Advertisements


Why the Supreme Court"s OSHA ruling could be more complicated for multi-state employers

The Supreme Court's ruling Thursday related only to the federal agency's vaccine mandate-or-testing rule, and it doesn't prohibit companies enacting mandates of their own. A pair of St. Louis lawyers explain why that makes for a challenging landscape for companies operating in multiple states......»»

Category: topSource: bizjournalsJan 14th, 2022

Florida Judge Says Governor"s "Stop Woke Act" Can Go Forward

Florida Judge Says Governor's "Stop Woke Act" Can Go Forward Authored by Jannis Falkenstern via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), Florida Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker ruled on June 27 that the state can enforce the “Stop Woke Act”—but did not rule on its constitutionality, nor a piece affecting colleges and universities. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis addresses the media in Miami, in April 2022. (Courtesy, The Florida Governor's Office) The judge, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2012 and became chief justice in 2018, ruled that HB 7—or what Gov. Ron DeSantis branded as the “Stop Woke Act”—can move forward and regulate how race can be taught in the classroom and the workplace. The new law is part of DeSantis’ education agenda that targets ties to Critical Race Theory (CRT) in the state school system as well as corporate training at companies surrounding “white privilege.” The governor’s press secretary Christina Pushaw said DeSantis is not “planning to comment on the ruling,” but she said, “generally … we are confident that this law will ultimately survive all legal challenges and protect Floridians from the harmful effects of discriminatory woke ideology.” In past press conferences DeSantis has said he did not want children to be taught now to “hate one another.” The ruling by Walker gives DeSantis a win, as the judge has frequently ruled against him, allowing the law to move forward—but made it clear that he was not ruling on the constitutionality of the law nor was his decision an endorsement of the law. “This court is not determining whether the challenged regulations are constitutional, morally correct, or good policy,” Walker wrote in his ruling. “And this order should not be interpreted as endorsing the [legislation] or the related Board of Education regulation.” In March, lawmakers passed HB 7 after strong debate on both house floors. Read more here... Tyler Durden Thu, 06/30/2022 - 18:30.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedge3 hr. 51 min. ago

The Oath Keepers will tell a jury they really believed Donald Trump would turn them into his own, personal militia on Jan. 6

Elmer Stewart Rhodes will tell a DC jury he had a perfectly non-seditious reason to be at the Capitol: He thought Trump would federalize the Oath Keepers. these In this Jan. 6, 2021 file photo rioters supporting President Donald Trump storm the Capitol in Washington.John Minchillo/AP Lawyers for Elmer Stewart Rhodes will tell jurors the far-right group believed President Trump would federalize them. They will argue at their Sept. 28 seditious conspiracy trial that this, not sedition, was their lawful reason to be at the Capitol on Jan. 6. They'll also claim the Insurrection Act is so vaguely written, Trump legally could have used it to make them a federal militia. When nine accused leaders of the Oath Keepers go on trial for seditious conspiracy in Washington, DC, this fall, jurors in the government's first big, Jan. 6 showcase trial will hear a defense argument that sounds little short of crazy.They'll be told that the far-right extremists believed President Donald Trump would invoke the Insurrection Act as they gathered at the Capitol, 100 strong in their camo-colored tactical gear — and turn them into his own, ultra-loyal federal militia.Their fantasy mission? To "Stop the Steal," "Defend the President," and "Defeat the Deep State," according to since-deleted rhetoric from their website. A defiant Trump would officially be their commander in chief."Do NOT concede, and do NOT wait until January 20, 2021," Inauguration Day. "Strike now," Oath Keepers leader and founder Elmer Stewart Rhodes urged in an open letter to Trump on Dec. 14, 2020."You must call us up and command us."Oath Keepers founder Elmer Stewart Rhodes was charged with seditious conspiracy in the January 6 investigation.Photo by Philip Pacheco/Anadolu Agency/Getty ImagesJames Lee Bright, a lawyer for Rhodes, jokes that most people will laugh to learn the Oath Keepers thought they'd ever be a federal militia. "They believe what?" Bright imagines them thinking. "These guys are fucking crazy."But he says he plans nonetheless to convince jurors that the pro-Trump, anti-government group actually had two lawful — and non-seditious — reasons to be at the Capitol on Jan. 6.Reason one: They were an invited security force for rally planners and participants, including Roger Stone, Ali Alexander, Latinos for Trump and Virginia Women for Trump.Reason two: They were awaiting Trump's orders.When those orders failed to come, Rhodes' lawyers will argue, the Oath Keepers left the Capitol. They had dinner at Olive Garden, and then collected the weapons and provisions they'd stashed — at the ready but never used — in their rooms at a Comfort Inn in Arlington, VA. Then they went home."I just want to fight," federal prosecutors say Rhodes complained after failing to get Trump on the phone that night, like some extremist Pinocchio with a thwarted dream of becoming a real militiaman.Prosecutors, will, of course, tell jurors a different tale. The feds argue in court papers that the Oath Keepers' private chat messages show sedition was their real motive.The chats are full of references to a Civil War against "the usurpers" — Joe Biden and Kamala Harris — and to using force to oppose the transfer of presidential power, which is the very definition of seditious conspiracy.The feds also argue that Rhodes oversaw two military-style "stacks" or formations, of Oath Keepers who forcibly breached the Capitol — and that the real reason the group left DC was that the FBI had begun making arrests.A far fetched fantasy"I don't necessarily understand the mindset of it," says Bright, whose private practice is based in Dallas."It's not my world view," says Bright, speaking to Insider this week about the Oath Keepers' strategy for a 5-to-6 week trial scheduled to begin Sept. 28."But the evidence does exist that these individuals believed in it," he said of the group's hope that Trump would use the Insurrection Act to summon them into federal service against an imagined Biden-Harris "coup." "They believed that if it was invoked, it was legal," Bright said. "And it would have been legal, arguably."Which leads to perhaps the most eyebrow-raising part of the Oath Keepers' planned defense.The Insurrection Act is so broadly written — leaving words like "insurrection," "militia" and "militias of the state" without clear definition  — that Trump actually could have federalized the Oath Keepers, Rhodes' lawyers will tell jurors."It's so farfetched, and yet it's legal," at least until a court stepped in and held otherwise, Bright believes. An Oath Keeper from Idaho in Bozeman, Montana.William Campbell/Corbis via Getty ImagesExperts in the Insurrection Act, on the other hand, say no. It's just farfetched."While I understand where they got the idea from, what they're saying is mostly nonsense," says Joseph Nunn, counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School.Yes, Nunn concedes, there is a separate, archaic federal statute, 10 USC 246 — drafted in 1792, the same year as the original Insurrection Act — which still includes as part of a larger definition of militia, "all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age ... and under 45 years of age." It's a statute Rhodes cites in his writings, though the 57-year-old believes that military vets such as himself would somehow be eligible until age 65."That definition plausibly includes the Oath Keepers," says Nunn. "It also includes me. It also includes seniors in high school." It also includes the Crips street gang and the Brigham Young University men's choir."So it would be technically possible," Nunn says, "for the president to invoke the Insurrection Act and call on some group of civilians to act as a militia, and help the president enforce the law or suppress a rebellion." But "it's just not plausible," he says, not the least reason being that there's no framework for it. Would a federalized Oath Keepers militia be subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice? Could they be court-martialed? And ultimately, as desperate as he was to stay in power, Trump didn't go there, probably, as Nunn puts it, because "there were some people in his ear, explaining to him that he couldn't do things." "There's no world in which it's remotely likely where the president of the United States would invoke the Insurrection Act" says Nunn, "and call on what is fundamentally just a social club of guys who have firearms."Or is it? The House Jan. 6 hearings are producing evidence and witnesses that suggest that Trump seized upon moves his legal advisers told him were illegal in attempts to cling to power.There are a few other complications that Rhodes didn't think of, says Michel Paradis, a professor of military and constitutional law at Columbia Law School.For one, in the centuries since 1792, virtually every state has expressly banned private paramilitary militias from acting as law enforcement in their jurisdictions.Also, Paradis notes, there's a 1956 revision to the Insurrection Act that requires a president to first ask nicely that the insurrectionists disperse and go home.How would that even work? The Oath Keepers believed that real insurrectionists were Biden, Harris, "Communists from China" and a shadowy "deep state." Would Trump ask them to disperse, or the pro-Trump mob that breached the Capitol?"There's simply no example throughout all of Constitutional history of the president ever, essentially, creating his own draft under the Insurrection Act," and calling up civillians, Paradis says."It's always been done by drawing upon the militia resources of the states, what we now call the National Guard."Both Paradis and Nunn agree the Insurrection Act is in dire need of a Congressional overhaul that would clarify these points, and better define what a president can and can't do."It leaves totally to the president's discretion what constitutes an insurrection," says Nunn, who has written extensively on the topic for the Brennan Center."And it's largely up to the president to decide, do I need to activate a few hundred guys from the Maryland National Guard? Or do I send in the 1st Armored Division?' Wouldn't it still be sedition?The Oath Keepers' two-pronged sedition defense — that they were at the Capitol as invited rally security, and that they were awaiting the president's orders — is not an after-thought excuse, Bright notes."These guys were not planning this in the shadows," he says. "It all predates January 6. The government has recordings of the Oath Keepers discussing not bringing weapons into the district" until Trump gave the OK, he says.As president, Trump repeatedly flirted aloud with the idea of invoking the act, including against migrants at the southern border in 2019, against George Floyd protesters in the summer of 2020.But did Trump — or anyone from Trumpworld — give any indication to the Oath Keepers that he would federalize them, or invoke the Insurrection Act? "To date, we are unaware of any direct communications that ever took place between the Oath Keepers and Trump, or anyone in his inner circle," Bright says.Here's another problem with the defense.What if the government tells jurors sure, let's assume the Oath Keepers did believe Trump would federalize them, even absent of any encouragement of that belief from Trumpworld.Wouldn't anything they planned to do as an armed, Trump-led militia still amount to sedition?"I understand that," says Bright. "And that is an area of law we are really deeply looking at," he says. "We're looking into that. We anticipate that argument being made," he added."It's all quite complicated. And legally, it's fascinating."Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsider6 hr. 7 min. ago

A federal judge dismissed Leon Black"s conspiracy suit against his former business associates and his assault accuser, but didn"t sanction his lawyers

A Manhattan federal court dismissed billionaire Leon Black's lawsuit alleging his business partners and a former lover conspired to ruin his reputation. Leon Black, the former CEO of Apollo Global ManagementREUTERS/Kevork Djansezian A federal judge derided Black's allegations in a lawsuit against his former business partner and others as "more creative writing than factual averment." Black, who alleged a plot to damage his reputation, plans to appeal, his attorney said. A state court lawsuit by Black's accuser is still ongoing. A federal judge in Manhattan has dismissed a lawsuit by former Apollo CEO Leon Black, who had accused his Apollo co-founder Josh Harris, public relations executive Steven Rubenstein, and a former romantic partner of conspiring to "destroy" and "cancel" him.  In blockbuster court filings in January, Black had described a hostile faction within Apollo Global Management, which he said emerged amid internal tensions over succession at the hedge fund he co-founded. Black had brought claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, or RICO Act, an unusual move in a civil dispute between estranged business partners, as the federal statute is more commonly used by prosecutors to target organized crime. Black filed his lawsuit after his former lover, Guzel Ganieva, sued him in New York state court accusing him of harassing and sexually assaulting her during their yearslong affair. Black has denied her allegations, and insisted their relationship was consensual throughout. On Thursday, New York federal judge Paul Engelmayer dismissed the RICO claims without allowing Black to amend them, saying that his allegations hadn't shown any proof of a conspiracy between Harris, Rubenstein and Ganieva. But he declined to sanction his lawyers, as Ganieva's attorneys had requested. The judge ruled that Black had not detailed allegations about how those three figures worked together, or even what their relationship was. "Under the governing case law, these pleadings — more creative writing than factual averment — fall well short," he wrote in the ruling. "These nebulous and overtly conjectural allegations do not come close to knitting Ganieva, Harris and Rubenstein together in any solid or coherent way in concerted acts toward a common end," he wrote. Black plans to appeal the court's ruling and to pursue claims against Ganieva, Harris, and Rubenstein, according to his attorney, Susan Estrich. Estrich did not comment on whether Black would pursue defamation claims against Wigdor LLP, the firm that represents Ganieva, whose lawsuit against him is still pending in New York state court.  "The evidence that has been uncovered demonstrates that these individuals conspired to try to destroy Mr. Black's reputation and end his professional career," Estrich said in a statement Thursday. "He remains confident that those responsible will be held accountable." On Thursday, Judge Engelmayer stopped short of granting Wigdor's motion for sanctions against Black's lawyers for bringing RICO claims in the first place. (Black's suit had originally also targeted Wigdor in his RICO conspiracy claims, before dropping those claims against the law firm). The judge wrote that while Black's RICO claims weren't detailed enough to keep his suit alive, they weren't "patently frivolous" to the point of warranting sanctions against his attorneys.  According to Black, Harris formed a "war council" comprising Apollo employees and PR people including Steven Rubenstein. Black claimed they worked to further undermine him at the company after news reports revealed the extent of Black's ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Harris's goal, Black alleged, was to usurp the CEO role, and, failing that, to tarnish his reputation. (Harris has repeatedly denied Black's allegations). To that end, Black alleged, Harris eventually found common cause with Ganieva. In her own suit, Ganieva accused Black of assaulting and bullying her during their affair, and of even flying her to Epstein's Palm Beach mansion on one occasion and pressuring her to have a threesome, which Ganieva said she refused. Black has also repeatedly denied those allegations.  Harris, who sought to dismiss Black's lawsuit, told the court he wasn't responsible for the "unfortunate consequences of Black's own actions."  "We are pleased the court swiftly and fairly dismissed the case and believe the decision speaks for itself," Jonathan Rosen, a representative for Harris, said in a statement. Ganieva's lawyers have also repeatedly denied associations with Harris and others. "When Leon Black first filed this lawsuit, our immediate reaction was that he did so to retaliate against our client Guzel Ganieva for speaking out about the sexual violence that she endured at his hands, and to retaliate against the lawyers that were representing her," Jeanne Christensen of Wigdor, who represents Ganieva, told Insider. "We said all along that the allegations about our activity and our client's activity were complete fabrications, and today the court ruled exactly that." she said.  A lawyer for Steve Rubenstein also lauded the ruling. "We were confident from the outset that this ever-changing and concocted tale, packed with lies about Steven, would not withstand judicial scrutiny, and we are gratified that the court agreed," said Jacob Buchdahl, partner at Susman Godfrey, who represents Rubenstein.A representative for Apollo declined to comment. Apollo is not involved in the legal disputes between Black and Ganieva. Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsider7 hr. 35 min. ago

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says "we are witnessing a judicial coup" with the Supreme Court taking up a case that could reshape US election law

"All our leaders - regardless of party - must recognize this Constitutional crisis for what it is," the New Yorker tweeted about an upcoming case. U.S. representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speaks to abortion-rights supporters in Union Square in response to the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade Friday, June 24, 2022 in Manhattan, New York.Barry Williams/NY Daily News via Getty Images AOC says the US is "witnessing a judicial coup in process" and is in a "constitutional crisis." The Supreme Court is taking up a case that could radically reshape election law.  "The Court is signaling they will come for the Presidential election next," Ocasio-Cortez tweeted.  Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez warned that the country is "witnessing a judicial coup in process" and is in the midst of a "Constitutional crisis" after the Supreme Court announced on Thursday that it will take up a case that could upend current US election law. "If the President and Congress do not restrain the Court now, the Court is signaling they will come for the Presidential election next," the New York Democrat tweeted. "All our leaders - regardless of party - must recognize this Constitutional crisis for what it is."—Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 30, 2022"At this point we should be well beyond partisanship," Ocasio-Cortez added. "Members of Congress have sworn an oath to the Constitution. It is our duty to check the Court's gross overreach of power in violating people's inalienable rights and seizing for itself the powers of Congress and the President."The Supreme Court announced at the end of its term on Friday that it will hear Moore v. Harper, a case out of North Carolina challenging the state supreme court's ability to strike down the new congressional and legislative maps passed by the state legislature for being unfairly gerrymandered in favor of Republicans.The petitioner, North Carolina Speaker Tim Moore, is asking the court to weigh in on not just the maps, but to adopt a once-fringe legal theory known as the independent state legislature doctrine which would monumentally reshape election law and make it much harder for courts to strike down voting maps or provide judicial review on election laws.The theory, which didn't enter the mainstream until 2020, claims that the Elections Clause of the US Constitution only gives state legislatures and no other authorities, like courts or executive officers, jurisdiction over redistricting and election laws. If the Supreme Court adopts the independent state legislature theory, it has far-reaching implications beyond redistricting, including for the 2024 election.Former president Donald Trump and his allies who sought to overturn the 2020 election in the courts and in Congress cited the theory in their efforts to reverse state election results, unsuccessfully claiming that state election laws shaped by courts or executive orders were invalid. In cases over the 2020 election and in considering the North Carolina case earlier this year, three members of the high court's conservative wing indicated they were open to accepting the doctrine to varying degrees. The Supreme Court is also set to hear Merrill vs. Milligan, a case over whether Alabama is required to draw a second majority-Black district under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that advocates worry could further erode the landmark civil rights law. The high court taking up the North Carolina case comes as the House Select Committee investigating January 6 is holding hearings shedding more light on how Trump and his allies pushed radical legal theories with the aim of overturning the election and keeping Trump in office. Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a member of the January 6 Committee, also expressed his concern over the high court taking the case, tweeting: "After the attempted coup, this cannot happen." Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsider9 hr. 7 min. ago

Live updates: Florida judge blocks the state"s 15-week abortion ban

The Supreme Court has overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that granted a nationwide, constitutional right to an abortion. Abortion rights and anti-abortion rights activists fill the street in front of the U.S. Supreme Court during a protest in the wake of the decision overturning Roe v. Wade outside on June 25, 2022, in Washington, DC.Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week. The 1973 landmark ruling established the constitutional right to an abortion. Over a dozen states have "trigger" laws meant to immediately outlaw abortion upon a reversal of Roe. The Supreme Court last week overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that established the constitutional right to an abortion. The opinion in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization threw out the ruling as the nation's highest court sided with Mississippi and other states, which passed restrictive anti-abortion laws.Immediately after last week's ruling, politicians on both sides of the aisle issued statements — with Republicans praising the Supreme Court and Democrats slamming the decision. Over a dozen states have "trigger laws" meant to ban abortion immediately upon the overturning of Roe, as the legality of abortion is now left up to state legislatures. Florida judge blocks the state's 15-week abortion banDemonstrators chant slogans during a rally in support of abortion rights in Miami, Florida.Lynne Sladky/AP PhotoA Florida judge blocked the state's 15-week abortion ban that was set to go into effect Friday. The ban violated Florida Constitution's right to privacy, Leon County Circuit Judge John Cooper ruled.Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who signed the restrictions into law, said his administration will appeal the decision.Read Full StoryBiden says he supports a filibuster exception to protect abortion and privacy rightsPresident Joe BidenSTEFANI REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty ImagesPresident Joe Biden said he now supports the Senate making an exception to the filibuster rule to pass protections for abortion and privacy rights."If the filibuster gets in the way, it's like voting rights ... we should require an exception to the filibuster for this action," Biden saidBiden's push to overturn the filibuster has run into opposition from moderate Democrats Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, key votes in the evenly divided 50-50 Senate.Read Full StoryBiden to appoint anti-abortion judge to lifetime federal post: reportPresident Joe Biden addresses the Supreme Court’s decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization to overturn Roe v. Wade June 24, 2022 in Cross Hall at the White House in Washington, DC. The Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health overturns the landmark 50-year-old Roe v Wade case and erases a federal right to an abortion.Photo by Alex Wong/Getty ImagesPresident Joe Biden will reportedly nominate an anti-abortion judge to a lifetime position in federal court — days after he vowed to protect abortion rights.Democratic Rep. John Yarmuth and other unnamed officials told the Louisville Courier-Journal that Biden planned to nominate lawyer Chad Meredith, who has defended Kentucky's anti-abortion legislation.Yarmuth said it was "clear" that the pending nomination was "part of some larger deal" with Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell.On the day the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe was handed down, Biden vowed to do "all in my power to protect a woman's right in states where they will face the consequences of today's decision." The White House and McConnell's office did not respond to requests for comment.Read MoreDem's slim majority in Congress and a conservative Supreme Court make it unlikely Roe v. Wade can be savedActivists march along Constitution Avenue to the US Supreme Court on May 14, 2022.Astrid Riecken for The Washington Post via Getty ImagesDespite calls from Democrats to protect abortion rights, it's unlikely that the Supreme Court's latest decision to throw out the constitutional right to an abortion will be overturned anytime soon."I don't think that we are going to see a reversal in Dobbs," Radhika Rao, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of Law, told Insider. "We're not going to see the return of the abortion right." Conservative justices have a 6-3 stranglehold on the nation's highest court, while Democrats have too slim of a majority in Congress to overcome Republicans' filibusters.Read MoreGeorge Washington University refuses to fire SCOTUS Justice Clarence ThomasJustice Clarence ThomasDrew Angerer/Getty ImagesGeorge Washington University has rejected calls for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to be fired from a teaching position after he joined the court's other conservative justices in overturning Roe v. Wade."Because we steadfastly support the robust exchange of ideas and deliberation, and because debate is an essential part of our university's academic and educational mission to train future leaders who are prepared to address the world's most urgent problems, the university will neither terminate Justices Thomas' employment nor cancel his class in response to his legal opinions," a letter stated.Read Full StoryKansas voters will be the first to address abortion rights after SCOTUS rulingThe Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade sent the question of abortion back to the states. — and the first direct electoral test of abortion rights in the post-Roe era will take place in Kansas.On Aug. 2, voters in Kansas will vote on a state constitutional amendment that would remove the right to an abortion in the state.The amendment would overturn a 2019 state court ruling that established a right to an abortion.Keep Reading Missouri health system restarts emergency contraception amid abortion ban fearsState laws banning abortion "from the moment of fertilization" could interfere with access to emergency contraception.Darin Oswald/Idaho Statesman/Tribune News Service via Getty ImagesA Missouri health system announced it would stop providing emergency contraception over concerns that its patients and staff could be prosecuted under the state's strict new abortion ban — then reversed course hours later.Missouri was the first state to make abortion illegal after the US Supreme Court on Friday overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling. Advocates fear that sweeping and vague abortion bans could also impede access to contraception or fertility treatment.Saint Luke's Health System referenced those concerns in their announcement, saying they would stop giving emergency contraception "until the law in this area becomes better defined."The medical system later said they would resume giving out the contraception. The sudden shift shows the confusion and uncertainty over how far state-level abortion bans apply.Read Full StoryHere's what Biden can do to help Americans retain abortion access now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, advocates sayAbortion advocates from across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden.Stefani Reynolds/Getty ImagesAs the nation reels from the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, abortion advocates from across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden. The suggestions raised by these advocates include expanding the Supreme Court, declaring a "public health and national emergency," establishing abortion clinics on federal land, and providing easier access to abortion medication.Read Full StoryHillary Clinton, who has known Clarence Thomas since law school, says he is a person of 'resentment, grievance, anger'Hillary Clinton has known Clarence Thomas since their days at Yale Law School in the '60s.Left: Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for The Met Museum/Vogue. Right: Drew Angerer/Getty Images.Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said Clarence Thomas, who she's known since they were at Yale Law School together in the '60s, has always been a "person of grievance.""I went to law school with him. He's been a person of grievance for as long as I have known him," Clinton said Tuesday during an interview on "CBS This Morning" with Gayle King. "Resentment, grievance, anger," she added.In a concurring opinion released when the Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week, Thomas wrote "we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents" for rulings that granted individuals the right to birth control access, intimate gay relationships, and same-sex marriage."He may be on his own, but he's signaling," Clinton said of Thomas. "He has signaled in the past to lower courts, to state legislatures to find cases, pass laws, get them up," she added.Read Full StoryNevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed an executive order strengthening protections for those seeking abortions and reproductive health services in the stateFILE: Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak speaks during a news conference in March 2020.Ethan Miller/Getty ImagesNevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed an executive order strengthening protections for out-of-state abortion patients and medical providers in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning the 1973 landmark ruling Roe v. Wade.The executive order is among a number of countermeasures being taken by Democratic state leaders after the fall of Roe."Today, I signed an Executive Order to strengthen protections for reproductive freedom in Nevada. Reproductive health care is a basic human right," Sisolak wrote in a tweet announcing the executive order. "We are committed to ensuring safe access to abortions for women seeking refuge from the restrictive laws in their state."Abortion rights in Nevada are enshrined in the state's law, making it immune to the impact of a reversal of Roe.—Governor Sisolak (@GovSisolak) June 29, 2022 Judges in Utah, Louisiana, and Texas have temporarily blocked state laws that would restrict or ban abortionsAttendees hold up signs during a Texas Rally for Abortion Rights at Discovery Green in Houston, Texas, on May 7, 2022.Mark Felix/AFP via Getty ImagesThe Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade on Friday sent abortion back to each individual state to decide — and state judges are emerging as key players in the new abortion fight.Before the Supreme Court decision, 13 states had enacted "trigger" laws designed to ban abortion as soon as Roe fell, others had passed abortion bans or restrictions in earlier years designed to challenge Roe, and still others had pre-Roe abortion bans on their books that courts are now tasked with ruling whether to uphold. Abortion rights litigants are now turning to state courts and arguing under state laws and constitutions to block those trigger laws and other restrictions, with judges in two states temporarily blocking trigger laws that went into effect on Friday.Read Full StoryThe Biden administration will make abortion pills more widely available following Roe's 'despicable' demise, top health official saysHealth and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra speaks about actions the Biden administration plans to take in response to the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Tuesday, June 28, 2022, in Washington.Patrick Semansky/AP PhotoThe federal government will make abortion pills more readily available to patients now that states have moved to ban abortion following the Supreme Court overturning its landmark Roe v. Wade decision, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said Tuesday.Becerra vowed his office will work with federal law enforcement agencies to ensure that states cannot ban abortion pills, as some Republican-led states have tried to do — though it's unclear how the laws would be enforced given that pills are sent through the mail. "Increasing access to this drug is a national imperative and in the public interest," Becerra said during a 30-minute press conference at the agency's headquarters in Washington, DC.Read MoreWhat 'packing the court' means — and why it's unlikely to happen to save Roe v. WadeActivists For Expanding The Supreme Court Rally Outside the Supreme Court on June 22, 2022.Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Demand JusticeThe Supreme Court's historic decision to end federal abortion rights in the United States has triggered calls to add more justices to the bench to offset its conservative majority.But with President Joe Biden against the reform and a lack of congressional support, it's unlikely to happen.The nation's highest court voted 5-4 on Friday to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion almost 50 years ago. The consequential decision has led some Democrats and abortion-rights activists to demand for the Supreme Court to be expanded in size — a change that aims to counteract the current conservative majority and its rulings by establishing an ideologically balanced court.Read Full StoryWhat the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade said during their confirmation hearingsWhat Justices Who Overturned Roe Said About Abortion During Confirmation HearingsGetty ImagesThe conservative Supreme Court justices who voted against Roe v. Wade and stripped away the constitutional right to an abortion had spoken about the importance of legal precedent during their confirmation hearings.But they had hedged when pressed on how they'd rule in abortion cases.Video compiled by Insider shows how Justices Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett responded when asked if they'd overturn Roe v. Wade.Keep ReadingUS military will continue to provide abortions when a woman's health is at riskUS Military membersBo Zaunders/Getty ImagesA memo to Department of Defense leaders said the military will not stop offering abortions to service members following the Supreme Court's ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade.The US military will continue to provide abortions when the health of the woman is at risk, the memo stated."Nothing is more important than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce, and DoD families, and we are committed to taking care of all of our people and ensuring that the entire Force remains ready and resilient," the memo said.Read Full StoryRestricting abortion rights will cause severe economic impacts for womenStates where abortion is restricted or banned will place a harsh burden on women seeking abortions — one that'll likely cause severe economic impacts.Women in these states may also lose out on earnings now that they may have to travel far to get abortion access, C. Nicole Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Women's Policy Research, previously told Insider.Mason said women "who are already economically vulnerable" — including women of color, hourly workers, and those without paid or sick leave —  will be most impacted by abortion bans. Read Full StoryFacebook, Instagram reportedly removed posts about abortion pillsRafael Henrique/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty ImagesFacebook and Instagram removed posts about abortion pills immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, according to the Associated Press and Vice.The AP reported that posts about how to obtain the pills — which refer to two drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol — were pulled off the platforms moments after the nation's highest court stripped away the constitutional right to an abortion.When reached for comment by Insider, Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, pointed to Meta spokesperson Andy Stone's Monday tweet."Content that attempts to buy, sell, trade, gift, request or donate pharmaceuticals is not allowed," Stone said.Read Full StoryRoe's daughter slams Supreme Court ruling throwing out abortion rightsAbortion rights are under threat in the US.TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty ImagesThe biological daughter of the woman at the center of the historic Roe v. Wade court case ripped the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the historic ruling — removing the constitutional right to an abortion."I believe that the decision to have an abortion is a private, medical choice that should be between a woman, her family, and her doctor," Shelley Lynn Thornton told ABC News. "We have lived in times of uncertainty and insecurity before, but to have such a fundamental right taken away and this ruling be overturned concerns me of what lies ahead."Read MoreWisconsin's Democratic governor vows to grant clemency to any doctors charged under the state's near-total abortion ban following fall of Roe v. WadeWisconsin Gov. Tony Evers addresses a joint session of the Legislature in the Assembly chambers at the state Capitol in Madison, Wis. on Feb. 15, 2022.AP Photo/Andy Manis, FileWisconsin Gov. Tony Evers said this weekend that he would offer clemency to any doctors charged under the state's antiquated law banning nearly all abortions, which dates back more than a century.The 1849 law was enacted long before Roe v. Wade was instated and remained a Wisconsin statute even after the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case rendered it moot. But after the nation's top court overturned Roe on Friday in a 5-4 majority decision, Wisconsin's 173-year-old abortion ban triggered back into effect. The state's ban makes performing abortions a felony and doctors charged under the statute face up to six years in prison, as well as fines up to $10,000. The law's only exception allows for abortion if it is needed to save the life of the mother. The law does not offer exceptions in instances of rape, incest, or the mother's general health. Read Full StoryUtah judge blocks state's abortion 'trigger law' ban for 14 days after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. WadeProtesters hold up hand-written signs in Salt Lake City, Utah.Niki Chan WylieA Utah judge granted a restraining order that will temporarily block the state's abortion ban from immediately going into effect, allowing doctors to provide abortions for the next 14 days.The ruling comes after the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade decision that granted women the constitutional right to an abortion.Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union chapter in Utah filed a lawsuit over the weekend in a bid to block the state's "trigger law," which was set to immediately ban abortion in the state following the SCOTUS ruling, which was leaked last month.Read Full StoryAfter Roe v. Wade: Doug Mastriano, GOP nominee for Pennsylvania governor, now says abortion is a 'distraction'State Sen. Doug Mastriano, R-Franklin, a Republican candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania, takes part in a primary night election gathering in Chambersburg, Pa., Tuesday, May 17, 2022.Carolyn Kaster/AP PhotoDoug Mastriano won the Republican nomination for governor in Pennsylvania by leaning into the culture war, using his Facebook live streams to rail against vaccine requirements, "Critical Race Theory," and members of his own party who failed to embrace conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.But this avowed opponent of abortion — who welcomed last week's Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade — is now trying to pivot conversations away from the question of reproductive rights, admitting that the issue is a boon to Democrats.In an interview with Newsmax on Monday, Mastriano was asked to comment on footage of pro-choice protesters who were dispersed by police with tear gas outside the state capitol in Arizona. Mastriano, who himself was on the front lines between police and protesters at the US Capitol on January 6, per video from the day, praised law enforcement for quelling the civil unrest.But the state senator also didn't reall.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsider10 hr. 35 min. ago

Renee Bracey Sherman wants you to know that someone you love has had an abortion

In the new post-Roe era, Renee Bracey Sherman, the "Beyonce of abortion storytelling" wants more people to hear real-life stories about abortion. Renee Bracey Sherman, "the Beyonce of abortion storytelling," is the founder of We Testify.Cheriss May for Insider Renee Bracey Sherman, 'the Beyonce of abortion storytelling,' says sharing positive abortion stories is more important than ever.  Her group, We Testify, has been showcasing personal stories about abortion since 2016. The group was behind a Supreme Court submission in which 6,641 people spoke out about their abortions. When does a personal story become a confession?That's one of the questions Renee Bracey Sherman was mulling a few days after the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, paving the way for abortion bans to take effect in nearly half the country. Bracey Sherman is the founder and executive director of We Testify, an outlet for people who want to share their abortion stories, and a resource for journalists to put a human face on coverage. Her mission is summed up her email sign-off: "Everyone loves someone who had an abortion."  But in the wake of the court's decision, so much is still unknown, including how aggressive states might be in coming after and prosecuting people involved in abortions after the fact. Almost immediately, women were urged to remove period-tracking apps off their phones, for fear the data could be used against them. On social media, doctors were ringing alarm bells that split-second decisions to save a pregnant patient could now carry serious legal consequences.   "Could stories be used as confessions? That has been keeping me up at night," Bracey Sherman said. But these feelings are also a reminder to her that the work of normalizing abortion is more important now than ever. "We just have to get creative," she said. "It's pushing We Testify to get better."Bracey Sherman, who is 36, created We Testify in 2016. Last year, when the US Supreme Court announced that they would consider Mississippi's restrictive abortion law, the group joined forces with Advocates for Youth and filed an amicus brief to the court that included the names of 6,641 people who have had abortions. Among them were people from all 50 states, D.C., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands — all of whom had agreed to speak openly about their experience. We Testify launched in 2016 as an outlet for people to share their personal stories about abortion.Cheriss May for InsiderThe brief also included some of their stories. A third-year law student explained that her oral contraception had failed when she started taking antibiotics and wasn't informed how the two would interact. Another woman said she discovered she was pregnant after being abandoned by her husband and left to care for her six-month-old son on her own. An expectant second-time mom told the court about learning at 22 weeks of pregnancy that the child she was carrying had health complications that were "incompatible with life." "Our goal was 376 signatures," Bracey Sherman said. Another amicus brief filed by the other side included the names of 375 people who said they had been injured by late-term abortions. "We wanted one more than the antis," Bracey Sherman said. Bracey Sherman's name was there. Also on the list was Bracey Sherman's mother. When she thinks about the 6,641 signatures, Bracey Sherman said, "I like to think that my mom was that one." 'What if we start sharing our stories?'For both Bracey Sherman and her mom, telling the other about her abortion didn't come easy — in fact, it took years.Bracey Sherman grew up outside Chicago in what she has called a progressive biracial family — her mother is Black and her father is white. Both her parents worked as nurses, and her father was a union organizer who years ago protested the draft. Abortion wasn't a taboo subject growing up. She learned only later that family members, including her mother, had had abortions in the past, but hadn't thought to ever share that with her.These days, Bracey Sherman talks all the time about getting an abortion at age 19. But it took six years before she started speaking about it openly. Had she known then that her own mother had been through something similar, "I would have known to go to her," Bracey Sherman said. "This is why I do what I do," she said.  When she applied for a master's of public administration from Cornell, she said writing about her abortion help secure her a generous scholarship. But as she began a career in public health, it struck her that, even among those working to protect abortion rights, almost no one wanted to discuss their own experiences with abortion. "I was the only person who was open about my abortion in the room. That was really fascinating to me," she said. So, she had an idea: "What if we start sharing our stories?"The deliberate act of people speaking openly and en masse about their abortions began about a decade ago, with social media propelling the effort. For so long, abortion had been framed as an abstract fight of Choice v. Life. But once people started speaking out, advocates saw the value of centering the actual experiences of real people who have had abortions. If people were willing to share their personal stories, bluntly and without any shame, the hope was that they could normalize abortion and refute misinformation. In 2015, for example, Amelia Bonow used the hashtag #ShoutYourAbortion — where shout is intended as a counterpoint to silence — and the story of her abortion went viral on Facebook, creating an opening for others to share their stories.Mary Ziegler, a professor at the University of California Davis and the author of several books about abortion, points to Ireland, which in 2018 voted overwhelmingly to overturn the country's abortion ban. After the vote, many cited the conversations they'd had with family, friends, and colleagues as pivotal in shaping their views."Stories matter when you're at a personal level with voters,"  Ziegler said. Renee Bracey Sherman sits behind a desk at the ìpàdé coworking space, which she helped found.Cheriss May for Insider'The Beyoncé of abortion storytelling'On the day I met her, Bracey Sherman greeted me wearing a Jurassic Park T-shirt. "When I'm really stressed I watch Jurassic Park," she explained. The movie comforts her, reminding her that things "could be worse. Dinosaurs could be eating people." On the inside of her right wrist, a tattoo reflects what has become her life's work. The words "share your story" are tucked into the outline of a swallow. The art was created by an artist with the Repeal Hyde Art Project, which is dedicated to raising awareness about the Hyde Amendment, the federal prohibition on using Medicaid dollars for abortion services that has been in place since 1976.We Testify is a remote operation, and Bracey Sherman often works out of the ìpàdé coworking space just off Dupont Circle, in Washington DC. It has deep purple walls and leafy views of Connecticut Avenue and R Street, and it's a space that Bracey Sherman helped bring into being — installing the bathroom shelves herself, she told me on a recent visit.After the stress of the last few days, this is a place where Bracey Sherman feels at ease, working quietly among friends and fellow activists and entrepreneurs. Curled up onto a crescent-shaped dark green sofa, her phone buzzed and lit up with a stream of incoming messages. She looked tired and her voice was raspy from hours spent outside the court. A few years back, someone bestowed on Bracey Sherman the title "the Beyoncé of abortion storytelling." She includes it in her Twitter bio. The story goes that after the Homecoming documentary debuted in 2019, it struck people that it was widely popular with white audiences, even though, as Bracey Sherman put it, "it was Black as fuck." A supporter of hers later said that, whatever you do, "become the Beyoncé of what you do." It became a joke because abortion storytelling, it was very white," Bracey Sherman said, and her focus was on minority stories. "It kind of snowballed after that," with news outlets adopting the title for her, too.Elizabeth Dawes Gay, founder and CEO of the coworking space where Bracey Sherman spends many of her work days, points to an old meme of Beyoncé as further evidence the nickname fits. "Renee is always on message like Beyoncé is always on beat," she said. "That's true because ask me anything and I have my abortion messaging down," Bracey Sherman replied.The fight over the right to abortion has intensified even as the number of people exercising that right has fallen overall since Roe v. Wade in 1973.We Testify's network of storytellers are empowered to share their abortion experiences on their own terms — revealing what they choose to, and in a way that feels safe. Last week, for instance, Teen Vogue published a piece featuring a We Testify storyteller who retraced the steps of her abortion.Before the pandemic, We Testify organized long-weekend retreats where people telling their abortion stories could meet, and talk about how to deal with the press. Bracey Sherman said the goal is never to tell people what to say, but to empower them to say no if they don't want to answer a particular question or share certain details of their experience."No is a complete sentence," she likes to tell participants. That goes for herself too: She declined to say whether she wants to be a mother someday. Bracey Sherman said her group is intentional in elevating the voices of storytellers who are Black and brown as well as those from the LGBTQ community, because she said straight, white voices are overrepresented in the abortion storytelling space.It's not yet clear if outrage over the court's decision will inspire more people to go public with their abortion stories or, fearing the reach of state prosecutors in states that are now instituting abortion bans, have a chilling effect on people's openness.Renee Bracey Sherman said it struck her early in her career that, even among those working to protect abortion rights, almost no one wanted discussed their own experiences with abortion.Cheriss May for InsiderOne of Bracey Sherman's storytellers, Cazembe Murphy Jackson, believes more people will want to come forward. "That's what I'm seeing," Jackson said. A Black trans man who now lives in Atlanta, Jackson had an abortion after being raped during his college years in Texas. "I share my story because Black trans people have abortions too and our voices should also be heard," he says on his We Testify page. Bonow, who started a a nonprofit advocacy group after her viral "shout your abortion" Facebook post, said that normalizing abortion is still important. Now her group's aim is to normalize participation in the abortion process, including getting people to say they will aid and abet abortion." "It was clear that we wanted to do more than the liberation of people sharing their stories," she said in an interview. "How do we actually make our friends and neighbors and family even get what they need?"In the near term, Bracey Sherman said her priority will be checking in on her storytellers. We Testify, she noted, has "had a lawyer on retainer since Day One." She also has a book on the history of abortion in the works.The long term is another story. The work of magnifying personal abortion stories continues. There's also a demand for consultants on TV and film productions, where there's a growing push to depict abortions in a realistic and responsible way. "Even if you have the policy wins or losses, you still have to do the culture work," she said. "That way people who are having abortions are seeing themselves." And as the reality of the Supreme Court's decision sinks in, there's no shortage of people who want to get involved. We Testify recently posted an opening for operations manager and, for that single opening, Bracey Sherman said that more than 600 people have applied. "We knew it was coming," she said of the court's ruling. "It's back to work." Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsider10 hr. 35 min. ago

Live updates: Biden supports filibuster exception to protect abortion rights

The Supreme Court has overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that granted a nationwide, constitutional right to an abortion. Abortion rights and anti-abortion rights activists fill the street in front of the U.S. Supreme Court during a protest in the wake of the decision overturning Roe v. Wade outside on June 25, 2022, in Washington, DC.Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week. The 1973 landmark ruling established the constitutional right to an abortion. Over a dozen states have "trigger" laws meant to immediately outlaw abortion upon a reversal of Roe. The Supreme Court last week overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that established the constitutional right to an abortion. The opinion in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization threw out the ruling as the nation's highest court sided with Mississippi and other states, which passed restrictive anti-abortion laws.Immediately after last week's ruling, politicians on both sides of the aisle issued statements — with Republicans praising the Supreme Court and Democrats slamming the decision. Over a dozen states have "trigger laws" meant to ban abortion immediately upon the overturning of Roe, as the legality of abortion is now left up to state legislatures. Biden says he supports a filibuster exception to protect abortion and privacy rightsPresident Joe BidenSTEFANI REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty ImagesPresident Joe Biden said he now supports the Senate making an exception to the filibuster rule to pass protections for abortion and privacy rights."If the filibuster gets in the way, it's like voting rights ... we should require an exception to the filibuster for this action," Biden saidBiden's push to overturn the filibuster has run into opposition from moderate Democrats Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, key votes in the evenly divided 50-50 Senate.Read Full StoryBiden to appoint anti-abortion judge to lifetime federal post: reportPresident Joe Biden addresses the Supreme Court’s decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization to overturn Roe v. Wade June 24, 2022 in Cross Hall at the White House in Washington, DC. The Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health overturns the landmark 50-year-old Roe v Wade case and erases a federal right to an abortion.Photo by Alex Wong/Getty ImagesPresident Joe Biden will reportedly nominate an anti-abortion judge to a lifetime position in federal court — days after he vowed to protect abortion rights.Democratic Rep. John Yarmuth and other unnamed officials told the Louisville Courier-Journal that Biden planned to nominate lawyer Chad Meredith, who has defended Kentucky's anti-abortion legislation.Yarmuth said it was "clear" that the pending nomination was "part of some larger deal" with Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell.On the day the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe was handed down, Biden vowed to do "all in my power to protect a woman's right in states where they will face the consequences of today's decision." The White House and McConnell's office did not respond to requests for comment.Read MoreDem's slim majority in Congress and a conservative Supreme Court make it unlikely Roe v. Wade can be savedActivists march along Constitution Avenue to the US Supreme Court on May 14, 2022.Astrid Riecken for The Washington Post via Getty ImagesDespite calls from Democrats to protect abortion rights, it's unlikely that the Supreme Court's latest decision to throw out the constitutional right to an abortion will be overturned anytime soon."I don't think that we are going to see a reversal in Dobbs," Radhika Rao, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of Law, told Insider. "We're not going to see the return of the abortion right." Conservative justices have a 6-3 stranglehold on the nation's highest court, while Democrats have too slim of a majority in Congress to overcome Republicans' filibusters.Read MoreGeorge Washington University refuses to fire SCOTUS Justice Clarence ThomasJustice Clarence ThomasDrew Angerer/Getty ImagesGeorge Washington University has rejected calls for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to be fired from a teaching position after he joined the court's other conservative justices in overturning Roe v. Wade."Because we steadfastly support the robust exchange of ideas and deliberation, and because debate is an essential part of our university's academic and educational mission to train future leaders who are prepared to address the world's most urgent problems, the university will neither terminate Justices Thomas' employment nor cancel his class in response to his legal opinions," a letter stated.Read Full StoryKansas voters will be the first to address abortion rights after SCOTUS rulingThe Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade sent the question of abortion back to the states. — and the first direct electoral test of abortion rights in the post-Roe era will take place in Kansas.On Aug. 2, voters in Kansas will vote on a state constitutional amendment that would remove the right to an abortion in the state.The amendment would overturn a 2019 state court ruling that established a right to an abortion.Keep Reading Missouri health system restarts emergency contraception amid abortion ban fearsState laws banning abortion "from the moment of fertilization" could interfere with access to emergency contraception.Darin Oswald/Idaho Statesman/Tribune News Service via Getty ImagesA Missouri health system announced it would stop providing emergency contraception over concerns that its patients and staff could be prosecuted under the state's strict new abortion ban — then reversed course hours later.Missouri was the first state to make abortion illegal after the US Supreme Court on Friday overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling. Advocates fear that sweeping and vague abortion bans could also impede access to contraception or fertility treatment.Saint Luke's Health System referenced those concerns in their announcement, saying they would stop giving emergency contraception "until the law in this area becomes better defined."The medical system later said they would resume giving out the contraception. The sudden shift shows the confusion and uncertainty over how far state-level abortion bans apply.Read Full StoryHere's what Biden can do to help Americans retain abortion access now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, advocates sayAbortion advocates from across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden.Stefani Reynolds/Getty ImagesAs the nation reels from the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, abortion advocates from across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden. The suggestions raised by these advocates include expanding the Supreme Court, declaring a "public health and national emergency," establishing abortion clinics on federal land, and providing easier access to abortion medication.Read Full StoryHillary Clinton, who has known Clarence Thomas since law school, says he is a person of 'resentment, grievance, anger'Hillary Clinton has known Clarence Thomas since their days at Yale Law School in the '60s.Left: Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for The Met Museum/Vogue. Right: Drew Angerer/Getty Images.Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said Clarence Thomas, who she's known since they were at Yale Law School together in the '60s, has always been a "person of grievance.""I went to law school with him. He's been a person of grievance for as long as I have known him," Clinton said Tuesday during an interview on "CBS This Morning" with Gayle King. "Resentment, grievance, anger," she added.In a concurring opinion released when the Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week, Thomas wrote "we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents" for rulings that granted individuals the right to birth control access, intimate gay relationships, and same-sex marriage."He may be on his own, but he's signaling," Clinton said of Thomas. "He has signaled in the past to lower courts, to state legislatures to find cases, pass laws, get them up," she added.Read Full StoryNevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed an executive order strengthening protections for those seeking abortions and reproductive health services in the stateFILE: Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak speaks during a news conference in March 2020.Ethan Miller/Getty ImagesNevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed an executive order strengthening protections for out-of-state abortion patients and medical providers in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning the 1973 landmark ruling Roe v. Wade.The executive order is among a number of countermeasures being taken by Democratic state leaders after the fall of Roe."Today, I signed an Executive Order to strengthen protections for reproductive freedom in Nevada. Reproductive health care is a basic human right," Sisolak wrote in a tweet announcing the executive order. "We are committed to ensuring safe access to abortions for women seeking refuge from the restrictive laws in their state."Abortion rights in Nevada are enshrined in the state's law, making it immune to the impact of a reversal of Roe.—Governor Sisolak (@GovSisolak) June 29, 2022 Judges in Utah, Louisiana, and Texas have temporarily blocked state laws that would restrict or ban abortionsAttendees hold up signs during a Texas Rally for Abortion Rights at Discovery Green in Houston, Texas, on May 7, 2022.Mark Felix/AFP via Getty ImagesThe Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade on Friday sent abortion back to each individual state to decide — and state judges are emerging as key players in the new abortion fight.Before the Supreme Court decision, 13 states had enacted "trigger" laws designed to ban abortion as soon as Roe fell, others had passed abortion bans or restrictions in earlier years designed to challenge Roe, and still others had pre-Roe abortion bans on their books that courts are now tasked with ruling whether to uphold. Abortion rights litigants are now turning to state courts and arguing under state laws and constitutions to block those trigger laws and other restrictions, with judges in two states temporarily blocking trigger laws that went into effect on Friday.Read Full StoryThe Biden administration will make abortion pills more widely available following Roe's 'despicable' demise, top health official saysHealth and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra speaks about actions the Biden administration plans to take in response to the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Tuesday, June 28, 2022, in Washington.Patrick Semansky/AP PhotoThe federal government will make abortion pills more readily available to patients now that states have moved to ban abortion following the Supreme Court overturning its landmark Roe v. Wade decision, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said Tuesday.Becerra vowed his office will work with federal law enforcement agencies to ensure that states cannot ban abortion pills, as some Republican-led states have tried to do — though it's unclear how the laws would be enforced given that pills are sent through the mail. "Increasing access to this drug is a national imperative and in the public interest," Becerra said during a 30-minute press conference at the agency's headquarters in Washington, DC.Read MoreWhat 'packing the court' means — and why it's unlikely to happen to save Roe v. WadeActivists For Expanding The Supreme Court Rally Outside the Supreme Court on June 22, 2022.Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Demand JusticeThe Supreme Court's historic decision to end federal abortion rights in the United States has triggered calls to add more justices to the bench to offset its conservative majority.But with President Joe Biden against the reform and a lack of congressional support, it's unlikely to happen.The nation's highest court voted 5-4 on Friday to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion almost 50 years ago. The consequential decision has led some Democrats and abortion-rights activists to demand for the Supreme Court to be expanded in size — a change that aims to counteract the current conservative majority and its rulings by establishing an ideologically balanced court.Read Full StoryWhat the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade said during their confirmation hearingsWhat Justices Who Overturned Roe Said About Abortion During Confirmation HearingsGetty ImagesThe conservative Supreme Court justices who voted against Roe v. Wade and stripped away the constitutional right to an abortion had spoken about the importance of legal precedent during their confirmation hearings.But they had hedged when pressed on how they'd rule in abortion cases.Video compiled by Insider shows how Justices Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett responded when asked if they'd overturn Roe v. Wade.Keep ReadingUS military will continue to provide abortions when a woman's health is at riskUS Military membersBo Zaunders/Getty ImagesA memo to Department of Defense leaders said the military will not stop offering abortions to service members following the Supreme Court's ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade.The US military will continue to provide abortions when the health of the woman is at risk, the memo stated."Nothing is more important than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce, and DoD families, and we are committed to taking care of all of our people and ensuring that the entire Force remains ready and resilient," the memo said.Read Full StoryRestricting abortion rights will cause severe economic impacts for womenStates where abortion is restricted or banned will place a harsh burden on women seeking abortions — one that'll likely cause severe economic impacts.Women in these states may also lose out on earnings now that they may have to travel far to get abortion access, C. Nicole Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Women's Policy Research, previously told Insider.Mason said women "who are already economically vulnerable" — including women of color, hourly workers, and those without paid or sick leave —  will be most impacted by abortion bans. Read Full StoryFacebook, Instagram reportedly removed posts about abortion pillsRafael Henrique/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty ImagesFacebook and Instagram removed posts about abortion pills immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, according to the Associated Press and Vice.The AP reported that posts about how to obtain the pills — which refer to two drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol — were pulled off the platforms moments after the nation's highest court stripped away the constitutional right to an abortion.When reached for comment by Insider, Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, pointed to Meta spokesperson Andy Stone's Monday tweet."Content that attempts to buy, sell, trade, gift, request or donate pharmaceuticals is not allowed," Stone said.Read Full StoryRoe's daughter slams Supreme Court ruling throwing out abortion rightsAbortion rights are under threat in the US.TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty ImagesThe biological daughter of the woman at the center of the historic Roe v. Wade court case ripped the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the historic ruling — removing the constitutional right to an abortion."I believe that the decision to have an abortion is a private, medical choice that should be between a woman, her family, and her doctor," Shelley Lynn Thornton told ABC News. "We have lived in times of uncertainty and insecurity before, but to have such a fundamental right taken away and this ruling be overturned concerns me of what lies ahead."Read MoreWisconsin's Democratic governor vows to grant clemency to any doctors charged under the state's near-total abortion ban following fall of Roe v. WadeWisconsin Gov. Tony Evers addresses a joint session of the Legislature in the Assembly chambers at the state Capitol in Madison, Wis. on Feb. 15, 2022.AP Photo/Andy Manis, FileWisconsin Gov. Tony Evers said this weekend that he would offer clemency to any doctors charged under the state's antiquated law banning nearly all abortions, which dates back more than a century.The 1849 law was enacted long before Roe v. Wade was instated and remained a Wisconsin statute even after the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case rendered it moot. But after the nation's top court overturned Roe on Friday in a 5-4 majority decision, Wisconsin's 173-year-old abortion ban triggered back into effect. The state's ban makes performing abortions a felony and doctors charged under the statute face up to six years in prison, as well as fines up to $10,000. The law's only exception allows for abortion if it is needed to save the life of the mother. The law does not offer exceptions in instances of rape, incest, or the mother's general health. Read Full StoryUtah judge blocks state's abortion 'trigger law' ban for 14 days after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. WadeProtesters hold up hand-written signs in Salt Lake City, Utah.Niki Chan WylieA Utah judge granted a restraining order that will temporarily block the state's abortion ban from immediately going into effect, allowing doctors to provide abortions for the next 14 days.The ruling comes after the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade decision that granted women the constitutional right to an abortion.Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union chapter in Utah filed a lawsuit over the weekend in a bid to block the state's "trigger law," which was set to immediately ban abortion in the state following the SCOTUS ruling, which was leaked last month.Read Full StoryAfter Roe v. Wade: Doug Mastriano, GOP nominee for Pennsylvania governor, now says abortion is a 'distraction'State Sen. Doug Mastriano, R-Franklin, a Republican candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania, takes part in a primary night election gathering in Chambersburg, Pa., Tuesday, May 17, 2022.Carolyn Kaster/AP PhotoDoug Mastriano won the Republican nomination for governor in Pennsylvania by leaning into the culture war, using his Facebook live streams to rail against vaccine requirements, "Critical Race Theory," and members of his own party who failed to embrace conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.But this avowed opponent of abortion — who welcomed last week's Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade — is now trying to pivot conversations away from the question of reproductive rights, admitting that the issue is a boon to Democrats.In an interview with Newsmax on Monday, Mastriano was asked to comment on footage of pro-choice protesters who were dispersed by police with tear gas outside the state capitol in Arizona. Mastriano, who himself was on the front lines between police and protesters at the US Capitol on January 6, per video from the day, praised law enforcement for quelling the civil unrest.But the state senator also didn't reall.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsider12 hr. 35 min. ago

In Landmark Ruling, Supreme Court Deals Massive Blow To Biden"s Climate Change Agenda

In Landmark Ruling, Supreme Court Deals Massive Blow To Biden's Climate Change Agenda At the same time as it give the Biden admin a token victory by overturning Trump's "remain in Mexico" rule, the US Supreme Court also struck a major blow to Biden's fight against climate change, when in a landmark ruling, the SCOTUS also curbed the ability of America’s top environmental regulator to limit greenhouse gas emissions, siding with coal miners and Republican-led states. In a majority opinion authored by chief justice John Roberts, the justices ruled that in the latest example of Democratic overreach, the Environmental Protection Agency was not specifically authorized by Congress to reduce carbon emissions when it was set up in 1970. The ruling leaves the Biden administration dependent on passing legislation if it wants to implement sweeping regulations to curb emissions. The opinion from the court's conservative majority said that “a decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body”. The justices added they doubted Congress intended to delegate the question of “how much coal-based generation there should be over the coming decades, to any administrative agency”. The dissenting opinion authored by justice Elena Kagan and joined by the court’s other two liberal justices said the EPA had the authority to regulate “stationary sources” of polluting substances that are harmful to the public, adding that curbing the output of greenhouse gas emissions was “a necessary part of any effective approach for addressing climate change”. In other words, the usual green tripe that has sent the country to the edge of a hyperinflationary commodity disaster. “This Court has obstructed EPA’s effort from the beginning,” Kagan wrote. “The limits the majority now puts on EPA’s authority fly in the face of the statute Congress wrote.” As the FT reports, at the heart of the case is a disagreement over how broadly the EPA should be allowed to interpret portions of the 1970 Clean Air Act, particularly the sections that direct the EPA to develop emissions limitations for power plants. Dubbed West Virginia vs EPA, the case was brought by a host of Republican attorneys-general and the coal industry. Their argument centres on a regulation that never took effect: an Obama-era proposal known as the Clean Power Plan, which would have mandated that power plants make 32 per cent reductions in emissions below 2005 levels by 2030. The Supreme Court ordered that rule to be suspended in 2016. That rule was later torn up by the Trump administration in favor of its Affordable Clean Energy rule, designed to support the coal industry. The Trump administration’s regulation, however, was struck down by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit last year. Challenging the lower court’s reversal of Trump’s rule at the Supreme Court, West Virginia has argued that the Obama-era Clean Power Plan relied on an overly broad interpretation of the Clean Air Act and gave the EPA excessive and “industry transforming” power. West Virginia argued that the lower court’s interpretation of the law granted the EPA “unbridled power” to issue significant rules that would reshape the US electricity grid and decarbonise sectors of the economy. It said the EPA should only have very limited authority to regulate emissions inside “the fence line” of power plants, and cannot apply broader industry-wide measures like carbon credit trading or biomass co-firing. Defending the case, Biden’s EPA has said that nothing in the Clean Air Act makes a distinction between inside the fence line measures and broader, industry-wide regulatory measures. It added that West Virginia’s “real concern” was that the agency might introduce some elements of Obama’s Clean Power Plan into a future rule. But the EPA said that the Supreme Court is not authorised to issue an advisory opinion on the types of measures a future rule could contain. Dick Durbin, the Democratic whip in the Senate, predictably said the decision was “a dangerous step backwards and threatens our air and our planet”, adding it “sets a troubling precedent both for what it means to protect public health and the authority regulatory agencies have to protect public health”. What he means is that the US may once again be on the path to becoming self-sufficient in energy, and not peddling money to corrupt "green" lobbies and interests. The ruling by the court’s conservative majority is the latest in a string of dramatic decisions that have challenged established legal precedents, including the recent reversal of Roe vs Wade. Last week, it also struck down a century-old New York state law requiring an individual to show “proper cause” to carry a concealed gun in public, deeming the statute unconstitutional. The court on Monday also ruled in favour of a former high school coach dismissed for praying at football games, fuelling the fraught debate on the separation of church and state. Tyler Durden Thu, 06/30/2022 - 11:20.....»»

Category: personnelSource: nyt13 hr. 7 min. ago

Live updates: Biden to nominate anti-abortion judge days after SCOTUS ruling, congressman says

The Supreme Court has overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that granted a nationwide, constitutional right to an abortion. Abortion rights and anti-abortion rights activists fill the street in front of the U.S. Supreme Court during a protest in the wake of the decision overturning Roe v. Wade outside on June 25, 2022, in Washington, DC.Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week. The 1973 landmark ruling established the constitutional right to an abortion. Over a dozen states have "trigger" laws meant to immediately outlaw abortion upon a reversal of Roe. The Supreme Court last week overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that established the constitutional right to an abortion. The opinion in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization threw out the ruling as the nation's highest court sided with Mississippi and other states, which passed restrictive anti-abortion laws.Immediately after last week's ruling, politicians on both sides of the aisle issued statements — with Republicans praising the Supreme Court and Democrats slamming the decision. Over a dozen states have "trigger laws" meant to ban abortion immediately upon the overturning of Roe, as the legality of abortion is now left up to state legislatures. Biden to appoint anti-abortion judge to lifetime federal post: reportPresident Joe Biden addresses the Supreme Court’s decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization to overturn Roe v. Wade June 24, 2022 in Cross Hall at the White House in Washington, DC. The Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health overturns the landmark 50-year-old Roe v Wade case and erases a federal right to an abortion.Photo by Alex Wong/Getty ImagesPresident Joe Biden will reportedly nominate an anti-abortion judge to a lifetime position in federal court — days after he vowed to protect abortion rights.Democratic Rep. John Yarmuth and other unnamed officials told the Louisville Courier-Journal that Biden planned to nominate lawyer Chad Meredith, who has defended Kentucky's anti-abortion legislation.Yarmuth said it was "clear" that the pending nomination was "part of some larger deal" with Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell.On the day the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe was handed down, Biden vowed to do "all in my power to protect a woman's right in states where they will face the consequences of today's decision." The White House and McConnell's office did not respond to requests for comment.Read MoreMissouri health system restarts emergency contraception amid abortion ban fearsState laws banning abortion "from the moment of fertilization" could interfere with access to emergency contraception.Darin Oswald/Idaho Statesman/Tribune News Service via Getty ImagesA Missouri health system announced it would stop providing emergency contraception over concerns that its patients and staff could be prosecuted under the state's strict new abortion ban — then reversed course hours later.Missouri was the first state to make abortion illegal after the US Supreme Court on Friday overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling. Advocates fear that sweeping and vague abortion bans could also impede access to contraception or fertility treatment.Saint Luke's Health System referenced those concerns in their announcement, saying they would stop giving emergency contraception "until the law in this area becomes better defined."The medical system later said they would resume giving out the contraception. The sudden shift shows the confusion and uncertainty over how far state-level abortion bans apply.Read Full StoryHere's what Biden can do to help Americans retain abortion access now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, advocates sayAbortion advocates from across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden.Stefani Reynolds/Getty ImagesAs the nation reels from the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, abortion advocates from across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden. The suggestions raised by these advocates include expanding the Supreme Court, declaring a "public health and national emergency," establishing abortion clinics on federal land, and providing easier access to abortion medication.Read Full StoryHillary Clinton, who has known Clarence Thomas since law school, says he is a person of 'resentment, grievance, anger'Hillary Clinton has known Clarence Thomas since their days at Yale Law School in the '60s.Left: Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for The Met Museum/Vogue. Right: Drew Angerer/Getty Images.Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said Clarence Thomas, who she's known since they were at Yale Law School together in the '60s, has always been a "person of grievance.""I went to law school with him. He's been a person of grievance for as long as I have known him," Clinton said Tuesday during an interview on "CBS This Morning" with Gayle King. "Resentment, grievance, anger," she added.In a concurring opinion released when the Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week, Thomas wrote "we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents" for rulings that granted individuals the right to birth control access, intimate gay relationships, and same-sex marriage."He may be on his own, but he's signaling," Clinton said of Thomas. "He has signaled in the past to lower courts, to state legislatures to find cases, pass laws, get them up," she added.Read Full StoryNevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed an executive order strengthening protections for those seeking abortions and reproductive health services in the stateFILE: Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak speaks during a news conference in March 2020.Ethan Miller/Getty ImagesNevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed an executive order strengthening protections for out-of-state abortion patients and medical providers in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning the 1973 landmark ruling Roe v. Wade.The executive order is among a number of countermeasures being taken by Democratic state leaders after the fall of Roe."Today, I signed an Executive Order to strengthen protections for reproductive freedom in Nevada. Reproductive health care is a basic human right," Sisolak wrote in a tweet announcing the executive order. "We are committed to ensuring safe access to abortions for women seeking refuge from the restrictive laws in their state."Abortion rights in Nevada are enshrined in the state's law, making it immune to the impact of a reversal of Roe.—Governor Sisolak (@GovSisolak) June 29, 2022 Judges in Utah, Louisiana, and Texas have temporarily blocked state laws that would restrict or ban abortionsAttendees hold up signs during a Texas Rally for Abortion Rights at Discovery Green in Houston, Texas, on May 7, 2022.Mark Felix/AFP via Getty ImagesThe Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade on Friday sent abortion back to each individual state to decide — and state judges are emerging as key players in the new abortion fight.Before the Supreme Court decision, 13 states had enacted "trigger" laws designed to ban abortion as soon as Roe fell, others had passed abortion bans or restrictions in earlier years designed to challenge Roe, and still others had pre-Roe abortion bans on their books that courts are now tasked with ruling whether to uphold. Abortion rights litigants are now turning to state courts and arguing under state laws and constitutions to block those trigger laws and other restrictions, with judges in two states temporarily blocking trigger laws that went into effect on Friday.Read Full StoryThe Biden administration will make abortion pills more widely available following Roe's 'despicable' demise, top health official saysHealth and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra speaks about actions the Biden administration plans to take in response to the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Tuesday, June 28, 2022, in Washington.Patrick Semansky/AP PhotoThe federal government will make abortion pills more readily available to patients now that states have moved to ban abortion following the Supreme Court overturning its landmark Roe v. Wade decision, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said Tuesday.Becerra vowed his office will work with federal law enforcement agencies to ensure that states cannot ban abortion pills, as some Republican-led states have tried to do — though it's unclear how the laws would be enforced given that pills are sent through the mail. "Increasing access to this drug is a national imperative and in the public interest," Becerra said during a 30-minute press conference at the agency's headquarters in Washington, DC.Read MoreWhat 'packing the court' means — and why it's unlikely to happen to save Roe v. WadeActivists For Expanding The Supreme Court Rally Outside the Supreme Court on June 22, 2022.Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Demand JusticeThe Supreme Court's historic decision to end federal abortion rights in the United States has triggered calls to add more justices to the bench to offset its conservative majority.But with President Joe Biden against the reform and a lack of congressional support, it's unlikely to happen.The nation's highest court voted 5-4 on Friday to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion almost 50 years ago. The consequential decision has led some Democrats and abortion-rights activists to demand for the Supreme Court to be expanded in size — a change that aims to counteract the current conservative majority and its rulings by establishing an ideologically balanced court.Read Full StoryWhat the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade said during their confirmation hearingsWhat Justices Who Overturned Roe Said About Abortion During Confirmation HearingsGetty ImagesThe conservative Supreme Court justices who voted against Roe v. Wade and stripped away the constitutional right to an abortion had spoken about the importance of legal precedent during their confirmation hearings.But they had hedged when pressed on how they'd rule in abortion cases.Video compiled by Insider shows how Justices Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett responded when asked if they'd overturn Roe v. Wade.Keep ReadingUS military will continue to provide abortions when a woman's health is at riskUS Military membersBo Zaunders/Getty ImagesA memo to Department of Defense leaders said the military will not stop offering abortions to service members following the Supreme Court's ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade.The US military will continue to provide abortions when the health of the woman is at risk, the memo stated."Nothing is more important than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce, and DoD families, and we are committed to taking care of all of our people and ensuring that the entire Force remains ready and resilient," the memo said.Read Full StoryRestricting abortion rights will cause severe economic impacts for womenStates where abortion is restricted or banned will place a harsh burden on women seeking abortions — one that'll likely cause severe economic impacts.Women in these states may also lose out on earnings now that they may have to travel far to get abortion access, C. Nicole Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Women's Policy Research, previously told Insider.Mason said women "who are already economically vulnerable" — including women of color, hourly workers, and those without paid or sick leave —  will be most impacted by abortion bans. Read Full StoryFacebook, Instagram reportedly removed posts about abortion pillsRafael Henrique/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty ImagesFacebook and Instagram removed posts about abortion pills immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, according to the Associated Press and Vice.The AP reported that posts about how to obtain the pills — which refer to two drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol — were pulled off the platforms moments after the nation's highest court stripped away the constitutional right to an abortion.When reached for comment by Insider, Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, pointed to Meta spokesperson Andy Stone's Monday tweet."Content that attempts to buy, sell, trade, gift, request or donate pharmaceuticals is not allowed," Stone said.Read Full StoryRoe's daughter slams Supreme Court ruling throwing out abortion rightsAbortion rights are under threat in the US.TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty ImagesThe biological daughter of the woman at the center of the historic Roe v. Wade court case ripped the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the historic ruling — removing the constitutional right to an abortion."I believe that the decision to have an abortion is a private, medical choice that should be between a woman, her family, and her doctor," Shelley Lynn Thornton told ABC News. "We have lived in times of uncertainty and insecurity before, but to have such a fundamental right taken away and this ruling be overturned concerns me of what lies ahead."Read MoreWisconsin's Democratic governor vows to grant clemency to any doctors charged under the state's near-total abortion ban following fall of Roe v. WadeWisconsin Gov. Tony Evers addresses a joint session of the Legislature in the Assembly chambers at the state Capitol in Madison, Wis. on Feb. 15, 2022.AP Photo/Andy Manis, FileWisconsin Gov. Tony Evers said this weekend that he would offer clemency to any doctors charged under the state's antiquated law banning nearly all abortions, which dates back more than a century.The 1849 law was enacted long before Roe v. Wade was instated and remained a Wisconsin statute even after the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case rendered it moot. But after the nation's top court overturned Roe on Friday in a 5-4 majority decision, Wisconsin's 173-year-old abortion ban triggered back into effect. The state's ban makes performing abortions a felony and doctors charged under the statute face up to six years in prison, as well as fines up to $10,000. The law's only exception allows for abortion if it is needed to save the life of the mother. The law does not offer exceptions in instances of rape, incest, or the mother's general health. Read Full StoryUtah judge blocks state's abortion 'trigger law' ban for 14 days after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. WadeProtesters hold up hand-written signs in Salt Lake City, Utah.Niki Chan WylieA Utah judge granted a restraining order that will temporarily block the state's abortion ban from immediately going into effect, allowing doctors to provide abortions for the next 14 days.The ruling comes after the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade decision that granted women the constitutional right to an abortion.Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union chapter in Utah filed a lawsuit over the weekend in a bid to block the state's "trigger law," which was set to immediately ban abortion in the state following the SCOTUS ruling, which was leaked last month.Read Full StoryAfter Roe v. Wade: Doug Mastriano, GOP nominee for Pennsylvania governor, now says abortion is a 'distraction'State Sen. Doug Mastriano, R-Franklin, a Republican candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania, takes part in a primary night election gathering in Chambersburg, Pa., Tuesday, May 17, 2022.Carolyn Kaster/AP PhotoDoug Mastriano won the Republican nomination for governor in Pennsylvania by leaning into the culture war, using his Facebook live streams to rail against vaccine requirements, "Critical Race Theory," and members of his own party who failed to embrace conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.But this avowed opponent of abortion — who welcomed last week's Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade — is now trying to pivot conversations away from the question of reproductive rights, admitting that the issue is a boon to Democrats.In an interview with Newsmax on Monday, Mastriano was asked to comment on footage of pro-choice protesters who were dispersed by police with tear gas outside the state capitol in Arizona. Mastriano, who himself was on the front lines between police and protesters at the US Capitol on January 6, per video from the day, praised law enforcement for quelling the civil unrest.But the state senator also didn't reall.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsider15 hr. 7 min. ago

The chances of restoring Roe v. Wade are near impossible with the Supreme Court"s 6 conservative justices and Democrats" slim Congress majority

Democrats are under pressure to protect abortion rights at the federal level in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Joanna Liverance, 26, of Detroit, protests with abortion-rights supporters outside of the Supreme Court, Wednesday, June 29, 2022, in Washington, DC.AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin Democrats are under pressure to protect abortion rights since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last Friday. But the constitutional right to an abortion is unlikely to be restored anytime soon. That's largely because of the Supreme Court's conservative majority and political gridlock in Congress. Democrats in Washington are under immense pressure to protect abortion rights at the federal level in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to end Roe v. Wade last Friday. But the half-century of nationwide reproductive rights is unlikely to be restored anytime soon.One reason is that the Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority will be around for a while. To reinstate Roe and reverse Friday's ruling for the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization there would have to be a change in who sits on the bench. Unless the court holds a liberal majority, there appears to be zero appetite for abortion to become a constitutional right again."I don't think that we are going to see a reversal in Dobbs," Radhika Rao, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of Law, told Insider. "We're not going to see the return of the abortion right." The Supreme CourtA majority of conservative justices, 5-4, handed down Friday's decision. Former President Donald Trump and a Republican-controlled Senate cemented that conservative tilt with three appointments to the bench: Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, all of whom are in their 50s. Given their ages, the justices are likely to stay on the bench for at least a couple of decades to come, providing three reliable conservative votes. "They're quite young. Their tenure in the court is going to be incredibly long," Rao said.With the retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer, a liberal to be replaced by President Joe Biden's nominee Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the oldest members will now be conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, 74, and Samuel Alito, 72. But for Democrats to appoint their replacements, the circumstances will have to work in their favor."If it happened, we're talking about decades from now, after a couple of the conservatives die, and they just happen to die when the Democrat controls the White House and the Democrats control the Senate," Richard Pierce, a professor at George Washington University Law School told Insider.Another pathway for Democrats to try to protect abortion rights would be to expand the court, which some members of the party have called for to offset its conservative majority. The US Constitution does not dictate the court's size, with the number of justices at one point being as high as 10. Congress has the power to decide.But President Joe Biden has ruled that out. "That is not something that he wants to do," White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters over the weekend.What about Congress?Democrats have also been pressed to codify protections that existed under Roe v. Wade into federal law. Yet legislation in the Senate needs 60 votes to bypass the filibuster. And Democrats, with a tiny majority in the 50-50 Senate, do not have enough votes.The party has also recently tried that: following last month's leak of the draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, an abortion-rights bill failed in the Senate by a 49-51 vote. The other option would be to advance the bill on a party-line vote by eliminating the filibuster. But Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona have consistently been against tossing out the rule, putting the rest of their party in a bind.Democrats push for voting to expand their majoritiesThat's why President Joe Biden, along with congressional leaders, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, have urged voters to elect more Democrats to Congress in this year's midterm elections so they can win larger majorities and approve legislation that would protect abortion rights. Though if Democrats ever manage to codify Roe v. Wade into federal law, there remains the possibility of a future Republican president coming along, with Republican majorities in the House and Senate, which could repeal such a law and perhaps pass a national ban on abortion.And codifying abortion rights, even if possible given the current makeup of Congress, could potentially face a legal challenge — one that would almost certainly end up at the Supreme Court."I think the court would immediately strike it down as being beyond Congress's power," Barry McDonald, a professor at Pepperdine University Caruso School of Law, told Insider. This reality has left Democrats scrambling to protect abortion access nationwide. The Biden administration has already pledged to defend the right to obtain a medical abortion in all 50 states, citing the FDA's authority to regulate drugs. Though advocates have called for more actions, such as establishing abortion clinics on federal lands in states that have restricted the procedure and offering financial support to women who travel to get an abortion in a state where it's still legal. Since Friday, a slew of Republican-led states moved to restrict abortion, impacting roughly half of the country.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 29th, 2022

New Corporate Policies on Abortion Travel Spark Worries About Employees’ Privacy

More than 25 companies, including Disney, Meta and Dick's Sporting Goods, announced that they would cover employees who need to travel to receive abortion care In the hours after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on Friday, eliminating the constitutional right to an abortion, several major U.S. corporations announced they would cover travel expenses for employees who had to cross state lines to obtain an abortion. Dick’s Sporting Goods announced it would provide up to $4,000 in travel expense reimbursement to employees who live in states with abortion restrictions, so they “can access the same health care options, regardless of where they live, and choose what is best for them,” CEO Lauren Hobart said in a LinkedIn post. Meta, Facebook’s parent company, said it would offer travel expense reimbursements “to the extent permitted by law” for employees who need to access reproductive care in another state. “We are in the process of assessing how best to do so given the legal complexities involved,” a Meta spokesperson said. Disney told employees that a benefit offering them access to care in other states extends to “family planning (including pregnancy termination),” according to a company spokesperson. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”] They’re among more than 25 companies—many of them household names—that announced such policies in the weeks leading up to the Supreme Court’s decision or after the official ruling on Friday. But as the dust settles in a post-Roe America, companies’ involvement in their employees’ abortion care also raises a host of new legal and privacy issues. And abortion-rights advocates are frustrated that people who become pregnant in states where abortion is illegal or heavily restricted will have to depend on their employer as they navigate complex health decisions. “Certainly women who have to access care are not overjoyed that this is where we find ourselves. This is a policy failure. This is a systemic failure,” says Erika Seth Davies, CEO of Rhia Ventures, a fund focused on reproductive health care that has encouraged companies to improve access to abortion. “And now we’re having to look to the private sector to just see to it that people can get what they need, and that’s a very precarious position.” Kayte Spector-Bagdady, a lawyer and bioethicist at the University of Michigan who focuses on health data, says she appreciates companies that are making well-intentioned efforts to support employees’ access to abortion. But there’s still a lot of uncertainty regarding what these policies will actually mean for employees; whether the benefits will be managed by health insurance providers, supervisors, or a human resources department; whether employees can use their health savings accounts for abortion care; and how employees’ privacy will be protected. Read More: What Abortion Providers in Anti-Abortion States Will Do Post-Roe “People think of health information as being protected because it’s about your health, and that’s not accurate,” she says. “I have a lot of concerns regarding the legality of the way they arrange this funding for travel, as well as the kinds of privacy protections that are in existence to protect the kind of information being generated in these relationships.” She acknowledges that company reimbursements are a valuable resource for people who could otherwise not afford to travel for abortion care, but sharing that kind of personal information with an employer poses additional challenges. “It’s a terrible position to put people into,” she says. The end of Roe v. Wade has given rise to new concerns about how sensitive abortion data—including period-tracking apps or internet searches for abortion-inducing medication—could be exploited amid efforts to criminalize abortion and potentially penalize people who have an abortion and those who help them. Read More: Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers Are Collecting Troves of Data That Could Be Weaponized Against Women So far, no states have criminal penalties for people who seek abortions—but there are signs that such laws may be coming. Texas and Oklahoma passed laws allowing private citizens to sue abortion providers and others who help someone get an abortion. It’s not yet clear if companies paying for employees’ abortion-related travel could also be liable, though a group of Republican lawmakers in Texas pledged to introduce legislation that would stop corporations from doing business in the state if they pay for abortions in other states, the Texas Tribune reported. And earlier this year, a Republican in Louisiana introduced a bill that would classify abortion as homicide and would allow prosecutors to criminally charge abortion patients. The bill was withdrawn after criticism, but it alarmed abortion-rights advocates. Roughly half of Americans receive health insurance through an employer—and experts note that employers have previously had access to other sensitive health information for their employees, which is often protected by federal health data privacy laws. But it’s not yet clear how every company will handle their new abortion-access policies—especially if threatened with legal or financial penalties. “When we’re talking about telling your employer that you’re going to get an abortion and the employer giving you cash to support that decision, that is far outside any scope of protected health data,” Spector-Bagdady says. “And also, I fear, opens women up to additional layers of potential discrimination.” She says companies need to prioritize data privacy to protect employee information as much as possible, while they roll out new policies supporting abortion access, “both to protect the company itself, but also in some states, the woman from criminal liability.” Read More: What to Know About Abortion Pills Post-Roe So far, no states have passed laws restricting patients’ ability to travel out of state for an abortion. But reproductive rights advocates worry that anti-abortion lawmakers could also pursue that in the future. “Employers should make sure that in providing these payment systems, they are standing in the shoes of the employee for a moment and thinking, ‘You know, what protections are necessary to ensure that employees can be comfortable taking advantage of them?’” says Liz Brown, an associate professor of business law and ethics at Bentley University in Massachusetts. One of the most important protections, she says, is confidentiality, “so that an employee doesn’t have to, for example, ask their boss or have their boss know.” With Roe overturned, 26 states are likely to ban abortion, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that advocates for abortion rights. And low-income people and women of color are likely to be most heavily affected by lack of access to abortion, further exacerbating racial disparities in healthcare. Brown says it’s important for companies to keep that in mind and extend abortion-access policies to all front-line retail or service workers, not just employees in corporate offices. “I would strongly encourage employers to broaden access to this particular benefit as much as possible, considering the racial imbalance in the population that’s going to be most affected by these restrictions,” Brown says. So far, many large retailers have remained silent on this issue. That’s also why United for Respect, a nonprofit advocating for retail workers, has called on Walmart to follow other companies and enact a similar abortion-access policy for retail employees. (A spokesperson for Walmart did not immediately respond to a request for comment.) “With a heavy concentration of retail locations in the south—where several states have abortion trigger laws in place—Walmart has an opportunity and a duty to step up and ensure its associates are supported in decisions they make about their own bodies,” Bianca Agustin, corporate accountability director at United for Respect, said in a statement. “As the largest private employer in the nation, Walmart executives can set the standard for other companies by supporting their associates and providing adequate maternity leave, paid sick leave, and covering the cost of expenses for associates who need to travel across state lines to access abortion services.” And many advocates for reproductive rights have called on companies to do more than offer health benefits, but to stop donating to legislators who have supported anti-abortion legislation. “We should have never gotten here—to this point where corporations are reactively—and falsely —committing to fighting for abortion access,” UltraViolet, an organization that advocates for gender equality and reproductive health, said in a tweet. The group says that corporations have donated more than $195 million collectively to anti-abortion lawmakers since 2020. Davies thinks that companies’ abortion-access policies represent a step in the right direction, but it’s only a start. She would like to see more companies lobby Congress for federal policies that support reproductive health care and protect abortion access. “We don’t have to be in this position of having to, again, look to the private sector for this coverage and this access,” she says. “How are companies leveraging their political spending? Is it in alignment with the values that they espouse? And if it’s not, then it should be.”.....»»

Category: topSource: timeJun 29th, 2022

Uber, Nike, Lyft, Disney, JP Morgan and others vow to help employees access abortions after Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade: "We must keep up the fight"

Numerous US companies have gone public saying they'd front the costs for employees traveling to seek abortions. Protests spring up across the US as citizens react to the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. WadeSarah Silbiger/CNN The US Supreme Court has struck down Roe v. Wade. Businesses have had months to grapple with the ramifications of this long-anticipated ruling. Even before the ruling, some companies had come out with public stances regarding the end of Roe. The Supreme Court has struck down Roe v. Wade, effectively cutting off abortion access in many parts of the US. The seismic ruling is set to reverberate throughout the country, including in the business world."We therefore hold that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion," the majority of Supreme Court justices wrote in the decision, handed down Friday morning. "Roe and Casey must be overruled, and the authority to regulate abortion must be returned to the people and their elected representatives."Given the widespread implications for half the workforce in anti-abortion states, experts have said companies based in jurisdictions with abortion bans will face repercussions around recruitment and retention and even possible legal jeopardy.Before the ruling, some businesses began offering support for employees affected by the court's long-predicted decision. Others have remained largely silent on the issue.This story is developing. Check back for updates.AmazonAmazon has publicly said it'd cover costs for employees seeking abortions in states where the procedure were made illegal.AppleApple CEO Tim Cook has said the tech giant will cover employees who "travel out-of-state for medical care if it is unavailable in their home state."AT&TThe telecommunications giant said in a statement: "The health of our employees and their families is important to our company, and we provide benefits that cover the cost of travel for medical procedures that are not available within 100 miles of their home."Previous reporting from Insider found that AT&T contributed some $1.2 million to leaders backing abortion bans in the US. It is the single largest publicly traded company behind so-called trigger laws, or laws that will effectively ban abortion in several states given the Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade.  Comcast-NBC UniversalThe media company confirmed with Variety that it offers travel benefits that cover medical services and procedures that aren't available in the employee's area for up to $4,000 per trip and three trips a year. CNN confirmed that abortion care is covered.Condé NastCondé Nast CEO Roger Lynch sent out an email to workers that says the company's "most powerful" response will be through its "distinct editorial lenses"—Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) June 24, 2022Condé Nast has also announced that it will "assist covered employees and their covered dependents in obtaining access to reproductive care regardless of where they reside.""Today, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion, allowing individual states to more aggressively regulate or ban the procedure altogether," CEO Roger Lynch wrote in a note to employees. "It is a crushing blow to reproductive rights that have been protected for nearly half a century."CVS"Ensuring access to safe, legal, high-quality health care is one of our most important priorities," the pharmacy giant said in a statement to Insider. "We will continue to provide colleagues, clients, and consumers with the flexibility to choose medical and pharmacy benefits to best suit their needs, including making out-of-state care accessible for our covered employees residing in states that have instituted laws that limit access in their state."Dick's Sporting GoodsDick's CEO Lauren Hobart posted on LinkedIn, saying she's protecting her employees'  health and well-being."In response to today's ruling, we are announcing that if a state one of our teammates lives in restricts access to abortion, DICK'S Sporting Goods will provide up to $4,000 in travel expense reimbursement to travel to the nearest location where that care is legally available. This benefit will be provided to any teammate, spouse or dependent enrolled in our medical plan, along with one support person," the retail CEO said."We recognize people feel passionately about this topic, and that there are teammates and athletes who will not agree with this decision. However, we also recognize that decisions involving health and families are deeply personal and made with thoughtful consideration," she addedDisneySpeaking on background, a Disney spokesperson said the company has "communicated directly" with its employees to "recognize the impact of the ruling." The company's travel benefit will cover pregnancy-related decisions, and the company re-emphasized its commitment to providing affordable healthcare for all employees, regardless of their locations.HP"As a company, we believe that it should be up to every single one of our employees to decide whether and when to start a family, whether that's choosing who they love and marry, taking paid time off if they are having a child, and having access to healthcare," HP CEO Enrique Lores tweeted on Friday. The information technology and hardware company said in a May statement that it would continue to support employees needed out-of-state reproductive care and would cover related travel expenses. IndeedThe careers platform said in a statement that: "Employees who are on Indeed insurance will be reimbursed for travel expenses for covered medical procedures that are unavailable where they live.""At Indeed, we believe that work needs women, and women need access to safe and affordable health care," the statement reads. "Anything that limits the freedom of women to make their own decisions about their health hurts them and society. Limiting access to safe and affordable health care will hit hardest in marginalized communities, especially people of color and those in lower income brackets."Johnson & JohnsonA spokesperson for the pharmaceutical and consumer-goods giant told Insider in a statement that the company offers reimbursement for US employees who need to travel for medical services not available within 100 miles of their home, which includes reproductive healthcare. "As the world's most broadly-based healthcare company, we strive to improve access and affordability, create healthier communities, and put health within reach for the people we serve," the spokesperson said. "We also believe healthcare decisions are best determined by individuals in consultation with their healthcare provider."JPMorgan ChaseIn response to the Roe ruling, the financial institution assured its workforce that it would pay for employees to travel to receive abortions, according to CNBC.KrogerA Kroger spokesperson told Insider that employees who use the company's health plan have access to "a comprehensive benefits package that includes quality, affordable health care and travel benefits up to $4,000 to facilitate access to quality care for several categories of medical treatments and a full range of reproductive health care services, including abortion and fertility treatments."Levi StraussIn a statement to Insider, a spokesperson from the clothing company highlighted the brand's donations to reproductive-rights nonprofits and said:"We stand strongly against any actions that hinder the health and well-being of our employees, which means opposing any steps to restrict access to the full range of reproductive health care, including abortion. Protection of reproductive rights is a critical business issue impacting our workforce, our economy, and progress toward gender and racial equity. Given what is at stake, business leaders need to make their voices heard and act to protect the health and well-being of our employees." Live NationIn an Instagram post, Live Nation pledged to cover the travel expenses for employees who need access to women's healthcare services, and bail expenses for employees arrested while protesting peacefully. A post shared by Live Nation Concerts (@livenation)  LyftThe rideshare company promised legal support for drivers at risk of lawsuits for driving passengers to abortion appointments. "We believe access to healthcare is essential and transportation should never be a barrier to that access," a Lyft spokesperson told ABC News. "This decision will hurt millions of women by taking away access to safe, and private reproductive healthcare services."MetaMeta said in a statement that it plans to reimburse travel expenses for employees who need to access out-of-state reproductive care.In a post on Facebook, longtime Meta COO Sheryl Sandberg posted about the Supreme Court's decision."I grew up hearing stories from my mom about what women in our country went through before Roe," she wrote. "My Mom had a friend who left the country to get a safe abortion. Most women could not afford to do this; some had back-alley abortions, which led all too often to serious health complications and sometimes even death. All women knew that they could possibly face impossible choices between controlling their futures and their health and breaking the law."Sandberg went on to write, "I never thought my mom's past would become my daughters' futures. I cannot believe that I'm going to send my three daughters to college with fewer rights than I had. The Supreme Court's ruling jeopardizes the health and the lives of millions of girls and women across the country."The "Lean In" author wrote that the new ruling "threatens to undo the progress women have made in the workplace.""It will make it harder for women to achieve their dreams," she wrote. "And it will disproportionately impact women with the fewest resources. This is a huge setback. For ourselves, our daughters, and every generation that follows, we must keep up the fight. Together, we must protect and expand abortion access."!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(e){if(void 0!==e.data["datawrapper-height"]){var t=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var a in e.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r=0;r.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 29th, 2022

Justice Neil Gorsuch fumes that the Supreme Court "failed" to "honor this Nation"s promises" as it rolled back tribal authority in Oklahoma

Gorsuch's dissenting opinion came as the nation's highest court handed more power to states over Native American lands. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch is seen in the House chamber during President Donald Trump's State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress on January 30, 2018.Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call The Supreme Court on Wednesday gave Oklahoma officials the authority to handle certain crimes on Native American land. Justice Neil Gorsuch blasted the ruling, saying it "failed" to "honor this Nation's promises." A 2020 ruling previously said only tribal and federal authorities can prosecute crimes in the jurisdiction.  Justice Neil Gorsuch on Wednesday blasted the Supreme Court for handing more power to states over Native American land, saying the ruling "failed" to "honor this Nation's promises."The nation's highest court on Wednesday delivered a victory to state authorities, declaring that Oklahoma officials have jurisdiction over crimes that involve non-Native Americans and take place on Native American territory.The 5-4 majority opinion, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Amy Coney Barrett. Gorsuch and the court's three liberals — Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor — dissented."Truly, a more ahistorical and mistaken statement of Indian law would be hard to fathom," Gorsuch wrote in a fiery dissenting opinion.Wednesday's ruling limits a Supreme Court decision handed down two years ago that said a large chunk of eastern Oklahoma is considered Native American reservations, meaning that only tribal and federal authorities — not state — could handle criminal prosecutions on that land. Gorsuch authored that 2020 ruling and the court's liberal wing joined him then as well, forming the majority at the time. Yet now, the court has an expanded 6-3 conservative majority, placing Gorsuch in the minority. The conservative justice, who's from Colorado, has had a track a record of standing up for tribal rights in his opinions."One can only hope the political branches and future courts will do their duty to honor this Nation's promises even as we have failed today to do our own," Gorsuch wrote in his dissent.The case, known as Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta, concerned Victor Castro-Huerta, a non-Native American who was convicted by state authorities of neglecting his 5-year-old stepdaughter, a Native American, on Cherokee Nation territory. An Oklahoma appeals court tossed out his conviction after the 2020 Supreme Court ruling. Federal authorities then stepped in, charging Castro-Huerta, who pleaded guilty. He has not been sentenced yet.Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican, celebrated Wednesday's ruling as a "clear victory for all four million Oklahomans, the state of Oklahoma, and the rule of law.""Justice has been delayed and denied to thousands of Native victims in our state for no reason other than their race. Now Oklahoma law enforcement can help uphold and enforce the law equally, as we have done for over a century," he said in a statement.The head of the Cherokee Nation on Wednesday said he was "disappointed" in the Supreme Court's decision. "The dissent today did not mince words – the Court failed in its duty to honor this nation's promises, defied Congress's statutes, and accepted the 'lawless disregard of the Cherokee's sovereignty,'" Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr. said in a statement.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 29th, 2022

GWU Agrees Not to Fire Justice Thomas

GWU Agrees Not to Fire Justice Thomas; Denies Student Cancel-Culture Petition to Terminate His Classes GWU GWU Agrees Not to Fire Justice Clarence Thomas WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 28, 2022) – The George Washington University (GWU) agreed, after hearing strong statements from numerous members of its law school faculty, not to fire Justice Clarence Thomas who […] GWU Agrees Not to Fire Justice Thomas; Denies Student Cancel-Culture Petition to Terminate His Classes GWU GWU Agrees Not to Fire Justice Clarence Thomas WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 28, 2022) – The George Washington University (GWU) agreed, after hearing strong statements from numerous members of its law school faculty, not to fire Justice Clarence Thomas who teaches a course at the GWU Law School. if (typeof jQuery == 'undefined') { document.write(''); } .first{clear:both;margin-left:0}.one-third{width:31.034482758621%;float:left;margin-left:3.448275862069%}.two-thirds{width:65.51724137931%;float:left}form.ebook-styles .af-element input{border:0;border-radius:0;padding:8px}form.ebook-styles .af-element{width:220px;float:left}form.ebook-styles .af-element.buttonContainer{width:115px;float:left;margin-left: 6px;}form.ebook-styles .af-element.buttonContainer input.submit{width:115px;padding:10px 6px 8px;text-transform:uppercase;border-radius:0;border:0;font-size:15px}form.ebook-styles .af-body.af-standards input.submit{width:115px}form.ebook-styles .af-element.privacyPolicy{width:100%;font-size:12px;margin:10px auto 0}form.ebook-styles .af-element.privacyPolicy p{font-size:11px;margin-bottom:0}form.ebook-styles .af-body input.text{height:40px;padding:2px 10px !important} form.ebook-styles .error, form.ebook-styles #error { color:#d00; } form.ebook-styles .formfields h1, form.ebook-styles .formfields #mg-logo, form.ebook-styles .formfields #mg-footer { display: none; } form.ebook-styles .formfields { font-size: 12px; } form.ebook-styles .formfields p { margin: 4px 0; } Get The Full Henry Singleton Series in PDF Get the entire 4-part series on Henry Singleton in PDF. Save it to your desktop, read it on your tablet, or email to your colleagues (function($) {window.fnames = new Array(); window.ftypes = new Array();fnames[0]='EMAIL';ftypes[0]='email';}(jQuery));var $mcj = jQuery.noConflict(true); Q1 2022 hedge fund letters, conferences and more In a communication signed by its Provost and Executive VP for Academic Affairs, Christopher Alan Bracey, and the Dean of its Law School, Dayna Bowen Matthew, it said: "Because we steadfastly support the robust exchange of ideas and deliberation, and because debate is an essential part of our university's academic and educational mission to train future leaders who are prepared to address the world's most urgent problems, the university will neither terminate Justice Thomas' employment nor cancel his class in response to his legal opinions." It continued: "like all faculty members at our university, Justice Thomas has academic freedom and freedom of expression and inquiry. Our university’s academic freedom guidelines state: “The ideas of different faculty members and of various other members of the University community will often and quite naturally conflict. But it is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals within or outside the University from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive.” Public Interest law professor John Banzhaf, one of the first to publicize the student petition to terminate Thomas' employment, said he was delighted with his university's prompt decision to stand up to this latest incident of cancel culture - but apparently the first to involve a sitting supreme court justice's teaching position at a major university - and to reaffirm the rights of "all faculty members at our university" to "academic freedom and freedom of expression and inquiry" including to express ideas some may find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive.” This, he notes, is in stark contrast with the actions of neighboring Georgetown University which recently fired a faculty member for expressing views some found offensive, and then allowed him to come to work only after warning that any future expression of the same views would likely lead to his being fired again. Academic Freedom Here's how LAW.COM reported on the situation, and Professor Banzhaf's views concerning academic freedom. "John F. Banzhaf III, professor emeritus of public interest law at GW Law, said the petition represents the 'ultimate cancel culture demand.' 'These sound like the same students who signed a petition asking their GW university to ban the stick figure used on lighted crosswalk signs on campus because they feel ‘oppressed’ because the figure appears to be that of a white man telling them what to do,' According to Banzhaf, 'while there have been many other situations in which students have demanded that a professor be relieved of all his teaching duties because some disagreed with his views, this may well be the first time that students want to stop a Supreme Court justice from agreeing to teach at a law school.'” Updated on Jun 29, 2022, 12:44 pm (function() { var sc = document.createElement("script"); sc.type = "text/javascript"; sc.async = true;sc.src = "//mixi.media/data/js/95481.js"; sc.charset = "utf-8";var s = document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(sc, s); }()); window._F20 = window._F20 || []; _F20.push({container: 'F20WidgetContainer', placement: '', count: 3}); _F20.push({finish: true});.....»»

Category: blogSource: valuewalkJun 29th, 2022

Gorsuch fumes that the Supreme Court "failed" to "honor this Nation"s promises" as it rolled back tribal authority in Oklahoma

Gorsuch's dissenting opinion came as nation's highest court ruled on the case Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch is seen in the House chamber during President Donald Trump's State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress on January 30, 2018.Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that Oklahoma can have jurisdiction in Native American land. Justice Neil Gorsuch blasted the ruling, saying it "failed" to "honor this Nation's promises." A 2020 ruling previously said only tribal and federal authorities can prosecute crimes in the jurisdiction.  Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch blasted the Supreme Court in a dissenting opinion on Wednesday, saying it "failed" to "honor this Nation's promises" as it rolled back tribal authority in Oklahoma.The nation's highest court ruled in the case Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta that state authorities can retain jurisdiction over crimes taking place in Native American territory involving non-native citizens.Gorsuch joined the three liberal justices to oppose the decision, writing a fiery dissent."Now, at the bidding of Oklahoma's executive branch, this Court unravels those lower-court decisions, defies Congress's statutes requiring tribal consent, offers its own consent in place of the Tribe's, and allows Oklahoma to intrude on a feature of tribal sovereignty recognized since the founding," Gorsuch wrote in his dissent.He continued: "One can only hope the political branches and future courts will do their duty to honor this Nation's promises even as we have failed today to do our own."Wednesday's ruling is a step back from a previous ruling in 2020 that declared a large chunk of territory in eastern Oklahoma as Native American tribal land under the Major Crimes Act. This meant that only tribal and federal authorities — not state — can prosecute crimes in the jurisdiction.In a statement, the Cherokee Nation's Principal Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr. said he was "disappointed" in Wednesday's ruling. "It does not diminish our commitment to meeting our public safety responsibilities and to protecting Oklahomans on our reservations and across the state. Tribal and federal jurisdiction remain unchanged by this decision, but the need to work together on behalf of Oklahomans has never been more clear," he said. Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 29th, 2022

Paypal, PwC, Edelman share internal employee memos about Roe overturn. Here are 5 things to consider when drafting a memo on the abortion decision.

With Roe v. Wade overturned, CEOs must articulate their stance to employees, customers, and others through a statement. Tips for a crisis memo. Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade, corporate leaders need to make clear where they stand, experts say.Phil Roeder/Getty Images The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which protected abortion rights. Companies like PayPal and PwC shared their memos to workers about the decision. Comms experts offered CEOs five critical components to draft an effective crisis memo.  ow that the Supreme Court has struck down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, many corporate leaders are going to have to weigh in with a written memo or statement.Abortion is a difficult issue for companies, which risk alienating workers, customers, suppliers, shareholders, and others by taking a public stance. Many CEOs remained quiet on the subject when the Supreme Court's draft majority opinion was leaked in May. Yet now that Roe v. Wade has been overturned, silence is not an option, experts say."Employers need to know that now is one of those critical moments in history where they are given a choice to actually demonstrate to themselves and the communities most impacted by the overturning of federal legislation protecting people's right to abortion who they really are," said McKensie Mack, change-management consultant and CEO of MMG EARTH, which focuses on racial and social justice.Corporate leaders have begun speaking out. In an internal memo shared with Insider, Lisa Ross, US CEO of the PR giant Edelman, condemned the ruling. She wrote that the high court's decision could lay the groundwork for rolling back same-sex marriage and birth control. "It's not lost on me that on the heels of Juneteenth and the culmination of Pride Month, times where we honor historically marginalized communities, the Court's decision represents another assault on human rights. In this very difficult environment, please take care of yourselves," Ross wrote.PayPal CEO Dan Schulman weighed in as well in an internal memo that was posted to the company website. "[The decision] allows for potentially widespread restrictions to reproductive healthcare access to immediately go into effect in states across the country," he wrote. "I understand the anxiety and concern that many of you and your families may be feeling at this moment. I want to be clear: caring for our employees is our highest priority. As a company, we are fully committed to ensuring that our U.S.-based employees have equitable access to the healthcare and benefits that they and their families need," Schulman wrote. Others have taken a more middle-of-the-road approach. In a memo shared with Insider, PwC's US CEO Tim Ryan said: "We are a diverse firm in every sense of the word — from gender and race to our backgrounds, religious beliefs, personal experiences, hobbies, and our politics. It is that very diversity that makes us better," he wrote. "One thing that we do have in common, however, is our values — and specifically, our care and respect for each other."  CEOs can't afford to stay on the sidelines on the issue of abortion, Carla Bevins, a professor of business communication at Carnegie Mellon University, told Insider before the Supreme Court handed down its decision. Companies that choose to remain silent do so to the detriment of employees relying on employers' benefits packages for abortions and aftercare, she said Experts say top CEOs are struggling to figure out how to respond effectively. Insider spoke with Bevins and Jason Thompson, an executive coach, on what steps CEOs should take in crafting the perfect memo regarding the potential reversal of Roe v. Wade, abortion, and reproductive rights. They say CEOs should consider five critical components when drafting a memo: alignment with core values, communicating in a timely manner, concise messaging, appropriate tone, and the key components to include.Align with your values Before drafting a crisis memo, leaders must decide what position to take. According to Thompson, the most important thing CEOs can do right now is review their vision and mission statements and make sure that whatever they do aligns with that.The murder of George Floyd was a watershed moment in America, forcing CEOs to commit to racial justice. Following the incident, Boston Scientific CEO, Michael Mahoney, addressed the incident in an open letter to employees that was a case study in how leaders should address hot-button issues in alignment with their values. "George Floyd's death reflects deeply ingrained, long-standing divisions in our society," Mahoney wrote. The CEO went on to write that the executive committee felt "compelled" to "reaffirm our commitment to live by our values and cultivate a workplace that makes equality, diversity and openness priorities — a workplace that sets an example for the greater community." Other CEOs who need to address controversial issues should take note of his letter, Thompson said."What gets people in trouble is inconsistent messaging. If you say you're committed to the community, for example, and you don't speak out on community-centered issues, you have done nothing to convince us that you're living your values," Thompson said. Timely communicationNo matter where a company comes down on an issue, timely communication is essential. "As a company, you and your communications management team want to have control of the message you're sending out," Bevins said. "It's incredibly important to have a timely message and to be clear and transparent with where you stand — even if the stance is 'We don't have a clear position at this point, we are looking into it.' It's essential that companies clearly articulate their position in a timely manner," she said.Clear, concise, upfront messagingMemos should be brief, jargon-free, and clearly written to a specified audience. A memo should be one page, max, and straight to the point. "Identify two or three key points you want to cover. Bullet points can be very effective," Bevins said.Your reader needs to quickly understand the content of the memo and make a decision based on that information. "Be very judicious with the information you include," Bevins said, warning that it's not a time to add fluff. "You want to make sure that you are sharing only the key pieces of information that your audience needs."Measured toneUse a tone appropriate to the information you convey, consider your audience, and think carefully about how your words come across to them. "You don't want to come off unfeeling, especially with this issue. Leaders have to be very empathetic and caring with the tone of their message," Bevins said.When COVID-19 stay-at-home orders were lifted, companies faced the uncharted challenge of returning employees to physical work locations amid an ongoing public-health crisis. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy met the challenge by sending a company-wide memo explaining return-to-office plans in a way communications consultants described as powerful, timely, authentic, and empathetic in tone."We've never been through something like this before, and hope we never encounter it again," Jassy wrote in the 850-word memo. "When are we really going back to the office, what will that really be like, how will I allocate my time between the office and home, how will others do it?" When employees "see a question that looks like a question they've been asking, they know that the CEO is hearing the voice of the employee," Suzanne Bates, the author of "Speak Like a CEO" and a managing director and partner at the leadership consultancy BTS, said in an interview with Insider. "They think, 'The CEO is attuned to what we're talking about.'"Where possible, communications teams should use language to echo the company's mission and vision statements. "I always try to come up with the words so the language overlaps. Whether or not people agree with your stance, when questioned, you can say, 'This is consistent with our mission and vision and how we see ourselves as an organization,'" Thompson said.Include key components Memos are divided into segments to organize the information clearly and help achieve the writer's purpose. Bevins outlined the critical components for a clean memo:Heading Segment: To, From, Date, Subject. Be specific and concise in your subject line.Opening Segment: Include the purpose, context, problem, and the specific assignment or task of the memo. Task Segment: Describe what you are doing to solve the problem. Avoid insignificant details.Discussion Segment: Include all the details that support your ideas. Include solid points and evidence.Closing Segment: Close with a courteous ending stating the action you want your reader to take. Attachments: Provide detailed data at the end of your memo (lists, graphs, tables, etc.).For Mack, the diversity consultant, now that Roe has fallen, the need for leaders to weigh in is clear: "We often say that if we had been alive during the pinnacle of the Civil Rights Movement, abolitionist movements during the Civil War, the fight for human rights for people with HIV/AIDS, we would hope to be the kind of people that would wield our power and privilege — no matter how much or how little — to do the right thing and advocate for people being targeted by destructive and violent legislation."This story was originally published in May 2022.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 29th, 2022

Live updates: Here"s what Biden can do to help Americans retain abortion access now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, advocates say

The Supreme Court has overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that granted a nationwide, constitutional right to an abortion. Abortion rights and anti-abortion rights activists fill the street in front of the U.S. Supreme Court during a protest in the wake of the decision overturning Roe v. Wade outside on June 25, 2022, in Washington, DC.Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week. The 1973 landmark ruling established the constitutional right to an abortion. Over a dozen states have "trigger" laws meant to immediately outlaw abortion upon a reversal of Roe. The Supreme Court last week overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that established the constitutional right to an abortion. The opinion in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization threw out the ruling as the nation's highest court sided with Mississippi and other states, which passed restrictive anti-abortion laws.Immediately after last week's ruling, politicians on both sides of the aisle issued statements — with Republicans praising the Supreme Court and Democrats slamming the decision. Over a dozen states have "trigger laws" meant to ban abortion immediately upon the overturning of Roe, as the legality of abortion is now left up to state legislatures. Here's what Biden can do to help Americans retain abortion access now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, advocates sayAbortion advocates from across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden.Stefani Reynolds/Getty ImagesAs the nation reels from the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, abortion advocates from across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden. The suggestions raised by these advocates include expanding the Supreme Court, declaring a "public health and national emergency," establishing abortion clinics on federal land, and providing easier access to abortion medication.Read Full StoryHillary Clinton, who has known Clarence Thomas since law school, says he is a person of 'resentment, grievance, anger'Hillary Clinton has known Clarence Thomas since their days at Yale Law School in the '60s.Left: Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for The Met Museum/Vogue. Right: Drew Angerer/Getty Images.Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said Clarence Thomas, who she's known since they were at Yale Law School together in the '60s, has always been a "person of grievance.""I went to law school with him. He's been a person of grievance for as long as I have known him," Clinton said Tuesday during an interview on "CBS This Morning" with Gayle King. "Resentment, grievance, anger," she added.In a concurring opinion released when the Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week, Thomas wrote "we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents" for rulings that granted individuals the right to birth control access, intimate gay relationships, and same-sex marriage."He may be on his own, but he's signaling," Clinton said of Thomas. "He has signaled in the past to lower courts, to state legislatures to find cases, pass laws, get them up," she added.Read Full StoryNevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed an executive order strengthening protections for those seeking abortions and reproductive health services in the stateFILE: Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak speaks during a news conference in March 2020.Ethan Miller/Getty ImagesNevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed an executive order strengthening protections for out-of-state abortion patients and medical providers in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning the 1973 landmark ruling Roe v. Wade.The executive order is among a number of countermeasures being taken by Democratic state leaders after the fall of Roe."Today, I signed an Executive Order to strengthen protections for reproductive freedom in Nevada. Reproductive health care is a basic human right," Sisolak wrote in a tweet announcing the executive order. "We are committed to ensuring safe access to abortions for women seeking refuge from the restrictive laws in their state."Abortion rights in Nevada are enshrined in the state's law, making it immune to the impact of a reversal of Roe.—Governor Sisolak (@GovSisolak) June 29, 2022 Judges in Utah, Louisiana, and Texas have temporarily blocked state laws that would restrict or ban abortionsAttendees hold up signs during a Texas Rally for Abortion Rights at Discovery Green in Houston, Texas, on May 7, 2022.Mark Felix/AFP via Getty ImagesThe Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade on Friday sent abortion back to each individual state to decide — and state judges are emerging as key players in the new abortion fight.Before the Supreme Court decision, 13 states had enacted "trigger" laws designed to ban abortion as soon as Roe fell, others had passed abortion bans or restrictions in earlier years designed to challenge Roe, and still others had pre-Roe abortion bans on their books that courts are now tasked with ruling whether to uphold. Abortion rights litigants are now turning to state courts and arguing under state laws and constitutions to block those trigger laws and other restrictions, with judges in two states temporarily blocking trigger laws that went into effect on Friday.Read Full StoryThe Biden administration will make abortion pills more widely available following Roe's 'despicable' demise, top health official saysHealth and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra speaks about actions the Biden administration plans to take in response to the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Tuesday, June 28, 2022, in Washington.Patrick Semansky/AP PhotoThe federal government will make abortion pills more readily available to patients now that states have moved to ban abortion following the Supreme Court overturning its landmark Roe v. Wade decision, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said Tuesday.Becerra vowed his office will work with federal law enforcement agencies to ensure that states cannot ban abortion pills, as some Republican-led states have tried to do — though it's unclear how the laws would be enforced given that pills are sent through the mail. "Increasing access to this drug is a national imperative and in the public interest," Becerra said during a 30-minute press conference at the agency's headquarters in Washington, DC.Read MoreWhat 'packing the court' means — and why it's unlikely to happen to save Roe v. WadeActivists For Expanding The Supreme Court Rally Outside the Supreme Court on June 22, 2022.Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Demand JusticeThe Supreme Court's historic decision to end federal abortion rights in the United States has triggered calls to add more justices to the bench to offset its conservative majority.But with President Joe Biden against the reform and a lack of congressional support, it's unlikely to happen.The nation's highest court voted 5-4 on Friday to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion almost 50 years ago. The consequential decision has led some Democrats and abortion-rights activists to demand for the Supreme Court to be expanded in size — a change that aims to counteract the current conservative majority and its rulings by establishing an ideologically balanced court.Read Full StoryWhat the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade said during their confirmation hearingsWhat Justices Who Overturned Roe Said About Abortion During Confirmation HearingsGetty ImagesThe conservative Supreme Court justices who voted against Roe v. Wade and stripped away the constitutional right to an abortion had spoken about the importance of legal precedent during their confirmation hearings.But they had hedged when pressed on how they'd rule in abortion cases.Video compiled by Insider shows how Justices Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett responded when asked if they'd overturn Roe v. Wade.Keep ReadingUS military will continue to provide abortions when a woman's health is at riskUS Military membersBo Zaunders/Getty ImagesA memo to Department of Defense leaders said the military will not stop offering abortions to service members following the Supreme Court's ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade.The US military will continue to provide abortions when the health of the woman is at risk, the memo stated."Nothing is more important than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce, and DoD families, and we are committed to taking care of all of our people and ensuring that the entire Force remains ready and resilient," the memo said.Read Full StoryRestricting abortion rights will cause severe economic impacts for womenStates where abortion is restricted or banned will place a harsh burden on women seeking abortions — one that'll likely cause severe economic impacts.Women in these states may also lose out on earnings now that they may have to travel far to get abortion access, C. Nicole Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Women's Policy Research, previously told Insider.Mason said women "who are already economically vulnerable" — including women of color, hourly workers, and those without paid or sick leave —  will be most impacted by abortion bans. Read Full StoryFacebook, Instagram reportedly removed posts about abortion pillsRafael Henrique/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty ImagesFacebook and Instagram removed posts about abortion pills immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, according to the Associated Press and Vice.The AP reported that posts about how to obtain the pills — which refer to two drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol — were pulled off the platforms moments after the nation's highest court stripped away the constitutional right to an abortion.When reached for comment by Insider, Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, pointed to Meta spokesperson Andy Stone's Monday tweet."Content that attempts to buy, sell, trade, gift, request or donate pharmaceuticals is not allowed," Stone said.Read Full StoryRoe's daughter slams Supreme Court ruling throwing out abortion rightsAbortion rights are under threat in the US.TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty ImagesThe biological daughter of the woman at the center of the historic Roe v. Wade court case ripped the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the historic ruling — removing the constitutional right to an abortion."I believe that the decision to have an abortion is a private, medical choice that should be between a woman, her family, and her doctor," Shelley Lynn Thornton told ABC News. "We have lived in times of uncertainty and insecurity before, but to have such a fundamental right taken away and this ruling be overturned concerns me of what lies ahead."Read MoreWisconsin's Democratic governor vows to grant clemency to any doctors charged under the state's near-total abortion ban following fall of Roe v. WadeWisconsin Gov. Tony Evers addresses a joint session of the Legislature in the Assembly chambers at the state Capitol in Madison, Wis. on Feb. 15, 2022.AP Photo/Andy Manis, FileWisconsin Gov. Tony Evers said this weekend that he would offer clemency to any doctors charged under the state's antiquated law banning nearly all abortions, which dates back more than a century.The 1849 law was enacted long before Roe v. Wade was instated and remained a Wisconsin statute even after the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case rendered it moot. But after the nation's top court overturned Roe on Friday in a 5-4 majority decision, Wisconsin's 173-year-old abortion ban triggered back into effect. The state's ban makes performing abortions a felony and doctors charged under the statute face up to six years in prison, as well as fines up to $10,000. The law's only exception allows for abortion if it is needed to save the life of the mother. The law does not offer exceptions in instances of rape, incest, or the mother's general health. Read Full StoryUtah judge blocks state's abortion 'trigger law' ban for 14 days after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. WadeProtesters hold up hand-written signs in Salt Lake City, Utah.Niki Chan WylieA Utah judge granted a restraining order that will temporarily block the state's abortion ban from immediately going into effect, allowing doctors to provide abortions for the next 14 days.The ruling comes after the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade decision that granted women the constitutional right to an abortion.Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union chapter in Utah filed a lawsuit over the weekend in a bid to block the state's "trigger law," which was set to immediately ban abortion in the state following the SCOTUS ruling, which was leaked last month.Read Full StoryAfter Roe v. Wade: Doug Mastriano, GOP nominee for Pennsylvania governor, now says abortion is a 'distraction'State Sen. Doug Mastriano, R-Franklin, a Republican candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania, takes part in a primary night election gathering in Chambersburg, Pa., Tuesday, May 17, 2022.Carolyn Kaster/AP PhotoDoug Mastriano won the Republican nomination for governor in Pennsylvania by leaning into the culture war, using his Facebook live streams to rail against vaccine requirements, "Critical Race Theory," and members of his own party who failed to embrace conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.But this avowed opponent of abortion — who welcomed last week's Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade — is now trying to pivot conversations away from the question of reproductive rights, admitting that the issue is a boon to Democrats.In an interview with Newsmax on Monday, Mastriano was asked to comment on footage of pro-choice protesters who were dispersed by police with tear gas outside the state capitol in Arizona. Mastriano, who himself was on the front lines between police and protesters at the US Capitol on January 6, per video from the day, praised law enforcement for quelling the civil unrest.But the state senator also didn't reall.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 29th, 2022

Supreme Court Reinstates Louisiana Election Map Disputed By Democrats

Supreme Court Reinstates Louisiana Election Map Disputed By Democrats Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times, The Supreme Court granted an emergency Republican application to reinstate a disputed election map in Louisiana late in the day on June 28, a move that allows the map to remain in place for the next elections. In the process, the high court also stayed two lower court rulings that found that the redrawn congressional district boundaries in the map probably violated the federal Voting Rights Act by diluting the power of black voters. The court said in the brief unsigned order (pdf) that it would hold off on considering the merits of the case until after it hears and decides a similar dispute from Alabama that is expected to be argued in the court’s new term that begins in October. The map was approved by Louisiana state lawmakers in March after they overrode Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards’s veto. According to a CNN summary, the map kept Republicans’ advantage in five of the Pelican State’s six congressional districts. This left only the 2nd district, which runs all the way from New Orleans to Baton Rouge, as the state’s only majority black district and the sole district to favor Democrats. Reportedly, 33 percent of all Louisianans are black. The ruling came in Ardoin v. Robinson, court file 21A814. Kyle Ardoin is Louisiana’s Republican secretary of state. The emergency application to revive the electoral map was filed with Justice Samuel Alito, who referred the case to the full court. The court’s liberal members - Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan - dissented from the new decision but did not provide reasons explaining why. Read more here... Tyler Durden Tue, 06/28/2022 - 22:05.....»»

Category: smallbizSource: nytJun 28th, 2022

A timeline of the allegations against Tina Peters, the pro-Trump Colorado election official accused of facilitating an election data leak

Peters, who has been indicted by a Mesa County grand jury on charges related to an election breach, is running in a GOP primary for Colorado secretary of state. yPillow CEO Mike Lindell told Vice News that Peters is now "holed up" in a safe house.Getty Images, Mesa County Tina Peters is an election clerk from Mesa County, Colorado, accused of sharing election data. The Colorado Secretary of State has sued Peters three times, attempting to remove her from her post. Peters is under state and federal investigation. Here is how Peters has pushed the Big Lie in her county. Tina Peters is a pro-Trump elections official in Mesa County, Colorado, accused of leaking sensitive voting machine data that was presented at a conspiracy conference hosted by MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell in August 2021.In the Republican Mesa County, Peters has been a vocal supporter of former President Donald Trump, and since 2020, she has echoed many of the lies about the integrity of the election that his camp has pushed.Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold has accused Peters of taking her advocacy for Trump a step further in a slew of post-election lawsuits, accusing Peters and an aide of distributing and potentially altering data from the County's Dominion Voting Systems machines in March and May 2021.And in early February of 2022, Peters was arrested for resisting a search warrant for her iPad — unrelated to her alleged election data breach. She is currently running to be Colorado's secretary of state. Here is a complete guide to Tina Peters' emergence into the national political spotlight.June 26, 2018Peters won a GOP primary contest against opponent Bobbie Gross with 54% of the vote, The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel reported, paving the way to a November victory in overwhelmingly Republican Mesa County.February 20, 2020When officials opened up a ballot drop box outside the Mesa County election office, they expected to find votes for the upcoming presidential primary. What they found were more than 500 ballots from the previous year's election that had never been counted, according to Colorado Public Radio."I apologize for this error and will always face challenges head-on with transparency and integrity in order to always keep your trust," Peters said in a statement at the time.June 4, 2020An effort to recall Peters from office formally began, with supporters given two months to gather just over 12,000 signatures."Tina Peters has repeatedly failed in her duties as Clerk & Recorder," stated the recall petition, per The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel.Critics cited the failure of Peters' office to count the 500-odd ballots from the 2019 election, noting they had been "left in a ballot box steps outside her offices for months." The petition also cited irregularities in the 2020 presidential primary election, including people "voting twice and other counting errors."Organizers were ultimately unsuccessful, however, coming up roughly 1,200 signatures short of the minimum to proceed to a recall election, The Colorado Sun reported.January 2021In early January, Peters tweeted several conspiracies about the 2020 election, according to the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. Some have since been deleted. In one tweet, Peters responded to Sen. Pat Toomey, who at the time chastised Republican colleagues who refused to certify the results of the 2020 election, floating a false conspiracy theory about election machines.March 2021In March, District Judge Valerie J. Robison alleged that Peters allowed an unauthorized consultant to access the county's voting machines, with one of her aides requesting that election-department cameras be turned off for two weeks — long enough to allow that unauthorized third party to make a "forensic image" of the hard drive used by Dominion vote-tabulating equipment. Judge Robison alleged that Peters repeated the conduct in May.August 11-13, 2021Tina Peters attended Mike Lindell's Cyber Symposium conference from August 10-12, 2021. At the conference, Peters reportedly shared election information with noted QAnon figures like Ron Watkins, Colorado's Secretary of State alleged in a lawsuit filed weeks after the conference.According to Colorado Newsline, after Peters' attendance at the conference, two ethics complaints were filed against the official.August 30, 2021Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold sued Peters, accusing her of, "allowing an unauthorized individual to participate in the secure process for installing an update to the County's electronic voting system and to have access to the secure voting system, leading to the public disclosure of State-guarded passwords needed to access the equipment and compromising that equipment."Peters was temporarily removed from her election-related duties. Former Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams, a Republican, was appointed by Griswold's office to temporarily take Peters' place for the remainder of 2021.Peters spent weeks hiding in an undisclosed location provided by Lindell in August after the accusations in the lawsuit came to light, Lindell claimed.October 13, 2021A judge in Colorado issued an injunction that stripped election authority from Peters, saying that she allowed an unauthorized "consultant" to access voting machines.In her ruling, Judge Robison said Peters and her aide had "neglected their duties by failing to take adequate precautions to protect confidential information, and committed wrongful acts by being untruthful." Griswold's aide, Belinda Knisley, was also implicated and stripped of her role. Griswold lauded the decision and said it "bars Peters from further threatening the integrity of Mesa's elections and ensures Mesa County residents have the secure and accessible election they deserve."In October, a joint federal and state investigation was also launched into Peters' and her aide's alleged conduct.November 5, 2021The Colorado Secretary of State sued Peters again, according to the Denver Post, this time alleging that Peters had solicited 2022 campaign contributions via a legal defense fund on her website, without properly submitting an affidavit to the state or creating an active candidate committee. Peters also countersued Griswold, claiming that the Secretary of State "illegally removed her" from her post.November 16, 2021FBI agents raided four locations in Mesa County as part of its investigation into potential tampering with local voting machines. Among the locations searched were Peters' home and those of several of her friends, according to The Tina Peters Legal Defense Fund."On the morning of Nov. 16, the FBI conducted federally-authorized law enforcement actions into potential criminal activity by employees of the Mesa County Clerk and Recorder's Office and others associated with those employees. The activity occurred in both Mesa and Garfield Counties at four separate locations," a spokesperson for the Mesa County District Attorney told Insider.No arrests were made.January 12, 2022In the new year, Griswold extended an offer to Peters: She could have her job back, if she agreed to certify elections using a new set of security protocols that gave her less authority, and if she walked back the statement that she wanted to have "those machines so that they are transparent to the people and they are not able to do what they're designed to do." Peters refused."Every eligible Coloradan – Republican, Democrat, and Independent alike – has the right to make their voice heard in safe and secure elections," Griswold said in a statement, according to the Denver Post. "As Clerk Peters is unwilling to commit to following election security protocols, I am taking action to ensure that Mesa County voters have the elections they deserve.""Demanding someone recant their beliefs, especially beliefs for government transparency or else be punished is something we would expect to see in North Korea, China, or even medieval Europe — not the United States of America," Peters responded.Griswold does not have the authority to remove Peters as an elected official for the 2022 elections, as in Colorado only a judge can make that move. January 18, 2022Griswold sued Peters again to remove her ahead of the upcoming election, asking a judge to appoint Mesa County Director of Elections Brandi Bantz in her place."Respondents Tina M. Peters, the Clerk and Recorder for Mesa County, and Belinda Knisley, the Deputy Clerk and Recorder for Mesa County, were removed by this Court from exercising their election-related duties in the 2021 coordinated election," the lawsuit said. "That court order will expire upon the completion of all election-related tasks related to the 2021 election, which is anticipated to occur in the next few weeks.""Among other things, the Election Order required Peters to certify that she will comply with Colorado's laws as Mesa County's DEO in 2022, and to agree to the use of the Dominion Voting Systems equipment Mesa County has purchased and adopted for use in its elections. Peters refused to sign. This failure is itself an independent, freestanding violation of the Election Order," Griswold wrote in the third civil lawsuit. February 9, 2022Tina Peters was arrested at a bagel shop in Grand Junction on February 9, 2022.According to a Grand Junction Police Department affidavit, when investigators with the Mesa County District Attorney's Office attempted to seize her iPad, Peters refused. It was then that Grand Junction police witnessed a "heated discussion," with the iPad investigators were seeking "being passed around between patrons" who were at the establishment with Peters, per the affidavit.The arrest was not linked to a grand jury investigation into election tampering and official misconduct. The Mesa County Clerk and Recorder is accused of using the tablet computer to illegally record a court hearing for one of her former aides.Peters, according to the affidavit, then stepped between a police officer and an unidentified person. At that point the officer took Peters "by her left bicep." Peters, in turn, began "actively resisting" — attempting to "kick back with her right leg to strike" one of the other officers, hitting the other officer's Taser.Video of the incident also surfaced on social media."Do not kick! Do you understand!?" the officer stated, per the document, while another asked her to "please relax," to which Peters responded, "No!"February 14, 2022Tina Peters announced a run for Colorado Secretary of State on Steve Bannon's War Room show, running against Democratic Secretary Jena Griswold–who is seeking re-election in 2022 as her cases against Peters play out."Colorado deserves a secretary of state who will stand up to the Biden administration that wants to run our country into the ground with nationalized elections," Peters said in a statement. Secretary of State Jena Griswold responded to the news saying that Peters is a "danger," to the state."Tina Peters is unfit to be Secretary of State and a danger to Colorado elections. Peters compromised voting equipment to try to prove conspiracies, costing Mesa County taxpayers nearly one million dollars," Griswold said in a statement sent to Insider. "She works with election deniers, spreads lies about elections, was removed from overseeing the 2021 Mesa County election, and is under criminal investigation by a grand jury. Colorado needs a Secretary of State who will uphold the will of the people; not one who embraces conspiracies and risks Coloradans' right to vote."March 9, 2022Tina Peters is indicted on 10 counts by a Mesa County grand jury related to her alleged role in the election data breach, according to the county's district attorney. Her aide, Belinda Knisley was indicted on six counts related to the breach.Peters was indicted on counts of attempting to influence a public servant, criminal impersonation, conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, identity theft, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty, and failing to comply with the secretary of state. "Using legal muscle to indict political opponents during an election isn't new strategy, but it's easier to execute when you have a district attorney who despises President Trump and any constitutional conservative like myself who continues to demand all election evidence be made available to the public," Peters said in response to the indictment.Peters pleaded not guilty to the charges.May 10, 2022Peters, Knisley, and another aide, Julie Fisher, are barred from administering 2022 elections in Mesa County after a ruling by Colorado district Judge Valerie Robison, making it the second time in two years that Peters was stripped of that authority."The Court's decision today bars Peters from further threatening the integrity of Mesa's elections and ensures Mesa County residents have the secure and accessible elections they deserve," Griswold said after the ruling, according to CNN.June 2022On June 28, Peters will face a run-off in a Republican primary for the Colorado Secretary of State, which she has been campaigning for alongside Mike Lindell at times.Peters faces Pam Anderson, a former county clerk who also represented Colorado's county clerks association, as well as Mike O'Donnell.If Peters wins, it will set up a face-off against Griswold, the current Democrat Secretary of State who has successfully sued Peters twice to limit her powers as Mesa County Clerk.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 28th, 2022

Here"s what Biden can do to help Americans retain abortion access now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, advocates say

From packing the court to offering grants for out-of-state travel, here are measures advocates and lawmakers have recommended after the reversal of Roe v. Wade. US President Joe Biden attends the first day of the G7 leaders' summit, at Bavaria's Schloss Elmau castle, in Kruen, Germany, Sunday, June 26, 2022.Lukas Barth/Pool Photo via AP The Supreme Court ended the federal right to an abortion by overturning Roe v. Wade last week.  President Joe Biden condemned the decision, calling on Congress to act and citizens to vote. Here are the measures abortion advocates have called on Biden to implement since Roe was overturned.  As the nation reels from the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, abortion advocates across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden. On Friday, Biden said the Court's decision would "literally take America back 150 years" and that his administration will aggressively defend Americans' rights to receive abortion pills through the mail or to travel across state lines to receive care. The president called on Congress to act, despite Democrats' failures to codify abortion rights into federal law. He also called on Americans to vote in the midterms in November. "Let me be very clear and unambiguous: The only way we can secure a women's right to choose, the balance that existed, is for Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade as federal law," he said. "No executive action from the president can do that."While Biden has said his "administration will use all of its appropriate lawful powers" to help Americans retain access to abortion,  lawmakers and advocates have called on the president to implement the following measures since Roe was overturned. Expand the Supreme CourtActivists For Expanding The Supreme Court Rally Outside the Supreme Court on June 22, 2022 in Washington, DC.Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Demand JusticeDemocrats and abortion-rights activists have demanded Biden administration to expand the Supreme Court and add justices to balance the conservative majority. Over 50 House Democrats co-signed a 2021 bill to expand the Court to 13 justices. While the number of justices on the Supreme Court has been nine since 1869, it historically ranged between five and 10 justices. There is no limit to number of justices on the high court in the Constitution,and Congress has the power to decide its size. The last major attempt to expand the court, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, failed in Congress.White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Saturday that President Joe Biden "does not agree with" expanding the Supreme Court. "I was asked this question yesterday, and I've been asked it before," she said. "That is something that the President does not agree with. That is not something that he wants to do," Jean-Pierre said during a press briefing.Declare a 'public health and national emergency'Activists march along Constitution Avenue to the US Supreme Court on May 14, 2022.Astrid Riecken for The Washington Post via Getty ImagesSenators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Tina Smith of Minnesota called on Biden to  "declare a public health emergency" after the Supreme Court ruling."We urge the president to declare a public health emergency to protect abortion access for all Americans, unlocking critical resources and authority that states and the federal government can use to meet the surge in demand for reproductive health services. The danger is real, and Democrats must meet it with the urgency it deserves," Warren and Smith wrote in an op-ed for the New York Times.Members of the Congressional Black Caucus authored a letter to Biden ahead of the Court's final decision, calling on the president "to use every tool at your disposal to protect fundamental reproductive rights and abortion access." "The effects of this decision on the lives and health of Black women and pregnant people will be devastating and require an urgent and whole-of-government response," said the letter signed by Reps. Ayanna Pressley, Cori Bush, Barbara Lee, and nearly two dozen others."Declaring a public health emergency and national emergency will allow your Administration to utilize additional flexibilities and deploy resources where necessary," they added. "In this unprecedented moment, we must act urgently as if lives depend on it because they do."Establish abortion clinics on federal landRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez joins abortion-rights activists as they demonstrate following Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in Washington on June 24, 2022.Jacquelyn Martin/APRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Friday demanded Biden create abortion clinics on federal lands while speaking at a protest in New York. "There are also actions at President Biden's disposal that he can mobilize," Ocasio-Cortez said. "I'll start with the babiest of the babiest of the baby steps: Open abortion clinics on federal lands in red states right now. Right now."However, Vice President Kamala Harris said that putting abortion clinics on federal lands is "not right now what we are discussing" in the administration. The proposition would face logistical hurdles like the longstanding Hyde Amendment, which bars federal funds from directly funding abortion services through programs like Medicaid and Title X. A White House official told Insider that the proposal could be a risk to "women and providers who are not federal employees could be potentially be prosecuted."Offer federal support or grants for those traveling out of state for abortion careAbortion access is a confusing patchwork across the US, with each state in charge of its own rules.In total, eight states have banned abortion since the Supreme Court ruling on June 24, but courts have temporarily blocked abortion bans in Louisiana and Utah, allowing patients to receive care in the meantime. Experts have pointed out that many Americans will be forced to travel across state lines to access abortions. States like Illinois — which share borders with states that immediately implemented bans on abortion after the Supreme Court ruling — are bracing for an influx of people to cross their state lines.Biden said he intends to fight to protect an individual's right to travel across state lines to get abortion care, but he hasn't gone as far as offering federal support to people who have to travel."If any state or local official, high or low, tries to interfere with a woman's exercising her basic right to travel, I will do everything in my power to fight that deeply un-American attack," Biden said last Friday in his address following the ruling.Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of the non-profit Public Citizen, told Insider that the Biden administration could establish grants for people who need to travel to get abortion care. "State by state there will be different requirements and limitations, so the cost of traveling to a place where you can get this care is part of the issue," Gilbert told Insider. "So figuring out ways to assist, providing grants or other mechanisms for funding to reach women who need to travel would be a thing for them to consider."Any actions the administration takes would again have to be in compliance with the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion care. Provide easier access to abortion medicationBoxes of the drug mifepristone line a shelf at the West Alabama Women's Center in Tuscaloosa, Ala., on Wednesday, March 16, 2022.Allen G. Breed, File/APGilbert added that the Biden administration could also loosen restrictions on prescribing the abortion pill. In December, the US Food and Drug Administration lifted a measure that required patients to visit a clinic or doctor in person in order to obtain mifepristone, one of the drugs used in a medical abortion, The New York Times reported.  "The federal government could help make abortion medication easier to access, the abortion pill," Gilbert said. "They've already made it easier for women to get abortion pills by mail or prescribed through telemedicine, but they can also change the guidelines to allow any medical provider to write a prescription for the medication and could expand where you can get it, to which pharmacies it could be gotten at. So that's a pretty straightforward thing that would be wonderful to see."Help people understand abortion laws state by state as well as their rightGilbert said one of the biggest ways the Biden administration can help is "just helping people understand abortion law." "This sort of patchwork that I was describing is going to be a huge problem. It's state-by-state, and it's going to be evolving very regularly, we would imagine," Gilbert said. "So making sure that the administration is being helpful on that front."While laws on abortion access vary state by state, conservative states like Texas and Oklahoma have enacted vigilante abortion laws that encourage citizens to report those who they think have assisted in providing an abortion. On Saturday, one day after the Supreme Court's ruling, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a guide to help people "know your rights" on reproductive care. "People can find the info from the federal government. They've set up a website already, and so just making sure that that's updated and that people know about it and that they can get the information that they need," Gilbert said. Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 28th, 2022