Connect with us

Politics

Supreme Court to hear case of Los Angeles man denied visa over his tattoos

Published

on

Supreme Court to hear case of Los Angeles man denied visa over his tattoos

The Supreme Court will take up the case of a Los Angeles man who was denied a visa, in part because of his tattoos.

Luis Acensio Cordero has been separated from his wife Sandra Muñoz for nine years after he was denied a visa to return to the U.S. The couple sued, arguing the federal government had violated Muñoz’s constitutional right to marriage and due process by denying her husband’s visa without providing a timely explanation.

They secured a victory in California’s 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2022. Then the Biden administration appealed to the Supreme Court.

Advertisement

On Friday, the court announced it will hear the case but limit its review to the first two of three questions presented by the federal government in its appeal.

Those questions are “whether a consular officer’s refusal of a visa to a U.S. citizen’s noncitizen spouse impinges upon a constitutionally protected interest of the citizen,” and “whether, assuming that such a constitutional interest exists, notifying a visa applicant that he was deemed inadmissible… suffices to provide any process that is due.”

The third question not taken up by the court was whether due process requires the government to provide a further factual basis for the visa denial “within reasonable time.”

The outcome of the case could have ripple effects for immigrants like Acensio, who rarely win challenges to the government’s visa denials. His attorneys fear that if the Supreme Court sides with the Biden administration, former President Trump — if reelected — would use the decision and the underlying authority to justify blanket bans of people from certain countries, as he did while in office.

Acensio had been living in the U.S. unlawfully when he and Muñoz got married in 2010. The final step in his green card petition was to return to his native country of El Salvador for a consular interview. The government denied it, saying Acensio would be likely to engage in unlawful activity if allowed back into the U.S.

Advertisement

In court proceedings, consular officials argued that they didn’t owe the family an explanation for the decision. They cited the doctrine of consular non-reviewability, which prevents judicial reviews of visa determinations made by consular officers as long as the decision is “facially legitimate and bona fide.” But in certain cases, a U.S. citizen who proves they were harmed by the denial can challenge the doctrine.

The couple learned in 2018 that, based on Acensio’s in-person interview, a criminal review and a review of his tattoos, the federal government believed he was a member of MS-13, the Salvadoran criminal gang that started in Los Angeles in the 1980s, according to court documents.

Politics

State regulators vote to keep utility profits high, angering customers across California

Published

on

State regulators vote to keep utility profits high, angering customers across California

Despite complaints from customers about rising electric bills, the California Public Utilities Commission voted 4 to 1 on Thursday to keep profits at Southern California Edison and the state’s other big investor-owned utilities at a level that consumer groups say has long been inflated.

The commission vote will slightly decrease the profit margins of Edison and three other big utilities beginning next year. Edison’s rate will fall to 10.03% from 10.3%.

Customers will see little impact in their bills from the decision. Because the utilities are continuing to spend more on wires and other infrastructure — capital costs that they earn profit on — that portion of customer bills is expected to continue to rise.

The vote angered consumer groups that had detailed in filings and hearings at the commission how the utilities’ return on equity — which sets the profit rate that the companies’ shareholders receive — had long been too high.

Among those testifying on behalf of consumers was Mark Ellis, the former chief economist for Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Gas. Ellis estimated that the companies’ profit margin should be closer to 6%.

Advertisement

He argued in a filing that the California commission had for years authorized the utilities to earn an excessive return on equity, resulting in an “unnecessary and unearned wealth transfer” from customers to the companies.

Cutting the return on equity to a little more than 6% would give Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric, SDG&E and SoCalGas a fair return, Ellis said, while saving their customers $6.1 billion a year.

The four commissioners who voted to keep the return on equity at about 10% — the percentage varies slightly for each company — said they believed they had found a balance between the 11% or higher rate that the four utilities had requested and the affordability concerns of utility customers.

Alice Reynolds, the commission’s president, said before the vote that she believed the decision “accurately reflects the evidence.”

Commissioner Darcie Houck disagreed and voted against the proposal. In her remarks, she detailed how California ratepayers were struggling to pay their bills.

Advertisement

“We have a duty to consider the consumer interest in determining what is a just and reasonable rate,” she said.

Consumer groups criticized the commission’s vote.

“For too long, utility companies have been extracting unreasonable profits from Californians just trying to heat or cool their homes or keep the lights on,” said Jenn Engstrom at CALPIRG. “As long as CPUC allows such lofty rates of return, it incentivizes power companies to overspend, increasing energy bills for everyone.”

California now has the nation’s second-highest electric rates after Hawaii.

Edison’s electric rates have risen by more than 40% in the last three years, according to a November analysis by the commission’s Public Advocates Office. More than 830,000 Edison customers are behind in paying their electric bills, the office said, each owing a balance of $835 on average.

Advertisement

The commission’s vote Thursday was in response to a March request from Edison and the three other big for-profit utilities. The companies pointed to the January wildfires in Los Angeles County, saying they needed to provide their shareholders with more profit to get them to continue to invest in their stock because of the threat of utility-caused fires in California.

In its filing, Edison asked for a return on equity of 11.75%, saying that it faced “elevated business risks,” including “the risk of extreme wildfires.”

The company told the commission that its stock had declined after the Jan. 7 Eaton fire and it needed the higher return on equity to attract investors to provide it with money for “wildfire mitigation and supporting California’s clean energy transition.”

Edison is facing hundreds of lawsuits filed by victims of the fire, which killed 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes in Altadena. The company has said the fire may have been sparked by its 100-year-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon, which it kept in place even though it hadn’t served customers since 1971.

Return on equity is crucial for utilities because it determines how much they and their shareholders earn each year on the electric lines, substations, pipelines and the rest of the system they build to serve customers.

Advertisement

Under the state’s system for setting electric rates, investors provide part of the money needed to build the infrastructure and then earn an annual return on that investment over the assets’ life, which can be 30 or 40 years.

In a January report, state legislative analyst Gabriel Petek detailed how electric rates at Edison and the state’s two other biggest investor-owned electric utilities were more than 60% higher than those charged by public utilities such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. The public utilities don’t have investors or charge customers extra for profit.

Before the vote, dozens of utility customers from across the state wrote to the commission’s five members, who were appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, asking them to lower the utilities’ return on equity.

“A profit margin of 10% on infrastructure improvements is far too high and will only continue to increase the cost of living in California,” wrote James Ward, a Rancho Santa Margarita resident. “I just wish I could get a guaranteed profit margin of 10% on my investments.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Trump Boasts About Economy in Prime Time Speech

Published

on

Video: Trump Boasts About Economy in Prime Time Speech

new video loaded: Trump Boasts About Economy in Prime Time Speech

transcript

transcript

Trump Boasts About Economy in Prime Time Speech

The president gave a televised speech that featured repeated criticism of Democrats and his predecessor, Joseph R. Biden Jr., along with boasts about gains that many Americans have said they are not experiencing.

Good evening, America. Eleven months ago, I inherited a mess, and I’m fixing it. The last administration and their allies in Congress looted our treasury for trillions of dollars, driving up prices and everything at levels never seen before. I am bringing those high prices down. It’s not done yet, but boy, are we making progress. Nobody can believe what’s going on. Here are just some of the efforts that we have underway. You will see in your wallets and bank accounts in the new year, after years of record setting falling incomes, our policies are boosting take-home pay at a historic pace. Next year, you will also see the results of the largest tax cuts in American history that were really accomplished through our great, Big Beautiful Bill. Military service members will receive a special, we call, “warrior dividend,” before Christmas, a “warrior dividend,” in honor of our nation’s founding in 1776. And the checks are already on the way. We are respected again like we have never been respected before. To each and every one of you, have a merry Christmas and a happy new year. God bless you all.

Advertisement
The president gave a televised speech that featured repeated criticism of Democrats and his predecessor, Joseph R. Biden Jr., along with boasts about gains that many Americans have said they are not experiencing.

By Shawn Paik

December 18, 2025

Continue Reading

Politics

Texas Republicans launch ‘Sharia Free America Caucus’ aimed at defending ‘Western civilization’

Published

on

Texas Republicans launch ‘Sharia Free America Caucus’ aimed at defending ‘Western civilization’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

FIRST ON FOX: A pair of conservative lawmakers are launching a new group in the House of Representatives to “protect Western civilization in the United States,” according to one of its founders.

Reps. Keith Self, R-Texas, and Chip Roy, R-Texas, are starting the “Sharia Free America Caucus,” Fox News Digital learned first.

“Anytime you go to a fight, you bring as many friends with you as you can. I’m a military guy,” Self told Fox News Digital. “So what we need to do is build this caucus now so that we can start educating the American people to the dangers of Sharia in the United States.”

TRUMP MOVES AGAINST MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD AS ISLAMIST GROUP SPREADS IN WEST

Advertisement

Reps. Chip Roy and Keith Self are creating a new group called the “Sharia Free America Caucus.” (Tom Brenner/Getty Images; Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Self said it was “fundamentally incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.”

The caucus also has support in the Senate from Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., who Self said he hoped could help push some of its legislative goals forward through both chambers.

Among the bills they’re hoping to push is a ban on foreign nationals who “adhere to Sharia” from entering the U.S., and a measure that would designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.

FORMER UK PM DEFENDS TRUMP FOR HIGHLIGHTING ‘SHARIA LAW’ IN BRITAIN DURING UN SPEECH

Advertisement

Sen. Tommy Tuberville arrives for a Senate Republican Caucus luncheon at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, April 2, 2025 (Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

“America is facing a threat that directly attacks our Constitution and our Western values: the spread of Sharia law,” Roy said in a statement. “From Texas to every state in this constitutional republic, instances of Sharia adherents masquerading as ‘refugees’ — and in many cases, sleeper cells connected to terrorist organizations — are threatening the American way of life.”

Sharia broadly refers to a code of ethics and conduct used by devout Muslims. Sharia law more specifically often refers to the criminal code used in non-secular Islamic countries, like Iran.

In its most extreme cases, such as when ISIS-controlled parts of the Middle East, charges like blasphemy could carry the death penalty.

U.S. Capitol building is seen in Washington, Dec. 2, 2024.  (Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Advertisement

But guarantees of religious freedom in the Constitution mean that Sharia law can not be carried out on any governmental level in the U.S.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The Republicans’ caucus appears largely symbolic in nature, but it’s evidence of the continued culture war raging in the country.

Self also pointed to countries like the U.K. and France, where growing unrest between Muslim refugees and the current populace has dominated headlines in recent years.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending