Patrick James Morrisey (born December 21, 1967) is an American politician and lawyer who served as Attorney General of the 34th and now West Virginia since 2013. He is a member of the Republican Party.
Morrisey was elected West Virginia Attorney in 2012, becoming the first Republican to play a role in his role since 1933. Running for the United States Senate in 2018, Morrisey won a Republican nomination and will face current Democratic Senator Joe Manchin in November. election.
Video Patrick Morrisey
Early life and education
Born in Brooklyn, New York, Morrisey grew up in Edison, New Jersey. His father was an account manager at US Steel, while his mother worked as a registered nurse. Morrisey ran across the country and played on his high school tennis team, before he graduated from Bishop George Ahr High School in 1985.
Morrisey graduated with honors from Rutgers College with a Bachelor of Arts degree in history and political science in 1989. He also attended Rutgers School of Law-Newark, receiving a juris doctor in 1992.
Maps Patrick Morrisey
Careers in law and lobbying
After graduating from Rutgers, Morrisey opened a private law firm in 1992. He practiced health care, elections, regulatory and communication law at Arent Fox's lobby group from 1995 to 1999.
Morrisey served as deputy director of staff and chief health advisor to the United States Committee on Energy and Trade from 1999 to 2004, where he worked on the part of the Healthcare Response Act and the Public Bioterrorism and Medicare Prescription Drugs, Improvements and Modernization Act Medicare Part D). He ran unsuccessfully to the United States House of Representatives in the New Jersey 7th congress district in 2000, receiving 9% of the Republican vote.
From 2004 to 2012, Morrissey worked as a lobbyist at Washington D.C. He worked at the firm law firm Sidley Austin before joining King & amp; Spalding in 2010, became a partner. As a lobbyist, he is seen as an expert in laws and regulations related to health and medicine. He paid $ 250,000 to lobby on behalf of the pharmaceutical trade group. The group is funded by some of the same opioid distributors demanded by West Virginia as it floods the country with opioids.
Attorney General
In 2012, Morrisey ran for West Virginia Attorney General against Darrell McGraw, a five-year racer. He defeated McGraw and was sworn in on January 14, 2013, making him the first Republican Attorney State to serve in West Virginia since 1933.
Federal lawsuits
DEA opioid demands
Morrisey sued the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for releasing data on opioid sales, and about the sales quota system he used to organize opioid producers, the first lawsuit ever to have existed in the history of West Virginia. Morrisey placed the lawsuit on the lawsuit after successfully negotiating with the Trump administrations in order for DEA to reconsider whether or not to alter the aggregate quota system.
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
In 2014, Morrisey filed a lawsuit against the federal government of the United States, challenging the regulatory changes described by the Obama Administration as an administrative remedy for the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Morrisey Lawsuit, State of West Virginia v. The US Department of Health and Human Services , was dismissed by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2015. Morrisey appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which in 2016 again dismissed the lawsuit, discovering that West Virginia not injured and has no position.
Environmental Protection Agency
Morrisey's office has filed numerous lawsuits and amicus challenging the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
In August 2014, Morrisey filed suit, along with 11 other countries, challenged the EPA proposal to regulate coal-fired power plants as part of President Barack Obama's plan to mitigate climate change. The lawsuit resulted in the history of 2016 living in the Supreme Court.
American Farm Bureau v. EPA. On September 13, 2013, at the American Farm Bureau Federation v. EPA, United States District Court for the Central District of Pennsylvania said that the EPA has the authority under the Clean Air Act to impose the maximum daily maximum load standard for pollutants and that established procedures are consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act. This contradicts the argument by a brief amicus Morrisey who says that "the EPA is exceeding the limit in Chesapeake Bay. The Daily Maximum Amount (TDML) violates the state's traditional right to 'Clean Water Act intended to protect.'
Mingo Logan Coal v. EPA. On March 24, 2014, at Mingo Logan Coal Company v. EPA, the United States Supreme Court dismissed the case without commenting that found the appeal unfounded. The court rejected the argument in Morrisey's explanation that "the EPA unlawfully vetoed the permits issued by the United States Armed Forces Engineer Corps."
White Stallion v. EPA. On April 15, 2014, at White Stallion Energy Center v. EPA, the US Court of Appeals for the Circuit District of Columbia said that the Mercury EPA and Air Toxics Standard (MATS) emission rule rules of coal-fired power plant units are appropriate and necessary and that the EPA acts within its legal authority and shows a reasonable relationship between its actions and decision notes. The Court rejected the argument in Morrisey's explanation that "the EPA rules seize state authority by setting minimum substantive requirements for state performance standards."
Homer City v. EPA. On April 29, 2014, at EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, the US Supreme Court said the EPA's State Pollution Rules of EPA is a cost-effective emission reduction allocation. among the wind-fighting states and is a permissible, applicable, and fair interpretation of the Good Neighbor's Terms. The court rejected the argument in Morrisey's explanation that "the EPA exceeds its authority under the federal Clean Air Act when it announces the Rule of Water Pollution."
