Donald Trump administration condemned for opposing Washington child abuse law; senator says 'children will continue to suffer'
The Washington law was signed into effect by Governor Bob Ferguson in May of this year but has been beset by a number of legal challenges from religious advocacy groups, as well as local representatives of the Catholic church, who oppose it on the grounds of religious freedom.
Donald Trump's administration has made it clear it stands firmly against the Washington law as well, with Attorney General Pam Bondi launching a First Amendment probe against the legislation.
This has culminated in the DOJ formally intervening in the lawsuit between the Seattle, Spokane and Yakima Catholic dioceses against the Washington Governor's office, known as Etienne v Ferguson.
This Friday, Judge David G. Estudillo granted a preliminary injunction blocking the law's enforcement.
Advocates for stronger laws against child abuse have spoken out against this development, with Senator Noel Frame saying, 'Children will continue to suffer because religious leaders they trust are not reporting when children tell them they are being hurt.'
JUST IN: A federal judge has barred Washington state from enforcing a law that would have required priests to report evidence of child abuse learned during confession.The Trump administration had intervened on the side of the Catholic clergy.https://t.co/CkAt8urSd4 pic.twitter.com/nP2rL2tBD9
Trump's Department of Justice opposes child abuse law
Donald Trump's Department of Justice is working to invalidate Washington state's law as part of a broader conservative agenda to protect religious institutions.
Weighing in on the Etienne v Ferguson lawsuit, the DOJ claimed that the law "deprives Catholic priests of their fundamental right to freely exercise their religious beliefs, as guaranteed under the First Amendment".
A federal judge has ruled that Catholic priests in Washington state cannot be required to report child abuse or neglect they learn about through confession after the Trump administration intervened in their favor.
Child abuse has been a recurring stain on the Catholic church's reputation ever since the church was embroiled in scandal after scandal throughout the 1990s and 2000s. Advocates of the Catholic church have claimed that the church has reformed as a consequence and can police itself, but these arguments have repeatedly been called into question in recent investigations such as the 2018 Pennsylvania grand jury report.
The case will likely escalate to the Supreme Court
The legal battle regarding Washington's child abuse law is likely to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Given that Donald Trump himself has appointed the majority of the Supreme Court justices, there is considerable pessimism on the law's ability to hold up to legal challenges.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
23 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Japan's Ishiba says he'll stay in office to tackle inflation and US tariffs despite election loss
Trump has added to the pressure, complaining about a lack of progress in trade negotiations and the lack of sales of U.S. autos and American-grown rice to Japan despite a shortfall in domestic stocks of the grain. A 25% tariff due to take effect Aug. 1 has been another blow for Ishiba. At a news conference Monday, Ishiba said his LDP and the Komeito have agreed to stick with their coalition while seeking further cooperation from opposition parties. Ishiba resisted calls for his resignation and did not say how much longer he planned to stay on. He is sticking around for the country and the people, not for self-interest, 'to put the pressing issues on a path to a solution," he said. Voters frustrated with price increases exceeding the pace of wage hikes, especially younger people who have long felt ignored by the ruling government's focus on senior voters, rapidly turned to emerging conservative and right-wing populist parties. Established liberal to centrist parties, including the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, gained little ground. The Democratic Party for the People quadrupled its seats by campaigning for higher take-home pay. The right-wing Sanseito, running on a 'Japanese First' platform that puts tougher regulations on foreigners and brakes on gender and sexual diversity, surged to number three in the opposition. The LDP has lost support due to the people's discontent over the party's measures for rising prices, foreign residents and other reasons and that he will 'quickly analyze the results and learn the lesson," Ishiba said. None of the opposition parties said they want to form a full-fledged alliance with the governing coalition but are open to cooperating on policy. CDPJ leader Yoshihiko Noda told broadcaster NHK that his priority is to form an alliance among the opposition. 'Public opinion clearly said 'no' to the Ishiba government,' Noda said. Sanseito leader Sohei Kamiya told NHK late Sunday he is open to cooperating with the ruling bloc on conservative policies. While he said his party did better than expected, he would wait to gain more seats in the other house in the next election and attempt to form a multi-party coalition like in Europe. The Sanseito party's stance encouraged the spread of xenophobic rhetoric in the campaign and on social media, while also attracting people who are strugging with economic woes and looking for targets to vent their discontent and anxiety, experts say. The language triggered protests from rights activists and alarmed foreign residents.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
23 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Samajwadi Party misused power to occupy office space for ₹115: SC
The Supreme Court on Monday rapped the Samajwadi Party for "fraudulently occupying" office space for a paltry Rs 115 in Uttar Pradesh's Pilibhit, underlining a "clear misuse of political power". A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi told senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for the political party, that it was not a case of fraudulent allotment but a case of "fraudulent occupation using muscle power and misusing power". The top court was acting on the party's plea against Nagarpalika Parishad of Pilibhit's eviction order. Dave argued despite paying rent for the office space, the municipal authorities were adamant to evict his client. He said a suit seeking injunction on the eviction order had been filed. "You are a political party. You misused official position and political power to occupy the space. When action comes, you start remembering everything. Have you ever heard of office space in a municipal area for Rs 115 rent. This is a clear case of abuse of power," the bench noted. When Dave pressed for protection from eviction for six weeks, the bench said, "Right now, you are an unauthorised occupant. These are not fraudulent allotments but fraudulent occupations." Dave claimed the party was being singled out by the authorities. "It will be better if you file a writ petition before the high court and bring to the court's notice any such fraudulent allotment or occupation. We will be welcoming this step," the bench said. Refusing to examine the plea, the bench did not express any opinion on the petitioner's suit in the civil court which it said should be decided at the earliest. The party was challenging the July 2 order of the Allahabad High Court refusing to hear the plea. On June 16, the top court dismissed a similar plea moved by the party's Pilibhit district president against the high court order restraining him from filing a fresh petition on the issue of eviction order for local party office. The top court granted liberty to the party to move the high court against the decision of the civic body. The apex court pointed out a 998-day delay in filing the appeal against the December 1, 2020 order of the high court on the plea of one Anand Singh Yadav who claimed to be the party's district president. The party had claimed that the civic body ordered it to vacate the premises on November 12, 2020 without offering it the opportunity to be heard.
NDTV
23 minutes ago
- NDTV
What Next in Impeachment Process For Judge Caught In Cash-At-Home Row
New Delhi: The process of impeachment of Justice Yashwant Varma - the former Delhi High Court judge at whose home "piles of burnt Rs 500 notes" were found - having started in parliament with a memorandum signed by 145 MPs, Speaker Om Birla is expected to carry the ball further tomorrow, by forming an inquiry committee. The committee is expected to include a serving judge of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of a High Court and a reputed jurist. The report of the committee - which is expected to investigate the allegations against Justice Varma - is likely to come during the winter session of parliament. After this, the process of investigation and hearing will start. The committee is expected to lay down the allegations and a copy of it will be given to the judge, who will also be given a chance to respond in writing. After this, there could be an interrogation or cross-examination of witnesses in the matter, following which the committee will present its conclusions in parliament. The committee's report will be discussed in both houses and Justice Verma will be given a chance to present his side. This would be followed by the actual process of voting for impeachment in both houses of parliament. To carry out the impeachment, either a simple majority of the total number of members or a two-thirds majority of those present and voting will be required. A go ahead from both houses is needed after which the President issues an order to remove the judge. The complicated process of impeachment is part of the reason why no judge has been impeached in Independent India. On most of the five cases that came close, the judges had resigned before the proceedings had reached the final phase. Justice Yashwant Varma had come under scrutiny after a fire broke out at his official residence on March 14 and wads of half-burnt cash were found. It had caused a furore, and though Justice Varma denied any wrongdoing, questions were raised about the judiciary. In view of the row, then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had initiated an in-house inquiry. A three-judge panel was appointed to conduct an investigation. After the committee confirmed the presence of cash at Justice Varma's residence and submitted its report to the CJI, Justice Khanna sent the findings to the Prime Minister and the President, recommending initiation of removal proceedings as per the Judges Inquiry Act and Article 124(4) of the Constitution.
