Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., has drawn fire for his questioning of the first Muslim American judicial nominee.

Hawley, along with Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, posed what the Council on American Islamic Relations called "irrelevant" and "hostile" questions to the Democratic nominee about Israel, Palestinians and the Middle East.

Edward Mitchell, national deputy director of the council, denounced the three senators for their treatment of President Joe Biden's historic judicial nominee, Adeel Mangi, during his confirmation hearing.

"Singling out a Muslim judicial nominee and forcing him to answer 'gotcha questions' about the Middle East simply because of faith or because of his tangential connections to Muslims who comment on the Middle East is un-American and Islamophobic," Mitchell stated.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., presided at the hearing and said Republican senators have "reached a new low, hurling unfounded accusations of antisemitism at an historic Muslim American judicial nominee today." He read out a letter from The National Council of Jewish Women noting their endorsement of Mangi's nomination.

Hawley was the last of the three GOP senators to question Mangi and pressed him multiple times on whether he believed Israel is a colonial state, an occupying force in Palestinian territory. Mangi reiterated he is not an expert on the Middle East, and such policy questions weren't relevant to why he was there.

"Senator, I have no basis as a judicial nominee to cast a view on the Middle East," Mangi said.

The questioning became so hostile Durbin banged his gavel several times to tell Cruz to stop and to tell Hawley his time was up. Hawley said he asked the same question in four different ways and Mangi did not give a clear "yes" or "no" answer.


get more stories like this via email

The Ohio Democratic Party is ramping up to get more people thinking about running for statewide offices.

The goal is to boost representation in upcoming elections because Democrats have noted too often, Republican candidates in Ohio run unopposed. The recruitment program is part of a national campaign led by the group Contest Every Race.

Katie Seewer, press secretary for the Ohio Democratic Party, pointed out Ohio has thousands of local offices on the ballot. She said they have identified suburbs of major cities and rural areas as ideal spots for future contenders.

"Once they're interested, we connect them with our county parties. We can get resources there," Seewer explained. "Then, we also provide training and teach folks how to get on the ballot, how to raise money, all that stuff that you need to know to run a campaign."

The recruitment program includes text messaging infrastructure, coaching calls and meetings to organize and mobilize. Seewer argued finding candidates in every Ohio county who reflect their local communities is key to widespread voter representation. She added more than 200 people have reached out so far to express an interest since recruitment efforts began.

Just under 72% of Ohio's registered voters cast their ballot in last year's presidential election. The outcome was not what Democrats had hoped for, although Vice President Kamala Harris' short but impactful presidential campaign has inspired more women to consider running for office nationwide.

Seewer emphasized the recruitment efforts are open to anyone passionate about making change in their communities but acknowledged some women may need a nudge.

"When we do these kinds of efforts to directly recruit folks, there are studies out there that show women need to be directly asked, where guys just think, 'Hey, I could do that,'" Seewer stressed. "When we're directly asking folks, it's definitely going to lead to more women in politics and running in these races."

The recruitment program is casting a wide net for candidates to fill more than 6,000 offices, including village and city council members, school board members and other local positions. The deadline to file for the next election is Feb. 5.


get more stories like this via email

With just a few days before President Joe Biden leaves office, more than 140 nonprofits are urging him to act on the Equal Rights Amendment. Passed by Congress in 1972 and ratified by 38 states by 2020, the ERA ensures constitutional gender equality.

Amy Widestrom, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, said it prohibits discrimination based on sex, empowers Congress to enforce it, and takes effect two years after ratification.

"What we're really advocating for is that because we've reached the three-quarters threshold of the states, that the archivist published the amendment. It's met the constitutional requirements to become an amendment of the United States Constitution," she explained.

Widestrom pointed out some people argue the ERA missed its congressional deadline, but legal scholars say the Constitution doesn't allow or require such deadlines for amendments. They point to the 27th Amendment, introduced with the Bill of Rights and ratified centuries later, as proof deadlines are not binding.

Widestrom said the Constitution currently lacks a provision guaranteeing equal protection based on sex.

"Right now we rely on the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law, but it does not specify by sex. And there is a sitting Supreme Court justice that has said that he believes that the Constitution allows for sex discrimination. So it would be an important addition to the Constitution," she continued.

Widestrom noted that during Donald Trump's first presidency, he directed the archivist not to publish the ERA, creating a less supportive environment. With Biden rescinding that directive, she believes this is the best chance for ratification. She emphasized the importance of Pennsylvanians working with Congress and the White House to explore the best options for the ERA.

A proposal to make Wisconsin's strict Voter ID law a constitutional amendment passed Wisconsin's Republican-controlled Assembly on Tuesday.

Voters will see the proposal on the April 1 ballot. If approved, the state constitution would be amended, which would make the change much harder to repeal in the future. Proponents insist stricter ID requirements help to prevent voter fraud.

Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause Wisconsin, and other opponents said they also provide a partisan advantage for Republicans.

"All it does is, it reduces the opportunity for certain segments of the population to be able to vote," Heck explained. "It doesn't do anything about preventing fraud, and it's just a voter suppression method."

Heck believes the measure will attract more conservatives to the polls in April. And even if voters reject the idea of changing the constitution, the state's voter ID requirement, which is already among the strictest in the country, would remain.

The state's voter ID law has been long debated for its prohibitive requirements. Wisconsin allows seven forms of identification to be presented at the polls but Heck pointed out they have to meet particular requirements.

"These are forms of ID that, although they seem on the surface to make some sense, they're very difficult for some segments of the population to obtain," Heck emphasized.

Heck added rushing to put the requirements in the state constitution is strategic, given the state Supreme Court justice ballot the measure will share. Over more than 40 years, the conservative Heritage Foundation lists only 68 cases of voter fraud in Wisconsin.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.


get more stories like this via email