Water Utility v. EPA. On June 23, 2014, at Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, the US Supreme Court said that the EPA is sufficiently interpreting the Act to require resources that would require permission based on conventional pollutant emissions to comply with the Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) for greenhouse gases and that EPA's decision to request BACT for emitted greenhouse gases by sources which, if not subject to Significant Logging Prevention (PSD) are, as a matter of common, permissible interpretation of legislation. The court rejected the argument in Morrisey's explanation that "the EPA violates the US Constitution and the Clean Air Act by mixing greenhouse gas regulations" and that the courts need to "control the inpatient agency and alert the President and his subordinates that they can not rule with the executive decision. "
Murray Energy v. EPA. On June 25, 2014, Morrisey and other attorney general filed a brief report on Murray Energy v. The EPA before the US Court of Appeal, DC Circuit The suit was prematurely filed before the EPA has issued a final standard, which is not due until June 1, 2015. The DC circuit has decided less than two years earlier in December 2012 on this issue at Las Brisas Energy Center v. EPA. The court dismissed the case with one short sentence: "The proposed rule against which it is opposed is not the act of a final agent subject to judicial review."
National Mining v. EPA. On July 11, 2014, at the National Mining Association v. EPA, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said that the EPA and the US Engineer Corps have legal authority under the Clean Water Act to enforce the rules of procedure (Memorandum of Coordination Process Improvement) to review mining permits at the top of the mountain. The court rejected the argument in Morrisey's explanation stating that "the EPA is seeking to take on itself the responsibility given to states and other federal agencies."
West Virginia et al. v. EPA. On July 31, 2014, Morrisey and the attorney general from other countries filed suit of West Virginia et al. v. The EPA in the United States Court of Appeals for the Circuit District of Columbia challenged the court ordering a settlement over the previous three years on March 2, 2011 between the EPA and 11 states - New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia. In these settlements, the EPA promises to issue a now-pending regulation that sets performance standards for GHG emissions from the Electric Steam Power Plant (EGUs). A settlement was achieved based on guidance from a US Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency in 2007 where the Supreme Court declared that carbon dioxide is an air pollutant subject to regulations under the Clean Air Act. The attorney general's lawsuit more than three years late. The EPA issues proposed settlements in December 2010, and Section 113 (g) of the Clean Air Act allows a 30-day period to challenge any requirements of the Clean Air Act.
In Morrisey's lawsuit against the EPA he said that the Clean Air Act "prevents the EPA directing countries to set performance standards for any existing source for air pollutants." The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Court disagreed with Morrisey, and on June 9, 2015, said "rejecting the petition for review and petition for a prohibition order because the proposed rule is not a final problem." The court only claims the authority to review the legality of the final agent rule , not a proposal. "
Litigation Power Plan
West Virginia et al. v. EPA (Motion for Expedition of Challenge to Clean Power Plan). On October 21, 2014, the US Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed Patrick Morrisey's Movement for Hearing Expedition on the challenge of Cleaning Power Plan, which he submitted on September 3, 2014. On June 2, 2014, the EPA has released the Power Plan Clean. On September 2, 2014, New York and 11 countries have petitioned to support the Clean Power Plans.
West Virginia et al. v. EPA (draft opposed to Clean Power Generation Rules). On June 9, 2015, the US Court of Appeals for the Circuit Districts of Columbia dismissed Patrick Morrisey's challenge to draft a Clean Power Generation Rule as premature, since rules are draft rules, not final rules, and have not been published in the Federal Register. On August 1, 2014, West Virginia and 12 states have filed a lawsuit to block the Clean Power Plan draft rule.
West Virginia et al. v. EPA (request for an emergency residence from the final Clean Power Plant rule). On September 9, 2015, the US Circuit Court for the District of Columbia Circuit refused to grant Patrick Morrisey a request for an emergency stay at Clean Power Pack. On 5 August 2015. West Virginia and 12 states have requested to stop the implementation of the Clean Power Plans until the court makes a decision. On August 13, 2015. West Virginia and 12 states have petitioned for an emergency. On August 3, 2015, the EPA has announced the final rule for the Cleaner Generator Plan. On August 14, 2015, California and 15 countries have petitioned to support the Clean Power Plans.
West Virginia et al. v. EPA (request to refuse the implementation of the Clean Power Plans). On January 21, 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected Patrick Morrisey's request to stop the implementation of the Clean Power Plan until litigation was concluded. On October 23, 2015, West Virginia and 24 states have filed a lawsuit against the Clean Power Plans. On October 23, 2015, the EPA has issued a Clean Power Plan in the Federal Register.
