News Brief (April 10): Arizona Supreme Court Issues Bombshell Decision on Abortion | AUDIO

Good morning, and welcome to The Epoch Times News Brief for Wednesday, April 10, 2024. I’m Bill Thomas, and today, we have a lineup of significant developments,
News Brief (April 10): Arizona Supreme Court Issues Bombshell Decision on Abortion | AUDIO
Arizona Supreme Court Justices (L–R) William G. Montgomery, John R. Lopez IV, Vice Chief Justice Ann A. Scott Timmer, Chief Justice Robert M. Brutinel, Clint Bolick, and James Beene listen to oral arguments in Phoenix on April 20, 2021. (Matt York, File/AP Photo)
4/10/2024
Updated:
5/18/2024
0:00

Good morning, and welcome to The Epoch Times News Brief for Wednesday, April 10, 2024. I’m Bill Thomas, and today, we have a lineup of significant developments, from groundbreaking court decisions to economic warnings that hint at uncertain times ahead. Let’s get right into it.

First up, in Arizona, a historic court ruling revives a nearly 160-year-old abortion ban. We'll explore the implications.

Arizona Supreme Court Issues Bombshell Decision on Abortion

Arizona’s Supreme Court has ruled that a pre-statehood ban on most abortions is legally enforceable in the state, settling a nearly two-year legal battle.

The 1864 law prohibits abortions in Arizona, except in cases where the mother’s life is at risk. The court’s 4–2 ruling overturns a lower court’s opinion that a 15-week abortion limit enacted in 2022 overrides the older law. The court concluded that the 2022 law does not repeal or restrict the 1864 ban and is dependent on a federal constitutional right to abortion that no longer exists. Consequently, the ban is now enforceable and will take effect on April 23.

This ruling comes after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision in June 2022, which overturned Roe v. Wade, sparking a nationwide debate.

Some have criticized the ban as “extreme and dangerous,” while others see it as a victory for the protection of unborn children. A ballot initiative for the general election in Arizona aims to establish a constitutional right to abortion until the point of fetal viability.

Former President Donald Trump and Arizona Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake both expressed support for states deciding the legality of abortion, with Ms. Lake calling for a common-sense solution from Arizona’s leaders.

Next, President Trump clashes with Sen. Lindsey Graham over abortion policies.

Trump Responds to Lindsey Graham’s Criticism of His Abortion Announcement

President Trump responded to criticism from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and other critics of his recent abortion-related announcement. President Trump said that if Republicans pursue Mr. Graham’s proposals, they will likely lose in the 2024 elections.

He urged Mr. Graham and others to study the 10th Amendment and states’ rights, emphasizing that states should make their own choices regarding abortion. President Trump argued that passing a federal ban on abortion is unlikely, as Democrats will not support Republican-based bans.

He accused Democrats of wanting to keep the issue of abortion at the forefront of the 2024 election to hand losses to Republicans. President Trump highlighted that terminating Roe v. Wade was a significant event but acknowledged that it also brought difficulties.

He criticized Mr. Graham and others who wanted the issue to be determined by the federal government, claiming that his states’ rights-based proposal aligns with longstanding GOP policy.

President Trump underscored that his endorsement was crucial for Mr. Graham’s success in South Carolina. Additionally, he expressed disappointment in criticism from other conservatives, including Mike Pence.

President Trump’s legal battles continue in New York. Details ahead.

Trump Lawyers Argue Attorney General Cannot Turn Monitor Into Special Counsel

Lawyers for President Trump are objecting to New York Attorney General Letitia James’s request for an expanded monitorship in the civil fraud case against the former president and his Trump Organization.

They argue that final judgment has already been entered in the case, and Ms. James’s request is an attempt to turn the monitor into her own special counsel.

The lawyers also claim that the request is a politicized investigatory proceeding that lacks the characteristics of a judicial proceeding. They argue that discovery had closed months ago at the direction of the attorney general, and the defense has not withheld any information related to perjury.

The lawyers raise concerns that the attorney general’s request was made via an informal letter, which would prevent the defendants from appealing any amendment to the monitorship order. They argue that conferring investigative authority on the monitor would violate separation of powers principles. The defense maintains that an investigation at this stage would not change the outcome of the trial or the final judgment.

Now, we head into another major story about President Trump. Stay with us.

Appeals Court Accepts Trump Gag Order Appeal but Won’t Delay Trial

New York Supreme Court Justice Cynthia Kern denied a motion from President Trump’s attorneys to delay his trial until he could appeal a gag order. The judge ordered briefs to be submitted by April 15, the start of the trial.

This came a day after another New York Supreme Court justice rejected a separate request to postpone the trial while the defense sought a change of venue.

President Trump is facing 34 counts of falsifying business records related to an alleged payment scheme to suppress negative news stories during the 2016 presidential election.

On March 26, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan issued a gag order prohibiting President Trump from making statements about several groups of people related to the case. The judge later expanded the gag order to cover his and the district attorney’s family members after President Trump made comments about the judge and his daughter’s involvement in the case.

The defense has sued the judge over the gag order and argued for President Trump’s right to comment on high-profile witnesses and claim the case is politically motivated.

Next, in Michigan, a groundbreaking sentence for the parents of a school shooter sets a new precedent.

Michigan School Shooter’s Parents Sentenced to More Than 10 Years in Prison

James and Jennifer Crumbley, whose son carried out a school shooting at Oxford High School in 2021, have been sentenced to 10–15 years in prison for involuntary manslaughter. This makes them the first parents in the United States to be held criminally responsible for a school shooting committed by their child. They were found guilty in separate jury trials earlier this year.

Judge Cheryl Matthews ordered that they have no contact with the families of the victims and will decide later whether they are allowed contact with their son, Ethan, the shooter. Prosecutors had sought a 10–15-year sentence for the parents, arguing that they failed to take adequate measures to prevent the tragedy, including locking up the gun used in the shooting and ignoring warning signs about their son’s mental health.

During the sentencing hearing, the defense criticized the pre-sentencing investigation for inaccuracies and bias. They argued that it did not reflect the specific defendant and contained incorrect information.

Victim impact statements were read in court, expressing the pain and anger felt by the families of the victims.

Reina St. Juliana, the older sister of Hana, a student killed in the shooting, said the maximum sentence being 15 years is “too short,” adding “Hana didn’t even have 15 years to live.”

The Crumbleys apologized to the families in their own statements and asked for a fair sentence. They also expressed agreement with a parent who called for an investigation into the shooting and the response from the school and first responders.

Their son, Ethan Crumbley, pleaded guilty to murder and terrorism and is serving a life sentence without parole.

The parents had hoped to avoid prison time, but prosecutors argued for a sentence that exceeded the advisory guideline range, citing the severe impact of the tragedy on the community. The defense attorneys requested sentences of fewer than five years in prison each.

The judge ultimately sentenced them to 10–15 years in prison, taking into account the devastating consequences of their negligence. It is unclear whether the parents will appeal the convictions.

Finally, JPMorgan’s CEO issues a dire economic warning, signaling turbulent times ahead.

JPMorgan CEO Issues a Stark Warning

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon has issued a warning about the U.S. economy, stating that the risks facing Americans could be the worst since World War II.

In his annual letter to shareholders, Mr. Dimon expressed concerns about the possibility of a “soft landing” for the economy. He highlighted that investors may be ignoring risks in an increasingly complex and dangerous world.

Mr. Dimon identified major economic and geopolitical forces such as debt levels, fiscal stimulus, and conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East as potential threats to global markets. He also expressed worries about the Biden administration’s deficit spending, inflation rates, quantitative easing, and deglobalization.

Mr. Dimon warned that “the impact of these geopolitical and economic forces are large and somewhat unprecedented” and that “they may not be fully understood until they have completely played out over multiple years.”

Additionally, he expressed concerns about persistent inflationary pressures driven by factors such as fiscal stimulus, supply chain disruptions, and the growing need for capital in the green economy.

Mr. Dimon emphasized the potential negative impact of geopolitical instability on America and warned of a potential restructuring of the global order. He advised businesses and investors to plan for a “very broad” range of interest rates, from 2 percent to as high as 8 percent or even more. He also suggested that investors prepare for the possibility of stagflation.

Mr. Dimon’s concerns about inflation were also echoed by other Wall Street executives.

That’s our final story on today’s edition of The Epoch Times News Brief, but before we sign off, we always like to remind you: if you enjoy our News Brief program, please let us know by sending over an email. We’re at [email protected]. We always welcome your thoughts, comments, and suggestions.

We’d also appreciate it if you could tell a few of your friends, family, and co-workers about our program as we continue to try and grow the News Brief.

Remember, we’re portable, we’re on-demand, and you can get caught up on all the important issues very rapidly and from pretty much anywhere, anytime, except when you’re busy working as a court stenographer. In which case, continue to catch all the live testimony, and the News Brief will be here for when you’re done working. Very convenient!

Finally, we end today’s program with this notable quote:

“If you look at what you have in life, you‘ll always have more. If you look at what you don’t have in life, you’ll never have enough.” -Oprah Winfrey

Thanks a million for tuning in to the program. We hope you always have enough in life, and for all of us here at The Epoch Times News Brief, I’m Bill Thomas. Have a meaningful day today.