npr--2020-01-21--NPR Poll: Majority Of Americans Believe Trump Encourages Election Interference

Weeks before the first votes of the 2020 presidential election , Americans report a high level of concern about how secure that election will be and worry about the perils of disinformation , according to a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll .
Forty-one percent of those surveyed said they believed the U.S. is not very prepared or not prepared at all to keep November 's election safe and secure .
Do n't see the graphic above ?
Click here .
Reflecting the polarization of the Trump era , two-thirds of Democrats think the country is n't prepared , while 85 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` Like so many issues , Americans view election security from opposite poles of the partisan divide , '' said Lee Miringoff , director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion , which conducted the poll .
President Trump , who has often disputed the U.S. intelligence community 's assessment that Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election , gets low marks from many voters on his handling of election security .
Driven by Democrats and independents , 56 % of those surveyed think Trump has not done very much or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure there will be no future election interference — although 75 % of Republicans think he has done enough .
`` I can trust [ Trump 's ] word to know that he is going to try as best as he can ... in order to stop influence from foreign countries in our elections , '' said first-time voter Joel Martin , a Republican from California .
Martin and other respondents were contacted by NPR for follow-up interviews after they had given their initial responses to questions from Marist pollsters .
Trump faces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to his efforts to get Ukraine to launch an investigation into one of his potential 2020 rivals , former Vice President Joe Biden .
And despite the scrutiny and criticism of his actions with respect to Ukraine , Trump also said in October that China should `` start an investigation into the Bidens . ''
Remarks like those may have been on the mind of the 51 % of the Americans surveyed who said Trump had encouraged election interference .
Eighty-eight percent of Democrats and 51 % of independents backed that assertion .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ electoral system to be the single biggest assault on United States sovereignty since Pearl Harbor , '' said poll participant Dimitri Laddis , an independent voter from New York .
`` The fact that the commander in chief has done nothing to reassure us that we are safe from such an attack — and the fact that he seems to be keenly aware that he benefits from outside forces having influence over our elections — is very disheartening , '' Laddis said .
Although there is no evidence that any votes were changed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 , almost 4 in 10 Americans surveyed said they believe it is likely another country will tamper with the votes cast in 2020 in order to change the result .
The poll 's results also paint a picture of a polarized electorate wary about what it reads and not fully convinced that elections are fair .
In a reflection of how divided the country is , only 62 % of Americans said U.S. elections are fair .
Barely half of Democrats agree with that sentiment , perhaps a reflection of lingering unhappiness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by capturing the Electoral College while losing the popular vote .
And even as Trump has continued to claim without evidence that millions of votes were cast illegally in 2016 , 80 % of Republicans surveyed reported that they believe elections are fair .
`` Many Americans think election cycles are no longer on the up and up , '' said Miringoff , the Marist director .
`` These opinions are a troublesome sign about this keystone of our democracy . ''
Intelligence and elections officials work hard to reassure voters about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is concern about the effect of disinformation in the political discourse .
False , misleading and agitating material were a big part of Russia 's active measures in 2016 .
Do n't see the graphic above ?
Click here .
Americans retain concerns about this today ; 59 % of those surveyed reported that it is hard to tell the difference between what is factual and what is misleading information .
Despite nearly four years ' worth of attention to disinformation , 55 % of Americans say it will be harder to identify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Eighty-two percent of those surveyed said they believe they will read misleading information on social media and a similar proportion believe foreign countries will spread false information about candidates this year .
The public does not trust big social network and tech companies to prevent their platforms from being misused to present election interference , the poll revealed .
Seventy-five percent of those surveyed are not confident about the tech companies , a 9-point increase from a similar 2018 NPR/Marist poll .
Despite casting blame on tech companies for spreading disinformation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be most responsible for reducing its flow : 39 % pointed to the media , 18 % to tech companies , 15 % to the government and 12 % to the public itself .
Not surprisingly given Trump 's oft-repeated claim that the media peddles in `` fake news , '' 54 % of Republicans say it 's the media 's responsibility to stop the spread of disinformation .
Americans who responded to the poll were divided about what they considered the biggest threat to the election — 35 % said disinformation is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voter fraud ; 16 % said voter suppression ; 15 % blamed foreign interference .
In yet another sign that voters live in very different media bubbles , voter suppression was cited as the greatest threat for Democrats .
Voter fraud topped the list for Republicans .
Independents were most concerned with misleading information .
By an overwhelming margin , Americans said they found voting to be easy , and most have not encountered problems with confusing ballots , problems with their voter ID or registration or broken voting machines .
But more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters say they have experienced long lines .
Moreover , women and nonwhite respondents are considerably more likely than men and white voters to say that their own vote wo n't be counted .
And half of women and slightly more than half of nonwhite respondents said many votes will not be counted , in contrast to men and white Americans , who are more confident that all ballots will be tallied .
Do n't see the graphic above ?
Click here .
`` People are trying to redline the country to stop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Larry Swoffard , an African American poll respondent from California .
Local election officials get relatively high marks from voters , with 68 % expressing confidence that officials will run a fair election in 2020 .
Nearly 6 in 10 respondents say they plan to vote in person on Election Day .
Twenty-three percent say they will vote by mail or absentee ballot .
Another 18 % said they would cast their ballot at an early voting site .
NPR 's Domenico Montanaro and Lexie Schapitl contributed reporting to this story .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ conducted by the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion between Jan. 7 and Jan. 12 .
It has a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points when adults are referenced and 3.8 percentage points when registered voters are referenced .

NPR Poll: Majority Of Americans Believe Trump Encourages Election Interference
Enlarge this image Marcus Marritt for NPR Marcus Marritt for NPR
Weeks before the first votes of the 2020 presidential election, Americans report a high level of concern about how secure that election will be and worry about the perils of disinformation, according to a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll.
Forty-one percent of those surveyed said they believed the U.S. is not very prepared or not prepared at all to keep November's election safe and secure.
Loading...
Don't see the graphic above? Click here.
Reflecting the polarization of the Trump era, two-thirds of Democrats think the country isn't prepared, while 85% of Republicans said they think it is.
"Like so many issues, Americans view election security from opposite poles of the partisan divide," said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, which conducted the poll.
President Trump, who has often disputed the U.S. intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election, gets low marks from many voters on his handling of election security.
Driven by Democrats and independents, 56% of those surveyed think Trump has not done very much or has done nothing at all to make sure there will be no future election interference — although 75% of Republicans think he has done enough.
"I can trust [Trump's] word to know that he is going to try as best as he can ... in order to stop influence from foreign countries in our elections," said first-time voter Joel Martin, a Republican from California.
Martin and other respondents were contacted by NPR for follow-up interviews after they had given their initial responses to questions from Marist pollsters.
Trump faces an impeachment trial this month tied directly to his efforts to get Ukraine to launch an investigation into one of his potential 2020 rivals, former Vice President Joe Biden.
And despite the scrutiny and criticism of his actions with respect to Ukraine, Trump also said in October that China should "start an investigation into the Bidens."
Remarks like those may have been on the mind of the 51% of the Americans surveyed who said Trump had encouraged election interference. Eighty-eight percent of Democrats and 51% of independents backed that assertion.
"I considered the attack on our electoral system to be the single biggest assault on United States sovereignty since Pearl Harbor," said poll participant Dimitri Laddis, an independent voter from New York.
"The fact that the commander in chief has done nothing to reassure us that we are safe from such an attack — and the fact that he seems to be keenly aware that he benefits from outside forces having influence over our elections — is very disheartening," Laddis said.
Although there is no evidence that any votes were changed by a foreign power in 2016 or 2018, almost 4 in 10 Americans surveyed said they believe it is likely another country will tamper with the votes cast in 2020 in order to change the result.
The poll's results also paint a picture of a polarized electorate wary about what it reads and not fully convinced that elections are fair.
In a reflection of how divided the country is, only 62% of Americans said U.S. elections are fair.
Barely half of Democrats agree with that sentiment, perhaps a reflection of lingering unhappiness that Donald Trump won the 2016 election by capturing the Electoral College while losing the popular vote.
And even as Trump has continued to claim without evidence that millions of votes were cast illegally in 2016, 80% of Republicans surveyed reported that they believe elections are fair.
"Many Americans think election cycles are no longer on the up and up," said Miringoff, the Marist director. "These opinions are a troublesome sign about this keystone of our democracy."
Disinformation
Intelligence and elections officials work hard to reassure voters about the integrity of the system, but there is concern about the effect of disinformation in the political discourse. False, misleading and agitating material were a big part of Russia's active measures in 2016.
Loading...
Don't see the graphic above? Click here.
Americans retain concerns about this today; 59% of those surveyed reported that it is hard to tell the difference between what is factual and what is misleading information.
Despite nearly four years' worth of attention to disinformation, 55% of Americans say it will be harder to identify deceptive information than it was in 2016.
Eighty-two percent of those surveyed said they believe they will read misleading information on social media and a similar proportion believe foreign countries will spread false information about candidates this year.
The public does not trust big social network and tech companies to prevent their platforms from being misused to present election interference, the poll revealed.
Seventy-five percent of those surveyed are not confident about the tech companies, a 9-point increase from a similar 2018 NPR/Marist poll.
Despite casting blame on tech companies for spreading disinformation, there was little consensus on who should be most responsible for reducing its flow: 39% pointed to the media, 18% to tech companies, 15% to the government and 12% to the public itself.
Not surprisingly given Trump's oft-repeated claim that the media peddles in "fake news," 54% of Republicans say it's the media's responsibility to stop the spread of disinformation.
Voting rights and election administration
Americans who responded to the poll were divided about what they considered the biggest threat to the election — 35% said disinformation is the biggest threat; 24% blamed voter fraud; 16% said voter suppression; 15% blamed foreign interference.
In yet another sign that voters live in very different media bubbles, voter suppression was cited as the greatest threat for Democrats. Voter fraud topped the list for Republicans. Independents were most concerned with misleading information.
By an overwhelming margin, Americans said they found voting to be easy, and most have not encountered problems with confusing ballots, problems with their voter ID or registration or broken voting machines.
But more than a third of younger and nonwhite voters say they have experienced long lines.
Moreover, women and nonwhite respondents are considerably more likely than men and white voters to say that their own vote won't be counted. And half of women and slightly more than half of nonwhite respondents said many votes will not be counted, in contrast to men and white Americans, who are more confident that all ballots will be tallied.
Loading...
Don't see the graphic above? Click here.
"People are trying to redline the country to stop different ethnic groups from voting," said Larry Swoffard, an African American poll respondent from California.
Local election officials get relatively high marks from voters, with 68% expressing confidence that officials will run a fair election in 2020. Nearly 6 in 10 respondents say they plan to vote in person on Election Day. Twenty-three percent say they will vote by mail or absentee ballot. Another 18% said they would cast their ballot at an early voting site.
NPR's Domenico Montanaro and Lexie Schapitl contributed reporting to this story.
The phone survey of 1,259 adults was conducted by the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion between Jan. 7 and Jan. 12. It has a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points when adults are referenced and 3.8 percentage points when registered voters are referenced.


npr--2020-01-21--Roe v. Wade: Settled Law Or Bad Precedent? States Prep For An Overturn

Roe v. Wade : Settled Law Or Bad Precedent ?
States Prep For An Overturn Jan. 22 marks the 47th anniversary of Roe v. Wade , the landmark case that legalized abortion nationwide .
People on both sides of the furious debate say this could be the year when everything changes .
In March , the Supreme Court will hear its first abortion case since Justice Brett Kavanaugh replaced Anthony Kennedy , who had been the swing vote on abortion cases .
A decision is expected by summer .
The case , June Medical Services v. Gee , challenges a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital .
It 's a reprise of a case decided in 2016 , when a five-vote majority ( including Kennedy 's ) struck down a similar Texas law in Whole Woman 's Health v. Hellerstedt .
On Jan. 2 , more than 200 Republican members of the House and Senate filed a brief in the Gee case urging the justices to use it to overturn Roe once and for all .
`` Forty-six years after Roe was decided , it remains a radically unsettled precedent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 1992 case that reiterated a curtailed right to abortion , Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey , did not help , the members argued .
`` Casey clearly did not settle the abortion issue , and it is time for the Court to take it up again . ''
But many legal scholars say the court is far more likely to rule narrowly in the case than to use it to overturn Roe and/or Casey , because that 's what the Supreme Court tends to do .
Still , even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it might do something that could hasten Roe 's demise : uphold the Louisiana law by ruling that abortion providers can not sue on behalf of their patients , something the state of Louisiana is urging it to do .
That would make it much more difficult to challenge state abortion restrictions because only women seeking abortions would be able to challenge those laws in court .
Many pregnant women seeking abortions do n't want to go to the additional trouble of becoming part of a highly public lawsuit that could take years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal '' than finding some other legal justification to uphold Louisiana 's law , says Mary Ziegler , a law professor at Florida State University who has written several books on abortion and abortion law .
It 's part and parcel of an anti-abortion strategy : Make abortion more difficult to obtain even where it is technically legal .
`` A right is certainly important , '' says Elisabeth Smith of the Center for Reproductive Rights , an abortion-rights legal advocacy group .
`` But if you can not access abortion care , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2004 , the group has periodically looked at what would happen to abortion laws in states if the Supreme Court were to reverse its conclusion that abortion , at least in some cases , is a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution .
In its original report , titled `` What If Roe Fell , '' and again in 2007 and 2017 , the center assessed the likely legal status of abortion in the states , because in the absence of Roe , abortion 's legality would be determined by state lawmakers or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ version of `` What If Roe Fell , '' the group took a slightly different tack .
This latest iteration looked at likely legality , but also at the relative availability of the procedure .
The report concludes that if the Supreme Court eliminates federal protections for abortion , the procedure is likely to be immediately prohibited in 24 states , and remain legal and generally available in 21 .
The five other states and the District of Columbia have not established a right to abortion .
Even with Roe still standing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Mississippi and Missouri , are already abortion `` deserts , '' where the procedure is all but unavailable .
Nonetheless , `` the situation would be much worse if the federal right is limited or overturned , '' she says .
In fact , some states are `` havens '' that have made abortions easier to obtain .
For now , `` abortion is still legal .
Every state has at least one abortion clinic , '' Smith adds .
This is far from the first time it appeared Roe was teetering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after Justice Clarence Thomas replaced Thurgood Marshall , one of the original seven justices in the majority in Roe , the country braced for an overturn .
It did not happen .
In 2005 , when Justice Sandra Day O'Connor , a swing vote on abortion , retired and was replaced by Justice Samuel Alito , the alarms were raised again .
And the overturn of Roe v. Wade did not happen .
Then in 2018 , when Kennedy — O'Connor 's successor as the abortion swing vote — retired and was replaced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more .
The Louisiana case is the first chance for what would appear to be a clear five-vote anti-abortion majority to rule .
Ziegler , the Florida State law professor , warns that overturning Roe would not end the fight .
`` If this goes back to the states , it 's going to continue indefinitely , '' Ziegler says .
`` The endpoint for people who oppose abortion is not just allowing states to decide . ''
In other words , if you think the abortion issue is inflammatory now , just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Health News is a nonprofit , editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation .
KHN is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente .

Roe v. Wade: Settled Law Or Bad Precedent? States Prep For An Overturn
Enlarge this image toggle caption Anna Moneymaker/Bloomberg via Getty Images Anna Moneymaker/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Jan. 22 marks the 47th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark court case that legalized abortion nationwide. People on both sides of the furious debate say this could be the year when everything changes.
In March, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear its first abortion case since Justice Brett Kavanaugh replaced Anthony Kennedy, who had been the swing vote on abortion cases. A decision is expected by summer.
The case, June Medical Services v. Gee, challenges a Louisiana law that requires doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. It's a reprise of a case decided in 2016, when a five-vote majority (including Kennedy's) struck down a similar Texas law in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt.
On Jan. 2, more than 200 Republican members of the House and Senate filed a brief in the Gee case urging the justices to use it to overturn Roe once and for all. "Forty-six years after Roe was decided, it remains a radically unsettled precedent," the brief said. And the 1992 case that reiterated a curtailed right to abortion, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, did not help, the members argued. "Casey clearly did not settle the abortion issue, and it is time for the Court to take it up again."
But many legal scholars say the court is far more likely to rule narrowly in the case than to use it to overturn Roe and/or Casey, because that's what the Supreme Court tends to do.
Still, even if the court does not overturn Roe, it might do something that could hasten Roe's demise: Uphold the Louisiana law by ruling that abortion providers cannot sue on behalf of their patients, something the state of Louisiana is urging it to do. That would make it much more difficult to challenge state abortion restrictions because only women seeking abortions would be able to challenge those laws in court. Many pregnant women seeking abortions don't want to go to the additional trouble of becoming part of a highly public lawsuit that could take years.
Article continues after sponsor message
"That would be a bigger deal" than finding some other legal justification to uphold Louisiana's law, says Mary Ziegler, a law professor at Florida State University who has written several books on abortion and abortion law.
It's part and parcel of an anti-abortion strategy: Make abortion more difficult to obtain even where it is technically legal.
"A right is certainly important," says Elisabeth Smith of the Center for Reproductive Rights, an abortion-rights legal advocacy group. "But if you cannot access abortion care, that right is meaningless."
Since 2004, the group has periodically looked at what would happen to abortion laws in states if the Supreme Court were to reverse its conclusion that abortion, at least in some cases, is a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. In its original report, titled "What If Roe Fell," and again in 2007 and 2017, the center assessed the likely legal status of abortion in the states, because in the absence of Roe, abortion's legality would be determined by state lawmakers or state constitutions.
But in its 2019 version of "What If Roe Fell," the group took a slightly different tack. This latest iteration looked at likely legality, but also at the relative availability of the procedure. The report concludes that if the Supreme Court eliminates federal protections for abortion, the procedure is likely to be immediately prohibited in 24 states and remain legal and generally available in 21. The five other states and the District of Columbia have not established a right to abortion.
Even with Roe still standing, Smith says, some states, such as Mississippi and Missouri, are already abortion "deserts," where the procedure is all but unavailable.
Nonetheless, "the situation would be much worse if the federal right is limited or overturned," she says. In fact, some states are "havens" that have made abortions easier to obtain. For now, "abortion is still legal. Every state has at least one abortion clinic," Smith adds.
This is far from the first time it appeared Roe was teetering on the brink. In 1992, after Justice Clarence Thomas replaced Thurgood Marshall, one of the original seven justices in the majority in Roe, the country braced for an overturn. It did not happen.
In 2005, when Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a swing vote on abortion, retired and was replaced by Justice Samuel Alito, the alarms were raised again. And the overturn of Roe v. Wade did not happen. Then in 2018, when Kennedy — O'Connor's successor as the abortion swing vote — retired and was replaced by Kavanaugh, the bells rang once more.
The Louisiana case is the first chance for what would appear to be a clear five-vote anti-abortion majority to rule.
Ziegler, the Florida State law professor, warns that overturning Roe would not end the fight.
"If this goes back to the states, it's going to continue indefinitely," Ziegler says. "The endpoint for people who oppose abortion is not just allowing states to decide."
In other words, if you think the abortion issue is inflammatory now, just wait and see what happens if Roe is gone.
Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit, editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation. KHN is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.


npr--2020-01-21--Along The Rim of Alaska, The Once-A-Decade U.S. Census Begins In Toksook Bay

Along The Rim of Alaska , The Once-A-Decade U.S. Census Begins In Toksook Bay Near the iced-over Bering Sea , parka-clad workers for the U.S. Census Bureau are gathering in a remote fishing village along the southwestern rim of Alaska to resume a U.S. tradition seen only once a decade — a count of every person living in the country .
After years of largely under-the-radar planning by the federal government and months of turmoil arising from the Trump administration 's failed push to add a citizenship question , the 2020 census is officially beginning Tuesday in Toksook Bay , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2010 head count .
The bureau 's director , Steven Dillingham , is expected to arrive by plane to attend a ceremony at the gymnasium of Nelson Island School , where community members are marking the day with traditional Yup'ik dancing and drumming .
For most households in the country — including those in the Lower 48 , Hawaii and the U.S. territories , as well as Alaska 's major cities — the count is not set to roll out until March .
But since Alaska became a state in 1959 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's most remote residents in January , when the frozen ground makes it easier for the federal government 's door knockers to reach far-flung communities .
To get around the country 's largest state by land area , the bureau 's workers rely on bush planes , snow machines , or snowmobiles , and dog sleds to get to villages to ask people their name , sex , age , race and other demographic information .
Since the 2000 census , the bureau has selected one village to be the site of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state 's central coast and then Noorvik in northern Alaska .
This year , census workers are starting in the state 's southwest corner , in Toksook Bay , home to members of the Nunakauyarmiut Tribe .
It was first thrust into the national spotlight after the Census Bureau announced it had selected the village in 2018 .
`` We 're all excited about it , '' says Alexie Jimmie , 76 , whose family was one of the first to settle in the village in 1964 , when it was just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that people counting for the census will go to every house , every home so that everybody can be counted .
That 's very important . ''
The future of Toksook Bay , along with every other community in the U.S. , will be shaped by the results of the census , which the federal government is expected to start releasing by the end of this year .
The numbers are used to distribute congressional seats and Electoral College votes among the states , as well as an estimated $ 1.5 trillion a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Washington , D.C. , politics , however , have often diverted the public 's attention away from the constitutionally mandated count .
As the census officially launches in Alaska , lawmakers are regrouping Tuesday on Capitol Hill to resume the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump .
Last year , days before printers were scheduled to start producing census mailers , Trump announced he was looking into delaying the count for the first time in U.S. history after the Supreme Court ruled to keep the citizenship question he wanted off census forms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that more than 120 million paper census questionnaires have been printed for the count .
In Toksook Bay and some other rural parts of the country , however , they wo n't be arriving in the mail .
Instead , census workers are collecting people 's responses through in-person visits , beginning with the home of Lizzie Chimiugak Nenguryarr , an elder of Toksook Bay .
Dillingham , the bureau 's director , is himself expected to interview Nenguryarr for the first enumeration of the 2020 census .
`` It 's overwhelming for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is such a big honor , '' Nenguryarr says in Yup'ik through interpretation by one of her daughters , Katie Schwartz Nuiyaaq .
`` This is just one in every day that comes rolling in . ''
Toksook Bay has seen a flurry of activity these past few days .
The day before the count , classes ended early at Nelson Island School to allow mourners to pay their respects to a former resident , George Paul Miisaq , whose body was returned home to be buried in the village cemetery .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a locally renowned member of an Yup'ik dancing group , held an early celebration for what she considered to be at least her 90th birthday , based on a baptismal record .
`` I want everybody to show love and compassion towards all human beings , young and old , '' Nenguryarr said .

Along The Rim of Alaska, The Once-A-Decade U.S. Census Began In Toksook Bay
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
Updated Jan. 22 at 3:41 p.m. ET
Near the iced-over Bering Sea, parka-clad workers for the U.S. Census Bureau are gathering in a remote fishing village along the southwestern rim of Alaska to resume a U.S. tradition seen only once a decade — a count of every person living in the country.
After years of largely under-the-radar planning by the federal government and months of turmoil arising from the Trump administration's failed push to add a citizenship question, the 2020 census officially began Tuesday in Toksook Bay, Alaska — population 590, according to the 2010 head count.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
The start of the count was delayed by about four hours. Weather grounded a flight that was scheduled to bring the bureau's director, Steven Dillingham, into the village on Tuesday morning to help conduct the interview with the first person to be counted for the 2020 census. By the afternoon, residents of Toksook Bay gathered in the gymnasium of Nelson Island School to mark the day with traditional Yup'ik dancing and drumming.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
For most households in the country — including those in the Lower 48, Hawaii and the U.S. territories, as well as Alaska's major cities — the count is not set to roll out until March.
But since Alaska became a state in 1959, the Census Bureau has started tallying Alaska's most remote residents in January, when the frozen ground makes it easier for door knockers to reach far-flung communities. To get around the country's largest state by land area, the bureau's workers rely on bush planes, snow machines, or snowmobiles, and dog sleds to get to villages to ask people their name, sex, age, race and other demographic information.
toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR
Since the 2000 census, the bureau has selected one village to be the site of the first counting, beginning with Unalakleet along the state's central coast and then Noorvik in northern Alaska. This year, census workers are starting in the state's southwest corner, in Toksook Bay, home to members of the Nunakauyarmiut Tribe. It was first thrust into the national spotlight after the Census Bureau announced it had selected the village in 2018.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
"We're all excited about it," says Alexie Jimmie, 76, whose family was one of the first to settle in the village in 1964, when it was just a fishing camp. "I hope that people counting for the census will go to every house, every home so that everybody can be counted. That's very important."
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
The future of Toksook Bay, along with every other community in the U.S., will be shaped by the results of the census, which the federal government is expected to start releasing by the end of this year. The numbers are used to distribute congressional seats and Electoral College votes among the states, as well as an estimated $1.5 trillion a year in federal funding for public services.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
Washington, D.C., politics, however, have often diverted the public's attention away from the constitutionally mandated count. As the census officially launches in Alaska, lawmakers are regrouping on Capitol Hill to resume the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump. Last year, days before printers were scheduled to start producing census mailers, Trump announced he was looking into delaying the count for the first time in U.S. history after the Supreme Court ruled to keep the citizenship question he wanted off census forms.
Last week, the bureau confirmed that more than 120 million paper census questionnaires have been printed for the count.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
In Toksook Bay and some other rural parts of the country, however, they won't be arriving in the mail. Instead, census workers are collecting people's responses through in-person visits, beginning with the home of Lizzie Chimiugak Nenguryarr, an elder of Toksook Bay.
"It's overwhelming for people to come in and say this is such a big honor," Nenguryarr says in Yup'ik through interpretation by one of her daughters, Katie Schwartz Nuiyaaq. "This is just one in every day that comes rolling in."
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
Enlarge this image toggle caption Claire Harbage/NPR Claire Harbage/NPR
Toksook Bay has seen a flurry of activity these past few days. The day before the count, classes ended early at Nelson Island School to allow mourners to pay their respects to a former resident, George Paul Miisaq, whose body was returned home to be buried in the village cemetery.
A day earlier, Nenguryarr, who is a locally renowned member of an Yup'ik dancing group, held an early celebration for what she considered to be at least her 90th birthday, based on a baptismal record.
"I want everybody to show love and compassion towards all human beings, young and old," Nenguryarr says.


npr--2020-01-21--After Volcano Quiets, Philippine Officials At Odds Over Residents' Return

After Volcano Quiets , Philippine Officials At Odds Over Residents ' Return Scientists in the Philippines are defending their assessment of a volcano that has been spewing ash for more than a week after a local official demanded they change their `` opinion '' of the danger it poses and urged people to defy authorities and return to their homes .
The vice mayor of the town of Talisay , located within a nine-mile zone around the Taal volcano that has been subject to evacuation , criticized the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology ( Philvolcs ) , questioning the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interview on Manila 's DZMM news radio on Monday , Charlie Natanauan referred to an earlier eruption of Taal in 1965 that killed an estimated 200 people .
`` Back in 1965 , that was strong ; it had lava , but now it 's just ash , '' he said , according to a translation by Rappler , a Philippine news website .
`` [ It 's ] just blowing off steam after 50 years , '' he said .
`` Philvolcs , meanwhile , predicts the end . ''
Natanauan mocked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who reiterated on Monday in an interview with the same radio station that there were signs of magma `` recharging '' under the volcano that `` could cause a strong explosion . ''
`` Why did he say that ?
Is he God ? ''
Natanauan said .
`` I urge you to come back and clean up , '' he said , addressing the townspeople forced to flee Talisay last week .
`` They can sue me if the volcano erupts ; I 'll be one of the dead anyway , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take care of a population of 70,000 for an extended period ?
I do n't think so ; some are already going hungry . ''
The Taal volcano , located about 40 miles south of the capital , Manila , sprang to life on Jan. 12 , sending plumes of ash and steam thousands of feet into the sky and covering the countryside for miles around in a blanket of thick ash .
After the initial eruption , Philvolcs raised the warning level to 4 out of 5 , saying that a much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hours or days . ''
The warning triggered a massive evacuation from hardest-hit Batangas province , where Talisay is located , and from neighboring Cavite province .
National disaster management officials say at least 38,906 families , or 148,514 people , are being housed in evacuation centers .
On Tuesday , the Volcanology Institute held a news conference to discuss the situation and to address the concerns of local officials , such as Talisay 's vice mayor .
Maria Antonia Bornas , chief of the Philvolcs Volcano Monitoring and Eruption Prediction Division , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` is under so much stress . ''
`` We would like to respect the vice mayor 's feelings , but at the same time , we are firm in our science that we are doing our best , '' Bornas told reporters .
After evacuations went into full swing late last week , Bornas announced that the volcano had experienced a calming and that a hazardous eruption might not happen `` for a considerable period of time . ''
That created a dilemma for the people living near the volcano , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and livestock , and the authorities who ordered them away .
Some residents have already defied government orders and returned home .
`` We understand their plight , '' Bornas said at Tuesday 's news conference .
`` We are working doubly hard so we can give them the best information . ''
`` We will be the first one to say if it 's safe to go back because we have [ the evacuees ] in mind all the time , '' she added .
Meanwhile , Interior Secretary Eduardo Ano told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they need to permanently relocate some 6,000 families living in four villages along the slopes of the 1,020-foot Taal volcano .
The area , which is home to farmers , fish pen operators and tourist guides , has long been designated a danger zone by the government due to the proximity of the volcano .
Officially , no one is allowed to live there , but that injunction has received lax enforcement over the years .
`` We have to enforce these regulations once and for all because their lives are at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to The Associated Press .
Taal is among the most active volcanoes in the Philippines , which sits on the `` Ring of Fire , '' an area of elevated volcanic and seismic activity that circles the Pacific Ocean .
Taal last erupted in 1977 .
In a 1911 eruption , it killed 1,335 people .

