Connect with us

News

Joe Biden drops out of US election and endorses Kamala Harris

Published

on

Joe Biden drops out of US election and endorses Kamala Harris

Unlock the US Election Countdown newsletter for free

US President Joe Biden has abandoned his re-election bid following overwhelming pressure from fellow Democrats and endorsed his vice-president Kamala Harris to succeed him, saying it was “in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down”.

The president announced his decision to quit the race in a letter published to social media on Sunday, throwing this year’s White House contest into turmoil with less than four months to go until voters in the world’s biggest economy elect their new leader on November 5.

“It has been the greatest honour of my life to serve as your president,” Biden said. “And while it has been my intention to seek re-election, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as president for the remainder of my term.”

Advertisement

The president added that he would speak to the country “later this week in more detail about my decision”. Biden has not been seen in public since Wednesday, when he was diagnosed with Covid-19.

He said in a second social media post that he would “offer my full support and endorsement for Kamala to be the nominee of our party this year”.

“Democrats — it’s time to come together and beat Trump,” Biden added. “Let’s do this.”

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Harris later issued her own statement saying she was “honoured” to have Biden’s endorsement, adding: “My intention is to earn and win this nomination.

Advertisement

“I will do everything in my power to unite the Democratic party — and unite our nation — to defeat Donald Trump,” she added.

Harris, who would become the country’s first female president should she win, quickly picked up the backing of several influential Democrats.

Former president Bill Clinton and the party’s 2016 nominee Hillary Clinton issued a joint statement saying they were “honoured to join the president in endorsing vice-president Harris”, adding they would “do whatever we can to support her”.

Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, and Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer — both considered possible presidential candidates themselves — were also expected to endorse Harris, said three prominent Democratic party donors and operatives with direct knowledge of the matter. Representatives for Newsom and Whitmer did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Barack Obama, who selected Biden as his own vice-president in 2008, issued a statement calling him “one of America’s most consequential presidents, as well as a dear friend and partner”. Obama stopped short of endorsing a successor, but said he had “extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges”.

Advertisement

Democrats will need to rally behind a new presidential candidate in the weeks before the party’s official nominating convention on August 19. Democratic National Committee chair Jaime Harrison on Sunday said the party would “in short order” lay out the “next steps and the path forward for the nomination process”.

Biden’s unprecedented decision will reverberate across the globe, injecting new uncertainty into US policy at a moment of acute geopolitical tension, from the Indo-Pacific to Ukraine to the Middle East.

Biden’s announcement follows more than three weeks of wrenching debate among Democrats about his candidacy after a disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump reignited concerns about the 81-year-old’s mental acuity and damaged his standing among American voters. An Associated Press poll out last week found nearly two-thirds of Democratic voters said Biden should drop out of the race.

Trump had opened up a significant polling lead over Biden in national and swing state surveys in recent weeks. In a statement posted to his Truth Social platform on Sunday he said Biden was “not fit to run for president” and “certainly not fit to serve”.

Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson issued a statement calling for Biden’s immediate resignation from the presidency.

Advertisement

“If Joe Biden is not fit to run for president, he is not fit to serve as president,” Johnson said.

But Biden’s decision earned him immediate praise from several top Democrats, including Senate leader Chuck Schumer, who described him as a “great president . . . a great legislative leader” and “a truly amazing human being”.

“His decision of course was not easy, but he once again put his country, his party, and our future first.”

Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic House leader, said the country would be “forever grateful” to Biden for his leadership.

The decision by the 46th American president not to seek a second term marks the beginning of the end of one of Washington’s most storied political careers. Biden entered the Senate in 1973, became vice-president to Obama in 2009, and gained the Oval Office in 2020 in an era marked by a global pandemic, economic recovery, inflation and war.

Advertisement

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending