact of the order, which Abbott issued Tuesday, was unclear and a spokesman for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services said there were no open cases based on the governor’s directive.

Abbott’s letter to state agencies came after Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton this week released a non-binding legal opinion that labeled certain gender-confirming treatments as “child abuse.” That goes against the nation’s largest medical groups, including the American Medical Association, which have opposed Republican-backed restrictions filed in statehouses nationwide.

Both Abbott and Paxton are up for reelection this year, and their actions came a week before they are on the ballot for Republican voters in Texas’s first-in-the-nation primary of 2022.

“I hereby direct your agency to conduct a prompt and thorough investigation of any reported instances of these abusive procedures in the State of Texas,” Abbott said in a letter to the Department of Family and Protective Services.

The uncertainty over the impact is largely due to the fact that attorney general opinions do not carry the weight of law. In Houston, the county office that represents the state in civil child abuse cases said it would not take any actions based on the letter, and Texas’ largest child welfare advocacy group said it was unclear what judges and prosecutors would do with the opinion.

“What is clear is that politicians should not be tearing apart loving families — and sending their kids into the foster care system — when parents provide recommended medical care that they believe is in the best interest of their child,” said Kate Murphy, the senior policy associate for child protection at Texans Care for Children.

The opinion by Paxton is directed at treatments that include puberty blockers and hormone therapy. It comes months after Texas Republican legislators— who filed more anti-LGBTQ proposals last year than in any other statehouse — proposed laws banning such treatments but failed to pass them.

Arkansas became the first state to pass a law prohibiting gender confirming treatments for minors, and Tennessee approved a similar measure.

Numerous states also have enacted laws banning transgender students from competing in scholastic sports on the basis of their gender identity.

Cathryn Oakley, state legislative director and senior counsel for the Human Rights Campaign, said no other governor has taken the same action as Abbott. She called it a “lawless interpretation” and expressed worry for parents.

“The terror that is being struck into their hearts is very real,” Oakley said. “I’m also thinking about the kids who are relying on that care and how frightened the are.”

WHILE STILL IN THE SENATE...
Trudeau revokes emergency powers after Canada blockades end

By ROB GILLIES today

1 of 6

A police officer mans a checkpoint near Parliament Hill, Wednesday, Feb. 23, 2022 in Ottawa. Ottawa protesters who vowed never to give up are largely gone, chased away by police in riot gear in what was the biggest police operation in the nation’s history. (Adrian Wyld /The Canadian Press via AP)


TORONTO (AP) — Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Wednesday he is removing emergency powers police can use after authorities ended the blockades at the borders and the occupation in Ottawa by truckers and others opposed to COVID-19 restrictions.

Trudeau said the “threat continues” but the acute emergency that included entrenched occupations has ended. His government invoked the powers last week and lawmakers affirmed the powers late Monday.

“The situation is no longer an emergency, therefore the federal government will be ending the use of the emergencies act,” Trudeau said. “We are confident that existing laws and bylaws are sufficient.”

The emergencies act allows authorities to declare certain areas as no-go zones. It also allows police to freeze truckers’ personal and corporate bank accounts and compel tow truck companies to haul away vehicles.

The trucker protest grew until it closed a handful of Canada-U.S. border posts and shut down key parts of the capital for more than three weeks. But all border blockades have now ended and the streets around the Canadian Parliament are quiet.

“We were very clear that the use of the emergencies act would be limited in time,” Trudeau said.

Trudeau had warned earlier this week there were some truckers just outside Ottawa who might be planning further blockades or occupations. His public safety minister also said there was an attempt to block a border crossing in British Columbia over the weekend.

The protests, which were first aimed at a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for cross-border truckers but also encompassed fury over the range of COVID-19 restrictions and hatred of Trudeau, reflected the spread of disinformation in Canada and simmering populist and right-wing anger.

The self-styled Freedom Convoy shook Canada’s reputation for civility, inspired convoys in France, New Zealand and the Netherlands and interrupted trade, causing economic damage on both sides of the border. Hundreds of trucks eventually occupied the streets around Parliament, a display that was part protest and part carnival.

For almost a week the busiest U.S.-Canada border crossing, the Ambassador Bridge between Windsor, Ontario and Detroit, was blocked. The crossing sees more than 25% of the trade between the two countries.

Authorities moved to reopen the border posts, but police in Ottawa did little but issue warnings until Friday, even as hundreds and sometimes thousands of protesters clogged the streets of the city and besieged Parliament Hill.

On Friday, authorities launched the largest police operation in Canadian history, arresting a string of Ottawa protesters and increasing that pressure on Saturday until the streets in front of Parliament were clear. Eventually, police arrested at least 191 people and towed away 79 vehicles. Many protesters retreated as the pressure increased.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police said those who had their bank accounts frozen were “influencers in the illegal protest in Ottawa, and owners and/or drivers of vehicles who did not want to leave the area.”

The province of Ontario also announced it is ending its state of emergency but said the “emergency tools provided to law enforcement will be maintained at this time as police continue to address ongoing activity on the ground.”

Those who block critical infrastructure face up to a year in prison and a maximum fine of $100,000.

A small convoy of truckers demanding an end to coronavirus mandates began a cross-country drive from California to the Washington, D.C., area on Wednesday.

Several hundred people rallied in a parking lot in the cold, windswept Mojave Desert town of Adelanto before about two dozen trucks and a number of other vehicles hit the road. It wasn’t clear how many intended to go all the way.

The Pentagon has approved the deployment of 700 unarmed National Guard troops to the nation’s capital as it prepares for multiple trucker convoys. The troops would be used to assist with traffic control during demonstrations expected in the city in the coming days, the Pentagon said.

US drops name of Trump’s ‘China Initiative’ after criticism
By ERIC TUCKER

 Matthew G. Olsen, of Maryland, nominee to be an Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice, attends a Senate Judiciary Hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on July 14, 2021. The Justice Department is ending its China Initiative. The move announced Wednesday, Feb. 23, 2022, by Assistant Attorney General Olsen amounts to a rebranding of a Trump-era program that was created to crack down on economic espionage by Beijing but that critics said had unfairly scrutinized Chinese professors on the basis of their ethnicity. (AP Photo/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is scrapping the name of a Trump-era initiative that was intended to crack down on economic espionage by Beijing but has been criticized as unfairly targeting Chinese professors at American colleges because of their ethnicity.

The decision to abandon the China Initiative and to impose a higher bar for prosecutions of professors was announced Wednesday by the Justice Department’s top national security official. It follows a monthslong review undertaken after complaints that the program chilled academic collaboration and contributed to anti-Asian bias. The department has also endured high-profile setbacks in individual prosecutions, resulting in the dismissal of multiple criminal cases against academic researchers in the last year.

Assistant Attorney General Matthew Olsen said the department will still “be relentless in defending our country from China,” but no longer will group its investigations and prosecutions under the China Initiative label, in part out of recognition of the threats facing the U.S. from Russia, Iran, North Korea and others.

“I’m convinced that we need a broader approach, one that looks across all of these threats and uses all of our authorities to combat them,” he told reporters before a speech in which he detailed the changes.

The program was established in 2018 under then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions as a way to thwart what officials said were aggressive efforts by China to steal American intellectual property and to spy on American industry and research.

Olsen told reporters he believed the initiative was prompted by genuine national security concerns. He said he did not believe investigators had targeted professors on the basis of ethnicity, but he also said he had to be responsive to concerns he heard, including from Asian American groups.

“Anything that creates the impression that the Department of Justice applies different standards based on race or ethnicity harms the department and our efforts, and it harms the public,” Olsen said.

Speaking later in the day at the National Security Institute at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School, Olsen said that by “grouping cases under the China Initiative rubric, we helped give rise to a harmful perception that the (Justice Department) applies a lower standard to its investigations and prosecutions of criminal conduct related to that country or that we in some way view people with racial, ethnic or familial ties to China differently.”

Some Asian American groups and officials who had lobbied the department to end the China Initiative cheered the move Wednesday. Rep. Judy Chu, a California Democrat and the chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, said the initiative had ruined careers, discouraged Asian Americans from pursuing academic specialties in science, technology, engineering and math and reinforced “harmful stereotypes.”

“There are serious national security concerns facing our country from all across the world, but our response must be based on evidence, not racism and fear,” Chu said in a statement.

The initiative has resulted in convictions, including of Charles Lieber, a Harvard University professor who was found guilty in December of hiding his ties to a Chinese-run recruitment program.

But its pursuit of professors, including those accused of concealing ties to the Chinese government on applications for federal research grants, hit snags. The department in the last year dismissed multiple cases against researchers or had them thrown out by judges.

In January, the department dropped its case against Gang Chen, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor charged in the final days of the Trump administration. Prosecutors concluded that they could no longer meet their burden of proof after they received information from the Department of Energy suggesting he had not been required to disclose certain information on his forms.

A federal judge in September threw out all charges against a University of Tennessee professor accused of hiding his relationship with a Chinese university while receiving research grants from NASA, and the university has since offered to reinstate him.

Olsen said the department continued to stand behind the pending cases it has against academics and researchers, signaling that those prosecutions won’t necessarily be abandoned.

Federal prosecutors are still expected to pursue grant fraud cases against researchers when there is evidence of malicious intent, serious fraud and a connection to economic and national security, with prosecutors from the department’s National Security Division in Washington playing an active supervisory role — though in some cases, prosecutors may opt for civil or administrative solutions instead of criminal charges, Olsen said.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said in a speech last month that the threat from China was “more brazen” than ever, with the FBI opening new cases to counter Chinese intelligence operations every 12 hours or so. And Olsen said he agreed.

“I’m not taking any tools off the table here,” Olsen said. He also noted, “I do not think that there is a reason to step back from that threat, and we will not step back from that threat.”

Uncertain future for islanders who survived Tongan eruption

By NICK PERRY

Survivors Sulaki Kafoika, left, and Sione Vailea pose for a photo in Nukuʻalofa, Tonga on Feb. 22, 2022. Kafoika and Havea were on Mango Island in Tonga, one of the closest islands to the Jan. 15 volcanic eruption that was so huge it echoed around the world. Every single home on the island was destroyed by the tsunami that followed. 

(Aloma Johansson/Tonga Red Cross/IFRC via AP)

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — The first two booms from the volcano were scary enough, but the third explosion was immense, sending everyone from the village running from their homes in a reaction that would save all but one of their lives.

Even now, more than five weeks later, the children from Mango Island still often run or cower when they hear a thunderclap or loud noise.

The small island in Tonga was one of the closest places to the Jan. 15 South Pacific volcanic eruption, an event so massive it sent out a sonic boom that could be heard in Alaska and a mushroom plume of ash that was seen in startling images taken from space. On Mango Island, every single home was destroyed by the tsunami that followed.

All 62 survivors were rescued by boat and moved to Tonga’s capital, Nuku’alofa, where they have been living together since in a church hall. Most of that time they’ve been in lockdown after Tonga experienced its first outbreak of the coronavirus.

Two of the survivors described their experiences and uncertain future to The Associated Press in an interview that was translated by an official from the Tonga Red Cross.

Sione Vailea, 52, said Mango Island is the prettiest place he knows and nothing compares to it in all of Tonga. Just 14 families lived on the island, he said, all of them close together in a single village.

Each family owned a small, open-sided boat and each morning the weather was favorable, they would go onto the ocean to catch reef fish, snapper, octopus and lobster.

What they couldn’t eat themselves they would take to the capital to sell, getting enough money to buy food and other necessities. For those fortunate enough to have a decent-sized engine on their boats, it was a six-hour return journey to the capital, but it could take double that time for those puttering along on 15 horsepower.

Mango Island is a little over 20 miles (32 kilometers) from the Hunga Tonga Hunga Ha’apai undersea volcano, which back in late 2014 had rumbled to life, creating a small, new island and briefly disrupting air travel in a series of eruptions.

But those were nothing compared to the scale of eruption that took place on that Saturday evening in January. When the islanders heard the third massive boom, they began running from their low-lying village up a nearby hill, the highest point on Mango Island.

“There was no sign that there was going to be a tsunami, but our gut feeling was we needed to get up to the top, because we weren’t sure what was happening,” Vailea said.

As the island’s appointed town officer, Vailea checked to make sure everybody was gathered. He noticed one family was missing.

Another survivor, 72-year-old Sulaki Kafoika, who goes by the name Halapaini — or talking chief — a title bestowed upon him by Tonga’s king, said that once he got to the top of the hill, he looked back. He could see waves crashing over the tops of their houses. He’d never experienced anything like it in his life.

Vailea scrambled back down the hill and saw the wife, two daughters and son of a 65-year-old man coming up. The man was gone, taken by the waves.

“He was the first victim of the tsunami,” Vailea said. “Because he died right then, as they were trying to get up to the top of the island.”

Two other people elsewhere in Tonga also died from the tsunami, including a British national, and a fourth person died from what authorities described as related trauma. The tsunami crossed the Pacific Ocean to Peru, where it caused an oil spill and two more people drowned.

On Mango Island, night’s darkness quickly followed the tsunami as the villagers remained huddled at the top of the hill. Throughout the night, the men held blankets above the women and children to protect them from the ash and small volcanic rocks that were pelting down. The tsunami had cut off all phone and internet connections, and they were alone and isolated.

In this photo provided by the Australian Defence Force, debris from damaged building and trees are strewn around on Atata Island in Tonga, on Jan. 28, 2022, following the eruption of an underwater volcano and subsequent tsunami. The small Mango Island in Tonga was one of the closest to the Jan. 15 volcanic eruption that was so huge it echoed around the world. Every single home on the island was destroyed by the tsunami that followed. (POIS Christopher Szumlanski/Australian Defence Force via AP, File)

When dawn broke, they walked down the hill and found the body of the drowned man. Amid the wreckage, they found a small shovel and an axe. They dug a grave, a process that took much of the day after they hit rock about 1 meter (3 feet) down.

All of their boats were wrecked and they had almost no food. After searching the village, they found two small bags of rice, which they cooked for the children, Vailea said. The adults ate nothing that day, or the next, as they waited.

Finally on Tuesday morning, a boat arrived from a neighboring island to check on them. Their neighbors had brought with them some cassava, a root vegetable, and a bunch of plantains, which are similar to bananas.

“They cooked it and it was the best meal,” said Vailea. “On a normal day, you wouldn’t call it a good meal. But on that Tuesday, it was very special.”

The next day, they were all transported to the nearby island of Nomuka and then a few days later to Nuku’alofa, the capital, where they have been living since. None of them have been back to Mango Island. Until Sunday, they were in lockdown after the outbreak of the virus, which was likely brought in by foreign military crews delivering vital aid.