After Volcano Quiets, Philippine Officials At Odds Over Residents' Return
toggle caption Julie McCarthy/NPR
Updated at 10:30 a.m. ET
Scientists in the Philippines are defending their assessment of a volcano that has been spewing ash for more than a week after a local official demanded that they change their "opinion" of the danger it poses and urged people to defy authorities and return to their homes.
The vice mayor of the town of Talisay, located within a 9-mile zone around the Taal Volcano that has been subject to evacuation, criticized the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (Philvolcs), questioning the science of predicting volcanoes.
In an interview on Manila's DZMM news radio on Monday, Charlie Natanauan referred to an earlier eruption of Taal in 1965 that killed an estimated 200 people.
"Back in 1965, that was strong; it had lava, but now it's just ash," he said, according to a translation by Rappler, a Philippine news website.
"[It's] just blowing off steam after 50 years," he said. "Philvolcs, meanwhile, predicts the end."
Enlarge this image toggle caption Gregorio B. Dantes Jr./Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images Gregorio B. Dantes Jr./Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
An aerial view of the volcano during a flyover Tuesday aboard a Philippine Air Force helicopter showed Taal in a relatively calm state. White wisps of plumes replaced the towering columns of steam and gas that belched out of the volcano when it erupted less than two weeks ago.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Julie McCarthy/NPR Julie McCarthy/NPR
The ashfall that has covered dozens of towns and villages has all but ceased. Acre upon acre of slopes wear a billowy beige ash, as if someone threw a cashmere blanket over the island. But bank around a corner and you see deep ridges breaking the smooth surface — fissures that volcanologists say indicate magma intruding through Earth's layers, pushing its way up through the volcano's belly to the surface.
Natanauan mocked the institute's director, Renato Solidum, who reiterated on Monday that there were signs of magma "recharging" under the volcano that "could cause a strong explosion."
"Why did he say that? Is he God?" Natanauan told DZMM.
"I urge you to come back and clean up," he said, addressing the townspeople forced to flee Talisay last week. "They can sue me if the volcano erupts; I'll be one of the dead anyway. Can they take care of a population of 70,000 for an extended period? I don't think so. Some are already going hungry."
Enlarge this image toggle caption Aaron Favila/AP Aaron Favila/AP
But the officer in charge of the regional relief efforts, Elias Fernandez, urged the public on Tuesday to "ignore" Natanauan. Taking a hard line on any mayor trying to skirt the stay-away order, Fernandez told journalists at Basilio Fernando Air Base in Bantagas province, the worst-hit by the volcano, that "if the local chief executives concerned refuse to heed the advice [not to return home] we will issue them show cause orders if necessary."
"After all," Fernandez said, "it's the law. They are accountable for their actions."
Authorities have imposed a strict lock-out of the towns and municipalities within the danger zone of the volcano.
The Taal Volcano, located about an hour's drive south of the capital, Manila, sprang to life on Jan. 12, sending plumes of ash and steam thousands of feet into the sky and covering the countryside for miles around in a blanket of thick ash.
After the initial eruption, the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology raised the warning level to 4 out of 5, saying that a much more dangerous eruption could occur "within hours or days."
The warning triggered a massive evacuation from Batangas province, where Talisay is located, and from neighboring Cavite province.
Disaster management officials report that 44,376 families, or 171,140 people, have sought shelter in nearly 600 evacuation centers.
And 23,188 families, or 94,403 people, are housed outside such centers, usually with relatives. But many turn up at evacuation centers anyway in search of food.
Some 15,000 such evacuees showed up last week at the sprawling National Shrine of St. Padre Pio in the city of Santo Tomas, just beyond the 9-mile danger zone around the volcano. Father Froilan Carreon helps run the center, which is exceptionally well-equipped by Taal disaster standards. He told NPR on Tuesday that, for now, they can only concentrate on the 500 people who have settled at their center and must turn away the "walk-ins." He worries they will be forced to "wander, looking for food" and that "the government should improve that."
With no recourse, they may well yearn to return home and then act on it.
On Tuesday, the Volcanology Institute held a news conference to discuss the situation and to address the concerns of local officials, such as Talisay's vice mayor.
Maria Antonia Bornas, chief of the Philvolcs Volcano Monitoring and Eruption Prediction Division, said she "understood" that Natanauan "is under so much stress."
"We would like to respect the vice mayor's feelings, but at the same time, we are firm in our science that we are doing our best," Bornas told reporters.
After evacuations went into full swing late last week, Bornas announced that the volcano had experienced a calming and that a hazardous eruption might not happen "for a considerable period of time."
That created a dilemma for the people living near the volcano, who have been forced to leave their property and livestock, and the authorities who ordered them away. Some residents have already defied government orders and returned home.
"We understand their plight," Bornas said at Tuesday's news conference. "We are working doubly hard so we can give them the best information."
"We will be the first one to say if it's safe to go back because we have [the evacuees] in mind all the time," she added.
Meanwhile, Interior Secretary Eduardo Ano told officials in Batangas province over the weekend that they need to permanently relocate some 6,000 families living in four villages along the slopes of the 1,020-foot Taal Volcano, now declared a "no man's land."
The area, which is home to farmers, fish pen operators and tourist guides, has long been designated a danger zone by the government because of the proximity of the volcano. Officially, no one is allowed to live there, but that injunction has received lax enforcement over the years.
"We have to enforce these regulations once and for all because their lives are at stake," Ano said Sunday, according to The Associated Press.
Taal is among the most active volcanoes in the Philippines, which sits on the "Ring of Fire," an area of elevated volcanic and seismic activity that circles the Pacific Ocean. Taal last erupted in 1977. In a 1911 eruption, it killed 1,335 people.


npr--2020-01-20--How The Senate Impeachment Trial Will Work

How The Senate Impeachment Trial Will Work President Trump 's fate is now in the hands of the Senate .
The House of Representatives has impeached the president , and it is up to senators to determine whether he will be removed from office .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , released a resolution outlining the rules of the Senate trial on Monday .
The Senate is voting on the proposal Tuesday ; it is expected to pass , given the Republican 's majority .
It has been more than a month since the House voted to impeach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power and obstructing Congress .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif. , had been holding off on transmitting the articles to the Senate , essentially delaying the trial , because she wanted details on how the trial would work .
She ultimately relented without any further information from McConnell , naming House impeachment managers to serve as the prosecution team on Jan. 15 .
The next day , Chief Justice John Roberts was sworn in to preside over the trial .
He then administered the oath to senators , who swore to render @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Here is more about the various roles and how the trial will play out .
Timing : Senate will vote on organizing resolution on Jan. 21 The details of a Senate impeachment trial are generally up for negotiation , but that negotiation essentially ended when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , announced he had the votes to move ahead with a resolution outlining the process without Democrats .
That is expected on Tuesday .
McConnell 's plan has two main phases : first , opening arguments and questioning .
The second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call witnesses and introduce more evidence .
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , D-N.Y. , had been pushing for a deal up front that would include testimony from witnesses , including Trump administration officials .
It takes only 51 votes to approve the rules , though , so McConnell can rely on his majority to begin the trial without such a deal .
Schumer has been unable to get four Senate Republicans to break with McConnell on Democrats ' demands for witnesses .
Once the trial begins , there are clear rules for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chief Justice John Roberts presides .
Senators do not do the talking ; they can only submit written questions .
Impeachment managers from the House will represent the Democrats ' argument .
The president 's defense includes White House counsel , outside attorneys and a number of Republican members of the House .
It is the first time in the inquiry that the White House is making its case on the record .
The White House declined to participate in the Democratic-led House proceedings , which Trump considered a `` sham . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Each side gets up to 24 hours over two days to make their case .
Then , senators will have 16 hours to ask questions in the chamber , followed by two hours of arguments each by the House impeachment managers and the president 's lawyers .
Then comes the debate on whether to subpoena witnesses or introduce new documents .
This is where moderate Republicans could throw wrenches into the leadership 's plans , if enough of them decide they want to hear additional testimony .
Once again , these procedural votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tie is considered a failure to pass because Vice President Pence can not cast the deciding vote as he would ( and has ) in other cases .
The chief justice is unlikely to want to cast a deciding vote as he presides over the trial , seeking to maintain impartiality .
The rules also note that any witness must be deposed before testifying .
After the trial , the Senate votes on whether to convict or acquit the president on each article of impeachment .
Convicting Trump and therefore removing him from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean 20 Republicans would have to join Democrats in the effort — a highly unlikely prospect .
Acquitting Trump of the charges or dismissing the charges , however , takes only 51 votes .
Ca n't see the graphics in this story ?
Click here .
Photos : Win McNamee/Getty Images ( Mitch McConnell ) ; Paul Morigi/Getty Images ( Susan Collins ) ; Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images ( Lisa Murkowski and John Roberts ) ; Mark Wilson/Getty Images ( Cory Gardner , Joe Manchin , Martha McSally and Chuck Schumer ) ; Alex @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Romney ) NPR 's Susan Davis , Claudia Grisales and Deirdre Walsh contributed to this report .

