csmonitor--2020-09-28--Are Amy Coney Barrett’s religious views fair game?

The U.S. Constitution prohibits religious tests as a qualification for federal office .
However , some argue that the clause does not ban senators from considering the influence a judicial nominee ’ s religious views might have on her work , just as they would also consider other views relevant to their work .
“ Judges don ’ t come to the bench as blank slates , ” says Richard Garnett , a longtime colleague of Judge Barrett and a professor of law at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana .
While Senate Democrats will no doubt scrutinize Judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been careful so far to avoid any appearance of an attack on her religious beliefs this time around .
Are Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett ’ s religious views fair game ?
The former Notre Dame professor encountered a lot of pushback over her conservative Catholic background in 2017 when President Donald Trump nominated her to be a federal judge .
Now the stakes are higher .
If confirmed , Judge Barrett would become the sixth Catholic on the nine-member Supreme Court , and cement a two-thirds conservative majority that could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Obamacare ” to the rights accorded LGBTQ individuals .
President Trump ’ s Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett , a federal judge and former standout Notre Dame law professor , has set the stage for a high-stakes confirmation process .
Nominating anyone five weeks before the election would have been controversial .
But Judge Barrett ’ s conservative Catholic background and membership in the People of Praise , a tightknit charismatic community , has raised particular concern on the left , despite liberal colleagues praising her as a brilliant legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cement a two-thirds conservative majority on a court likely to consider hot-button issues from abortion to “ Obamacare ” to the rights accorded LGBTQ individuals .
While likely to scrutinize her judicial record , Senate Democrats have been careful so far to avoid any appearance of an attack on Judge Barrett ’ s religious beliefs after being criticized for doing so in her 2017 confirmation hearings to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit .
The U.S. Constitution includes an explicit prohibition on religious tests as a qualification for federal office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some argue that the purpose of that clause is to protect against a practice then applied in England to keep Catholics out of government , and does not obviate the importance of considering how a judicial nominee ’ s religious views might shape the way she carries out her duties .
Walking that line in today ’ s fraught political environment is tricky , however , particularly given that religion is increasingly seen as a partisan issue .
“ Judges don ’ t come to the bench as blank slates – we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Richard Garnett , a professor of law and political science at Notre Dame University in Indiana , where he directs the Program on Church , State & Society .
“ I think it ’ s appropriate to ask about beliefs and views generally , so you could include religious beliefs among those , so long as they are not singled out for particular suspicion , ” says Professor Garnett , who has known Judge Barrett since she and his wife were clerks together on the Supreme Court .
However , he adds , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and purpose of those questions is focused on clarifying that the judicial nominee understands the role of a judge is to decide legal questions , not policy or religious questions .
“ What ’ s not appropriate – and this happened to some extent last time around , in my view – is to single out religious nominees , or for that matter , nominees from a particular religion , and to suggest that their particular religion makes them somehow unusually suspect.
” The last time around was in 2017 , when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nomination of then-Professor Barrett as an appeals court judge .
Democratic senators , most notably Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California , raised concerns about how her faith would shape her interpretation of the law .
“ Why is it that so many of us on this side have this very uncomfortable feeling that , you know , dogma and law are two different things and I think whatever a religion is , it has its own dogma , ” said Senator Feinstein .
“ The law is totally different and I think in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ read your speeches , the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you .
And that ’ s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for years in this country.
” Some saw such questions as reminiscent of anti-Catholicism attitudes prevalent in earlier years , as well as a violation of the Constitution .
Article VI states , “ The Senators and Representatives before mentioned , and the Members of the several State Legislatures , and all executive and judicial Officers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the several States , shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation , to support this Constitution ; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
” This is the only explicit reference to religious liberty in the original Constitution , before the First Amendment was added as part of the Bill of Rights several years later in 1791 .
Although the clause received unanimous support at the Constitutional Convention , it became a controversial topic during ratification , with some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to allow Catholics or non-Christians to hold office .
The “ no religious test ” clause has received more attention in recent years , particularly after several religious judicial nominees , including William Pryor , faced resistance in their 2003 hearings .
A 2007 Harvard Law Review article argues that the clause “ does not forbid officials – or the general citizenry – from considering or even inquiring into an individual ’ s religious beliefs when deciding whether to nominate , confirm , or vote for the individual.
” Jud Campbell , an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Richmond School of Law who specializes in First Amendment law and constitutional history , agrees that there is no constitutional limit on questions about a judicial nominee ’ s religiosity .
However , he urges caution not only in questioning religious nominees about how their religiosity would affect their interpretation of the law , but also in questioning LGBTQ nominees about how they would handle cases with LGBTQ litigants , or Black judges dealing with Black litigants .
“ Obviously those sorts of questions have the capacity to be deeply harmful to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to promote as a people and a constitutional culture , ” says Professor Campbell .
“ Those are not the sort of questions that white male Protestants get.
” One reason that white male Protestants don ’ t get those questions very often in Supreme Court confirmation hearings is that only two have been nominated in the past 30 years – David Souter , who served from 1990 to 2009 , and Neil Gorsuch , who was baptized Catholic and went to Jesuit schools but now identifies as Episcopalian .
Mr. Gorsuch sits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and five Catholic justices , including Obama nominee Sonia Sotomayor .
Judge Barrett would make the sixth Catholic on the nine-member court in a country where Catholics make up about 20 % of the population but play an outsize role in the conservative legal movement .
Leonard Leo , co-chairman of The Federalist Society and a member of the Knights of Malta , a Catholic order , has been credited with spearheading a surge in Catholic Supreme Court justices in recent years , according to a profile in The Daily Beast .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost seven judges Catholic at the same time when this country is becoming less Christian , more secular ...
I believe Catholics should behave responsibly and at least do something to reassure [ Americans ] that this is not part of a theocratic or integralist project , ” says Massimo Faggioli , a relatively liberal Catholic theologian at Villanova University in Pennsylvania .
“ I can understand why non-Catholics are not asking that question , because they don ’ t want to be accused of being anti-Catholic.
” Even Professor Faggioli has come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his critics characterized as old tropes about dual loyalties in a Politico column last week .
In the piece , he encouraged the Senate Judiciary Committee to examine Judge Barrett ’ s reported connection with the People of Praise and any impact her commitment to the group may have on her spiritual and intellectual freedom .
People of Praise is ecumenical but largely comprised of Catholics and is part of a broader movement of charismatic groups that have sprung up in the past few decades .
According to the group ’ s website @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instruction and participation in the community , members make a lifelong commitment , or covenant , to their fellow worshippers and to God .
The group has come under particular scrutiny for following the admonition of St. Paul that wives should be subservient to their husbands , as well as for leaders ’ reported influence on personal decisions such as dating and marriage .
Judge Barrett does not appear to have directly addressed her involvement in the group , though in her acceptance speech on Sept. 26 she made a point of noting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – a lawyer in private practice – was the better cook .
With President Trump looking on in the Rose Garden , she paid tribute to Ruth Bader Ginsburg , the liberal icon and women ’ s rights defender whom she would be replacing , calling her “ a woman of enormous talent and consequence , and her life of public service serves as an example to us all.
” Judge Barrett also highlighted the warm friendship that her own mentor and former boss , the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their differing views .
Judge Barrett did not mention her own faith at all in her speech .
But when asked by then-Sen. Orrin Hatch in her 2017 confirmation hearings how she would respond to Democrats ’ concerns about the impact of her faith on her judicial decisions , she replied : “ Senator , I see no conflict between having a sincerely held faith and duties as a judge.
” “ And were I confirmed as a judge , I would decide cases according to the rule of law from beginning to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what of issues on which the Roman Catholic Church ’ s position differs from that of the law ?
Nearly two decades earlier , as a Notre Dame law student in 1998 , then-Amy Coney co-authored a law review article on whether Catholic judges should recuse themselves from presiding over cases involving capital punishment , which is opposed to the church ’ s teachings .
The article , which also mentioned other areas of potential conflict such as abortion , concluded , “ Judges can not – nor should they try to – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s moral teaching whenever the two diverge .
They should , however , conform their own behavior to the Church ’ s standard.
” “ In the rare circumstance that might ever arise – I can ’ t imagine one sitting here now – where I felt that I had some conscientious objection to the law , I would recuse , ” she told Senator Hatch and his colleagues .
“ I would never impose my own personal convictions upon the law.
” The Senate approved her nomination 55-43 , with two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Manchin of West Virginia , both of whom are Catholic – joining the Republican majority .
This time may be harder .

The U.S. Constitution prohibits religious tests as a qualification for federal office. However, some argue that the clause does not ban senators from considering the influence a judicial nominee’s religious views might have on her work, just as they would also consider other views relevant to their work. “Judges don’t come to the bench as blank slates,” says Richard Garnett, a longtime colleague of Judge Barrett and a professor of law at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana.
Some see the Constitution’s “no religious test” clause as preventing such inquiries. But others say asking about how religion shapes a nominee’s outlook isn’t necessarily discriminatory – and is, in fact, vital.
While Senate Democrats will no doubt scrutinize Judge Barrett’s judicial record, they have been careful so far to avoid any appearance of an attack on her religious beliefs this time around.
Are Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s religious views fair game? The former Notre Dame professor encountered a lot of pushback over her conservative Catholic background in 2017 when President Donald Trump nominated her to be a federal judge. Now the stakes are higher. If confirmed, Judge Barrett would become the sixth Catholic on the nine-member Supreme Court, and cement a two-thirds conservative majority that could rule on hot-button issues from abortion to “Obamacare” to the rights accorded LGBTQ individuals.
President Trump’s Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, a federal judge and former standout Notre Dame law professor, has set the stage for a high-stakes confirmation process.
Nominating anyone five weeks before the election would have been controversial. But Judge Barrett’s conservative Catholic background and membership in the People of Praise, a tightknit charismatic community, has raised particular concern on the left, despite liberal colleagues praising her as a brilliant legal thinker. If confirmed, she would cement a two-thirds conservative majority on a court likely to consider hot-button issues from abortion to “Obamacare” to the rights accorded LGBTQ individuals. While likely to scrutinize her judicial record, Senate Democrats have been careful so far to avoid any appearance of an attack on Judge Barrett’s religious beliefs after being criticized for doing so in her 2017 confirmation hearings to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
The U.S. Constitution includes an explicit prohibition on religious tests as a qualification for federal office, including judicial posts. However, some argue that the purpose of that clause is to protect against a practice then applied in England to keep Catholics out of government, and does not obviate the importance of considering how a judicial nominee’s religious views might shape the way she carries out her duties. Walking that line in today’s fraught political environment is tricky, however, particularly given that religion is increasingly seen as a partisan issue.
Why We Wrote This Some see the Constitution’s “no religious test” clause as preventing such inquiries. But others say asking about how religion shapes a nominee’s outlook isn’t necessarily discriminatory – and is, in fact, vital.
“Judges don’t come to the bench as blank slates – we’re all human beings,” says Richard Garnett, a professor of law and political science at Notre Dame University in Indiana, where he directs the Program on Church, State & Society.
“I think it’s appropriate to ask about beliefs and views generally, so you could include religious beliefs among those, so long as they are not singled out for particular suspicion,” says Professor Garnett, who has known Judge Barrett since she and his wife were clerks together on the Supreme Court.
However, he adds, it’s important that the nature and purpose of those questions is focused on clarifying that the judicial nominee understands the role of a judge is to decide legal questions, not policy or religious questions. “What’s not appropriate – and this happened to some extent last time around, in my view – is to single out religious nominees, or for that matter, nominees from a particular religion, and to suggest that their particular religion makes them somehow unusually suspect.”
The last time around was in 2017, when the Senate considered President Donald Trump’s nomination of then-Professor Barrett as an appeals court judge. Democratic senators, most notably Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, raised concerns about how her faith would shape her interpretation of the law.
Tasos Katopodis/Reuters View caption Hide caption Protesters demonstrate outside the Supreme Court the day after President Donald Trump announced U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett as his nominee to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in Washington, Sept. 27, 2020.