The survivors say it has been difficult for them over the past few weeks as they deal with the trauma and the lockdown restrictions, but it has helped immensely that they have all been living together and have been able to comfort one another. They’ve benefited from the clothes, food and money that have been donated by people from around the world.

What happens next remains uncertain. As town officer, Vailea has been meeting regularly with Tongan officials but said the final decision of whether they will be able to return and resettle Mango Island rests with Tonga’s government and the monarch, King Tupou VI. The survivors hope they will get a decision within the coming weeks.

Vailea said the people of Mango Island are split, with some wanting to return and others happy to start life afresh in Nuku’alofa or elsewhere. He said it is his duty to support whatever his people want.

Halapaini said he has mixed feelings. All the good things that he enjoyed in life were on Mango Island, but he also worries that the volcano could erupt again.

Vailea is more emphatic. He wants to return to Mango Island, where life can be hard but where you own your time and share everything with your neighbors. Where you wake up in the morning and jump on your boat to fish.

AP-NORC poll: Most in US oppose major role in Russia strife

By NOMAAN MERCHANT and HANNAH FINGERHUT

1 of 8

FILE = This image provided by The White House via Twitter shows President Joe Biden at Camp David, Md., Feb. 12, 2022. A new poll finds little support among Americans for a major U.S. role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. President Joe Biden has acknowledged the growing likelihood of a new war in Eastern Europe will affect Americans even if U.S. troops don’t deploy to Ukraine. Just 26% of Americans say the U.S. should have a major role in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

(The White House via AP, File)


WASHINGTON (AP) — There’s little support among Americans for a major U.S. role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, according to a new poll, even as President Joe Biden imposes new sanctions and threatens a stronger response that could provoke retaliation from Moscow.

Biden has acknowledged a growing likelihood that war in Eastern Europe would affect Americans, though he has ruled out sending troops to Ukraine. Gas prices in the U.S. could rise in the short term. And Russian President Vladimir Putin has a range of tools he could use against the U.S., including cyberattacks hitting critical infrastructure and industries.

“Defending freedom will have costs for us as well, here at home,” Biden said Tuesday. “We need to be honest about that.”

Just 26% say the U.S. should have a major role in the conflict, according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Fifty-two percent say a minor role; 20% say none at all.

The findings are a reminder for Biden and fellow Democrats that while the crisis may consume Washington in the coming months, pocketbook issues are likely to be a bigger priority for voters heading into the midterm elections. A December AP-NORC poll showed that Americans are particularly focused on economic issues, including rising inflation.

The Biden administration has argued that supporting Ukraine is a defense of fundamental American values and has made a concerted effort to declassify intelligence findings underscoring the dangers it sees for Ukraine and the wider European region. But the survey shows widespread public skepticism of the U.S. intelligence community.

Democrats are more likely than Republicans to think the U.S. should have a major role in the conflict, 32% to 22%. Overall, the poll shows 43% of Americans now approve of Biden’s handling of the U.S. relationship with Russia, a downtick from 49% in June of last year.

Despite the clear reluctance about major involvement in the conflict, Americans are hardly looking at Russia through rose-colored glasses. The poll finds 53% say they’re very or extremely concerned that Russia’s influence around the world poses a threat to the U.S., an uptick from 45% in August 2021.

Jennifer Rau, a 51-year-old mother of three adopted teenagers who lives on Chicago’s South Side, said she listens to local public radio for her world news. But in recent days, when the news turns to Russia and Ukraine, she has started to turn it off.

“I’m so frustrated. It’s enough. We’re bombarded,” Rau said. “There are other stories in Chicago that need to be covered.”

Rau is a political independent who voted for Biden. But she believes the U.S. gets involved in foreign wars to make money. She is more concerned about rising crime in Chicago, the prevalence of guns, and systemic racism that affects her three children, who are Hispanic.

“I just feel like there’s a war going on in the United States, every day, in Chicago,” she said. “And it is really scary. And I feel like no one helps us.”

Edward Eller, a 67-year-old retiree from Shady Valley, Tennessee, said the White House needs to focus on lowering oil prices.

“They want to send millions of dollars of ours to stop a war that we have nothing to do with,” he said. “I’m sorry they’re involved in a mess, but it’s not our problem.”

The poll was conducted Friday to Monday during a period of rapidly escalating tensions, culminating with Putin recognizing the independence of two separatist regions in eastern Ukraine, widely seen in the West as a step toward a wider war. Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian forces have been locked since 2014 in fighting that’s killed 14,000 people.

Asked on Tuesday why people in the U.S. should have to sacrifice for the conflict, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said, “This is about standing up for American values.”

“We have repeatedly throughout history been leaders in the world in rallying support for any effort to seize territory from another country,” she said.

Russia has massed at least 150,000 troops on three sides of Ukraine and continues to establish bridges, camps, and logistics necessary for a protracted invasion. U.S. officials believe Putin could attack Ukraine at any time. A full-on war in Ukraine could result in thousands of deaths and huge numbers of refugees fleeing for the U.S. or elsewhere in Europe.

The U.S. has imposed sanctions on Russian banks and oligarchs with more measures possible this week.

The White House has warned in increasingly strong words about a Russian invasion while trying to persuade Putin against launching one. It has declassified Russian troop positions and detailed allegations of “false-flag” plots that could set a pretext for a military attack on Ukraine.

However, the poll shows there remains skepticism among Americans of the U.S. intelligence community. Only 23% said they had a “great deal of confidence” in intelligence agencies. Another 52% say they have some confidence and 24% have hardly any.

U.S. Rep. Mike Quigley, an Illinois Democrat who serves on the House Intelligence Committee, says the intelligence he’s received on Ukraine “has been very, very good. Sadly, it’s been accurate.” But he often hears from constituents who are uninterested in Ukraine and more focused on health care and the coronavirus pandemic.

Over time, Quigley said, he has developed comments about why Ukraine matters to the U.S.: its role as a strategic ally and a “sovereign democratic nation at Putin’s doorstep,” and how a new war could hit already disrupted technology supply chains that use exports from Russia and Ukraine.

Among Russia’s biggest threats to Americans is its capability to wage cyberwarfare. Previous Russia-linked cyberattacks have cut off services at hospitals and breached the servers of American government agencies. A ransomware attack on Colonial Pipeline linked to a Russia-based hacking group temporarily shut down gas stations across the East Coast. And Russia was accused of interfering in both the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.

“I think it’s an incredibly difficult time to message because of everything else that’s topping the list of what Americans care about. It’s hard to bump COVID, inflation, safety issues away,” Quigley said. “But you’ve got to try.”

___

The AP-NORC poll of 1,289 adults was conducted Feb. 18-21 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.

___

Associated Press journalist Zeke J. Miller contributed to this report.

Broad majority of Americans support Russia sanctions - poll


The Russian Embassy, as President Biden announces new sanctions on Russia, in Washington

Wed, February 23, 2022
By Jason Lange

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - More than two-thirds of Americans think the United States should impose additional sanctions against Russia as it masses its forces along the border with Ukraine, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll completed on Wednesday.

Nearly half of respondents to the poll disapproved of President Joe Biden's handling of the crisis, in keeping with his low overall job approval ratings, with 48% saying Ukraine's problems are not America's business.

Biden has vowed Russia will pay a steep price for launching an invasion of Ukraine but he has pledged to keep U.S. troops out of the conflict.

The poll, conducted online on Tuesday and Wednesday, found some 69% of Americans - majorities of Republicans and Democrats - support additional sanctions on Russia.

The president on Tuesday toughened measures against Russian companies and individuals, effectively kicking two Russian banks out of the U.S. banking system

The poll found 62% oppose sending U.S. troops to defend Ukraine against a Russian invasion, with opposition strongest among Republicans. A majority also opposed air strikes.

Republican lawmakers, who are seeking to win control of the U.S. Congress in the Nov. 8 midterm election, have criticized Biden's response to Russian President Vladimir Putin as too little, too late.

The poll found that just 12% of Republicans approved of Biden's handling of the crisis, compared with 58% of Democrats.

Still, relatively few Americans blame Biden for the crisis.

According to the poll, about half the country, including a majority of Democrats and nearly half of Republicans, blame Putin, who on Tuesday ordered Russian troops to enter Ukrainian territory claimed by ethnic Russian separatists. Only 25% of Republicans polled said Biden was to blame.

Despite broad support for sanctions, only about half of Americans said sanctions were worthwhile if they increased fuel and gas prices, according to the poll. Russia is a major oil and natural gas producer and worries over the conflict have pushed prices for some oil contracts to their highest levels since 2014.

The poll was conducted online and in English throughout the United States. It gathered responses from 1,004 adults including 420 Democrats, 394 Republicans and 131 independents. The results have a credibility interval, a measure of precision, of 4 percentage points.

(Reporting by Jason Lange, additional reporting by David Morgan; Editing by Scott Malone and Cynthia Osterman)

The parts of America paying closest attention to the Russia-Ukraine crisis



Stef W. Kight
Tue, February 22, 2022

Data: Google Trends; Chart: Will Chase/Axios

Russia's talk of invading Ukraine has now captured America's attention, although residents in some congressional districts are paying closer attention than others, according to new Google Trends data and analysis.

Why it matters: Some Republicans criticized President Biden on Tuesday for not taking stronger actions. Some Democrats have largely supported his focus on diplomacy. It's unclear how much the issue will affect the midterms in November — but right now, interest among potential voters is growing.

The districts visualized in the accompanying map reflect congressional maps in effect as of Feb. 1. Some of the lines will change as the once-per-decade redistricting process continues this year across the country.

Google measures search interest on a scale of 0-100, which reflects the percentage of total Google searches dedicated to a topic.

By the numbers: Nationwide, searches for the "MOEX Russia Index" increased +4,900% in the past day, and use of the terms “russia ukraine news latest update” increased +1,750% over the past week, Google Trends' Simon Rogers notes in his Tuesday newsletter.

Congressional districts encompassing Colorado Springs, Colorado, and Buffalo, New York, saw high interest in the search term "Russia" earlier than most other districts.

During the past week, "Russia" made up the greatest percentage of Google searches in the newly drawn district for Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), whose territory includes Monterey, California.

The Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, the United States Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, as well as other military bases and communities in other high-ranking areas could explain the interest in some districts.

The districts with the highest percentage of Google searches for "Russia" in the past week were:


CA-19: Jimmy Panetta (D)


CO-05: Doug Lamborn (R)


NY-26: Brian Higgins (D)


CA-51: Sara Jacobs (D)


MA-03: Lori Trahan (D)


AZ-02: Tom O'Halleran (D)


CT-04: Jim Himes (D)


WA-10: Marilyn Strickland (D)


VA-11: Gerry Connolly (D)


CA-49: Mike Levin (D)

What to watch: Axios and Google Trends have been looking at congressional-level Google search trends across the country.


Keep an eye out for future projects in the coming months.

More from Axios: Sign up to get the latest market trends with Axios Markets.

NAZIFICATION OF UKRAINE

EXPLAINER: Why Putin uses WWII to justify attacks in Ukraine

By TIA GOLDENBERG

 Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks during a news conference in Moscow, Russia, Feb. 1, 2022. (Yuri Kochetkov/Pool Photo via AP, File)

TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Vladimir Putin told the world in the lead-up to Thursday’s attacks on Ukraine that his operation aims to “denazify” Ukraine, a country with a Jewish president who lost relatives in the Holocaust and who heads a Western-backed, democratically elected government.

The Holocaust, World War II and Nazism have been important tools for Putin in his bid to legitimize Russia’s moves in Ukraine, but historians see their use as disinformation and a cynical ploy to further the Russian leader’s aims.

Israel has proceeded cautiously, seeking not to jeopardize its security ties with the Kremlin, despite what it considers the sacred memory of the 6 million Jews who were murdered by the Nazis in the Holocaust.

Here’s a closer look at how the ghosts of the past are shaping today’s conflict:

THE WAR THAT DEFINES RUSSIA

World War II, in which the Soviet Union lost an estimated 27 million people, is a linchpin of Russia’s national identity. In today’s Russia, officials bristle at any questioning of the USSR’s role.

Some historians say this has been coupled with an attempt by Russia at retooling certain historical truths from the war. They say Russia has tried to magnify the Soviet role in defeating the Nazis while playing down any collaboration by Soviet citizens in the persecution of Jews.

On Ukraine, Russia has tried to link the country to Nazism, particularly those who have led it since a pro-Russian leadership was toppled in 2014.

This goes back to 1941 when Ukraine, at the time part of the Soviet Union, was occupied by Nazi Germany. Some Ukrainian nationalists welcomed the Nazi occupiers, in part as a way to challenge their Soviet opponents, according to Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust memorial. Historians say that, like in other countries, there was also collaboration.

Some of Ukraine’s politicians since 2014 have sought to glorify nationalist fighters from the era, focusing on their opposition to Soviet rule rather than their collaboration and documented crimes against Jews, as well as Poles living in Ukraine.

But making the leap from that to claiming Ukraine’s current government is a Nazi state does not reflect the reality of its politics, including the landslide election of a Jewish president and the aim of many Ukrainians to strengthen the country’s democracy, reduce corruption and move closer to the West.

“In terms of all of the sort of constituent parts of Nazism, none of that is in play in Ukraine. Territorial ambitions. State-sponsored terrorism. Rampant antisemitism. Bigotry. A dictatorship. None of those are in play. So this is just total fiction,” said Jonathan Dekel-Chen, a history professor at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University.

What’s more, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is Jewish and has said that three of his grandfather’s brothers were killed by German occupiers while his grandfather survived the war. That hasn’t stopped Russian officials from comparing Zelenskyy to Jews who were forced to collaborate with the Nazis during the Holocaust.

HOLOCAUST DISTORTION

Putin’s attempts to stretch history for political motives is part of a trend seen in other countries as well. Most prominently is Poland, where authorities are advancing a nationalist narrative at odds with mainstream scholarship, including through a 2018 law that regulates Holocaust speech.

The legislation sought to fight back against claims that Poland, a victim of Nazi Germany, bore responsibility for the Holocaust. The law angered Israel, where many felt it was an attempt to whitewash the fact that some Poles did kill Jews during the German occupation during World War II. Yad Vashem also came out against the legislation.

Havi Dreifuss, a historian at Tel Aviv University and Yad Vashem, said the world was now dealing with both Holocaust denial and Holocaust distortion, where countries or institutions were bringing forth their own interpretations of history that were damaging to the commemoration of the Holocaust.

“Whoever deals with the period of the Holocaust must first and foremost be committed to the complex reality that occurred then and not with wars over memory that exist today,” she said.

ISRAELI INTERESTS

The Holocaust is central to Israel’s national identity. The country comes to a two-minute standstill on its Holocaust remembrance day. Schoolchildren, trade groups and soldiers makes regular trips to Yad Vashem’s museum. Stories of the last cohort of Holocaust survivors constantly make the news.

Israel has butted heads with certain countries, like Poland, over the memory of the Holocaust. But Israel has appeared more reticent to challenge Putin and his narrative, according to some observers, because of its current security interests. Israel relies on coordination with Russia to allow it to strike targets in Syria, which it says are often weapons caches destined for Israel’s enemies.

Israel came under fire from historians in 2020 after a speech by Putin and a separate video presentation at a meeting of world leaders in Jerusalem to commemorate the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp, which they said skewed toward his narrative and away from the historical facts.

Israel was conspicuously muted in its criticism of Russia in the lead-up to the attacks on Ukraine. Commentator Raviv Drucker wrote in the daily Haaretz that Israel was “on the wrong side of history” with its response, which initially sought to support Ukraine while not rattling Russia. On Thursday, Israel condemned Russia’s attacks as “a grave violation of the international order.”

Vera Michlin-Shapir, a former official at Israel’s National Security Council and the author of “Fluid Russia,” a book about the country’s national identity, said that Israel’s regional security concerns were of greater interest than challenging Russia on its narrative.

“Russia can provide weapons systems to our worst enemies and therefore Israel is proceeding very cautiously — you could say too cautiously — because there is an issue here that is at the heart of Israel’s security,” she said.

RUSSIA CHAIRS THE SECURITY COUNCIL

‘It’s too late’: Russian move roils UN meeting on Ukraine

By JENNIFER PELTZ and EDITH M. LEDERER

1 of 6

In this image from UNTV video, Ukraine's Ambassador to the United Nations Sergiy Kyslytsya, holds up a phone as he speaks an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council Wednesday, Feb. 23, 2022, at U.N. headquarters. (UNTV via AP)


UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The emergency U.N. Security Council meeting was meant as an eleventh hour effort to dissuade Russia from sending troops into Ukraine. But the message became moot even as it was being delivered.

While diplomats at U.N. headquarters were making pleas for Russia to back off — “Give peace a chance,” Secretary-General Antonio Guterres implored — Russian President Vladimir Putin went on television in his homeland to announce a military operation that he said was intended to protect civilians in Ukraine.

Putin warned other countries that any effort to interfere with the Russian operation would lead to “consequences they have never seen.”

The council, where Russia holds the rotating presidency this month, gathered Wednesday night hours after Russia said rebels in eastern Ukraine had asked Moscow for military assistance. Fears that Russia was laying the groundwork for war bore out about a half hour later.

“It’s too late, my dear colleagues, to speak about de-escalation,” Ukrainian Ambassador Sergiy Kyslytsya told the council. “I call on every one of you to do everything possible to stop the war.”

In a spontaneous exchange not often seen in the council chamber, Kyslytsya challenged his Russian counterpart to say that his country wasn’t at that very moment bombing and shelling Ukraine or moving troops into it.

“You have a smartphone. You can call” officials in Moscow, Kyslytsya said.

“I have already said all I know at this point,” Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia responded.

He added that he didn’t plan to wake up Russia’s foreign minister — and said that what was happening was not a war but a “special military operation.”

Kyslytsya dismissed that description outside the meeting as “lunatic semantics.”

At the council’s second emergency meeting this week on Ukraine, members found themselves delivering prepared speeches that were instantly outdated. Some ultimately reacted in a second round of hastily added remarks.

“At the exact time as we are gathered in the council seeking peace, Putin delivered a message of war, in total disdain for the responsibility of this council,” U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield said.

She added that a draft resolution would be circulated to the council Thursday.

The resolution would declare that Russia is violating the U.N. Charter, international law and a 2015 council resolution on Ukraine, a European diplomat said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private. The resolution would urge Russia to come back into compliance immediately, the diplomat said.

Earlier Wednesday, diplomats from dozens of countries took the floor at the U.N. General Assembly to deplore Russia’s actions toward Ukraine and plead for dialogue, while Russia and ally Syria defended Moscow’s moves.

Echoing a narrative being broadcast to Russians at home, Nebenzia portrayed his country as responding to the plight of beleaguered people in the breakaway areas. Russia claims Ukraine is engaging in violence and oppression, which Ukraine denies.

“The root of today’s crisis around Ukraine is the actions of Ukraine itself,” he told the council Wednesday.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba implored countries to use tough economic sanctions, strong messages and “active diplomacy” to get Russia to back off. A lackluster response would jeopardize not only Ukraine but the concept of international law and global security, he warned.

Meeting a day after Western powers and some other countries imposed new sanctions on Russia, the 193-member General Assembly didn’t take any collective action. But the comments from nearly 70 nations, with more scheduled for Monday, represented the broadest forum of global sentiment since the crisis dramatically escalated this week.

Russia seized Ukraine’s Crimea Peninsula in 2014, and pro-Russia rebels have since been fighting Ukrainian forces in the eastern areas of Donetsk and Luhansk. More than 14,000 people have been killed in the conflict.

After weeks of rising tension as Moscow massed over 150,000 troops on Ukraine’s borders, Putin on Monday recognized the two regions’ independence and ordered Russian forces there for what he called “peacekeeping.”

Guterres disputed that, saying the troops were entering another country without its consent.

By the end of the night Wednesday, as explosions were heard in Kyiv and other cities across Ukraine, Guterres’ appeal to “give peace a chance” had become a darker and more desperate plea.

“President Putin, in the name of humanity, bring your troops back to Russia,” the secretary-general said in remarks to reporters. “In the name of humanity, do not allow to start in Europe what could be the worst war since the beginning of this century.”

US Poll: Stark racial gap in views on Black woman on high court

By CHRIS MEGERIAN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans are starkly divided by race on the importance of President Joe Biden’s promise to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court, with white Americans far less likely to be highly enthusiastic about the idea than Black Americans — and especially Black women.

That’s according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research that shows 48% of Americans say it’s not important to them personally that a Black woman becomes a Supreme Court Justice. Another 23% say that’s somewhat important, and 29% say it’s very or extremely important. Only two Black men have served on the nation’s highest court, and no Black women have ever been nominated.

The poll shows Biden’s pledge is resonating with Black Americans, 63% of whom say it’s very or extremely important to them personally that a Black woman serves on the court, compared with just 21% of white Americans and 33% of Hispanics. The findings come as Biden finalizes his pick to fill the seat that is being vacated by Stephen Breyer, who announced his retirement last month.

“While I’ve been studying candidates’ backgrounds and writings, I’ve made no decisions except one: The person I will nominate will be someone with extraordinary qualifications, character, experience and integrity, and that person will be the first Black woman ever nominated to the United States Supreme Court,” Biden said in his remarks on Breyer’s impending retirement. “It’s long overdue, in my view.”

Black women are particularly moved by the idea, with 70% placing high importance on the nomination, compared to 54% of Black men.

Diana White, a 76-year-old Democrat from Hanley Hills, Missouri, said Biden wouldn’t choose someone if “she didn’t have the potential and the professionalism and the knowledge to do the job.”

White, who is Black, said making a groundbreaking nomination could be inspirational to younger people.

“That’s what I think about, things for other people to look forward to later in life,” she said.

Any enthusiasm that could be generated by Biden’s nomination could benefit his party in this year’s midterm elections, when Democrats risk losing control of Congress. So far Biden has struggled to deliver on other goals for the Black community, such as police reform legislation and voting rights protections.

Some 91% of Black voters backed Biden in the 2020 presidential election, according to AP VoteCast, an expansive survey of the electorate.

But recent polls suggest Biden’s approval rating has dipped substantially among Black Americans since the first half of 2021, when about 9 in 10 approved of how he was handling his job. The new poll shows that his approval among Black Americans stands at 67%.

Jarvis Goode, a 35-year-old Democrat from LaGrange, Georgia, agreed that it’s “overdue” to have a Black woman on the court.

Goode, who is Black, said he hopes the nomination would provide further proof that “women can do the same as men.”

Biden first promised to choose a Black women for the Supreme Court when he was running for president. According to a person familiar with the process, he’s interviewed at least three candidates for the position — judges Ketanji Brown Jackson, J. Michelle Childs and Leondra Kruger — and he’s expected to announce his decision next week.

The poll shows that most Democrats say a Black woman on the court is at least somewhat important, though only half think it’s very important. Among Republicans, about 8 in 10 say it’s not important.

John Novak, a 52-year-old Republican from Hudson, Wisconsin, said he disliked Biden’s pledge to choose a Black woman, saying there’s too much focus on “checking boxes” when it comes to nominating people.

“It should have been stated that we’re going to pick the best candidate who is going to follow the Constitution,” said Novak, who is white. “And then throw in that we’d like her to be a woman and woman of color.”

There’s been a mixed reaction from Republican elected officials.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, described Biden’s promise as “offensive” because it sends a message to most Americans that “I don’t give a damn about you, you are ineligible.”

However, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said it did not bother him, and he noted that President Donald Trump and President Ronald Reagan had promised to nominate women for the Supreme Court.

“I heard a couple of people say they thought it was inappropriate for the president to announce he was going to put an African American woman on the court. Honestly, I did not think that was inappropriate,” said McConnell said during a Tuesday event in his home state.

The poll found that Americans’ faith in the Supreme Court continues to wane. Only 21% said they have a great deal of confidence in the high court, while 24% said they have hardly any confidence. The latter number has risen somewhat from 17% in September 2020, the last time the question was asked.

New poll: 55% of Americans say nominating a Black woman to the Supreme Court is not ‘important’ (yahoo.com)

___

The AP-NORC poll of 1,289 adults was conducted Feb. 18-21 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.