How The Senate Impeachment Trial Works
The Senate is scheduled to vote on President Trump's fate on Wednesday at 4 p.m. ET after about two weeks of his impeachment trial.
The House of Representatives impeached the president in December, charging him with abusing his power and obstructing Congress for efforts to get Ukraine to investigate Trump's political rivals.
Loading...
The Senate trial has included opening and closing arguments from the Democratic House impeachment managers and Trump's defense team, as well as a 16-hour period of questioning by senators.
Outside of the official trial, senators have time Monday through Wednesday to speak on the floor about impeachment.
The trial itself had a raucous start. Senators passed a resolution on the ground rules for the trial on Jan. 21 after a marathon 13 hours of debate that included multiple failed attempts by Democrats to get a commitment on witnesses and documents.
The issue of whether to allow witnesses has been a central controversy in the proceedings, with senators ultimately voting not to call any at all.
toggle caption Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images
Here is more about how the trial has played out.
Setting The Ground Rules
Timing: Senate passed organizing resolution on Jan. 21
The details of a Senate impeachment trial are generally up for negotiation, but that negotiation essentially ended when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., announced he had the votes to move ahead with a resolution outlining the process without Democrats.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., delayed transmitting the articles to the Senate for nearly a month, hoping to get details on how the trial would work. McConnell didn't budge, though.
Loading...
Republicans passed McConnell's resolution on Jan. 21, with some last-minute, hand-written changes, but not before Democrats offered multiple amendments, triggering hours of debate.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., had been pushing for a deal up front that would include testimony from witnesses, including Trump administration officials. The resolution that passed delayed debate on witnesses and new evidence until after days of opening statements and questioning from senators.
The Trial
Timing: Opening arguments began on Jan. 22
During the trial, there are clear rules for each of the key players. U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts presides. Senators do not do the talking; they can only submit written questions. Senators did have a 16-hour period of questioning after both parties gave opening arguments, where senators submitted written questions that Roberts then read allowed to the prosecution and defense teams.
Impeachment managers from the House represent the Democrats' argument. The president's defense includes White House counsel, outside attorneys and a number of Republican members of the House.
Loading...
Opening arguments began Jan. 22. Each side had up to 24 hours over three days to make their case (the original resolution from McConnell only afforded two days to each side).
The Democratic managers went first, then the defense team made its case. It was the first time in the inquiry that the White House has fully participated. The White House declined to participate in the Democratic-led House proceedings, which Trump considered a "sham."
Loading...
After opening arguments, senators had 16 hours to ask questions in the chamber, followed by two hours of arguments each by the House impeachment managers and the president's lawyers.
Then came the debate on whether to subpoena witnesses or introduce new documents.
This is where moderate Republicans became crucial to each side. Four Republicans would have had to join the Democratic caucus to get witnesses, but Democrats only convinced two to join them, Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah.
Swing votes Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska announced before the vote that they opposed witnesses.
The Final Vote
Timing: Feb. 5 at 4 p.m. ET
After the trial, the Senate votes on whether to convict or acquit the president on each article of impeachment. Convicting Trump and therefore removing him from office requires 67 votes. That would mean 20 Republicans would have to join Democrats in the effort — a highly unlikely prospect.
Acquitting Trump of the charges or dismissing the charges, however, takes only 51 votes. This is the most likely outcome in the Republican-controlled Senate.
Loading...
Can't see the graphics in this story? Click here.
Photos: Win McNamee/Getty Images (Mitch McConnell); Paul Morigi/Getty Images (Susan Collins); Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images (Lisa Murkowski and John Roberts); Mark Wilson/Getty Images (Cory Gardner, Joe Manchin, Martha McSally and Chuck Schumer); Alex Wong/Getty Images (Doug Jones and Mitt Romney)
This story originally published on Dec. 31, 2019.
NPR's Susan Davis, Claudia Grisales and Deirdre Walsh contributed to this report.


npr--2020-01-20--Migrant Caravan Crosses River into Mexico In Standoff With Security Forces

Migrant Caravan Crosses River into Mexico In Standoff With Security Forces Hundreds of migrants from Central America on Monday moved off a closed border bridge and waded across the Suchiate River at the Guatemala-Mexico border after Mexican officials informed the group they would not be permitted to move farther into the country .
With the river low from the dry season , migrants were able to cross but were met with the Mexico 's National Guard lining the river 's banks on the other side .
The caravan of migrants are now on Mexican territory and are being prevented from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ armed Mexican National Guard members , some outfitted in riot gear , who are under orders from government officials to block their entry .
At least 4,000 people who hoped to travel northward to the U.S. entered Guatemala from Honduras last week , according to the Guatemalan government .
The migrants threatened to enter by force if authorities refuse to allow that .
But now , in Mexico , security officials apparently are not planning to budge .
Brayan Hernandez , 26 , was carrying his 1-year-old baby , Daisy , when he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more scary [ to cross the river ] when you 're with your child but we do n't have any other option , '' he said .
`` I never expected Mexico to react like this .
It makes me angry .
We did n't attack them , '' he said .
Hernandez added : `` Our goal is to go to the United States .
We are n't turning around here . ''
It is unclear how the standoff between the large group of migrants and Mexican National Guard members will end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are determined to make it into the country somehow .
The latest showdown between Central American migrants and Mexico 's border enforcers comes after the Mexican government told the Trump administration it would clamp down on migration flows toward Mexico 's border with the U.S. Trump has threatened to impose economic sanctions on Mexico if it does n't crack down harder on migrants .
Jessica Corrales Torres , 40 , and her 12-year-old daughter were among those prevented from moving through Mexico .
Having her journey cut short , she said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , very hard .
There are not a lot of jobs .
There 's a lot of crime .
It 's insecure more than anything else , '' Corrales said of her home country of Honduras .
`` It 's horrible . ''
She adds : `` If you could go to the U.S. , who would n't ?
But if not , I 'll settle for anywhere I can find work . ''
But she and the other migrants have been confused by mixed messages from Mexico 's top officials .
Mexican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a press conference recently that there are more than 4,000 jobs available for migrants in the caravan , only to later say that most of the migrants who hand themselves into authorities will actually be deported .
On Saturday , tensions flared between migrants hoping to make a journey to the U.S. and Mexican troops , who used pepper spray and shut a large metal gate at the crossing to thwart the group .
There were fewer confrontations on Monday , though both migrants and Mexican National Guard members were seen tossing rocks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mexican authorities have protected the border more successfully than in 2018 , when a caravan of some 8,000 people , many fleeing violence , persecution and poverty , crossed the border illegally , grabbing the attention of Trump , who has called large caravans of migrants `` an invasion . ''
The president has used the image of migrant caravans as part of the reason to spend billions of dollars to erect a border wall with Mexico .
Trump upended American 's longstanding asylum procedures with the Remain in Mexico program in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wait for the outcome of their court cases in Mexico .
Less than 1 % of the cases lead to successful entry into the U.S. '' The message is clear , '' Mark Morgan , the acting commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection , said at a news conference in Washington last month .
`` They will no longer be allowed to exploit our laws .
And to be allowed into our country based on fraudulent claims , '' Morgan said .
`` Those loopholes have been closed . ''
NPR 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this report .

Migrant Caravan Crosses River into Mexico In Standoff With Security Forces
Enlarge this image toggle caption Santiago Billy/AP Santiago Billy/AP
Hundreds of migrants from Central America on Monday moved off a closed border bridge and waded across the Suchiate River at the Guatemala-Mexico border after Mexican officials informed the group they would not be permitted to move farther into the country.
With the river low from the dry season, migrants were able to cross but were met with the Mexico's National Guard lining the river's banks on the other side.
The caravan of migrants are now on Mexican territory and are being prevented from transiting through the country by scores of armed Mexican National Guard members, some outfitted in riot gear, who are under orders from government officials to block their entry.
At least 4,000 people who hoped to travel northward to the U.S. entered Guatemala from Honduras last week, according to the Guatemalan government. The migrants threatened to enter by force if authorities refuse to allow that. But now, in Mexico, security officials apparently are not planning to budge.
Brayan Hernandez, 26, was carrying his 1-year-old baby, Daisy, when he approached the river.
"It's more scary [to cross the river] when you're with your child but we don't have any other option," he said. "I never expected Mexico to react like this. It makes me angry. We didn't attack them," he said.
Hernandez added: "Our goal is to go to the United States. We aren't turning around here."
Enlarge this image toggle caption James Frederick /NPR James Frederick /NPR
It is unclear how the standoff between the large group of migrants and Mexican National Guard members will end, but many of the migrants say they are determined to make it into the country somehow.
The latest showdown between Central American migrants and Mexico's border enforcers comes after the Mexican government told the Trump administration it would clamp down on migration flows toward Mexico's border with the U.S. Trump has threatened to impose economic sanctions on Mexico if it doesn't crack down harder on migrants.
Jessica Corrales Torres, 40, and her 12-year-old daughter were among those prevented from moving through Mexico. Having her journey cut short, she said, is dispiriting.
"It's hard, very hard. There are not a lot of jobs. There's a lot of crime. It's insecure more than anything else," Corrales said of her home country of Honduras. "It's horrible."
She adds: "If you could go to the U.S., who wouldn't? But if not, I'll settle for anywhere I can find work."
But she and the other migrants have been confused by mixed messages from Mexico's top officials. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said at a press conference recently that there are more than 4,000 jobs available for migrants in the caravan, only to later say that most of the migrants who hand themselves into authorities will actually be deported.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images
On Saturday, tensions flared between migrants hoping to make a journey to the U.S. and Mexican troops, who used pepper spray and shut a large metal gate at the crossing to thwart the group. There were fewer confrontations on Monday, though both migrants and Mexican National Guard members were seen tossing rocks at each other.
So far, Mexican authorities have protected the border more successfully than in 2018, when a caravan of some 8,000 people, many fleeing violence, persecution and poverty, crossed the border illegally, grabbing the attention of Trump, who has called large caravans of migrants "an invasion."
The president has used the image of migrant caravans as part of the reason to spend billions of dollars to erect a border wall with Mexico.
Enlarge this image toggle caption James Frederick/For NPR James Frederick/For NPR
Trump upended American's longstanding asylum procedures with the Remain in Mexico program in which tens of thousands of asylum-seekers are forced wait for the outcome of their court cases in Mexico. Less than 1% of the cases lead to successful entry into the U.S.
"The message is clear," Mark Morgan, the acting commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said at a news conference in Washington last month.
"They will no longer be allowed to exploit our laws. And to be allowed into our country based on fraudulent claims," Morgan said. "Those loopholes have been closed."
NPR's Carrie Kahn and Joel Rose contributed to this report.


npr--2020-01-20--McConnell Lays Out Plan For Senate Impeachment Trial Procedure

On the eve of arguments in President Trump 's historic impeachment trial , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has revealed his long-awaited resolution setting the initial parameters for how the process will play out .
Democrats are already slamming the four-page resolution , which they say will place time limits on arguments , and departs heavily from President Clinton 's impeachment trial of 1999 .
The McConnell resolution does have some similarities to the Clinton-era resolution , however .
`` We have the votes , once the impeachment trial has begun , to pass a resolution essentially the same , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Clinton trial , which sets up , as you may recall , what could best be described , as maybe , a Phase One , '' McConnell told reporters Jan. 7 .
McConnell needs at least 51 of the 53 Senate Republicans to support his rules if he wants them to pass .
Any senator can attempt to change the rules by offering an amendment before the vote to approve the measure .
Those amendments also need 51 votes , meaning all 47 Democrats need to recruit four Republicans if they hope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plan .
On the process for amendments Tuesday , Democrats say they expect to offer several amendments .
The rule would allow two hours of debate on each amendment with each side controlling one hour of debate .
Democrats stress that they are not aiming to delay the trial ; the amendments will be targeted at calling for witnesses and potentially changing the rules McConnell has proposed .
The trial follows Trump 's impeachment last month in the House of Representatives on charges of obstruction of Congress and abuse of power .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejection of those charges , and called for an acquittal of the president .
At issue in the impeachment is whether Trump sought political favors from his Ukrainian counterpart in exchange for the release of military aid .
The White House denies any such link was made .
The McConnell resolution allows the House impeachment managers and president 's lawyers to present their opening arguments beginning Wednesday at 1 p.m. , and gives them 24 hours each over two days to make their case .
( Late Monday , the White House announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president 's defense team : Representatives Doug Collins , Mike Johnson , Jim Jordan , Debbie Lesko , Mark Meadows , John Ratcliffe , Elise Stefanik and Lee Zeldin . )
Following those arguments , senators will have 16 hours to ask questions in the chamber , followed by two hours of arguments each by the House impeachment managers and the president 's lawyers .
This would be followed by deliberation on a question of whether to subpoena witnesses or documents .
It would also allow an option for a motion to dismiss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is adopted , a senior Republican leadership aide said .
It 's unlikely , however , that such a motion would have the Republican votes needed to pass it .
At least one major difference from the Clinton process has caught the eye of Democrats : The resolution cuts short the number of days each side can make arguments in the case .
Rather than allow 24 hours of arguments that could extend over three days as was the case for Clinton , McConnell 's resolution shortens the number of days to two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arguing their case into the middle of the night and into the next morning , pushing the debate to the `` dead of night , '' a Democratic aide working on the trial said .
Democrats also object to the wording of the section pertaining to votes to call new witnesses before the Senate .
The rule includes a new hurdle before votes on witnesses and documents can occur : A majority of senators would have to agree to the concept of allowing witnesses and documents before they could vote on the individual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his resolution , it 's clear Senator McConnell is hell-bent on making it much more difficult to get witnesses and documents and intent on rushing the trial through , '' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , D-N.Y. , said in a statement .
`` On something as important as impeachment , Senator McConnell 's resolution is nothing short of a national disgrace . ''
The decision to limit the testimony to two days per side was based on the amount of time used during the Clinton trial , according to the senior Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neither side used the entire 24 hours provided for arguments .
That allowed them to wrap up the opening phase of the trial faster than expected .
The shift could potentially frustrate some Republicans who were operating under the expectation that McConnell planned to follow the letter of the 1999 Clinton rules .
The alterations may mean senators would be required to sit for testimony for significantly longer than expected and could invite criticism that McConnell is attempting to rush the process .
Democrats were irked by others parts of the resolution , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could also prevent the Senate and the American people from learning the full scope of claims against the president .
For example , it does n't admit the House record into evidence at the trial , he said .
McConnell 's resolution only allows that senators may offer the evidence , meaning all of the findings from the House process could be subject to majority vote , according to senior Democratic aides .
Schumer said he 'll be offering amendments as a result .
`` Any senator that votes for the McConnell resolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence from the American people , '' he said .
In order for Trump to be removed from office , 20 Republicans must join all 47 Democrats ; there is little to no indication that will happen .

After Pressure, McConnell Makes Last-Minute Changes To Impeachment Trial Procedure
Enlarge this image toggle caption Julio Cortez/AP Julio Cortez/AP
Updated Jan. 21 at 2:26 p.m. ET
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made last-minute, handwritten changes Tuesday to the parameters for how President Trump's impeachment trial process will play out. Departing from a draft resolution he released Monday night, the resolution now allows impeachment managers and the president's defense to have 24 hours to make arguments over three session days. The draft had stipulated 24 hours over two days. McConnell also altered the rules for admitting the House evidence into the record.
The Senate is debating the resolution Tuesday. The majority leader made the changes after meeting with his colleagues.
Read the resolution here.
Democrats had slammed McConnell's draft resolution, which they say will place time limits on arguments and departs heavily from President Clinton's impeachment trial of 1999. The McConnell resolution does have some similarities to the Clinton-era resolution, however.
A spokesperson for Republican Sen. Susan Collins said she and others had "raised concerns about the 24 hours of opening statements in two days and the admission of the House transcript in the record. Her position has been that the trial should follow the Clinton model as much as possible. She thinks these changes are a significant improvement."
McConnell needs at least 51 of the 53 Senate Republicans to support his rules if he wants them to pass. Any senator can attempt to change the rules by offering an amendment before the vote to approve the measure. Those amendments also need 51 votes, meaning all 47 Democrats need to recruit four Republicans if they hope to change any element of McConnell's plan.
"We have the votes, once the impeachment trial has begun, to pass a resolution essentially the same, very similar to the 100-to-nothing vote in the Clinton trial, which sets up, as you may recall, what could best be described as maybe a Phase 1," McConnell told reporters Jan. 7.
On the process for amendments Tuesday, Democrats say they expect to offer several amendments. The rule would allow two hours of debate on each amendment with each side controlling one hour of debate. Democrats stress that they are not aiming to delay the trial; the amendments will be targeted at calling for witnesses and potentially changing the rules McConnell has proposed.
The trial follows Trump's impeachment last month in the House of Representatives on charges of obstruction of Congress and abuse of power. The White House has laid out a forceful rejection of those charges and called for an acquittal of the president. At issue in the impeachment is whether Trump sought political favors from his Ukrainian counterpart in exchange for the release of military aid. The White House denies any such link was made.
The new McConnell resolution allows the House impeachment managers and president's lawyers to present their opening arguments beginning Wednesday at 1 p.m. and gives them 24 hours each over three days to make their case. Though the draft resolution only allowed for two days, the change brings the Trump impeachment trial more in line with the rules of the Clinton impeachment. Late Monday, the White House announced that eight House Republicans would join the president's defense team: Reps. Doug Collins, Mike Johnson, Jim Jordan, Debbie Lesko, Mark Meadows, John Ratcliffe, Elise Stefanik and Lee Zeldin.
Following those arguments, senators will have 16 hours to ask questions in the chamber, followed by two hours of arguments each by the House impeachment managers and the president's lawyers. This would be followed by deliberation on a question of whether to subpoena witnesses or documents.
It would also allow an option for a motion to dismiss the case outright immediately after the resolution is adopted, a senior Republican leadership aide said. It's unlikely, however, that such a motion would have the Republican votes needed to pass it.
After the draft was released Monday, Democrats had argued that would leave them arguing their case into the middle of the night and into the next morning, pushing the debate to the "dead of night," a Democratic aide working on the trial said.
Democrats also objected to the wording of the section pertaining to votes to call new witnesses before the Senate. The rule includes a new hurdle before votes on witnesses and documents can occur: A majority of senators would have to agree to the concept of allowing witnesses and documents before they could vote on the individual pieces of evidence.
Loading...
Democrats were irked by other parts of the resolution, too.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., argues that the resolution could also prevent the Senate and the American people from learning the full scope of claims against the president. For example, it doesn't admit the House record into evidence at the trial, he said. McConnell also changed that in the final version — House evidence will now be allowed unless there is an objection.
McConnell's draft resolution had only allowed that senators may offer the evidence, meaning all of the findings from the House process could be subject to majority vote, according to senior Democratic aides.
In order for Trump to be removed from office, 20 Republicans must join all 47 Democrats; there is little to no indication that will happen.


npr--2020-01-21--Glenn Greenwald Accused By Brazilian Prosecutors In Hacking Probe

Federal prosecutors in Brazil are accusing U.S. journalist Glenn Greenwald of criminal association over his role in spreading hacked messages from Brazilian officials ' phones that suggest collusion between a judge and prosecutors in the conviction and jailing of a former president .
Greenwald published the allegations in the online publication The Intercept , which he co-founded , and The Intercept Brasil .
He decried the accusation released Tuesday as an `` obvious attempt to attack a free press in retaliation for the revelations we reported . ''
`` We 're going to defend a free press like we always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be intimidated by the Bolsonaro government , '' Greenwald stated , referring to Brazil 's far-right President Jair Bolsonaro .
As NPR 's Philip Reeves reports from Rio de Janeiro , a judge will decide whether the case against Greenwald can move forward .
Prosecutors from the Federal Public Ministry accused Greenwald and six others in a criminal complaint .
They say in a statement that Greenwald provided a hacker with advice about deleting messages that they downloaded and sent to him in order to make it more difficult for authorities to link @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' statement says that it is legal for a journalist to publish information obtained illegally – but adds that Greenwald crossed a line by allegedly providing advice to a hacker on covering their tracks , which could hinder investigations .
Greenwald says the accusation against him , criminal association , is `` frivolous . ''
The prosecutors say they are petitioning a judge to remove an injunction that blocks them from moving forward with investigating Greenwald , who lives in Brazil .
According to The Associated Press , Brazil 's Supreme Court said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use `` coercive measures '' against Greenwald because of constitutional protections of the press .
`` Because of that , a judge would have to authorize any attempt by prosecutors to formally investigate Greenwald or bring charges , '' the wire service stated .
In December , Brazil 's federal police reached a different conclusion than the federal prosecutor about Greenwald 's role in the hacking .
As The Guardian notes , the police said `` it is not possible to identify moral or material participation by the journalist . ''
The accusation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freedom advocates .
`` The United States must immediately condemn this outrageous assault on the freedom of the press , and recognize that its attacks on press freedoms at home have consequences for American journalists doing their jobs abroad , '' Ben Winzer , the director of the American Civil Liberties Union 's Speech , Privacy , and Technology Project , said in a statement .
The Intercept published the series of reports last year looking into Operation Car Wash , the anti-corruption probe that led to the imprisonment of former President Luiz @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seem to show a top judge collaborating with prosecutors in a case in which leftist former President Lula da Silva wound up being jailed , and unable to run in the election eventually won by Jair Bolsonaro , '' Reeves reports .
The top judge implicated , Sergio Moro , is now Brazil 's justice minister .
`` Lula 's exclusion from the election , based on Moro 's finding of guilt , was a key episode that paved the way for Bolsonaro 's election victory , '' The Intercept stated in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police and surveillance powers in Brazil — courtesy of a president who was elected only after Moro , while he was a judge , rendered Bolsonaro 's key adversary ineligible to run against him . ''
Greenwald and his colleagues reported the stories based on `` private chats , audio recordings , videos , photos , court proceedings , and other documentation '' provided by an anonymous source .
Da Silva said in a tweet Tuesday that Greenwald `` was a victim of another blatant abuse of authority against freedom of press and @ @ @

Glenn Greenwald Accused By Brazilian Prosecutors In Hacking Probe
Enlarge this image toggle caption Ricardo Borges/AP Ricardo Borges/AP
Federal prosecutors in Brazil are accusing U.S. journalist Glenn Greenwald of criminal association over his role in spreading hacked messages from Brazilian officials' phones that suggest collusion between a judge and prosecutors in the conviction and jailing of a former president.
Greenwald published the allegations in the online publication The Intercept, which he co-founded, and The Intercept Brasil. He decried the accusation released Tuesday as an "obvious attempt to attack a free press in retaliation for the revelations we reported."
"We're going to defend a free press like we always have, we're not going to be intimidated by the Bolsonaro government," Greenwald stated, referring to Brazil's far-right President Jair Bolsonaro.
As NPR's Philip Reeves reports from Rio de Janeiro, a judge will decide whether the case against Greenwald can move forward.
Prosecutors from the Federal Public Ministry accused Greenwald and six others in a criminal complaint. They say in a statement that Greenwald provided a hacker with advice about deleting messages that they downloaded and sent to him in order to make it more difficult for authorities to link them to the journalist.
The prosecutors' statement says that it is legal for a journalist to publish information obtained illegally – but adds that Greenwald crossed a line by allegedly providing advice to a hacker on covering their tracks, which could hinder investigations.
Greenwald says the accusation against him, criminal association, is "frivolous."
The prosecutors say they are petitioning a judge to remove an injunction that blocks them from moving forward with investigating Greenwald, who lives in Brazil. According to The Associated Press, Brazil's Supreme Court said last year that the state may not use "coercive measures" against Greenwald because of constitutional protections of the press. "Because of that, a judge would have to authorize any attempt by prosecutors to formally investigate Greenwald or bring charges," the wire service stated.
In December, Brazil's federal police reached a different conclusion than the federal prosecutor about Greenwald's role in the hacking. As The Guardian notes, the police said "it is not possible to identify moral or material participation by the journalist."
The accusation against Greenwald garnered swift criticism from press freedom advocates.
"The United States must immediately condemn this outrageous assault on the freedom of the press, and recognize that its attacks on press freedoms at home have consequences for American journalists doing their jobs abroad," Ben Winzer, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said in a statement.
The Intercept published the series of reports last year looking into Operation Car Wash, the anti-corruption probe that led to the imprisonment of former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
"These seem to show a top judge collaborating with prosecutors in a case in which leftist former President Lula da Silva wound up being jailed, and unable to run in the election eventually won by Jair Bolsonaro," Reeves reports. The top judge implicated, Sergio Moro, is now Brazil's justice minister.
"Lula's exclusion from the election, based on Moro's finding of guilt, was a key episode that paved the way for Bolsonaro's election victory," The Intercept stated in its reporting. "Moro now wields immense police and surveillance powers in Brazil — courtesy of a president who was elected only after Moro, while he was a judge, rendered Bolsonaro's key adversary ineligible to run against him."
Greenwald and his colleagues reported the stories based on "private chats, audio recordings, videos, photos, court proceedings, and other documentation" provided by an anonymous source.
Da Silva said in a tweet Tuesday that Greenwald "was a victim of another blatant abuse of authority against freedom of press and democracy."
NPR's David Welna contributed to this report.


npr--2020-01-21--Ousted Female Chief Files Discrimination Complaint Against The Grammys

In the latest round of chaotic volleys around the Grammy Awards , the Recording Academy 's short-lived president and CEO , Deborah Dugan — the organization 's first female chief executive — announced Tuesday afternoon that she has filed a discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ) against the Academy , the organization that gives out the Grammys .
The EEOC complaint includes several bombshell accusations , including that her predecessor , Neil Portnow , raped a female artist in New York ; that she was pressed to hire Portnow as a consultant for $ 750,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John Poppo ; and that the Academy 's general counsel and former board chair , Joel Katz , sexually harassed Dugan in May 2019 , as she was being courted for the top Academy job .
Last Thursday , Dugan was put on administrative leave just ten days before this year 's Grammy Awards telecast , which will take place on Sunday .
She was announced as the organization 's leader last May , and took up her post in August .
As recently as last month , Dugan was giving interviews in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' of the Grammys .
The pledged changes included meeting concrete , measurable goals meant to add greater gender and racial diversity to the awards process , and to ensure voting and membership transparency across the awards , and the Academy .
In a statement issued Tuesday afternoon , her attorneys Douglas H. Wigdor and Michael J. Willemin said : `` The complaint that we filed today against the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences ( NARAS , the Academy 's former full name ) highlights tactics reminiscent of those deployed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also represents a Jane Doe , one of the women who is slated to testify in the Weinstein trial , which is getting underway in New York .
The lawyers ' statement continues : `` The attempt by the Recording Academy to impugn the character of Deborah Dugan is a transparent effort to shift the focus away from its own unlawful activity .
This blatant form of retaliation in corporate America is all too common , even post # MeToo , and we will utilize all lawful means necessary to ensure that those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
In the EEOC complaint , Dugan describes the Academy as a `` 'boys ' club network where men work together to the disadvantage of women and disenfranchised groups in order to line their own pockets and maintain a firm grip on the Academy 's dealings . ''
In a statement sent Tuesday evening to NPR , the Academy said : `` It is curious that Ms. Dugan never raised these grave allegations until a week after legal claims were made against her personally by a female employee who alleged Ms. Dugan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work environment and engaged in 'abusive and bullying conduct ' .
When Ms. Dugan did raise her 'concerns ' to HR , she specifically instructed HR 'not to take any action ' in response . ''
`` Nonetheless , '' the Academy statement continues , `` we immediately launched independent investigations to review both Ms. Dugan 's potential misconduct and her subsequent allegations .
Both of these investigations remain ongoing .
Ms. Dugan was placed on administrative leave only after offering to step down and demanding $ 22 million from the Academy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loyalty will always be to the 21,000 members of the Recording Industry .
We regret that Music 's Biggest Night is being stolen from them by Ms. Dugan 's actions and we are working to resolve the matter as quickly as possible . ''
Since Dugan was placed on leave , the Recording Academy and its erstwhile leader have exchanged dueling narratives in the trade press about the reasons behind the move .
A statement from the Academy last Thursday stated , `` In light of concerns raised to the Recording Academy board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of misconduct by a senior female member of the Recording Academy team , the Board has placed Recording Academy President and CEO Deborah Dugan on administrative leave , effective immediately . ''
But Dugan 's camp argued to the New York Times the same day that the real reason for her dismissal was linked to a memo that she had sent the Academy 's HR department three weeks prior , in which she voiced the concerns her lawyers referenced , including `` exorbitant and unnecessary '' legal bills — including some $ 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between the years 2013 and 2017 .
One of Dugan 's attorneys , Bryan Freedman , tweeted on Friday : `` What has been reported is not nearly the story that needs to be told .
When our ability to speak is not restrained by a 28-page contract and legal threats , we will expose what happens when you 'step up ' at the Recording Academy , a public nonprofit . ''
Freedman was referring to an infamous 2018 comment made by Dugan 's predecessor , Neil Portnow , in which the former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the music industry would need to `` step up '' in order to be recognized .
( In 2002 , Portnow replaced Michael Greene , who was forced to resign after allegations that he had sexually harassed and abused another Academy executive became public . )
The New York Times identified the woman accusing Dugan as Portnow 's former assistant , who claimed that Dugan has a `` bullying '' style of managing employees .
On Monday , the Academy alleged via Billboard that Dugan had offered to resign and drop her own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a $ 22 million payout .
Similar accusations were repeated by the Academy board president , Harvey Mason Jr. , in a memo sent to Grammy members , in which Mason also claims that Dugan made her allegations only after the Academy began its investigation of her .
Most recently before her Grammys appointment , Dugan led Red , the nonprofit group dedicated to fighting HIV/AIDS across Africa that was co-founded by U2 's Bono and Bobby Shriver .
Before joining Red , Dugan was a lawyer , an executive at the EMI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Disney Publishing Worldwide .

Ousted Female Chief Files Discrimination Complaint Against The Grammys
Enlarge this image toggle caption Bryan Bedder/Getty Images Bryan Bedder/Getty Images
Updated Wednesday, Jan. 22 at 12:50 p.m. ET
In the latest round of chaotic volleys around the Grammy Awards, the Recording Academy's short-lived president and CEO, Deborah Dugan — the organization's first female chief executive — announced Tuesday afternoon that she has filed a discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against the Academy, the organization that gives out the Grammys.
The EEOC complaint includes several bombshell accusations, including that her predecessor, Neil Portnow, raped a female artist in New York; that she was pressed to hire Portnow as a consultant for $750,000 by the Academy's then-board chair, John Poppo; and that the Academy's general counsel and former board chair, Joel Katz, sexually harassed Dugan in May 2019, as she was being courted for the top Academy job.
Both Neil Portnow and Joel Katz have denied Dugan's allegations. In a statement published by Billboard on Wednesday, Portnow said in part: "This document is filled with inaccurate, false and outrageous and terribly hurtful claims against me. ... The allegations of rape are ludicrous, and untrue. The suggestion that there was is disseminating a lie. The baseless complaint about my conduct referenced in the EEOC filing was immediately brought to the attention of the Board of Director's Executive Committee. An in-depth independent investigation by experienced and highly regarded lawyers was conducted and I was completely exonerated. There was no basis for the allegations and once again I deny them unequivocally."
In a statement sent to NPR, Katz's lawyer, Howard Weitzman, said in part: "Ms. Dugan's allegations of harassment and her description of a dinner at the steakhouse in the Ritz Carlton, Laguna Niguel are false, and Mr. Katz categorically and emphatically denies her version of that evening. .... Mr. Katz believed they had a productive and professional meeting in a restaurant where a number of members of the Board of Trustees of the Academy, and others, were dining. ... Mr. Katz will cooperate in any and all investigations or lawsuits by telling the absolute and whole truth. Hopefully Ms. Dugan will do the same."
Last Thursday, Dugan was put on administrative leave, just 10 days before this year's Grammy Awards telecast, which will take place on Sunday. She was announced as the organization's leader last May, and took up her post in August.
As recently as last month, Dugan was giving interviews in which she promised "a major restructuring" of the Grammys. The pledged changes included meeting concrete, measurable goals meant to add greater gender and racial diversity to the awards process, and to ensure voting and membership transparency across the awards, and the Academy.
In a statement issued Tuesday afternoon, her attorneys Douglas H. Wigdor and Michael J. Willemin said: "The complaint that we filed today against the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences (NARAS, the Academy's former full name) highlights tactics reminiscent of those deployed by individuals defending Harvey Weinstein."
Wigdor also represents a Jane Doe, one of the women who is slated to testify in the Weinstein trial, which is getting underway in New York.
The lawyers' statement continues: "The attempt by the Recording Academy to impugn the character of Deborah Dugan is a transparent effort to shift the focus away from its own unlawful activity. This blatant form of retaliation in corporate America is all too common, even post #MeToo, and we will utilize all lawful means necessary to ensure that those responsible are held accountable for their actions."
In the EEOC complaint, Dugan describes the Academy as a "'boys' club network where men work together to the disadvantage of women and disenfranchised groups in order to line their own pockets and maintain a firm grip on the Academy's dealings."
In a statement sent Tuesday evening to NPR, the Academy said: "It is curious that Ms. Dugan never raised these grave allegations until a week after legal claims were made against her personally by a female employee who alleged Ms. Dugan had created a 'toxic and intolerable' work environment and engaged in 'abusive and bullying conduct'. When Ms. Dugan did raise her 'concerns' to HR, she specifically instructed HR 'not to take any action' in response."
"Nonetheless," the Academy statement continues, "we immediately launched independent investigations to review both Ms. Dugan's potential misconduct and her subsequent allegations. Both of these investigations remain ongoing. Ms. Dugan was placed on administrative leave only after offering to step down and demanding $22 million from the Academy, which is a not-for-profit organization. Our loyalty will always be to the 21,000 members of the Recording Industry. We regret that Music's Biggest Night is being stolen from them by Ms. Dugan's actions and we are working to resolve the matter as quickly as possible."
In response, Dugan's lawyer sent NPR another statement on Tuesday evening that disputed the timeline presented by the Academy, saying in part that she had "repeatedly raised concerns throughout her entire tenure" and that unnamed artists and board members had raised the same issues to the organization. In addition, Dugan's lawyers said that on the morning she was placed on leave, the Academy offered her "millions of dollars" if she would drop her concerns, but only if she left within an hour. Dugan says that when she refused to accept that deal, she was placed on leave.
NPR asked the Recording Academy on Tuesday eveningf for a response to Dugan's version of the chronology. As of Wednesday morning, the organization had not answered.
Since Dugan was placed on leave, the Recording Academy and its erstwhile leader have exchanged dueling narratives in the trade press about the reasons behind the move.
A statement from the Academy last Thursday stated, "In light of concerns raised to the Recording Academy board of trustees, including a formal allegation of misconduct by a senior female member of the Recording Academy team, the Board has placed Recording Academy President and CEO Deborah Dugan on administrative leave, effective immediately."
But Dugan's camp argued to The New York Times the same day that the real reason for her dismissal was linked to a memo that she had sent the Academy's HR department three weeks prior, in which she voiced the concerns her lawyers referenced, including "exorbitant and unnecessary" legal bills — including some $15 million paid to two outside law firms between the years 2013 and 2017.
One of Dugan's attorneys, Bryan Freedman, tweeted on Friday: "What has been reported is not nearly the story that needs to be told. When our ability to speak is not restrained by a 28-page contract and legal threats, we will expose what happens when you 'step up' at the Recording Academy, a public nonprofit."
Freedman was referring to an infamous 2018 comment made by Dugan's predecessor, Neil Portnow, in which the former Grammy chief opined that women working in the music industry would need to "step up" in order to be recognized. (In 2002, Portnow replaced Michael Greene, who was forced to resign after allegations that he had sexually harassed and abused another Academy executive became public.) The New York Times identified the woman accusing Dugan as Portnow's former assistant, who claimed that Dugan has a "bullying" style of managing employees.
On Monday, the Academy alleged via Billboard that Dugan had offered to resign and drop her own accusations against the organization in exchange for a $22 million payout. Similar accusations were repeated by the Academy board president, Harvey Mason Jr., in a memo sent to Grammy members, in which Mason also claims that Dugan made her allegations only after the Academy began its investigation of her.
Most recently before her Grammys appointment, Dugan led Red, the nonprofit group dedicated to fighting HIV/AIDS across Africa that was co-founded by U2's Bono and Bobby Shriver. Before joining Red, Dugan was a lawyer, an executive at the EMI Record Group and a former president of Disney Publishing Worldwide.