“Why is it that so many of us on this side have this very uncomfortable feeling that, you know, dogma and law are two different things and I think whatever a religion is, it has its own dogma,” said Senator Feinstein. “The law is totally different and I think in your case, professor, when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for years in this country.”
Some saw such questions as reminiscent of anti-Catholicism attitudes prevalent in earlier years, as well as a violation of the Constitution. Article VI states, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
This is the only explicit reference to religious liberty in the original Constitution, before the First Amendment was added as part of the Bill of Rights several years later in 1791. Although the clause received unanimous support at the Constitutional Convention, it became a controversial topic during ratification, with some Americans considering it “too risky” to allow Catholics or non-Christians to hold office.
“No religious test” in spotlight
The “no religious test” clause has received more attention in recent years, particularly after several religious judicial nominees, including William Pryor, faced resistance in their 2003 hearings. A 2007 Harvard Law Review article argues that the clause “does not forbid officials – or the general citizenry – from considering or even inquiring into an individual’s religious beliefs when deciding whether to nominate, confirm, or vote for the individual.”
Jud Campbell, an associate professor of law at the University of Richmond School of Law who specializes in First Amendment law and constitutional history, agrees that there is no constitutional limit on questions about a judicial nominee’s religiosity. However, he urges caution not only in questioning religious nominees about how their religiosity would affect their interpretation of the law, but also in questioning LGBTQ nominees about how they would handle cases with LGBTQ litigants, or Black judges dealing with Black litigants.
“Obviously those sorts of questions have the capacity to be deeply harmful to the sort of inclusivity that we want to promote as a people and a constitutional culture,” says Professor Campbell. “Those are not the sort of questions that white male Protestants get.”
One reason that white male Protestants don’t get those questions very often in Supreme Court confirmation hearings is that only two have been nominated in the past 30 years – David Souter, who served from 1990 to 2009, and Neil Gorsuch, who was baptized Catholic and went to Jesuit schools but now identifies as Episcopalian.
A majority Catholic bench
Mr. Gorsuch sits on the court with two Jewish justices and five Catholic justices, including Obama nominee Sonia Sotomayor. Judge Barrett would make the sixth Catholic on the nine-member court in a country where Catholics make up about 20% of the population but play an outsize role in the conservative legal movement. Leonard Leo, co-chairman of The Federalist Society and a member of the Knights of Malta, a Catholic order, has been credited with spearheading a surge in Catholic Supreme Court justices in recent years, according to a profile in The Daily Beast.
“In this country, having six or almost seven judges Catholic at the same time when this country is becoming less Christian, more secular ... I believe Catholics should behave responsibly and at least do something to reassure [Americans] that this is not part of a theocratic or integralist project,” says Massimo Faggioli, a relatively liberal Catholic theologian at Villanova University in Pennsylvania. “I can understand why non-Catholics are not asking that question, because they don’t want to be accused of being anti-Catholic.”
Even Professor Faggioli has come under fire as anti-Catholic for raising what his critics characterized as old tropes about dual loyalties in a Politico column last week. In the piece, he encouraged the Senate Judiciary Committee to examine Judge Barrett’s reported connection with the People of Praise and any impact her commitment to the group may have on her spiritual and intellectual freedom.
People of Praise is ecumenical but largely comprised of Catholics and is part of a broader movement of charismatic groups that have sprung up in the past few decades. According to the group’s website, after three to six years of instruction and participation in the community, members make a lifelong commitment, or covenant, to their fellow worshippers and to God. The group has come under particular scrutiny for following the admonition of St. Paul that wives should be subservient to their husbands, as well as for leaders’ reported influence on personal decisions such as dating and marriage.
Judge Barrett does not appear to have directly addressed her involvement in the group, though in her acceptance speech on Sept. 26 she made a point of noting that her kids all thought her husband – a lawyer in private practice – was the better cook.
