DA asks appeals court to reject Trump’s latest bid to delay his hush money sentencing
(NEW YORK) — A day after former President Donald Trump asked a federal appeals court for a stay that would delay the sentencing in his New York hush money case, the Manhattan district attorney’s office on Thursday asked the court to reject Trump’s request.
Trump’s longshot attempt to delay his Sept. 18 sentencing came a day after District Judge Alvin Hellerstein denied Trump’s bid to move his criminal case to federal court.
In a 28-page filing late Wednesday, Trump’s attorneys asked the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to stay Judge Hellerstein’s order — a move that would delay Trump’s criminal case, including his sentencing, from moving forward.
“Absent the requested stay, President Trump and the American people will suffer irreparable harm,” defense attorneys Emil Bove and Todd Blanche wrote.
In their filing on Thursday, prosecutors said there’s no reason for the appellate court to get involved.
“For one thing, state court is already considering defendant’s request to defer a ruling on his post-trial motion and to delay the sentencing hearing until after the election,” Steven Wu, chief of appeals in the Manhattan DA’s office, said in a letter filed to the court.
Trump’s lawyers claimed in the appeal that the former president’s case belongs in federal court because the allegations and evidence in the case relate to Trump’s official acts as president — an argument defense attorneys said was bolstered by the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity.
In their filing, Trump’s attorneys emphasized the “irreparable harm” of allowing the sentencing to proceed because it could result in Trump’s “unconstitutional incarceration while the 2024 Presidential election is imminent.”
“Unlawfully incarcerating President Trump in the final weeks of the Presidential election, while early voting is ongoing, would irreparably harm the First Amendment rights of President Trump and voters located far beyond New York County,” defense attorneys wrote.
Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election. He has said he will appeal the decision.
On Friday, a panel of judges on the same federal appeals court is set to consider Trump’s appeal of a 2023 civil judgment that found him liable for the sexual abuse of magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll and awarded her $5 million in damages.
(WASHINGTON) — Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office requested a delay Thursday in responding to a scheduling order from the judge overseeing former President Donald Trump’s federal election subversion case, citing issues related to the Supreme Court’s decision that granted presidents immunity from prosecution for certain acts taken while in office.
In a joint status report filed Thursday evening, Smith’s office said they continue “to assess the new precedent set forth last month” by the Supreme Court in tandem with “other Department of Justice components.”
“Although those consultations are well underway, the Government has not finalized its position on the most appropriate schedule for the parties to brief issues related to the decision,” Smith’s office said. “The Government therefore respectfully requests additional time to provide the Court with an informed proposal regarding the schedule for pretrial proceedings moving forward.”
The filing further notes former President Trump’s team did not object to the Special Counsel’s request for a three-week extension, which would also call off a status conference set for Friday of next week and reschedule it at District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s choosing for any time “convenient” after the government’s filing.
The filing is the first clear indication Special Counsel Smith’s office continues to face difficulties in determining how to move forward with its Jan. 6 case against Trump after the Supreme Court’s decision granting immunity for “official acts” taken by a president, while declining to grant immunity for so-called “unofficial acts.”
While Chutkan resumed her control of the case last Friday and set forth a quick briefing schedule, Smith’s team has had more than a month since the Supreme Court handed down its July 1 decision to deliberate on the path forward.
The delay request follows many legal experts’ exasperation over the ambiguity and lack of clarity in the high court’s immunity ruling. They say this could make it difficult for any criminal prosecution of a president to move forward — even separate from Trump’s alleged criminal efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Trump last year pleaded not guilty to charges of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called “fake electors,” using the Justice Department to conduct “sham election crime investigations,” trying to enlist the vice president to “alter the election results,” and promoting false claims of a stolen election as the Jan. 6 riot raged — all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in power.
(NEW YORK) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom is urging schools across the state to restrict students’ cellphone usage in classrooms, he said in a letter to schools.
Los Angeles Unified School District — the second largest district in the U.S. — and Santa Barbara Unified have already implemented restrictions on the use of cellphones in schools.
In 2019, Newsom signed a bill into law granting districts the authority to regulate the use of the devices during school hours.
“Excessive smartphone use among youth is linked to increased anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues. A recent Pew Research Center survey found that 72% of high school and 33% of middle school teachers report cell phone distractions as a major problem,” Newsom wrote in the letter.
“Combined with the U.S. Surgeon General’s warning about the risks of social media, it is urgent to provide reasonable guardrails for smartphone use in schools,” the letter said.
Newsom also argued that reducing the use of phones in class leads to improved concentration, better academic outcomes and enhanced social interactions.
The push for limited cellphone usage in schools comes amid concerns from public health leaders that social media platforms are contributing to a mental health crisis among young people. In June, Surgeon General Dr. Vivek H. Murthy called for a warning label to be added to social media platforms stating that social media usage can be associated with significant mental health harms for adolescents.
Virginia also announced it will restrict cellphone use in public K-12 schools. Restrictions in that state are set to go into effect starting 2025.
(NEW YORK) — Tens of thousands of Boeing workers have voted to strike after rejecting the proposed contract from the embattled aerospace company — a move with far-reaching implications for the U.S. economy.
Boeing had reached a tentative agreement earlier this week with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, or IAM, the union representing 33,000 workers at Boeing plants in Washington State, Oregon and California.
However, union members rejected the contract agreement on Thursday night with a vote of 94.6%. IAM’s members will strike at midnight on Friday after 96% voted for the action.
“The message was clear that the tentative agreement we reached with IAM leadership was not acceptable to the members,” Boeing said in a statement following the strike vote. “We remain committed to resetting our relationship with our employees and the union, and we are ready to get back to the table to reach a new agreement.”
A work stoppage would weaken Boeing as it struggles to recover from a years-long stretch of scandals and setbacks, hamstringing the nation’s largest exporter, experts told ABC News. But, they added, workers are frustrated with what they perceive as inadequate compensation and a sense they must sacrifice to make up for the company’s mismanagement.
Here’s what to know about what’s behind the strike and its implications for the U.S. economy:
Why are Boeing workers preparing to strike?
Neither Boeing nor the IAM wants a strike. The workers might carry one out anyway.
The tentative agreement struck this week delivers a 25% raise over the four-year duration of the contract, as well as worker gains on healthcare costs and retirement benefits. The union had sought a 40% pay increase over the life of the deal.
The agreement also features a commitment from Boeing to build its next commercial plane with union labor in Washington state.
Boeing touted the strength of its offer earlier this week. “Simply put, this is the best contract we’ve ever presented,” Stephanie Pope, Boeing Commercial Airplanes president and CEO, wrote in a letter to union members obtained by ABC News.
The union echoed support for the agreement, urging workers to ratify the deal.
“We have achieved everything we could in bargaining, short of a strike. We recommended acceptance because we can’t guarantee we can achieve more in a strike,” IAM District 571 President Jon Holden, who leads the union local involved in negotiations, told members in a public letter.
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, a Boeing spokesperson pointed to a letter sent to union members by CEO Kelly Ortberg.
“I hope you will choose the bright future ahead, but I also know there are employees considering another path — and it’s one where no one wins,” Ortberg said.
“For Boeing, it is no secret that our business is in a difficult period, in part due to our own mistakes in the past. Working together, I know that we can get back on track, but a strike would put our shared recovery in jeopardy, further eroding trust with our customers and hurting our ability to determine our future together,” Ortberg added.
IAM declined to respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
Still, the vote indicates that workers are ready to defy the company and the union. For years, West Coast Boeing workers have taken issue with their level of compensation, especially in light of strong company performance and a surge in the cost of living, experts said.
“There are years and years of pent-up frustration among Boeing workers,” Jake Rosenfeld, a professor of sociology at Washington University in St. Louis who studies labor, told ABC News. “This is an expression of being completely fed up.”
Union members also view themselves as being asked to make sacrifices made necessary by the company’s mismanagement, said Henry Harteveldt, a travel industry analyst at Atmosphere Research Group.
In January, a door plug blew out of the company’s 737 Max 9 aircraft during an Alaska Airlines flight, prompting a federal investigation. The renewed scrutiny arrived roughly five years after Boeing 737 Max aircraft were grounded worldwide following a pair of crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia that killed a combined 346 people.
In 2021, after a two-year ban, Boeing 737 Max aircraft were permitted to fly.
Boeing is carrying nearly $60 billion in debt, Pope noted in her letter to union members. The company’s share price has plummeted almost 40% since the outset of 2024. Ortberg took over as CEO last month.
“The workers cannot and should not be expected to bear all of the burden of the changes needed at Boeing,” Harteveldt said.
“But I don’t think Boeing is asking them or expecting them to do that,” Harteveldt added. “Boeing has extended what appears to be a very generous offer with substantial wage increases.”
What’s at stake in a potential Boeing strike?
Boeing, which employs 145,000 U.S.-based workers, is a major U.S. firm with a sprawling network of suppliers, experts said.
The company estimates that it contributes nearly $80 billion to the U.S. economy each year, and indirectly accounts for 1.6 million jobs.
A prolonged strike would weaken production with the potential to slow output, diminish income and trigger layoffs, Harteveldt said.
“There’s a risk of a downward spiral,” Harteveldt said.
Such a strike would not impact flight activity or down planes, however, since the workers at issue take part in manufacturing new products. That stands in contrast with an averted railroad strike in 2022, which would have halted a sizable share of the nation’s cargo trains.
“This wouldn’t be as devastating,” Rosenfeld said.
Still, he added, a potential strike would hold implications for a signature U.S. firm.
“It would further damage an iconic company that has already had years of setbacks,” Rosenfeld said.