Connect with us

Judiciary

Supreme Court: Ginsburg treated for tumor on pancreas

Published

on

Supreme Court Ginsburg treated for tumor on pancreas

Editor’s Note: NOQ Report does not necessarily agree with any biased perspectives of this article from the Associated Press, but it is newsworthy information. We are confident our readers can see see through any clear bias and glean the truth from the facts reported.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has completed radiation therapy for a cancerous tumor on her pancreas and there is no evidence of the disease remaining, the Supreme Court said Friday.

It is the fourth time that the 86-year-old justice has announced that she has been treated for cancer over the last two decades and follows lung cancer surgery in December that kept her away from the court for weeks. December’s surgery was her first illness-related absence from the court since being appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1993 and prompted even closer attention to her health.

As the court’s oldest member, Ginsburg has been asked questions for years about her health and retirement plans. She has also in recent years attracted particularly enthusiastic fans as the leader of the liberal wing of the court, which includes four members appointed by Democratic presidents and five by Republicans. Both liberals and conservatives watch her health closely because it’s understood the court would shift right for decades if President Donald Trump were to get the ability to nominate someone to replace her.

The court kept Ginsburg’s latest cancer secret for three weeks, until she finished radiation treatment. Yet there is no obligation for justices to disclose details about their health, and Ginsburg has generally made more information available than some of her colleagues. Retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, for example, had a stent inserted to open a blocked artery in 2005 but the public only learned about it 10 months later when he returned to the hospital to have it replaced.

The Supreme Court said in a statement Friday that a routine blood test led to the detection of Ginsburg’s tumor. A biopsy performed July 31 confirmed a “localized malignant tumor,” and Ginsburg started outpatient radiation therapy Aug. 5. Ginsburg underwent three weeks of radiation therapy and as part of her treatment had a bile duct stent placed, the court said. Ginsburg “tolerated treatment well” and does not need any additional treatment but will continue to have periodic blood tests and scans, the statement said.

The tumor was “treated definitively and there is no evidence of disease elsewhere in the body,” the court said.

The statement did not say if the new tumor is a recurrence of the pancreatic cancer Ginsburg was diagnosed with in 2009, or a new cancer that arose. She was also treated for colorectal cancer in 1999.

“It’s certainly not unheard of for the cancer to come back,” but it’s a more dire situation if it’s that rather than a new tumor that was found early enough for effective treatment, said Dr. Michael Pishvaian, a pancreatic specialist at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center who had no first-hand knowledge of Ginsburg’s care.

Pancreatic tumors are usually treated with surgery, but she or her doctors may have chosen not to do that for various reasons, and radiation is a standard treatment if surgery is not done, Pishvaian said.

Dr. Alan Venook, a University of California, San Francisco, pancreatic cancer specialist who also has no direct knowledge of Ginsburg’s case, said it’s not possible to know much about her outlook without details from her doctors.

If it is a recurrence that took a decade to form, “that tells me it’s not a very aggressive cancer,” he said. If the cancer is truly limited to the pancreas, “it could have been managed perfectly well with radiation,” he said.

The court said Ginsburg canceled an annual summer visit to Santa Fe but otherwise maintained an active schedule during treatment. She is scheduled to speak in Buffalo next week and at the Library of Congress National Book Festival in Washington at the end of the month.

Before Friday’s announcement, Ginsburg’s most recent known health scare was in December, when she had surgery for lung cancer. The cancerous growths were found when Ginsburg underwent medical tests after she fell in her court office and broke three ribs in November. Ginsburg was absent from the court in January as she recovered from surgery and missed six days on which the court heard a total of 11 arguments. But she returned to the bench in February, and participated in the court’s work during her absence.

___

Chief Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione reported from Milwaukee.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Advertisement

0

Immigration

Asylum agreement with El Salvador is silly

Published

on

Asylum agreement with El Salvador is silly

The Trump administration has come to an “asylum cooperative agreement” with El Salvador that means anyone who passes through the nation must have been rejected asylum there in order to apply for asylum in the United States. Acting Homeland Security Director Kevin McAleenan signed the agreement Friday.

Unlike similar agreements in the works with Mexico and Guatemala, this one makes no sense. To understand why, look at a map.

El Salvador

Keep in mind, migrants FROM El Salvador would not be affected by this agreement since it would be El Salvador from which they’re seeking asylum. This means the agreement will only apply to those who go out of their way to cut through El Salvador from Honduras, which will be effectively zero. Even those who do will claim they went through Honduras to Guatemala, so the agreement is meaningless.

But it’s actually worse than meaningless. Every move the administration makes to secure the border will be viewed through a critical judicial lens. By signing an agreement with El Salvador, a nation rife with violence, it makes other agreements vulnerable as well. We do not need to be wasting time in court battles over an agreement that will have no practical effects because doing so allows th activist judiciary another opportunity to strike at effective agreements such as the one in place with Mexico and the one in the works with Guatemala.

This was a symbolic effort, one that is not only unnecessary but also puts real efforts at risk. I back the President’s plays on the border the vast majority of the time, but this one makes absolutely no sense.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Judge slaps temporary injunction on California tax return law targeting President Trump

Published

on

Judge slaps temporary injunction on California tax return law targeting President Trump

A federal judge placed a temporary injunction on a California law requiring presidential candidates to release their tax returns in order to be on the election ballot. U.S. District Judge Morrison England Jr., a George W. Bush appointee on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, said he will make a full ruling before October 1, 2020.

The law, which clearly targets President Trump as the only candidate who has not released his tax returns, was heralded as a victory for progressive California. But 1st Amendment advocates as well as Constitutional scholars have argued this law would add unconstitutional requirements for American citizens to run for federal office. If the state wants to limit state candidates, so be it, but the argument that they could affect the results for the entire nation has been questioned.

This law would not change the results of the election under normal circumstances as California is safely in the Democrats’ pocket, but a separate effort to make the winner of the popular vote the winner of the electoral college vote would make California’s law extremely important if their efforts succeed.

Federal judge blocks California law requiring Trump tax returns

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/462234-federal-judge-blocks-california-law-requiring-trump-tax-returnsThe judge’s decision came after a hearing on Thursday in Sacramento on consolidated arguments made in five lawsuits over the California law. During the hearing, England focused on the issue of whether a federal financial disclosure law preempts states from imposing additional rules, the Times reported.

A lawyer for California argued that different states already have different rules for their primary elections, while a lawyer for Trump argued that the U.S. Constitution established rules for running for president that states cannot alter, according to the Times.

Opinion

This is a symbolic victory for not only President Trump but for the office of the president in general. States’ rights are important to protect, but when protecting a state’s right affects other states so harshly, it can no longer be classified as federalism. California sought to sway the election in favor of Democrats with their law combined with efforts by those supporting the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

In such a scenario, President Trump would have zero chance of winning reelection. The Democrats know this, which is why they’re attempting to subvert half of the electorate in an effort to tilt this game unfairly in their favor.

Quote

“It remains our position that the law is unconstitutional because states are not permitted to add additional requirements for candidates for president, and that the law violated citizens’ 1st Amendment right of association.” – Jay Sekulow

Final Thoughts

The Democrats are trying every avenue, from impeachment to keeping President Trump off the ballot, because they realize their field of candidates have nobody who is capable of beating him in a free and fair election.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

How the FISA Report will further dampen the Mueller Report

Published

on

How the FISA Report will further dampen the Mueller Report

The hopes and dreams of Democrats around the country were systematically shattered over the last few months as the Mueller investigation into Russian hacking of the 2016 election yielded very little fruit. That hasn’t stopped the House Democrats from fishing for more information than the two-year investigation produced in hopes of hanging President Trump with an impeachment.

But the initial draft of the Department of Justice’s inspector general Michael Horowitz’s report has been given to the Attorney General for classification and markup, meaning the public will soon have access to the sordid details surrounding the Steele Dossier and other measures used to secure FISA warrants against the Trump campaign.

Meanwhile, former Deputy Attorney General Andrew McCabe has been recommended for charges after allegedly lying about an investigation into the Clinton Foundation around the same time period. And there’s still the U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation into illegal spying on the Trump campaign. All of this combines for a very rocky road ahead for Democrats and former DoJ personnel who may be held accountable for a fruitless investigation trumped up by false claims and shoddy sourcing.

It seems very likely the various “investigations of the investigators” will cause controversy at the very least while possibly leading to charges against multiple people. The seemingly coordinated effort to subvert the Trump campaign and to counter his victory in the then-unlikely scenario in which he wins jibes with the incessant pushing of the collusion narrative by Democrats and mainstream media. It wasn’t that they had anything of substance. They hopes what they had would have substance that would manifest in the Mueller report.

But now the Mueller investigation itself is in jeopardy of losing any remnants of credibility it still has as the premise behind it is being challenged by Attorney General William Barr and the various investigations he has commissioned. Horowitz’s report is the biggest so far, but may only be the tip of the iceberg compared to what Durham may find.

With all of the arrows pointing to foul play by Obama’s DoJ and the Mueller investigation, these reports are likely to unravel all hopes the Democrats have of stopping President Trump before the 2020 election. After he wins, their dreams will be quashed.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending