Florida
Sotomayor says presidents have largely followed rule of law, offers words of caution
MIAMI (AP) — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said presidents have historically obeyed judicial rulings with a few exceptions as she advocated for the court to move cautiously to maintain a system of checks and balances, but without directly referencing President Donald Trump’s efforts to test the limits of the executive power.
“By and large, we have been a country who has understood that the rule of law has helped us maintain our democracy,” she said Tuesday. “But it’s also because the court has proceeded cautiously, and has proceeded understanding that it has to proceed slowly.”
Sotomayor, a member of the court’s liberal minority, did not mention Trump. But her remarks come as top Trump administration officials are questioning the judiciary’s authority to halt the Republican leader’s sweeping changes over the past few weeks.
The pushback from the courts is in response to Trump’s efforts to dismantle government agencies and eliminate large swaths of the federal workforce. Judges have blocked Trump from moving forward with mass federal resignations and from implementing an executive order that seeks to end birthright citizenship for anyone born in the U.S.
Sotomayor spoke about the 1803 case Marbury v. Madison, saying it gives the courts the final say on the constitutionality of laws.
The justice, who was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Barack Obama in 2009, said there have been a few exceptions for presidents not respecting the court’s rulings. President Andrew Jackson ignored an 1832 Supreme Court decision that sided with the Cherokee against his forcibly removing them from their land and sending federal troops to evict them.
Last week, Sotomayor had already criticized how the conservative-led court has upended decades-old precedents. On Tuesday, Sotomayor told a Miami audience that doing so makes people feel discomfort with the court.
“We must be cognizant that every time we upset precedent, we upset people’s expectations and the stability of law. It rocks the boat in a way that makes people uneasy about whether they’re protected or not protected by the law.”
The court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, ending nationwide protections for abortion rights, a ruling Trump has taken credit for after appointing three conservative justices in his first term. The court also struck down affirmative action in college admissions.
Sotomayor said she was an advocate for the court to move more slowly.
“And if you’re going to undo precedent, do it in small measures. Let the society absorb the steps,” she said.
Arizona
Court sets March 19 date for first execution in state in over 2 years
PHOENIX (AP) — The Arizona Supreme Court set a March 19 execution date Tuesday for a man who pleaded guilty to murder more than 17 years ago and recently said his death sentence was “long overdue.” It would be the state’s first application of the death penalty in more than two years.
The court issued an execution warrant for Aaron Brian Gunches, who was convicted in 2007 in the 2002 shooting death of Ted Price, his girlfriend’s ex-husband, near the Phoenix suburb of Mesa.
Gunches also shot a trooper twice when he was pulled over by the Arizona Department of Public Safety near the California border in 2003, according to authorities. A bulletproof vest saved the trooper, and bullet casings from that scene matched ones found near Price’s body.
In a statement, Price’s sister, Karen Price, described her brother as a kind and loving person who enjoyed watching the Phoenix Suns and Arizona Diamondbacks and riding his motorcycle.
Price expressed relief now that the execution warrant has been issued. Her brother’s two children, teenagers at the time of his death, were forever changed, she said.
“It’s impossible to describe how Ted’s murder has devastated our family,” Price said.
Arizona, which has 112 prisoners on death row, last carried out three executions in 2022 following a nearly eight-year hiatus brought on by criticism that a 2014 execution was botched and because of difficulties obtaining drugs for execution. In one of the 2022 executions, the state was criticized for taking too long to insert an IV for lethal injection into a condemned prisoner.
The court had issued a death warrant for Gunches nearly two years ago, but the sentence wasn’t carried out because the state’s Democratic attorney general agreed not to pursue executions during a review of the state’s death penalty protocol. The review ended in November when Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs dismissed the retired federal magistrate judge she had appointed to examine execution procedures.
A spokesman said then that the review resulted in critical improvements to meet legal and constitutional standards, and that the governor “remains committed to upholding the law while ensuring justice is carried out in a way that’s transparent and humane.”
The 53-year-old Gunches, who isn’t a lawyer but is representing himself, had asked the court in late December to skip legal formalities and schedule his lethal injection earlier than authorities had planned, saying his death sentence was “long overdue.” The state Supreme Court rejected his request.
There was no immediate response to phone and email messages seeking comment from Emily Skinner, an attorney who serves as Gunches’ advisory counsel.
New York
NYC argues for noncitizen voting law before state’s top court
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — New York’s top court was asked Tuesday to reverse a ruling against a law that would allow noncitizens to vote in New York City municipal elections by lawyers who argued city officials acted within their legal powers.
New York City became the first major U.S. city to grant widespread municipal voting rights to noncitizens in January 2022 — though the law approved by the Democrat-led city council was never implemented due to a legal challenge from Republicans. The city law did not grant noncitizens the right to vote in presidential, congressional or state elections.
A trial judge sided with Republican challengers to noncitizen voting in June 2022. And a mid-level state appeals court ruled last year that the law violated the state constitution and a legal requirement to hold a public referendum on the proposal because it changed an election method.
The city council appealed to the state Court of Appeals. An attorney for the council told the judges that the city government did not violate the state constitution.
“It engaged in a core act of self-governance and the exercise of its home rule powers. This court should hold that the constitution permits the city to make that choice,” attorney Claude Platton said.
The city law gave municipal voting rights to noncitizens who have been lawful permanent residents of the city for at least 30 days, along with those authorized to work in the U.S. Supporters contend the law gives a say to more than 800,000 authorized immigrants. Mayor Eric Adams let the measure become law without his signature.
Republican officials accused Democrats of passing to law for partisan gain and promptly challenged the law in court. Their attorney Michael Hawrylchak argued that the state constitution expressly defines voting as a right granted only to citizens.
Arguments Tuesday focused largely on how to interpret specific constitutional language and how to define words like “citizen.” Though Judge Jenny Rivera noted the law could have an big impact if implemented, saying it would “expand the franchise to a very large number of individuals.”
A decision is expected in the coming months.
More than a dozen communities across the United States have allowed noncitizens to cast ballots in local elections, including 11 towns in Maryland and two in Vermont.
New York
Former aide to governors faces new charges in foreign agent of China case
NEW YORK (AP) — A former aide to two New York governors and her husband are facing additional charges in a case accusing her of acting as an agent of the Chinese government.
Linda Sun and Chris Hu pleaded not guilty to the charges at a hearing Tuesday in Brooklyn federal court, according to prosecutors.
Sun, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in China, held numerous posts in New York state government over a roughly 15-year career, including deputy chief of staff for Gov. Kathy Hochul and deputy diversity officer under former Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
Prosecutors have said Sun, at the behest of Chinese officials, promoted Chinese government priorities within New York state government, such as preventing representatives of the Taiwanese government from having access to the governor’s office. In return, prosecutors said, Hu received help for his various business ventures in China.
Sun had been charged last year with violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act, money laundering conspiracy and helping people commit visa fraud and enter the U.S. illegally. Hu was previously charged with money laundering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit bank fraud and misuse of means of identification.
The money laundering conspiracy charge against both Sun and Hu was amended to include additional legal statutes, prosecutors said Tuesday. Hu pleaded not guilty to three additional money laundering counts.
A superseding indictment didn’t elaborate on the nature of Hu’s charges other than to say they were related to three financial transactions in 2020 totaling $1.5 million. A spokesperson for federal prosecutors declined to comment beyond what was in the updated indictment.
Jarrod Schaeffer, one of Sun’s attorneys, said the revised indictment does not allege any new counts against his client, nor does it “remedy critical errors identified in the prior indictment.”
Lawyers for Hu didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment Tuesday. The couple remains free on bond and are due back in court April 23.
Prosecutors have said the financial arrangement with Chinese officials helped the couple buy a $3.6 million home on Long Island, a nearly $2 million condominium in Hawaii and luxury cars. Sun also received smaller gifts, including tickets to performances by Chinese groups and “Nanjing-style salted ducks.”
Sun’s lawyers argue in a motion seeking to dismiss the charges that she had been unfairly targeted because of her affluence and ethnic background.
“In the government’s view, Ms. Sun and her family simply have too much and so there must be a nefarious reason,” the filing reads. “Sputtering about state ethics rules and undisclosed gifts, the government eventually reached the conclusion that when a woman of Chinese heritage allegedly receives unreported gifts from other Chinese individuals, she must be bought and paid for by China.”
Prosecutors, in their written response, argued Sun’s efforts to dismiss the charges is premature, saying the indictment provides “ample factual details” to back up the claims.
They note Sun never registered as a foreign agent with the state and actively concealed actions she took on behalf of China. Prosecutors also said that during a voluntary interview with FBI agents, she misrepresented the purpose of at least one trip to China and concealed the fact that it was arranged and funded by Chinese representatives.
The case is part of a broader Justice Department effort to root out secret agents for the Chinese government who U.S. officials say are covertly advancing Beijing’s interests and harassing and intimidating Chinese dissidents on American soil.
Sotomayor says presidents have largely followed rule of law, offers words of caution
MIAMI (AP) — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said presidents have historically obeyed judicial rulings with a few exceptions as she advocated for the court to move cautiously to maintain a system of checks and balances, but without directly referencing President Donald Trump’s efforts to test the limits of the executive power.
“By and large, we have been a country who has understood that the rule of law has helped us maintain our democracy,” she said Tuesday. “But it’s also because the court has proceeded cautiously, and has proceeded understanding that it has to proceed slowly.”
Sotomayor, a member of the court’s liberal minority, did not mention Trump. But her remarks come as top Trump administration officials are questioning the judiciary’s authority to halt the Republican leader’s sweeping changes over the past few weeks.
The pushback from the courts is in response to Trump’s efforts to dismantle government agencies and eliminate large swaths of the federal workforce. Judges have blocked Trump from moving forward with mass federal resignations and from implementing an executive order that seeks to end birthright citizenship for anyone born in the U.S.
Sotomayor spoke about the 1803 case Marbury v. Madison, saying it gives the courts the final say on the constitutionality of laws.
The justice, who was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Barack Obama in 2009, said there have been a few exceptions for presidents not respecting the court’s rulings. President Andrew Jackson ignored an 1832 Supreme Court decision that sided with the Cherokee against his forcibly removing them from their land and sending federal troops to evict them.
Last week, Sotomayor had already criticized how the conservative-led court has upended decades-old precedents. On Tuesday, Sotomayor told a Miami audience that doing so makes people feel discomfort with the court.
“We must be cognizant that every time we upset precedent, we upset people’s expectations and the stability of law. It rocks the boat in a way that makes people uneasy about whether they’re protected or not protected by the law.”
The court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, ending nationwide protections for abortion rights, a ruling Trump has taken credit for after appointing three conservative justices in his first term. The court also struck down affirmative action in college admissions.
Sotomayor said she was an advocate for the court to move more slowly.
“And if you’re going to undo precedent, do it in small measures. Let the society absorb the steps,” she said.
Arizona
Court sets March 19 date for first execution in state in over 2 years
PHOENIX (AP) — The Arizona Supreme Court set a March 19 execution date Tuesday for a man who pleaded guilty to murder more than 17 years ago and recently said his death sentence was “long overdue.” It would be the state’s first application of the death penalty in more than two years.
The court issued an execution warrant for Aaron Brian Gunches, who was convicted in 2007 in the 2002 shooting death of Ted Price, his girlfriend’s ex-husband, near the Phoenix suburb of Mesa.
Gunches also shot a trooper twice when he was pulled over by the Arizona Department of Public Safety near the California border in 2003, according to authorities. A bulletproof vest saved the trooper, and bullet casings from that scene matched ones found near Price’s body.
In a statement, Price’s sister, Karen Price, described her brother as a kind and loving person who enjoyed watching the Phoenix Suns and Arizona Diamondbacks and riding his motorcycle.
Price expressed relief now that the execution warrant has been issued. Her brother’s two children, teenagers at the time of his death, were forever changed, she said.
“It’s impossible to describe how Ted’s murder has devastated our family,” Price said.
Arizona, which has 112 prisoners on death row, last carried out three executions in 2022 following a nearly eight-year hiatus brought on by criticism that a 2014 execution was botched and because of difficulties obtaining drugs for execution. In one of the 2022 executions, the state was criticized for taking too long to insert an IV for lethal injection into a condemned prisoner.
The court had issued a death warrant for Gunches nearly two years ago, but the sentence wasn’t carried out because the state’s Democratic attorney general agreed not to pursue executions during a review of the state’s death penalty protocol. The review ended in November when Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs dismissed the retired federal magistrate judge she had appointed to examine execution procedures.
A spokesman said then that the review resulted in critical improvements to meet legal and constitutional standards, and that the governor “remains committed to upholding the law while ensuring justice is carried out in a way that’s transparent and humane.”
The 53-year-old Gunches, who isn’t a lawyer but is representing himself, had asked the court in late December to skip legal formalities and schedule his lethal injection earlier than authorities had planned, saying his death sentence was “long overdue.” The state Supreme Court rejected his request.
There was no immediate response to phone and email messages seeking comment from Emily Skinner, an attorney who serves as Gunches’ advisory counsel.
New York
NYC argues for noncitizen voting law before state’s top court
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — New York’s top court was asked Tuesday to reverse a ruling against a law that would allow noncitizens to vote in New York City municipal elections by lawyers who argued city officials acted within their legal powers.
New York City became the first major U.S. city to grant widespread municipal voting rights to noncitizens in January 2022 — though the law approved by the Democrat-led city council was never implemented due to a legal challenge from Republicans. The city law did not grant noncitizens the right to vote in presidential, congressional or state elections.
A trial judge sided with Republican challengers to noncitizen voting in June 2022. And a mid-level state appeals court ruled last year that the law violated the state constitution and a legal requirement to hold a public referendum on the proposal because it changed an election method.
The city council appealed to the state Court of Appeals. An attorney for the council told the judges that the city government did not violate the state constitution.
“It engaged in a core act of self-governance and the exercise of its home rule powers. This court should hold that the constitution permits the city to make that choice,” attorney Claude Platton said.
The city law gave municipal voting rights to noncitizens who have been lawful permanent residents of the city for at least 30 days, along with those authorized to work in the U.S. Supporters contend the law gives a say to more than 800,000 authorized immigrants. Mayor Eric Adams let the measure become law without his signature.
Republican officials accused Democrats of passing to law for partisan gain and promptly challenged the law in court. Their attorney Michael Hawrylchak argued that the state constitution expressly defines voting as a right granted only to citizens.
Arguments Tuesday focused largely on how to interpret specific constitutional language and how to define words like “citizen.” Though Judge Jenny Rivera noted the law could have an big impact if implemented, saying it would “expand the franchise to a very large number of individuals.”
A decision is expected in the coming months.
More than a dozen communities across the United States have allowed noncitizens to cast ballots in local elections, including 11 towns in Maryland and two in Vermont.
New York
Former aide to governors faces new charges in foreign agent of China case
NEW YORK (AP) — A former aide to two New York governors and her husband are facing additional charges in a case accusing her of acting as an agent of the Chinese government.
Linda Sun and Chris Hu pleaded not guilty to the charges at a hearing Tuesday in Brooklyn federal court, according to prosecutors.
Sun, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in China, held numerous posts in New York state government over a roughly 15-year career, including deputy chief of staff for Gov. Kathy Hochul and deputy diversity officer under former Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
Prosecutors have said Sun, at the behest of Chinese officials, promoted Chinese government priorities within New York state government, such as preventing representatives of the Taiwanese government from having access to the governor’s office. In return, prosecutors said, Hu received help for his various business ventures in China.
Sun had been charged last year with violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act, money laundering conspiracy and helping people commit visa fraud and enter the U.S. illegally. Hu was previously charged with money laundering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit bank fraud and misuse of means of identification.
The money laundering conspiracy charge against both Sun and Hu was amended to include additional legal statutes, prosecutors said Tuesday. Hu pleaded not guilty to three additional money laundering counts.
A superseding indictment didn’t elaborate on the nature of Hu’s charges other than to say they were related to three financial transactions in 2020 totaling $1.5 million. A spokesperson for federal prosecutors declined to comment beyond what was in the updated indictment.
Jarrod Schaeffer, one of Sun’s attorneys, said the revised indictment does not allege any new counts against his client, nor does it “remedy critical errors identified in the prior indictment.”
Lawyers for Hu didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment Tuesday. The couple remains free on bond and are due back in court April 23.
Prosecutors have said the financial arrangement with Chinese officials helped the couple buy a $3.6 million home on Long Island, a nearly $2 million condominium in Hawaii and luxury cars. Sun also received smaller gifts, including tickets to performances by Chinese groups and “Nanjing-style salted ducks.”
Sun’s lawyers argue in a motion seeking to dismiss the charges that she had been unfairly targeted because of her affluence and ethnic background.
“In the government’s view, Ms. Sun and her family simply have too much and so there must be a nefarious reason,” the filing reads. “Sputtering about state ethics rules and undisclosed gifts, the government eventually reached the conclusion that when a woman of Chinese heritage allegedly receives unreported gifts from other Chinese individuals, she must be bought and paid for by China.”
Prosecutors, in their written response, argued Sun’s efforts to dismiss the charges is premature, saying the indictment provides “ample factual details” to back up the claims.
They note Sun never registered as a foreign agent with the state and actively concealed actions she took on behalf of China. Prosecutors also said that during a voluntary interview with FBI agents, she misrepresented the purpose of at least one trip to China and concealed the fact that it was arranged and funded by Chinese representatives.
The case is part of a broader Justice Department effort to root out secret agents for the Chinese government who U.S. officials say are covertly advancing Beijing’s interests and harassing and intimidating Chinese dissidents on American soil.
