On 12/5/2022, a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, “One last thing. Senator Shaheen has a statement. She’s apparently not coming to the ball tonight.”
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh. Okay.
Reporter: She’s upset that the President endorsed a proposal to put South Carolina ahead of New Hampshire. And she says that New Hampshire is now vulnerable for her party, which — does the President have a response to that?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: … it is the ultimate irony, you know, that the 2020 election was — was proven by the Trump administration’s Homeland — oh, sorry — I think I got ahead of myself there. (Laughs.) We take the law very seriously here.
Reporter: The Supreme Court heard arguments today about a graphic designer who objected to designing websites for gay couples. The justices seem to be sympathetic toward her in today’s — on the Court today. We’ve heard the White House talk about the potential ripple effects after the Dobbs ruling. Do you have a comment on this specific case? And any concerns from the administration about the potential wider implications of this particular case?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: … we recognize the — the right to free speech, and we support ensuring that no one is discriminated against or refused services because of who they love and who they are. And so, as you know, we’ve been very clear about that … Courts have recognized that we can recognize — that we can require businesses open to public — to service people, regardless of their backgrounds, even when that means businesses must incidentally engage in speech which they are — which they disagree upon. So this is no reason to upend this balance right now.
Reporter: Thank you, Karine. Has the administration decided whether to appeal the court ruling the ends Title 42, because the deadline is this week?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, I’ve been asked this question a couple of times in the briefing room. This is something that –because it’s a legal matter, it’s something that the Department of Justice will decide on, and I would leave it to them.
Reporter: We understand that the administration is considering a proposal that would bar certain migrants from receiving asylum here in the U.S. if they don’t seek asylum in other countries first. Is that a proposal that you’re moving forward with? Or are there any other alternative measures to Title 42 on the table?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, we are committed to continuing to secure our borders … Any suggestions that we might be changing a policy or looking at a different policy is inaccurate at this time. I know there’s been conversations about that. We haven’t made any — no such decisions have been made yet. But, again, we are committed to securing our border.
Reporter: As you know, the TSMC plant was announced in 2020. So, I wanted to note a couple things. Number one, what should ordinary Americans expect that is attributable to the CHIPS Act? How soon should they be seeing the effects of that in Arizona or elsewhere? And also, in the long run, should the government be playing any greater role in providing more water resources to a place like Arizona in light of this water-intensive industry?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, on your first question, Ronald, I would refer you to the Department of Commerce as timeline. They’re working on this and they’re playing point when it comes to the CHIPS and Science Act. On your final question, it’s important that these facilities are built sustainably … as they work with chipmakers and build in their region.
https://facebook.com/HygoNewsUSA/videos/541276077570604/
Reading prepared answers ahead of questions: sorry I got ahead; Require businesses in speech they disagree