West Virginia et al. v. EPA (request for fixed Power Plan). January 26, 2016. West Virginia and 24 states filed suit to keep the Clean Power Plan before the US Supreme Court. On February 9, 2016, the US Supreme Court granted a postponement of the Clean Power Plan when the case was filed with the US Court of Appeals for the Circuit District of Columbia. On March 16, 2016, New York and 19 countries petitioned to support the Clean Power Plan. The oral arguments are scheduled for September 27, 2016 on Clean Power Plans. In February 2016 the Court sided with Morrisey, issuing Stay.
Second Amendment
Morrisey has filed several amicus briefs in a lawsuit challenging the Second Amendment decision.
Kachalsky v. Cacace. On April 15, 2013, the US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal in Kachalsky v. Cacace is opposed to New York legislation that requires a person to indicate a particular need to get permission to carry firearms outside the home. Morrisey and the attorney general of other countries have filed a brief statement challenging a lower court's decision saying that the law "does not survive any level of oversight".
Drake v. Jerejian. On May 5, 2014, the US Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal in Drake v. Jerejian who challenges the requirements of New Jersey posing as an applicant for permission must show "justifiable requirements" in order to issue a license to carry a gun. Morrisey and the attorney general from other countries have filed a brief statement challenging a lower court's decision saying that New Jersey's law would "threaten" and "shake the foundations" of less restrictive weapons licensing schemes in other countries. "
Abramski v. United States of America. On June 16, 2014, the US Supreme Court at Abramski v. The United States says that "it does not matter whether the buyer can actually buy a gun, someone who buys a cannon on behalf of another while claiming that it is for himself to make material misstatements punishable" under the law. This is contrary to claims made by Morrisey that "the Justice Department wants to trap innocent West Virginia gun owners on the web of criminal law if they are trying to sell their weapons" and that "government interpretations go beyond the law and can get criminals out of innocent citizens. "
New York State Rifle & amp; Pistol Association v. Cuomo and Connecticut Citizens' Defense League v. Malloy. On October 19, 2015, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at New York State Rifle & amp; Pistol Association v. Cuomo and Connecticut Citizens said that "The core ban by New York and Connecticut from assault weapons and large-capacity magazines does not violate the Second Amendment." This is contrary to claims made by Morrisey and other public prosecutors that "New York's semi-automatic weapons ban imposes a fundamental right to defend and carry weapons" and "New York's ban on semi-automatic weapons can not stand the rigorous check. "
Friedman v. City of Highland Park . On December 7, 2015, the US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal against the Friedman case v. City of Highland Park. Morrisey and other attorney general have proposed a brief amicus which says that the decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is "the threat posed by the narrow judicial construction of the Second Amendment to citizens and their policies." The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit earlier on April 7, 2015 dismissed Morrisey's argument as saying "Weapon weapons with large-capacity magazines can fire more shots, faster, and thus can be more dangerous in aggregate.Why again they are the weapon of choice in shootings bulk? "
Peruta v. County San Diego. On June 9, 2016, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals at Peruta v. The County of San Diego says that "We are of the opinion that the Second Amendment does not protect or protect the rights of members of the general public to carry publicly hidden weapons." This is contrary to claims made by Morrisey and other public prosecutors that " New semi-automatic in New York weighs the fundamental right to defend and carry weapons "and" New York's ban on semi-automatic weapons can not survive the rigorous checks. "
Kolbe v. Hogan . In August 2017, Morrisey led a 21-state coalition to urge the Supreme Court to hear arguments against, and urged the court to bring down, a weapons ban in Maryland. His coalition argues that the arms ban violates the rights of law-abiding gun owners. The Maryland arms ban prohibits the sale, transfer, and possession of certain semi-automatic firearms and standard capacity magazines. The coalition, in its brief explanation with the Supreme Court, referred to the verdict of the US 4th Circuit Court of Appeal, which thwarted the ban. If an appeals court decision is enforced, it will establish a legal case governing similar laws in West Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia.
Supreme Court
At the end of January 2017, President Trump nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court to replace the late Antonin Scalia. The next day, Morrisey sent a letter to the Senate leaders along with the Attorney General from 19 other states to express support for Gorsuch and urged the Senate to confirm him without delay. Morrisey said he wrote the letter because of concerns over the impact of the trials on the people of West Virginia, citing a 2016 court ruling (5-4, with Antonin Scalia casting an important vote) to keep President Obama's Clean Power Plan, which Morrisey believes will keep people from working.
Morrisey asked the US Supreme Court to protect the integrity of the election while reviewing a case from Ohio that questioned the process commonly used to maintain the accuracy of the voter list. He did so by signing to a friend-of-court in favor of similar methods used in West Virginia and 12 other countries.
Political position
Abortion
Morrisey opposes abortion and joins 12 states in short support in favor of North Carolina's 20-week abortion ban. Morrisey investigated Planned Parenthood activities in West Virginia and passed to the US Senate by the West Virginians for Life.
opioid addiction
Morrisey has advocated a holistic approach to dealing with opioid addicts. This includes the "Fighting Addiction with Mercy" partnership that seeks to join law enforcement agencies with religious leaders who are trying to get ex-addicts back on their feet. He also focused on efforts to replace opioids with other non-narcotics as the first treatment for pain management. Morrisey called on West Virginia lawmakers to consider an "anti-retaliation" program to eliminate the negative consequences of prescribers who refused to issue opioid drugs, passed into law in 2018.
Morrisey supports President Trump's declaration of the opioid crisis as a national emergency. He said, "The Trump President's national declaration brings additional attention to the opioid crisis - a problem that plagues the West Virginia community, through litigation, education, religious endeavor and many other avenues, my office is facing an opioid epidemic."
City asylum
Morrisey leads a multi-state coalition of attorney general in defending the right of states to ban the cities of sanctuary within their borders. The decision of an approved federal appeals court supported the states.
Weapon
Morrisey has an A rank of the National Rifle Association and the West Virginia Defense League. He has secured mutual agreements with other countries, allowing permission to bring hidden countries to prevail in West Virginia, and vice versa.
Illegal Immigration
In July 2017, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton led a group of Republic Attorney General from nine other countries, including Morrisey, plus Governor Idaho Butch Otter, threatened Donald Trump's government that they would sue if the president did not stop Demands for Childhood Arrivals Policy (DACA). has been imposed by President Barack Obama. Other attorneys who joined in making threats against Trump include Steve Marshall of Alabama, Leslie Rutledge of Arkansas, Lawrence Wasden of Idaho, Derek Schmidt of Kansas, Jeff Landry of Louisiana, and Doug Peterson of Nebraska.
On September 5, 2017, Trump canceled the DACA policy. He suspended the implementation for six months to allow Congress time to set up solutions for young people eligible for DACA. Morrisey endorses Trump's move and says, "I applaud President Trump for having the courage of his conviction to uphold the rule of law and stop this Obama-era program.DACA is unconstitutional and represents unlawful and unilateral actions by the Obama administration."
Drug companies
In 2013, questions arose about Morrisey's relationship with Cardinal Health, his campaign funding, and the ongoing lawsuit against Cardinal Health. After he said he resigned from the lawsuit, he met privately on several occasions with company representatives. In addition, Cardinal Health has paid nearly $ 1.5 million to the lobbying company Morrisey's wife. Although West Virginia Bar found that Morrisey's previous role as a lobbyist was not an ethical violation, he said his wife's association with Cardinal Health could "reduce the integrity of the process and create an appearance of morbidity." Finally, Cardinal Health completed the lawsuit filed by the state attorney general's office by paying a $ 20,000,000 fine for violating the consumer protection law.
In 2016, Morrisey concluded a lawsuit against Miami-Luken, a drug company that sold excessive and suspicious opioids to small towns across West Virginia, after the drug company paid $ 2.5 million to settle. According to The Charleston Gazette , "Morrisey, a former lobbyist for a trade group representing Miami-Luken and other drug distributors, inherited the lawsuit in 2013 after ousting the old Attorney General Darrell McGraw." It was the biggest settlement of pharmaceutical companies in West Virginia history.
Sex trading
In 2017, Morrisey joins a coalition of 50 state and territorial prosecutors in encouraging Congress to pass legislation that would affirm that all law enforcement agencies retain their traditional authority to combat the sex trade. In a letter to Congress, the bipartisan group requested to amend the Communications Decision Act to legally affirm that states, regions and territories have the authority to investigate and prosecute child sex trafficking criminals wherever they operate, including online.
AS. Senate Election 2018
On July 10, 2017, Morrisey announced his intention to run for the seat of the United States Senate which is currently held by Joe Manchin. During the main Republican Party, he ran as a conservative and presented himself as an outsider, in contrast to Rep. Evan Jenkins. During the primary, Morrissey was attacked by his main opponents, Jenkins and Don Blankenship, for his carrier career. Amid criticism of Morrisey's past lobbyism, as well as his wife's lobbying career today, Morrisey's campaign promises that his wife will stop lobbying if Morrisey wins the election in the Senate. On May 8, 2018, Morrisey defeated Jenkins and Don Blankenship at the primaries of the US Republican Senate.
Personal life
Morrisey moved to Jefferson County, West Virginia in 2006. His wife, Denise, lives in northern Virginia, where he takes care of his elderly father before his death by the end of 2017. Denise works as a lobbyist, and lobbied hydrocodon restrictions on behalf of Cardinal Health.
Electoral history
References
External links
- Official Attorney General's Website
- Official campaign website
- Patrick Morrisey on Curlie (based on DMOZ)
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments