Liberals irate with Democrats who praise DNI nominee Jay Clayton
by Kerry Picket · The Washington TimesLiberal activists at Demand Progress criticized the top Democrats on the Senate and House intelligence committees for praising President Trump’s nominee for director of national intelligence.
Demand Progress said Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia and Jim Himes of Connecticut “gushed” over Jay Clayton, a Manhattan U.S. attorney, to replace Tulsi Gabbard as the next director of national intelligence.
“No Democrat should find solace in the fact that Trump has once again named a partisan hatchet man to be the nation’s top spy. Just as Trump asked Bill Pulte to investigate Letitia James and Adam Schiff, he also has asked Jay Clayton to investigate Democrats’ ties to Jeffrey Epstein,” said Demand Progress Executive Director Sean Vitka.
“The fact that Sen. Warner and Rep. Himes would gush so effusively over Clayton shows their clear desire to sabotage a deal on FISA privacy reforms and hand President Trump the unfettered surveillance powers that he is asking for.”
Mr. Warner said of Mr. Clayton that he has “known and respected Jay Clayton for many years and believe he is a capable public servant.”
Mr. Himes, meanwhile, said he has known Mr. Clayton for decades and “he had the independence of mind and respect for the law that are necessary for any Director of National Intelligence.”
He added, “The Senate should evaluate and confirm his nomination quickly. It is critical that we have a permanent DNI in place and move past the Bill Pulte disaster.”
Advertisement Advertisement
Ms. Gabbard plans to resign on Friday to be with her husband, who was recently diagnosed with bone cancer.
Her announced departure last month prompted Mr. Trump to appoint federal housing regulator Bill Pulte to replace her on an acting basis. Lawmakers balked at Mr. Pulte’s nomination, leading to the House voting down the reauthorization of the federal government’s foreign surveillance powers in protest. The statute expired on June 13.
Mr. Vitka said Mr. Pulte and Mr. Clayton both have proven that they will carry out Mr. Trump’s instructions “to weaponize the government against his political enemies.”
Trump DOJ prodded to settle abortion drug lawsuit
Pro-life activists urged Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to crack down on criminal instances of pregnant women being slipped an abortion drug to a woman without their knowledge.
Advertisement Advertisement
Susan B. Anthony Pro Life America, which called on the Justice Department to act, cited recent reports of misuse of the drugs, including a pregnant woman “poisoned” when someone surreptitiously tried to abort her baby.
SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser called on Mr. Blanche to settle with Louisiana by agreeing to a court-ordered consent decree that would end “Biden’s unlawful mail-order abortion drug policy and restore in-person dispensing immediately while the FDA completes a prompt, rigorous safety review.”
“There is a strong argument that leaving the mail-order policy in place violates federal law, namely the Administrative Procedure Act,” Ms. Dannenfelser said. “It is also politically perilous: 7 in 10 Americans want these deadly drugs out of the mail, and nearly a third of GOP base voters are at risk of sitting out midterms if the GOP abandons pro-life policies. Only immediate action can prevent future crimes before they happen.”
Mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortions, has been FDA-approved for over 25 years. When first approved, the agency required it to be dispensed in person by a physician. The Biden administration lifted the restriction in 2023, after an internal scientific review, allowing certified retail pharmacies to fill prescriptions directly and permitting the drug to be distributed by mail.
Advertisement Advertisement
Louisiana sued the FDA last October in federal court, seeking to restore the in-person requirement nationwide. The state argued the 2023 rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act and invoked an 1873 anti-obscenity statute.
Effort underway to strengthen immunity law for gun manufacturers
The Firearms Policy Coalition said that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) must be updated to better shield those the law was intended to protect, and the organization is doing just that.
The PLCAA is a federal law enacted in 2005 that provides legal immunity to firearms manufacturers and dealers from civil liability lawsuits when their products are used criminally or unlawfully by a third party.
Advertisement Advertisement
“FPC developed a proposed PLCAA amendment that advances the real mission: protecting the People’s rights and ensuring that frivolous litigation cannot be used to redline the Second Amendment out of existence.”
Congress passed it in response to a wave of lawsuits by cities and municipalities in the late 1990s and early 2000s seeking to hold gun makers financially responsible for gun violence.
The law is not absolute, and there are six exceptions where lawsuits can proceed, including negligence, knowing violation of state or federal statutes, breach of contract or warranty, defective product, injunctive relief by the government and actions against those who aided or abetted a knowing violation, also known as the “predicate exception.”
The last exception is the most litigated and permits lawsuits when a manufacturer or seller “knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product,” and was invoked by the plaintiffs in the Sandy Hook families’ suit against Remington under Connecticut’s Unfair Trade Practices Act.
Advertisement Advertisement
The case settled for $73 million in 2022.
• The Advocates column is a weekly look at the political action players who drive the debate and shape policy outcomes in Washington. Send tips to theadvocates@washingtontimes.com. Click here to receive The Advocates in your inbox each week.
Contact the author
Kerry Picket
Follow author updates Follow Click to follow. Manage followed authors