News
Trump to Pick Ohio Solicitor General, T. Elliot Gaiser, for Justice Dept. Legal Post
President Trump intends to nominate T. Elliot Gaiser, the conservative solicitor general of Ohio, to be the assistant attorney general leading the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, according to a Justice Department official. That position has traditionally often had the final say on legal debates within the executive branch.
The Office of Legal Counsel issues authoritative interpretations of the law for the executive branch through courtlike opinions. Its view of what the law permits is binding on other agencies and officials unless the attorney general overrides the office or the president opts not to take its advice.
The office was at the center of many legal and policy fights during Mr. Trump’s first administration. Led by the Trump appointee Steven Engel, it signed off on the ordering of the targeted killing of a top Iranian official and the Treasury Department’s withholding of Mr. Trump’s tax returns from Congress.
Mr. Gaiser, whose selection as the forthcoming nominee was provided by the official on condition of anonymity to discuss a matter that has not yet been announced, has a strong conservative legal résumé.
He clerked for Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. during the Supreme Court’s 2021-2 term, when Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion overruling the Roe v. Wade abortion rights precedent.
Mr. Gaiser had previously served two clerkship years with prominent conservative appellate court judges, Judge Neomi Rao of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and Judge Edith H. Jones of the Fifth Circuit, alternating with short stints at law firms.
He did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment late on Tuesday.
A native of Ohio, Mr. Gaiser attended Hillsdale College, a Christian liberal arts college in Michigan, and graduated in 2012 with a degree in political economy and speech studies. He spent a year at Ohio State University’s law school before transferring to the University of Chicago to finish his degree, according to his LinkedIn profile.
After his Supreme Court clerkship, Mr. Gaiser spent a year as an associate at the law firm Jones Day before the Ohio attorney general, Dave Yost, appointed him as the state’s solicitor general, representing the state government in appellate matters. Mr. Gaiser had clerked in that office after his second year in law school.
In announcing the appointment in October 2023, Mr. Yost called Mr. Gaiser “a master craftsman of ironclad legal arguments rooted in originalist principles and constitutional restraint.”
He argued before the Supreme Court in February, defending a state agency in a discrimination case brought by a heterosexual woman who twice lost positions to gay colleagues.
His arguments attracted puzzlement from the justices because he disavowed lower-court rulings in favor of the state that had turned on the idea that a member of a majority group must provide extra evidence of discrimination, compared to a member of a minority.
Mr. Gaiser told the Supreme Court that the plaintiff could not establish that she was discriminated against based on her sexual orientation so should lose the case — but also that the state agreed with her that “it is wrong to hold some litigants to a higher standard because of their protected characteristics.”
That prompted Justice Elena Kagan to ask whether the appeals court — which had ruled for Ohio — was wrong. Mr. Gaiser said it was.
“The idea that you hold people to different standards because of their protected characteristics is wrong,” he said.
The website for the Federalist Society, the conservative legal network, shows that Mr. Gaiser has participated in numerous events sponsored by the group in recent years. And the Heritage Foundation, where he was an intern in the summer of 2013, honored him last December as a distinguished alumnus.
He told a Heritage Foundation-linked online publication in December that Ohio was suing the Biden administration in 44 cases, while expressing conservative views on issues like environmental regulations, illegal immigration and transgender rights.
News
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
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.
News
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. 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.
News
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.
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.
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts5 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO5 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
News1 week agoWorld reacts as US top court limits Trump’s tariff powers