2 WEEKS’ DELAY ON EARLY CHINESE PANDEMIC DATA
During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, as researchers around the world tried to get more clarity on how it came about, the Chinese authorities waited two weeks before releasing the virus sequence data to the public.
That was the finding from the House Energy and Commerce Committee that they made public on Jan. 17.
This aerial view shows the P4 laboratory (L) on the campus of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China's central Hubei Province on May 13, 2020. Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images
A Chinese virologist—and current subgrantee of EcoHealth Alliance that got into controversy for U.S.-funded Chinese coronavirus research—submitted COVID virus genetic sequence to the National Institutes of Health database two weeks before Beijing shared such data publicly.
Energy and Commerce Committee said it was another evidence “we cannot trust any of the so-called ‘facts’ or data provided by the CCP.”
But coverup would hardly be new coming from China. Beijing has been suppressing negative outbreak-related information since the beginning of the pandemic, and continues to do so over the past four years as COVID breaks out sporadically in China.
Ren Lili, the Chinese researcher at China’s state-run Institute of Pathogen Biology, has played her part defending the regime, including by calling for the investigation of COVID origins outside of China.
The House committee, though, suggests that a lab leak theory should be seriously looked at. “Legitimacy of any scientific theories” based on information from the CCP should be questioned, they said.
—Eva Fu
WHITE HOUSE MEETING
President Joe Biden hosted congressional leaders at the White House Wednesday in hopes of persuading Republicans to support billions in additional aid for Ukraine.
Leaders from both chambers appeared optimistic about the possibility of reaching a deal, though House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said he still needs answers on Ukraine.
“We need the questions answered about the strategy, about the endgame, and about the accountability for the precious treasure of the American people,” he told reporters after the meeting.
Biden has asked Congress for $106 billion in supplemental funding, mostly to aid Ukraine in its ongoing war with Russia. The remaining funds would go toward Israel, the Indo-Pacific, and border security.
Democrats hold that Ukraine’s fate lies in the United States’ hands—or rather, purse.
“It is urgently necessary that we continue to support the Ukrainian effort for the good of the free world, for the good of democracy, and for the good of America’s national security interests,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said.
But Republicans say there will be no deal without significant immigration policy changes, such as a reinstatement of the Trump administration’s Remain in Mexico policy, an end to “catch-and-release” enforcement, and asylum and parole reforms.
A bipartisan group of senators has been working to solidify a deal that would appease both sides.
The details of the deal have yet to be officially released, but an alleged leak spread over the weekend claimed the legislation would allow the release of 5,000 illegal immigrants per day into the U.S., among other provisions.
Johnson made clear his opinion of the alleged deal with a blunt, “Absolutely not.”
But Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), the lead Republican negotiator in the Senate, took to his X account to clarify that the alleged leak was “a lie.”
“I encourage people to read the border security bill before they judge the border security bill,” he added. “I also advise people not to believe everything you read on the internet.”
—Samantha Flom
SCOTUS SEEMS POISED TO CURTAIL AGENCY POWER
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday over whether it should overturn a decades-old precedent that gives executive agencies deference in deciding how Congress’ laws allow them to regulate.
The Court seemed poised to overturn Chevron with multiple conservative justices indicating during oral argument and in prior decisions that they thought Chevron should go. The liberal justices each expressed skepticism about removing Chevron.
Chevron essentially tells courts to defer to an agency’s interpretation of a law when the law’s language is ambiguous. This set up a two-step process whereby courts first determine whether Congress had spoken unambiguously about an issue and, if not, step two entails courts deciding whether the agency’s interpretation of the ambiguity was reasonable.
Two sets of oral arguments happened with fishing companies telling the Court that Chevron violated the separation of powers outlined by the Constitution. Wednesday’s cases involved a law known as the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which the Commerce Department used to require fishing companies to pay for individuals to monitor their compliance with federal law.
Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson recused herself from participating in one of the oral arguments (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo), presumably because she heard oral argument for the case when she was on the D.C. Circuit.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, whose mother was EPA administrator when the Court decided Chevron, seemed to be the most critical of the precedent during oral arguments and, like Justice Clarence Thomas, has previously criticized the deference. Both he and Justice Brett Kavanaugh indicated that Chevron created instability in the legal system by allowing varying interpretations of laws in different administrations.
Stability of law was a major issue raised by attorneys on both sides, and is something courts consider when overturning longstanding precedent. Although the Supreme Court hasn’t applied Chevron in years, lower courts have used it frequently and created a situation whereby their rulings may be put in jeopardy if the justices overturn Chevron.
“Ambiguous ambiguity” was the phrase Justice Gorsuch used to underscore the uncertainty surrounding the interpretation of statutes under Chevron. Justice Samuel Alito similarly asked Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who was defending Chevron, for a definition of “ambiguity,” to which she replied: “Ambiguity exists when the court has exhausted the tools of interpretation and hasn’t been able to arrive at confidence that there is a right answer that Congress spoke to the issue.”
Expertise and specialized knowledge were considerations raised by Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan, who posed a hypothetical about courts deciding whether a cholesterol medication should be classified as a dietary supplement or drug. Instead, she suggested, that type of question should be left up to experts at the Health and Human Services Department.
“Uber-legislators,” Justice Jackson suggested, were what the courts could become without Chevron because it would allow courts to wade into policy by choosing between varying interpretations of a statute. Roman Martinez, who represented Relentless, Inc., argued interpretation was the courts’ job and answered a legal rather than policy question.
—Sam Dorman
WHAT’S HAPPENING
- President Joe Biden continues his Bidenomics tour with a speech in North Carolina.
- The House Homeland Security Committee holds a second hearing at 9:30 a.m. on the impeachment of DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
- No Labels, a political party that has built an infrastructure to offer a 2024 ballot line to an alternative candidate, holds a press conference in Washington. The group has said that the results of the GOP caucus in Iowa indicated a need for an alternative candidate.
Independent presidential hopeful Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s campaign announced the creation of a new political party, the “We the People” Party, in six states. The Epoch Times’ Jeff Louderback reported on the development, done in response to state-level requirements that make it harder for independent candidates to get on the ballot.
A Maine superior court has declined to intervene in a case regarding former President Donald Trump’s ability to appear on the ballot later this year, deferring to the Supreme Court’s upcoming decision. The Epoch Times’ Catherine Yang reports.
Former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley’s third-place finish in Iowa appears to have been helped, in part, by Democrats “playing Republican for a day.” The Epoch Times’ John Haughey reported on how polls and observers suggested that Democrats boosted Haley in the nation’s first electoral contest of 2024.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a Democrat-led bill in the Golden State that would have banned youth tackle football. In a time when parental rights and government overreach are key talking points in national politics, Politico reported that this veto “saved California Democrats from themselves.”
George Berges, an art dealer who helped first son Hunter Biden make a windfall selling his art spoke to President Joe Biden on two occasions, Berges told House investigators. The Epoch Times’ Zachary Stieber reported on the comments, in which Berges largely denied having had substantive conversations with the president.
