DOCSLIB.ORG

UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162980 Date: 09/26/2018 Re: Office of Civil Rights To: Cheryl Mills RELEASE IN PART 86 86 Subject: Re: Office of Civil Rights He could but I doubt he would. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162980 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162981 Date: 09/26/2018 Can I call Harold Koh and Eric Goosby? To: Cheryl Mills ...______ ____, RELEASE IN PART 86 B6 Subject: Can I call Harold Koh and Eric Goosby? I'll be home in ten minutes if you want to talk. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162981 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162982 Date: 09/26/2018 Office of Civil Rights From: Cheryl Mills RELEASE IN PART 86 86 To: Hillary Clinton [email protected] Subject: Office of Civil Rights Before I mention to D as something perhaps worth exploring- do you think this is a role he can fulfill? Office of Civil Rights At the Department of State, diversity is not just aworthy cause: it is abusiness necessity. Diversity of experience and background helps Department employees in the work of diplomacy. The Secretary believes that diversity is extremely important in making the State Department an employer of choice. The Secretary has delegated both tasks of advancing diversity within the Department and ensuring equal opportunity to all employees to the Director of the Office of Civil Rights (S/OCR), who also serves as the Chief Diversity Officer (CDO). S/OCR advises and assists the Secretary and other principal officers in equal employment opportunity (EEO) policy and diversity management issues that relate to the Department of State. The office is symbiotically separated into three sections: Diversity Management and Outreach, Intake and Resolution, and Legal. The Diversity Management and Outreach section helps the Department foster awork environment free of discrimination by maintaining an affirmative outreach program. It performs this task by preparing workforce diversity reports, managing special emphasis programs, delivering EEO and diversity briefings, conducting workforce analysis to eradicate barriers to equal employment opportunity for individuals and groups, organizing commemorative events to recognize the contributions of a diverse array of individuals and groups, and more. The Intake and Resolution section handles all complaints surrounding employment discrimination in both the informal/counseling process and the formal complaint process. The Intake and Resolution section manages the Department's Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program and the counseling program. Any employee or applicant who believes he/she has been discriminated against on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, or reprisal for protected EEO activity should contact S/OCR or an EEO counselor within 45 calendar days of the alleged discriminatory act. S/OCR is one of the few EEO offices within the federal government to employ in-house counsel. The Legal section seeks to advance the mission of S/OCR by providing assistance with legal compliance as it relates to the administrative processing of UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162982 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162982 Date: 09/26/2018 EEO complaints and other EEO issues. The Legal section also investigates sexual and discriminatory harassment complaints within the Department reported pursuant to the requirements of 3 FAM 1525 and 1526. S/OCR is in the forefront of establishing best practices for EEO and diversity management within afederal agency. The Department of State is the first cabinet-level agency to appoint aChief Diversity Officer with oversight authority to integrate and transform diversity principles into practices in the Department's operations. Another best practice cited by the EEOC is a dialogue between S/OCR and each bureau within the Department to discuss the bureau's current diversity statistics and ways that each bureau can work to improve the diversity of staff, experiences, and thought. For more information about EEO and diversity, please contact us at: Office of Civil Rights S/OCR, Room 7428 Department of State Washington, DC 20520 Email: [email protected] Tel: (202) 647-9295 or (202) 647-9294 Fax: (202) 647-4969 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162982 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162996 Date: 09/26/2018 Fwd: Fw: WSJ: Former President Clinton Retracts Default Comments From: Cheryl Mills 86 To: Hillary Clinton [email protected] RELEASE IN PART 86 Subject: Fwd: Fw: WSJ: Former President Clinton Retracts Def ault Comments Per your request ---------- Forwarded message ---------­ From: Cheryl Mills Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 20:30:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Fw: WSJ: Former President Clinton Retracts Default Comments To: Doug Band yes and then we should not do so again On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Doug Band wrote: > > > *From*: Matt McKenna ~------~ >*Sent*: Thursday, May 26, 201112:46 PM >*To*: Doug Band >*Cc*: Gene Sperling ; Jen Psaki < >~---- >*Subject*: WSJ: Former President Clinton Retracts Default Comments > > >Former President Clinton Retracts Default Comments > By LAURA MECKLERAnd DAMIAN >PALETIA UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162996 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162996 Date: 09/26/2018 > >WASHINGTON-Former President Bill Clinton retracted comments that the U.S. >government could default on its debt for afew days without "calamitous" >consequences, after being urged to do so by top White House officials, >people familiar with the events said Thursday. > >After hearing Mr. Clinton's comments on Wednesday, White House Chief of >Staff Bill Daley and Gene Sperling, director of the National Economic >Council, spoke with aides to Mr. Clinton and advised that he clarify his >thinking, two people said. The former president did so that afternoon. > >The White House officials suggested Mr. Clinton's comments could be used by >congressional Republicans, who are resisting the Obama administration's push >to raise the government's $14.3 trillion borrowing limit. Some Republicans >have been arguing that allowing the deadline to pass wouldn't be as >catastrophic as the Obama administration has warned. > >Mr. Daley, who is traveling with President Barack Obama in Europe, heard >about Mr. Clinton's remarks and called Doug Band, the former president's top >aide. Mr. Daley suggested that Mr. Clinton may have walked into abigger >controversy than he intended, one person said. For months, the White House >has been urging Congress to raise the legal borrowing limit so the >government has enough money to pay all its bills. > >Mr. Sperling, who was at a conference on fiscal issues where Mr. Clinton >spoke, helped draft Mr. Clinton's clarification. Mr. Sperling and Mr. Daley >both worked for Mr. Clinton when he was president. > >The White House's effort at damage control came as it is negotiating with >Republicans about ways to reduce the federal budget deficit, which they hope >will win them broad support for raising the borrowing limit. Obama >administration officials have argued that the debt ceiling must be raised >before Aug. 2or the government will default, which could rock financial >markets and trigger another recession. > >Speaking at the Washington conference, sponsored by the Peter G. Peterson >Foundation, Mr. Clinton said, "If we defaulted on the debt once for afew >days, it might not be calamitous. But if people thought we were literally UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162996 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162996 Date: 09/26/2018 >not going to pay our bills anymore, then they would stop buying our debt." > >That echoed GOP arguments that lawmakers can negotiate over an increase in >the government's borrowing limit until the last possible minute-and even >risk adefault-without major consequences. Mr. Clinton's remarks strayed not >only from the Obama White House position, but also from his own >administration's view during asimilar battle in the 1990s. > >In the statement, Mr. Clinton's spokesman, Matt McKenna, said the former >president "inadvertently misspoke" and "did not in any way mean to suggest >that adefault would not be highly damaging for the economy even for avery >short period of time." > >"What he meant to say was that if avote to extend the debt limit failed in >advance of adefault, that might not be harmful for acouple of days, but >that if people thought that we might actually default, that in his words 'we >were literally not going to pay our bills anymore,' then they would stop >buying our debt." > >The U.S. government hit the debt ceiling last week, but the Treasury >Department has several tools to avoid adefault until the beginning of >August. > >*Write to * Laura Meckler at [email protected] mand Damian Paletta at >[email protected] > Sent from my mobile device UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162996 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Session from Hell by Arnold Hamilton These Are the Raw Numbers: the Lawmakers Consider Sacrosanct: Cor- Legislature’S 101 House Members Porate Welfare
    $2.50 25,000 Blue Chip Readers VOL. 42, NO. 2 An Independent Journal of Commentary JANUARY 25, 2010 Wingnuts And Corporatists Session From Hell By Arnold Hamilton These are the raw numbers: The lawmakers consider sacrosanct: cor- Legislature’s 101 House members porate welfare. and 48 senators filed 2,235 bills and The state has created a cornucopia 59 resolutions in advance of the 2010 of tax exemptions – including sales session that opens Feb. 1. taxes on newspapers – that benefit Toss in the 1,051 bills and 86 res- the supposedly free-market Chamber olutions left over from last year and crowd. When GOP Sen. Mike Mazzei lawmakers could take up as many as of Tulsa tried to repeal them and start 3,431 measures this year – or one for over, he discovered neither Republi- just about every little Oklahoma town cans nor Democrats were much inter- the size of Medford or Fairland, Wister ested in disappointing wealthy busi- or Hydro. ness interests and deep-pocketed As impressive – or depressing – as campaign donors. the sheer magnitude of legislative Don’t be surprised if the GOP lead- creativity may be, there’s really only ership targets education, despite lip one number that is important to know service to the contrary. The corporat- heading into this session: 1.3 billion. ists in charge are not beyond using That’s the size of the projected hole the crisis to attempt to bring their – in dollars – in the 2010-11 budget, arch-enemies, the state’s teachers down from a $7.1 billion spending unions, to their knees.
    [Show full text]
  • UNDENIABLE the Survey of Hostility to Religion in America
    UNDENIABLE The Survey of Hostility to Religion in America 2014 Edition Editorial Team Kelly Shackelford Chairman Jeffrey Mateer Executive Editor Justin Butterfield Editor-in-chief Michael Andrews Assistant Editor Past Contributors Bryan Clegg An Open Letter to the American PEople UNDENIABLE To our fellow citizens: The Survey of Hostility to Religion in America Hostility to religion and religious freedom in America—institutional, pervasive, damaging hostility—can no longer reasonably be denied. And 2014 Edition yet there remain deniers. Because denial of these attacks is a mortal threat to the survival and health of Kelly Shackelford, chairman our republic, Liberty Institute and Family Research Council collaborated in 2012 to publish a survey documenting the frequency and severity of incidents Jeffrey Mateer, executive editor of hostility. In the 2013 survey entitled Undeniable, the research team led by Justin Butterfield, editor-in-chief a Harvard-trained constitutional attorney found almost twice the number of incidents in the previous twelve months than all the incidents found from Michael Andrews, assistant editor several years’ past. The rate of hostility was increasing at an alarming rate. This year in Undeniable: The Survey of Hostility to Religion 2014, the team Copyright © 2013–2014 Liberty Institute. of researchers again documented an alarming increase in the number of All rights reserved. hostile incidents toward religion from the year before. The rate of hostility is continuing to climb. We offer Undeniable 2014 to you, the American people, as an alarm bell This publication is not to be used for legal advice. Because the law is ringing in the night. We believe the many public opinion surveys showing constantly changing and each factual situation is unique, Liberty Institute that you, the people, are still a religious people.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S9304
    S9304 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE September 14, 2009 table, but this man is one of the great- the principal symptom of this adminis- Let me take my concerns one by one. est humanitarians who have ever lived. tration’s 8-month record of too many Article I of the Constitution of the He dedicated his life to the develop- Washington takeovers. We have an United States gives to the Congress the ment of scientific breakthroughs in AIDS czar, an auto recovery czar, a appropriations power and sets up, in order to ease malnutrition and famine border czar, and a California water articles II and III, the executive and ju- all over the world. czar. We have a car czar, a central re- dicial branches, a system of checks and One of Dr. Borlaug’s latest efforts gion czar, and a domestic violence czar. balances to make sure no one branch of began in the early 1980s. There wasn’t There is an economic czar, an energy the Federal Government runs away anything in the Nobel armada of prizes and environment czar, a faith-based with the government. Senator ROBERT that represented agriculture, which is czar and a Great Lakes czar. The list BYRD, the President pro tempore of the why he received the Peace Prize for goes on, up to 32 or 34. One of these, for Senate, wrote a letter to President recognition of his research in agri- example, is the pay czar, Mr. Kenneth Obama on February 23. Senator BYRD, culture, and so Dr. Borlaug thought Feinberg, the Treasury Department’s who is often called the Constitutional there ought to be an annual award for Special Master for Compensation.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Branch
    EXECUTIVE BRANCH THE PRESIDENT BARACK H. OBAMA, Senator from Illinois and 44th President of the United States; born in Honolulu, Hawaii, August 4, 1961; received a B.A. in 1983 from Columbia University, New York City; worked as a community organizer in Chicago, IL; studied law at Harvard University, where he became the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review, and received a J.D. in 1991; practiced law in Chicago, IL; lecturer on constitutional law, University of Chicago; member, Illinois State Senate, 1997–2004; elected as a Democrat to the U.S. Senate in 2004; and served from January 3, 2005, to November 16, 2008, when he resigned from office, having been elected President; family: married to Michelle; two children: Malia and Sasha; elected as President of the United States on November 4, 2008, and took the oath of office on January 20, 2009. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 20500 Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB), 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 20500, phone (202) 456–1414, http://www.whitehouse.gov The President of the United States.—Barack H. Obama. Personal Aide to the President.—Katherine Johnson. Special Assistant to the President and Personal Aide.—Reginald Love. OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT phone (202) 456–1414 The Vice President.—Joseph R. Biden, Jr. Chief of Staff to the Vice President.—Bruce Reed, EEOB, room 202, 456–9000. Deputy Chief of Staff to the Vice President.—Alan Hoffman, EEOB, room 202, 456–9000. Counsel to the Vice President.—Cynthia Hogan, EEOB, room 246, 456–3241.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 Arrested at V-Day Marriage Protest
    THE VOICE OF CHICAGO’S GAY, LESBIAN, BI AND TRANS COMMUNITY SINCE 1985 Feb. 18, 2009 • vol 24 no 21 www.WindyCityMediaGroup.com 7 arrested at V-Day marriage protest Condom BY YASMIN NAIR Campaigns When Proposition 8 passed in November 2008, it page 7 prompted a series of actions across the country and legal challenges in California. On March 5, the California Supreme Court will begin to hear arguments against Prop 8. In order to high- light the importance of the upcoming trial, Gay Liberation Network (GLN) and Join the Impact Chicago organized a Valentine’s Day action at the Cook County Marriage License Bureau, 50 W. Washington. This began with a traditional picket outside the building and ended with a sit-in in- side that resulted in the arrest of seven marriage activists. More than 300 people showed up at the protest Viola at 11 a.m. Feb. 14 in downtown Chicago, hold- ing signs and chanting during an initial picket Davis page 15 outside 118 S. Michigan. One man, with a sign that said, “Obama, Don’t 4Get,” said that he was there because “[w]e don’t the same protections that other couples have. The unions that that we have are just as valid as heterosexual unions.” Marriage-equality activists show unity by raising their fists at the Cook County License Bureau Turn to page 6 Feb. 14. Photo by Yasmin nair RuPaul’s amazing Sara Feigenholtz’s John ‘Race’ run for the House O’Hurley page 11 Over the next two weeks, Windy City Times will run interviews with several candidates vying for the Fifth Congressional District.
    [Show full text]
  • A Growing Diversity
    A Growing Diversity 1993–2017 In late April 1975, eight-year-old Anh (Joseph) Cao’s long and improbable odyssey to the halls of Congress began as North Vietnamese communists seized the southern capital city of Saigon.1 The trajectory of the soft-spoken, bookish Cao toward Capitol Hill stands out as one of the most remarkable in the modern era, even as it neatly encapsulated post-1965 Asian immigration patterns to the United States. Still, the origins of Cao’s story were commonplace. For three decades, conflict and civil war enveloped his country. After the Vietnamese threw off the yoke of French colonialism following World War II, a doomed peace accord in 1954 removed the French military and partitioned Vietnam. The new government in South Vietnam aligned with Western world powers, while North Vietnam allied with communist states. Amid the Cold War, the U.S. backed successive Saigon regimes against communist insurgents before directly intervening in 1965. A massive ground and air war dragged on inconclusively for nearly a decade. More than 58,000 American troops were killed, and more than three million South and North Vietnamese perished.2 Public opposition in the United States eventually forced an end to the intervention. America’s decision to withdraw from Vietnam shattered Joseph Cao’s family just as it did many thousands of others as communist forces soon swamped the ineffectual government and military in the South. In 2011 Japanese-American veterans received the Congressional Gold Medal for their valor during World War II. The medal included the motto of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, “Go for Broke.” Nisei Soldiers of World War II Congressional Gold Medal Obverse © 2011 United States Mint 42940_08-APA-CE3.indd 436 2/13/2018 12:04:16 PM 42940_08-APA-CE3.indd 437 2/13/2018 12:04:17 PM Just days before Saigon fell, Cao’s mother, Khang Thi Tran, spirited one of her daughters and two sons, including Anh, to a U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Suburbanization of the Democratic Party, 1992–2018
    The Suburbanization of the Democratic Party, 1992–2018 David A. Hopkins Boston College [email protected] Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, August 29, 2019. 1 Abstract Over the past three decades, the Democratic Party has become mostly suburban in both the residence of party supporters in the mass public and the composition of its congressional caucus. This transformation reflects migration patterns among American citizens, partisan shifts among some suburban voters, and a serious relative decline over time in the party’s rural strength. The trend of suburbanization has made the party’s elected officials more ideologically unified, especially on cultural issues, but it also works to preclude the partywide adoption of an ambitious left-wing economic agenda. Suburbanization has occurred alongside a growth in the racial heterogeneity of the Democratic mass membership and elite leadership alike, encouraged by the demographic diversification of American suburbs. Democratic suburban growth has been especially concentrated in the nation’s largest metropolitan areas, reflecting the combined presence of both relatively liberal whites (across education levels) and substantial minority populations, but suburbs elsewhere remain decidedly, even increasingly, Republican in their collective partisan alignment. Rather than stimulating a broad national pro-Democratic backlash across suburban communities in general, as is sometimes suggested by political observers, the election of Donald Trump has instead further magnified this existing divergence—leaving American suburbia, like the nation itself, closely and deeply divided between the two major parties. Introduction Political analysts, including academics, are fond of describing the current era of American politics as primarily distinguished by deep and stable partisan loyalties.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Maximizing Documentation of the Legislative Process
    I. MAXIMIZING DOCUMENTATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS I. A. Committee Records The responsibility to document the activities of Congress and pre- serve records that are of use to Senate and House committees pre- sents a serious challenge in the modern “information age.” Congressional staff, scholars, and archivists all recognize that the fragmentation and dispersal of congressional records inhibit the coordinated records management and archiving of records that are necessary for the present and future study of Congress. Although committees maintain and preserve their official records in greater quantity today than in the past, the quality and completeness of this documentation has yet to be established. Unpublished records cre- ated within the last two or three decades (depending on Senate or House access rules) have not been described systematically by the Center for Legislative Archives staff because they are still closed to research. The mounting volume of records and the demise of cen- tralized filing systems within committee offices, coupled with the increasing use of modern information technologies, have raised the concern that the records may not sufficiently document the legisla- tive process and the history of today’s Congress. This issue concerns committees as users of their own records as well as future researchers. To address these concerns, the Advisory Committee asks the Center for Legislative Archives to undertake a systematic archival description of modern committee records series in order to assess the informational value of the records preserved. The Center should report its findings to the Advisory Committee at the 1996 fall meet- ing in preparation for a full discussion of modern record-keeping practices in Congress and an exploration of the appropriate mea- sures to ensure that the legislative process is fully documented in the official records of Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress: Perspectives and Contemporary Analysis
    Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress: Perspectives and Contemporary Analysis Updated October 6, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R40504 Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress Summary The 12th Amendment to the Constitution requires that presidential and vice presidential candidates gain “a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed” in order to win election. With a total of 538 electors representing the 50 states and the District of Columbia, 270 electoral votes is the “magic number,” the arithmetic majority necessary to win the presidency. What would happen if no candidate won a majority of electoral votes? In these circumstances, the 12th Amendment also provides that the House of Representatives would elect the President, and the Senate would elect the Vice President, in a procedure known as “contingent election.” Contingent election has been implemented twice in the nation’s history under the 12th Amendment: first, to elect the President in 1825, and second, the Vice President in 1837. In a contingent election, the House would choose among the three candidates who received the most electoral votes. Each state, regardless of population, casts a single vote for President in a contingent election. Representatives of states with two or more Representatives would therefore need to conduct an internal poll within their state delegation to decide which candidate would receive the state’s single vote. A majority of state votes, 26 or more, is required to elect, and the House must vote “immediately” and “by ballot.” Additional precedents exist from 1825, but they would not be binding on the House in a contemporary election.
    [Show full text]
  • Globalizing Constitutional Moments? a Reflection on the Japanese Article 9 Debate
    University of New South Wales Law Research Series GLOBALIZING CONSTITUTIONAL MOMENTS? A REFLECTION ON THE JAPANESE ARTICLE 9 DEBATE ROSALIND DIXON AND GUY BALDWIN [2017] UNSWLRS 74 UNSW Law UNSW Sydney NSW 2052 Australia E: [email protected] W: http://www.law.unsw.edu.au/research/faculty-publications AustLII: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLRS/ SSRN: http://www.ssrn.com/link/UNSW-LEG.html GLOBALIZING CONSTITUTIONAL MOMENTS? A REFLECTION ON THE JAPANESE ARTICLE 9 DEBATE Rosalind Dixon* & Guy Baldwin** US scholars have developed a rich toolkit for analyzing informal, as well as formal, processes of constitutional change. A leading example is Bruce Ackerman’s theory of “constitutional moments”. Comparative constitutional scholars, in contrast, have given relatively little attention to the legitimacy of informal modes of constitutional change. This article contributes to filling this gap in our understanding of informal constitutional change outside the US, by analyzing recent attempts by Shinzo Abe’s LDP government informally to amend or “reinterpret” Japan’s pacifist Constitution. Attention to the Japanese experience in this context reveals superficial indications of an actual constitutional moment, but also a lack of true democratic support for such change. This, the article suggests, further helps reveal an important, though largely unstated, precondition for the application of Ackerman’s theory – i.e. that there must be meaningful competition between political parties, in the legislature and at national elections, before informal constitutional change can legitimately occur. Bruce Ackerman has famously suggested that the US Constitution can be amended by both formal and informal constitutional means.1 Basing his analysis on US history, Ackerman argues that several transformative constitutional changes have occurred outside the text of the Constitution, and the formal requirements for amendment under Article V.
    [Show full text]
  • News Release
    NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Tracy Hager 303.764.4090 [email protected] or Stephanie Moore 216.430.2939 [email protected] BakerHostetler Adds Bipartisan Senior Advisors to Expanding Federal Policy Team Former United States Congressman Heath Shuler and government affairs veteran Jim Murphy bolster the firm’s respected Washington team WASHINGTON — Jan. 5, 2017 — BakerHostetler today announced that it has added bipartisan team members, former Congressman Heath Shuler, D-N.C., and government affairs consultant James Murphy, as senior advisors to the growing roster of the firm’s Federal Policy team. Led by former U.S. Congressman Michael Ferguson, who joined the firm in June, Shuler and Murphy join a distinguished team of former government officials and senior advisors in the Washington office. “No matter which party leads Washington, generating bipartisan support for our clients’ initiatives in Congress is critically important,” Ferguson said. “Heath enjoyed a solid record of accomplishment in Congress, working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and he adds significant depth to BakerHostetler’s existing bipartisan government affairs capabilities. Jim’s longtime experience, both in Washington and in numerous states, furthers BakerHostetler’s reach and our ability to serve clients’ federal and state government affairs needs.” Shuler Shuler served as a member of Congress for six years, representing North Carolina’s 11th Congressional District from 2007 to 2013, where he was the Democratic Caucus senior whip. He also served as the co-chair and coalition whip to the fiscal conservative caucus the Blue Dog Coalition, co-chaired the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Congressional Caucus, and was founder and co-chair of the House Professional Sports Caucus.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:17-Cv-00458-RA Document 37 Filed 06/16/17 Page 1 of 6
    Case 1:17-cv-00458-RA Document 37 Filed 06/16/17 Page 1 of 6 UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON, RESTAURANT OPPORTUNITIES 17 Civ. 458 (RA) CENTER (ROC) UNITED, INC., JILL PHANEUF, AND ERIC GOODE, Plaintiffs, - v - DONALD J. TRUMP, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. MOTION FOR LEA VE TO FILE BRIEF OF SCHOLAR SETH BARRETT TILLMAN AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF THE DEFENDANT Robert W. Ray Thompson & Knight LLP 900 Third A venue 20th Floor New York, NY 10022 Tel. No.: 212-751-3347 [email protected] Josh Blackman Admission pro hac vice pending 1303 San Jacinto Street Houston, TX 77002 Tel. No.: 202-294-9003 [email protected] Counsel ofRecord Case 1:17-cv-00458-RA Document 37 Filed 06/16/17 Page 2 of 6 Scholar Seth Barrett Tillman, an American national, is a member of the regular full time faculty in the Maynooth University Depaiiment of Law, Ireland. Tillman hereby moves, through counsel, for leave to file the accompanying amicus brief (attached hereto as Exhibit A) in the above-captioned case in support of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 35). Plaintiffs consented to the filing of this brief. Defendant took no position. Fifteen years ago, then-Judge Ali to identified three different types of amici: Some friends of the court are entities with particular expertise not possessed by any party to the case. Others argue points deemed too far-reaching for emphasis by a party intent on winning a particular case.
    [Show full text]