;)
Saturday
Jul012023
July 1, 2023
Late Morning/Afternoon Update:
Maureen Dowd of the New York Times interviews Chris Christie.
France. Cara Anna, et al., of the AP: "Hushed and visibly anguished, hundreds of mourners from France's Islamic community formed a solemn procession from a mosque to a hillside cemetery on Saturday to bury a 17-year-old whose killing by police has triggered days of rioting and looting across the nation. Underscoring the gravity of the crisis, President Emmanuel Macron scrapped an official trip to Germany after a fourth straight night of unrest across France. Officials said they were again deploying 45,000 police to the streets nationwide in an effort to head off a fifth night of violence. Some 2,400 people have been arrested overall since the teen's death on Tuesday."
Julia Shapero of the Hill: "A lawyer for Hunter Biden blasted two IRS whistleblowers who claimed there was political interference in the investigation into the president's son in a scathing letter to the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee on Friday. Biden attorney Abbe Lowell slammed Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.), alleging that the committee's decision to release the testimony of the two IRS agents last week was 'an obvious ploy to feed the misinformation campaign to harm our client, Hunter Biden, as a vehicle to attack his father,' according to the letter obtained by Axios. Gary Shapley, an IRS supervisory special agent, claimed in an interview with the House Ways and Means Committee that Biden received 'preferential treatment' and that the Justice Department 'slow-walked' its investigation into the president's son. Lowell criticized Smith in Friday's letter for improperly releasing tax and investigation information and disseminating 'incomplete half-truths, distortions, and totally unnecessary detail' about Biden."
Leigh Ann Caldwell, et al., of the Washington Post: "In a phone call in late 2020..., Donald Trump tried to pressure Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) to overturn the state's presidential election results, saying that if enough fraudulent votes could be found it would overcome Trump's narrow loss in Arizona, according to three people familiar with the call. Trump also repeatedly asked Vice President Mike Pence to call Ducey and prod him to find the evidence to substantiate Trump's claims of fraud.... Pence called Ducey several times to discuss the election..., though he did not follow Trump's directions to pressure the governor.... Ducey described the 'pressure' he was under after Trump's loss to a prominent Republican donor over a meal in Arizona earlier this year, according to the donor.... The account was confirmed by others aware of the call. Ducey told the donor he was surprised that special counsel Jack Smith's team had not inquired about his phone calls with Trump and Pence.... After learning that Ducey was not being supportive of his claims, Trump grew angry and publicly attacked him." ~~~
~~~ Thanks to RAS, who describes Trump's call to Ducey as "just another perfect call." Update: CNN now has a report here.
Kagan Tells Confederate Supremes to MYOB. Jamelle Bouie of the New York Times: In her dissent in the student loan forgiveness case, "Justice Elena Kagan ... didn't just challenge the chief justice's reasoning [in his majority opinion], she questioned whether the court's decision was even constitutional.... 'At the behest of a party that has suffered no injury, the majority decides a contested public policy issue properly belonging to the politically accountable branches and the people they represent.... The Court is supposed to stick to its business -- to decide only cases and controversies, and to stay away from making this Nation's policy about subjects like student-loan relief.' The court, Kagan concluded, 'exercises authority it does not have. It violates the Constitution.'... Democrats may or may not get this particular message. But John Roberts heard it loud and clear. 'It has become a disturbing feature of some recent opinions to criticize the decisions with which they disagree as going beyond the proper role of the judiciary,' he wrote in his opinion. 'It is important that the public not be misled either. Any such misperception would be harmful to this institution and our country.' For Roberts, the problem isn't that the Supreme Court is overstepping its bounds, it's that one of its justices has decided that she's had enough."
Greece. Matina Stevis-Gridneff & Karam Shoumali of the New York Times: "Satellite imagery, sealed court documents, more than 20 interviews with survivors and officials, and a flurry of radio signals transmitted in the final hours suggest that the scale of death [on the Adriana which sank last month near Greece] was preventable. Dozens of officials and coast guard crews monitored the ship, yet the Greek government treated the situation like a law enforcement operation, not a rescue. Rather than send a navy hospital ship or rescue specialists, the authorities sent a team that included four masked, armed men from a coast guard special operations unit.... The sinking of the Adriana is an extreme example of a longtime standoff in the Mediterranean.... European coast guards often postpone rescues out of fear that helping will embolden smugglers to send more people on ever-flimsier ships.... So even as passengers on the Adriana called for help, the authorities chose to listen to the boat's captain, a 22-year-old Egyptian man who said he wanted to continue to Italy."
~~~~~~~~~~
Alexandra Hutzler of ABC News: "President Joe Biden said Friday his administration is moving forward with a new student loan relief plan after the Supreme Court struck down his original program to wipe out $430 billion in debt. Biden detailed the next steps in remarks delivered at the White House, where he was joined by Education Secretary Miguel Cardona.... Under the alternative strategy, Biden said the administration will invoke the 1965 Higher Education Act to allow Secretary Cardona to 'compromise, waive or release loans under certain circumstances.' In the meantime, Biden said they also have a plan to help alleviate the financial stress as loan payments restart in October after a three-year pause. The administration will create a temporary, 12-month "on-ramp repayment program" that will remove the threat of default for borrowers who are unable to pay their bills. The Department of Education will not refer borrowers who miss payments to credit agencies for a year as they readjust to making payments again.... Biden on Friday hit Republicans for opposing his plan, painting them as hypocritical for opposing relief for borrowers while some had their own business-related loans provided by the government during the pandemic forgiven." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
Ron Lieber & Tara Bernard of the New York Times: "Now that the Supreme Court has blocked President Biden's student debt cancellation proposal, people with loan balances have two things to watch in the short term. First, the pandemic-related pause on monthly payments will end by Sept. 1, with the first payment due sometime in October. But the Biden administration has said it will provide a yearlong 'on-ramp' to help ease the transition for borrowers who may struggle with making their payments -- if a borrower misses a monthly bill, they won't be considered delinquent from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30, 2024. Then, there is an even bigger source of relief: The Education Department has finalized its plan for a new loan repayment plan that could cut many borrowers' monthly bills by half -- and enrollment will be possible later this summer, before any payments are due. On Friday afternoon, the White House announced a separate effort to provide loan cancellation using the so-called 'settlement and compromise' authority it has under the Higher Education Act." ~~~
~~~ Here's the White House fact sheet on President Biden's new plan to provide relief to student borrowers (via the White House).
Robert Barnes & Danielle Douglas-Gabriel of the Washington Post: "The Supreme Court on Friday said President Biden does not have authority for his roughly $400 billion program to forgive student loan debt, the latest blow from a Supreme Court that has been dismissive of this administration's bold claims of power. The vote was 6 to 3 along ideological lines, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. writing for the court's dominant conservatives.... 'The Secretary [of Education] asserts that the HEROES Act grants him the authority to cancel $430 billion of student loan principal. It does not,' Roberts wrote. 'We hold today that the Act allows the Secretary to "waive or modify" existing statutory or regulatory provisions applicable to financial assistance programs under the Education Act, not to rewrite that statute from the ground up.'" NPR's report, by Nina Totenberg & Meghanlata Gupta, is here. The New York Times has a liveblog on the decision & reactions here. (Also linked yesterday.)
Wherein Roberts Makes up Stuff. Ian Millhiser of Vox: "The Supreme Court's decision in Biden v. Nebraska, the one canceling President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness program, is complete and utter nonsense. It rewrites a federal law which explicitly authorizes the loan forgiveness program, and it relies on a fake legal doctrine known as 'major questions' which has no basis in any law or any provision of the Constitution.... Congress clearly authorized the Education secretary to make modifications or waivers that are broad or narrow, or that apply to many or few borrowers. And it explicitly said that the secretary will have the final word on the scope of student loan relief within the context of a national emergency. [CJ John] Roberts's opinion in Nebraska effectively overrules the decision of both elected branches of government.... And it overrules the executive branch's judgment.... The statute explicitly instructs federal courts not to interpret other federal laws to limit the secretary's authority to alter student loan obligations."
Robert Barnes of the Washington Post: "The Supreme Court's conservative majority ruled in favor of an evangelical Christian graphic artist from Colorado who does not want to create wedding websites for same-sex couples, despite the state's protective anti-discrimination law. The vote split along ideological lines 6 to 3, with the liberals in dissent. It was the court's latest examination of the clash between laws requiring equal treatment for the LGBTQ community and those who say their religious beliefs lead them to regard same-sex marriages as 'false.'... Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, writing for the majority, said the First Amendment protects designer Lorie Smith from creating speech she does not believe." At 10:20 am ET, this is a developing story. NPR's report, by Nina Totenberg, is here. (Also linked yesterday.)
~~~ The decision & dissent, via the Court, are here. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ The New York Times has a liveblog on the decision & reactions here: "In a statement on the court's ruling, President Biden said he is 'deeply concerned that the decision could invite more discrimination against LGBTQI+ Americans.' He added, 'More broadly, today's decision weakens long-standing laws that protect all Americans against discrimination in public accommodations -- including people of color, people with disabilities, people of faith and women.'" (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. -- Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison decision, 1803 ~~~
~~~ Wherein Gorsuch Makes up Stuff. Ian Millhiser of Vox: "The frustrating thing about this case is that it involves an entirely fabricated legal dispute.... Lorie Smith has never actually made a wedding website for a paying customer. Nor has Colorado ever attempted to enforce its civil rights law against Ms. Smith.... Yet [Neil] Gorsuch's majority opinion repeatedly paints Smith as a hapless victim, oppressed by wicked state officials who insist that she must proclaim a dogma that she denies.... Federal courts, including the Supreme Court, do not have jurisdiction to decide hypothetical cases. As a unanimous Supreme Court held in Texas v. United States (1998), 'a claim is not ripe for adjudication if it rests upon "contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all."'" ~~~
~~~ Marie: Yes, but doesn't the Supreme Court have its Article III that says the Supremes can do anything they want? I'm all for revisiting Marbury v. Madison (1803), wherein the Supremes pretty much granted themselves the right to adjudicate everything. (That's an oversimplification, but subsequent rulings expanded the Court's reach and cemented its extraordinary authority.)
Sam Levine of the Guardian: "The US supreme court turned away a case on Friday challenging Mississippi's rules around voting rights for people with felony convictions, leaving intact a policy implemented more than a century ago with the explicit goal of preventing Black people from voting. Those convicted of any one of 23 specific felonies in Mississippi permanently lose the right to vote. The list is rooted in the state's 1890 constitutional convention, where delegates chose disenfranchising crimes that they believed Black people were more likely to commit.... Sixteen per cent of the Black voting-age population remains blocked from casting a ballot, as well as 10% of the overall voting age population, according to an estimate by The Sentencing Project.... Challengers to the law argued that the policy was unconstitutional because it bore the 'discriminatory taint' from the 1890 constitution.... The supreme court did not say on Friday why it was rejecting the case (it takes four votes on the court to grant review) and Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor were the only two justices who noted their dissent from the denial." ~~~
~~~ BUT. Adam Liptak & Glenn Thrush of the New York Times: "The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to consider whether the government may forbid people subject to domestic violence orders from having guns, setting up a major test of its ruling last year vastly expanding people's right to arm themselves in public. The case will turn on the scope of a new legal standard established in that decision, one whose reliance on historical practices has sown confusion as courts have struggled to apply it, with some judges sweeping aside gun controls that have been on the books for decades." ~~~
~~~ Marie: While we are complaining that the confederate Supremes are blasting us back to the Dark Ages, we should bear in mind that their embrace of the gun culture has never before been the law of the land or even the law of the Wild West. Earlier Supreme Courts never considered the Second Amendment to grant individual rights to bear arms. And in the 19th century, western towns typically required cowboys & other visitors to leave their arms at the "gates to the city" before they entered. The Roberts Court has relied more on the NRA and Fox "News" "philosophy" than on the Constitution. Americans will have to wait till long past my time to hope a future Court will have the sense to reverse the novel and radical decision to misinterpret the Second Amendment as a license to carry.
Noam Scheiber of the New York Times: "As a legal matter, the Supreme Court's rejection of race-conscious admissions in higher education does not in itself impede employers from pursuing diversity in the workplace.... But many experts argue that as a practical matter, the ruling will discourage corporations from putting in place ambitious diversity policies in hiring and promotion -- or prompt them to rein in existing policies -- by encouraging lawsuits under the existing legal standard. After the decision on Thursday affecting college admissions, law firms encouraged companies to review their diversity policies."
News York Times Editors: "In striking down affirmative action in higher education on Thursday, the Supreme Court's conservative majority said it had to do so because the Constitution forbids any form of racial distinction. With a single opinion, the justices overturned decades of precedents that upheld race-conscious admissions policies as consistent with the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause and ignored the reality of modern America, where prejudice and racism endure. As Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent, the decision cements 'a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society where race has always mattered and continues to matter.'... The 14th Amendment, ratified in the aftermath of the Civil War, was expressly intended to allow for race-conscious legislation, as Justice Sotomayor noted emphatically on Thursday." Read on. ~~~
~~~ Darren Walker, president of the Ford Foundation, in a New York Times op-ed: "... we should tell the truth about why diversity is now controversial: Opponents of diversity are opponents of any racial consciousness. They want to prevent us from understanding the ways that the past informs the present, from wrestling with the fullness and richness and complexity of our history. Indeed, they wish to impose an ahistoric mythology on the American people that makes it harder, if not outright impossible, to address the many ways that Black and white still live in separate and unequal Americas. We still live in an increasingly segregated society...." Walker ends the essay with a positive, flag-waving flair. MB: When Martin Luther King, Jr., had a dream, he knew its realization was a long time coming. Walker seems more delusional.
Marie: When you contemplate how cruel the confederate Supremes are to young people, you have to think this is a gang of sadistic SOBs. First, some of these kids will be born to young parents who did not intend to get pregnant and were unprepared financially and emotionally to rear a family. Then the Court decided minority children won't get even the hint of a leg up in apply to colleges where they might get the education necessary to pull themselves out of poverty. Next, the Court decided that if they did get admitted & attend university, they would have to pay through the nose for that education and get no relief from the debt incurred. BUT the Court's decision on that also may mean that employers won't give them a fighting chance to get a good job. AND, while they're lolling about with no employment to keep them busy, they just might get pregnant! I'm sure you can add to this list of how the Supremes' recent decisions punish young Americans, but that's quite a list already. How you gonna keep 'em down on the farm? Make damned sure they can't get away.
Michael Crowley of the New York Times: "The State Department should plan better for worst-case scenarios, strengthen its crisis-management capabilities and ensure that top officials hear 'the broadest possible range of views,' including ones that challenge their assumptions and decisions. Those were some of the key findings of a State Department review of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in summer 2021, which contributed to the sudden collapse of the Afghan government and required a massive airlift to rescue roughly 1250,000 U.S. citizens and Afghans who had assisted the United States. The report does not pin blame on specific individuals, and mentions Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken only in passing.... It does say that the department's participation in executive branch planning for an evacuation 'was hindered by the fact that it was unclear who in the department had the lead.'" Less than half of the 87-page report has been released to the public because much of it is classified. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) CNN's report is here.
Blake Ellis, et al., of CNN: "A secret investigation into alleged sexual abuse at the US Coast Guard Academy, the training ground for the Coast Guard's top officers, uncovered a dark history of rapes, assaults and other serious misconduct being ignored and, at times, covered up by high-ranking officials. The findings of the probe, dubbed 'Operation Fouled Anchor,' were kept confidential by the agency's top leadership for several years. Coast Guard officials briefed members of Congress this month after inquiries from CNN, which had reviewed internal documents from the probe. Despite credible evidence of assaults dating back to the late 1980s, investigators found that most of the alleged perpetrators were not criminally investigated at the time. Instead, the incidents were handled as administrative violations, and punishments, if they happened at all, were as minor as extra homework or lowered class standings. Sometimes, even those pushed out of the academy were still able to serve in the US military. As a result, some of the accused ascended to top roles at the Coast Guard and other military agencies. In contrast, many alleged victims left the academy after reporting their assaults, ending their hopes of a career in the service." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Marie: It appears the investigation and report were completed in 2019. I guess we shouldn't be surprised the Trump administration covered it up. ~~~
~~~ Karoun Demirjian & John Ismay of the New York Times: "The U.S. Coast Guard apologized on Friday for covering up scores of documented sexual assault and harassment cases that took place at the service's academy, and failing to properly investigate or discipline those accused in dozens more cases over a span of nearly two decades.... In a statement, a Coast Guard spokesman apologized to the victims, saying that 'by not having taken appropriate action at the time of the sexual assaults, the Coast Guard may have further traumatized the victims, delayed access to their care and recovery, and prevented some cases from being referred to the military justice system for appropriate accountability.'... [Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)] said that some had described the Coast Guard's failure to disclose its investigation as 'intentional.'" MB: No kidding.
Keith Alexander & Rachel Weiner of the Washington Post: "The Proud Boys organization must pay more than $1 million to a historic Black church in D.C. after a judge determined members of the group damaged a Black Lives Matter sign displayed on the building's front lawn in 2020. Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church sued the Proud Boys International LLC in 2021 after alleging members of the group vandalized the church's sign during a march in December 2020 and subsequently left threatening messages on the church&'s voice mail.... The church, which opened its doors in the late 1800s and is located at 15th and M Streets in Northwest Washington, sought damages to replace the sign and to cover additional security that church officials said was needed since the incident.... D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal E. Kravitz ruled that the Dec. 12, 2020, rally by hundreds of Proud Boys members and supporters following ... Donald Trump's failed reelection bid was an 'attack' on Metropolitan AME Church that 'resulted from a highly orchestrated set of events focused on the Proud Boys's guiding principles: white supremacy and violence.'" ~~~
~~~ Marie: Hey, Boys, take it to the Supremes. They'll reverse the ruling on account of you were only exercising your First Amendment right to free speech. Oh, what about First Amendment religious rights, you ask? Those are only for white Christians, silly you.
Sarah Fitzpatrick & Tom Winter of NBC News: "An attorney for Hunter Biden says purported screenshots of a text message from Hunter Biden to a potential Chinese business partner where he refers to Joe Biden -- a message that has been the subject of intense scrutiny following statements made by an IRS whistleblower -- are 'not real and contain myriad of issues.' Abbe Lowell who is one of Hunter Biden's attorneys, made the statement in a letter to Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has interviewed the whistleblowers.... IRS Supervisory Special Agent Gary Shapley told the committee under oath that, as an investigator for the IRS, he obtained messages Hunter Biden sent on the WhatsApp platform, including one in 2017 that he read demanding payment from a Chinese businessman named Henry Zhao.... Lowell writes that the screenshots of the message as tweeted by Smith, 'both include a photo of Mr. Biden not from 2017 but from the White House Easter Egg roll in April 2022 (long after the purported message was sent); both images portray the message in a blue bubble, whe WhatsApp messages are in green...' [and other stuff]." MB: I suppose it's pretty hard to send a text message accompanied by a photo that would not be taken until five years in the future.
Another Trumpity Grifter. Matthew Chapman of the Raw Story: "... Donald Trump's one-time ambassador Gordon Sondland ... faces tens of thousands of dollars in fines, reported The Daily Beast on Friday. 'The Federal Election Commission slapped a $28,000 fine on the hotel company belonging to Trump's former ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, for illegal corporate reimbursements totaling more than $100,000, according to documents released Friday,' reported Roger Sollenberger. 'In sworn testimony, the president of Provenance Hotels said he was 'acting under the directions' of Sondland personally, according to the FEC general counsel's report, a claim the former ambassador disputed in his own affidavit.'" MB: If you saw this guy at around the time of Trump's first impeachment, you no doubt figured then that he was a Trumpian grifter. He reported paid $1MM to Trump's inauguration fund to secure his prestigious ambassadorship, then spent $1MM in taxpayer funds on a lavish remodel of the ambassador's residence.
Katie Robertson of the New York Times: "Fox News has agreed to pay $12 million to Abby Grossberg, a former Fox News producer who had accused the network of operating a hostile and discriminatory workplace and of coercing her into providing false testimony in a deposition. Parisis G. Filippatos, a lawyer for Ms. Grossberg, said the settlement concluded all of Ms. Grossberg's claims against Fox and the people she had named in her complaints, which included the former host Tucker Carlson and some of his producers.... Ms. Grossberg said in a statement on Friday that she stood by her allegations, but she was 'heartened that Fox News has taken me and my legal claims seriously.'... Fox News had previously disputed Ms. Grossberg's claims. A spokeswoman for the network said in a statement on Friday: 'We are pleased that we have been able to resolve this matter without further litigation.'" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) An NPR story is here.
Presidential Race 2024. Marie: Republican presidential hopefuls went to Philadephia, Pa., this week to campaign at a meeting of Moms for Liberty, the book-ban ladies. Outside, protesters railed against the group as "Klanned Karenhood."
Beyond the Beltway
Indiana. Kate Zernike of the New York Times: "A ruling by Indiana's highest court on Friday cleared the way for a ban in the state on most abortions from conception. The court said that the state Constitution guarantees a limited right to abortion, but not a fundamental one -- that means allowing abortion only when it is necessary to save a woman's life or protect her from a serious health risk. The court’s decision removes the temporary injunction on a near-total ban on abortion that the state's Republican-controlled legislature passed last August.... By saying there was a limited but not a 'fundamental' right to abortion, the justices left open a door for future lawsuits, but only in cases where a woman's life or health was at risk...."
Louisiana. Rick Rojas of the New York Times: "Gov. John Bel Edwards [D] of Louisiana vetoed a ban on gender-transition care for transgender minors on Friday, standing in the way of his state becoming the latest to prohibit that kind of care. He also vetoed two other recent bills related to gender expression and sexual orientation in schools and among young people. The medical measure would forbid hormone treatments, puberty blockers and gender-transition surgery for people under 18. The other two bills would restrict what teachers can discuss in class on the subject of gender, and limit the ability of transgender and nonbinary students to have school personnel refer to them by pronouns that do not match the sex listed on their birth certificates.... All three bills passed the Republican-dominated Legislature by margins wide enough to override the governor's veto. But the legislative session ended recently, so that can't happen right away. Under Louisiana law, the lawmakers could reconvene after about 40 days for a special session...."
Maine. Hey, a Laboratory of Democracy! Alexandra Heal of the Washington Post: "The state of Maine is embarking on a controversial experiment by partially decriminalizing prostitution in an attempt to eliminate exploitation of sex workers -- adopting a model advocates say is a first in the country. Gov. Janet Mills (D) signed a bill into law Monday that will eliminate penalties for those who sell sex while leaving in place laws against the purchase of it. A former prosecutor and attorney general, Mills vetoed a similar measure in 2021 but approved the bill this year after a conversation with the famed author and feminist Gloria Steinem. The approach, versions of which have been adopted in Canada and several European countries, is championed by many feminists who see it as the best way to stamp out demand for paid sex while protecting those who sell it because of economic need or because they are victims of trafficking."
Texas. Milly Hennessy-Fiske of the Washington Post: Miss Texas, Averie Bishop, takes on Texas Republicans. "The [Miss Texas] perch has normally been occupied by apolitical women, but in Bishop's case, the pageant queen has used it to push back against the far-right policies supported by Texas's White male leaders. Her platform -- diversity and inclusion -- represents much of what Texas has been outlawing.... The first Asian contestant to win the crown in the pageant's 85 years, Bishop is an avatar for a rapidly diversifying state, one that despite its historic image is now majority minority, a change that is remaking cities, rural areas and political alliances, if not state leadership."
Way Beyond
Brazil. Jack Nicas of the New York Times: "Brazilian election officials on Friday blocked former President Jair Bolsonaro from seeking public office until 2030, removing a top contender from the next presidential contest and dealing a significant blow to the country's far-right movement. Brazil's electoral court ruled that Mr. Bolsonaro had violated Brazil's election laws when, less than three months ahead of last year's vote, he called diplomats to the presidential palace and made baseless claims that the nation's voting systems were likely to be rigged against him. Five of the court's seven judges voted that Mr. Bolsonaro had abused his power as president when he convened the meeting with diplomats and broadcast it on state television.... [Bolsonaro] is still expected to appeal the ruling to Brazil's Supreme Court, though that body acted aggressively to rein in his power during his presidency."
France. The Guardian is liveblogging developments in the protests over the fatal shooting of a teenager that continued for a fourth night Friday. More than 1,300 people were arrested throughout the country Friday, according to the AP.
Ukraine, et al. The Washington Post's live briefing of developments Saturday in Russia's war on Ukraine is here: "As Ukraine requests more weaponry amid its counteroffensive against Russia, the Biden administration is weighing whether to supply Kyiv with controversial cluster bombs.... A satellite image captured Friday showed what could be the rapid construction of a new camp in Belarus to house Wagner forces, following the group's rebellion and departure from Russia, according to local media and experts.... Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said he had offered Wagner troops an abandoned military base for housing in Belarus, the country where the group's leader Yevgeniy Prigozhin relocated this week, although his current whereabouts are not known.... Earlier this month, CIA Director William J. Burns made a secret visit to Ukraine, where officials revealed an ambitious endgame for the war. The strategy aims to retake Russian-occupied territory and open cease-fire negotiations with Moscow by the end of the year, officials familiar with the visit said.... A Russian missile hit a school in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region on Friday, killing two and injuring six, according to Ukrainian police. The school, located near the front line, was occupied by civilians at the time of the attack." ~~~
~~~ The Guardian's liveblog for Saturday is here. The Guardian's summary report is here.
Share Article
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.
Reader Comments (17)
Our local library just announced that starting July 9 there will be
sewing classes for boys and girls in 1st, 2nd and 3rd grades. After
completing the hand sewing courses they will be allowed to work
on sewing machines.
Good thing we aren't in Texas or Florida because they would no doubt
shut down our library and confiscate the needles and machines.
I personally could have used some of that sewing training while in
the military. I had to rely on others to do any button sewing or any
kind of sewing.
@Forrest Morris: When I went to junior high school, the boys took shop where they made lovely birdhouses, and the girls took home ec. We learned to cook simple stuff, sew & balance a checkbook. Of course we didn't have a choice as to which course we took; it was 100% sexually-segregated. And as I recall, these were required classes. All in all, I think the girls learned more useful stuff than did the boys. Unless maybe you live in a bird sanctuary.
BTW, I have not tried to balance a checkbook in a couple of decades; I let the bank do it and if it "seems" right, I'm happy. Even back when I did sort of balance my checkbook, I only tried to get close; I never added up the numbers beyond the decimals. I've never seen the point of double-checking down to the penny.
But, yeah, your library is totally radical. Good for them. (I do think some schools teach gender-neutral home economics and shop now.)
MAKING AMENDS: by Jill Lepore
"Every Fourth of July, Americans celebrate independence, but it might be more significant, more pregnant with meaning, to celebrate amendment — the writing, ratifying and especially the amending of constitutions. Except lately there hasn’t been much to celebrate, with amendment having become a lost art. And a constitution that can no longer be amended is dead....
No one has ever taken stock of this history of failed amendments, an America that never was but was wanted by some, and sometimes by very many, or even most. Americans won’t be able to agree anytime soon on how to amend the U.S. Constitution and will instead face the ongoing risk of “commotions, mobs, bloodshed and Civil War.” Amending is what makes the Constitution everyone’s. But until the Constitution can once again be amended, only the court can change it. And if that bench insists, perversely, illogically and in defiance of the very idea of constitutionalism that all change must be rooted in the past, its justices have got a whole lot of reading to do, into a richer, wider, better history."
One of my favorite actors is dead––Alan Arkin whose lists of films are many but the one I found most compelling in terms of how he took on the role was in "Glengarry Glen Ross." Here's a piece of that role playing by a NYT review:
"When “Glengarry Glen Ross” was released in November 1992, it seemed like a commentary on what we now dub “toxic masculinity” at the end of the George H.W. Bush era, and the howling, raging, swindling likes of Roma, Moss and Levene felt like pointed snapshots of the 20th-century man. Alan Arkin’s portrayal of George Aaronow feels like their 21st-century counterpart: hopeless, baffled, resigned, anguished. His raw performance is the beating heart of what could have been a cold, bloodless movie, and a reminder of the life and force he brought to so many roles in his long, varied career."
and there was something in that voice–--like a promise of something good but we need to work so very hard to get it.
Befuddled. That's what I am.
So the SCOTUS heard and decided a case brought by a potential web designer who, based on a purported inquiry from someone who apparently didn't ask anything, said she didn't wish to "use her own words" in any way that would seem to support a sexual relationship she found contrary to her beliefs. Her suit was intended to protect her religious right to do business (when she got around to doing it) and use her own words in a manner consistent with her beliefs.
And the Court leaped over the chasm of "ifs" the case was founded on, the if I had a business and if someone asked me to design a website for a gay marriage, and landed firmly on the side of the plaintiff's happy, god-ordained heterosexuality.
Aside from the obvious suggestion that the designer need not use her own words (she could use someone else's or none at all) to support a marriage she found anathema...I wonder....
How about a gay web designer who, based on his own interpretation of scripture, brought a theoretical suit claiming right to refuse to work with straights? (Considering the numbers, not a good business model)
Or a Muslim with Christians? (Maybe a better one)
How would this court decide?
That question suggests to me the issue may not be religious at all. It might be more a matter of balancing majority vs, minority rights.
If heterosexuality were not the norm, might we have had a different decision?
I can't see any way the SCOTUS could have handled this one without seeming stupid. Agreeing to deal with it at all was only where the stupidity began.
Ken: "I can't see any way the SCOTUS could have handled this one without seeming stupid. Agreeing to deal with it at all was only where the stupidity began."
The problem here is that our Supremes are not stupid––-what they are could be defined as "wrong headed"–-or "misinformed" –-or, dare we say "prejudiced? " as some have labeled their latest blow to our land of milk and honey in which the former is getting sour and the latter is only for those who can afford it. But I must confess–- I like your word––-perhaps using that word would wound their pride the most, although it didn't do much for Fatty who just threw it back at us.
No big deal, just another perfect call from Donald.
"In a phone call in late 2020, President Donald Trump tried to pressure Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) to overturn the state’s presidential election results, saying that if enough fraudulent votes could be found it would overcome Trump’s narrow loss in Arizona, according to three people familiar with the call."
@Ken Winkes: I often try to put myself into the shoes of the complainant, so in this case, I asked myself what I would do if I were a Website designer and someone asked me to create a racist Website for him. I. Just. Wouldn't. Do. It. Or a Trump-for-Dictator Website. Again, wouldn't do it. In my case, whatever copy there was in the prospective sites' main pages would be written by the customers. I wouldn't be contributing my own words. And my objections also would not be on religious grounds.
Now, of course -- since I'm not a right-wing person just a'wondering what would happen if I started a business and if someone happened in who wanted me to design their Website and I refused to do so -- I wouldn't sue unless somebody sued me or a government agency penalized me for not providing services to the white nationalists or whoever. But I have to admit that in almost all cases, whether my business was designing Website or making birthday cakes, I just wouldn't accommodate nasty bigots.
I was trying to think what the difference was between me and the aspirational Colorado Website designer. It turns out there is a difference with a distinction: racists and Trump supporters are not protected groups.
So I'm right back to where you are: this is one stupid ruling.
Regarding home ec and shop. I don't know what schools are doing now, but when my children were in middle school, both my son and daughter learned basic sewing and basic carpentry. My son is still willing to do small sewing jobs; my daughter still uses the tool box she made in shop. Doing the math, this would have been in the early 2000s. I'm sure this is commonplace most places now, and perhaps kids don't even know these classes were once segregated according to gender. Progress is possible.
When I was in my early thirties, I tried to teach myself how to sew just because I was tired of having to pay someone to sew on buttons that had come off dress shirts. I was terrible. My mother could sew buttons on that could survive a nuclear attack. Me? A quick head turn and off they came.
Oh, and I forgot the point…
The point being that it’s a good skill to learn. Girls and boys. Saves time and money, and like knowing how to tune up a car or replace a door knob or light switch, provides one with a sense of personal autonomy, no matter how fleeting.
@Akhilleus: Here's the trick: after you've finished running your thread through the buttonholes many times (assuming the fabric is sturdy), wrap the thread around itself three or four times between the button & the fabric (i.e., right under the button). Then push the thread back through the fabric one last time and tie it off by pushing the thread through the a bundle of some of the threads on the back several times. Finally, make a loop in the thread you're working and pull the thread through that to form a sort of knot.
I've never had a button fail that has been re-fastened that way. I believe I learned that technique in home ec. in 1957 or so. How did your birdhouse turn out?
@Akhilleus: I can replace a doorknob (though I think I've put in a few upside-down and/or backwards). I can jump-start a battery (one reason I have two vehicles) and replace a light-switch (love the dimmers!), not without some fear of electrocution. But the last time I changed a tire was 1972. And tune up a car? Not a chance. No way, no how, no, never.
It's mid afternoon here in the Smokey Mountain shores or Lake
Michigan. Still yellowish skies with no relief in sight.
I've decided that I will be a supreme court justice, or one of those
revivalist preachers, or some such thing.
I've been cherry picking. Isn't that what they do, pick the parts that
suit their outcome?
At least I can eat my efforts: maybe they'll choke on theirs.
Marie: Good news! "Tuning-up" a car is yesterday's skill, not of any use for any car you'd buy today. Yes, the spark plugs and wires may need to be changed out with age, ditto for any part that moves or carries electrons or fluids. But the old "tune-up" - rotor, points, plugs, timing is no longer regular maintenance, Electronic ignition, fuel injection, and the gizmos linked in your car's computer(s) do that work (well, similar work) automatically, adjusting as you go. I have a timing light at the bottom of my tool closet that I have not touched in over twenty years.
Stuff wears out, things break -- but you don't need to "tune" a car anymore.
Patrick: you are so right. We have been buying Hondas for years and years, from 2004-probably about 2019, whereupon I got so bored with the same little CR-Vs that we sort-of wigged out and bought the first Ascent in Suburu. None of those CR-Vs had anything wrong with them in the times we owned them. Seriously, no work needed. Husband preferred to trade every two or three years and Honda honored their cars and gave us good trade-ins every time. Of course, we then betrayed Honda and love our now second Suburu Ascent. Most of the time, when not with grandkids, it is more than we need, but today we put two beds, all pieces, two mattresses and the pieces to a dresser in the Ascent to travel back to PA from Baltimore. This was our first IKEA trip since covid. They REALLY make good cars these days. No upkeep required. The only reason we go to a dealer these days is to update things with computers or to fix the clock, since we can never remember how, our daughter is away, and it doesn't change automatically! The things that work always work. Yes, it's a car made in multiple places, but cars are wonderful these days. No tuneups needed.
Marie,
I sort of gave up on sewing buttons on, but your advice would have come in handy back then. No birdhouses for me. Never took a shop class. Working on carving a lamp base (plans from a library book) when I was 9 didn’t work out so good. I ended up nearly slicing my finger off. It was pretty cool though, I could see the tendon moving. Never finished the lamp but I still have the scar.