With President Trump looking on in the Rose Garden, she paid tribute to Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the liberal icon and women’s rights defender whom she would be replacing, calling her “a woman of enormous talent and consequence, and her life of public service serves as an example to us all.” Judge Barrett also highlighted the warm friendship that her own mentor and former boss, the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, had shared with Justice Ginsburg, despite their differing views.
Joshua Roberts/Reuters View caption Hide caption Supporters cheer President Donald Trump under a sign calling for the filling of the vacant Supreme Court seat with Amy Coney Barrett as he speaks during a campaign event at the Harrisburg International Airport in Middletown, Pennsylvania, Sept. 26, 2020.
Judge Barrett did not mention her own faith at all in her speech. But when asked by then-Sen. Orrin Hatch in her 2017 confirmation hearings how she would respond to Democrats’ concerns about the impact of her faith on her judicial decisions, she replied: “Senator, I see no conflict between having a sincerely held faith and duties as a judge.”
“And were I confirmed as a judge, I would decide cases according to the rule of law from beginning to end,” she continued.
And what of issues on which the Roman Catholic Church’s position differs from that of the law? Nearly two decades earlier, as a Notre Dame law student in 1998, then-Amy Coney co-authored a law review article on whether Catholic judges should recuse themselves from presiding over cases involving capital punishment, which is opposed to the church’s teachings. The article, which also mentioned other areas of potential conflict such as abortion, concluded, “Judges cannot – nor should they try to – align our legal system with the Church’s moral teaching whenever the two diverge. They should, however, conform their own behavior to the Church’s standard.”
“In the rare circumstance that might ever arise – I can’t imagine one sitting here now – where I felt that I had some conscientious objection to the law, I would recuse,” she told Senator Hatch and his colleagues. “I would never impose my own personal convictions upon the law.”
The Senate approved her nomination 55-43, with two Democrats – Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, both of whom are Catholic – joining the Republican majority.
This time may be harder.


csmonitor--2020-09-28--War in the Caucasus as a window on what brings peace

In the latest ranking of nations based on their “ peacefulness , ” the small landlocked nation of Armenia in the Caucasus region showed the most progress .
It shot up 15 places on the Global Peace Index to 99 .
This was largely due to a nonviolent revolution in 2018 that restored much of its democracy .
Since Sunday , however , Armenia has been embroiled in a dangerous war over disputed territory with its neighbor Azerbaijan .
That country , with an authoritarian leader , ranks only 120 on the index .
Just who started this war is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be telling .
Is democracy a deterrent to war ?
And do dictators initiate external conflicts more often to retain power ?
Perhaps the way this war ends will shed light on which of the two governments needed to fight a foreign enemy .
Among some experts , Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has the greater incentive to rally his people around the flag .
The pandemic has greatly reduced revenue from exports of oil and gas .
Social grievances , especially over police brutality , are piling up .
During a short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pro-government demonstration quickly turned against the regime .
Mr. Aliyev has reason to worry over his popularity .
He also has turned to Turkey for military help , fired an official in charge of peace talks with Armenia , and spent millions on advanced weapons .
In contrast , Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is known for his role as a no-violence activist who led the protests that brought down an authoritarian government .
His view of security is less in building up the military and more in fighting corruption , improving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
While he faces tough political opponents from the previous regime , he remains popular .
Since the 1990s , the two countries have struggled over Nagorno-Karabakh , a majority-ethnic Armenian enclave under Azerbaijan ’ s jurisdiction .
As Armenia has moved toward full democracy , the conflict has become a test of whether that form of government better allows grievances to be addressed and reduces nationalist aggression as a way to distract from domestic problems .
In the past decade , during a time of global decline in democracy , the vast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has taken place in authoritarian regimes , according to the Institute for Economics & Peace .
In addition , authoritarian regimes spent 3.7 % of gross national product on military expenditures in 2019 .
Full democracies spent only 1.4 % of GDP .
The current Armenia-Azerbaijan war may end with outside mediation by big powers .
Yet the real end to the underlying conflict will come with a full blossoming of democracy in both countries .
In recent centuries , progress against violence has been linked to a rise in freedom and equality @

In the latest ranking of nations based on their “peacefulness,” the small landlocked nation of Armenia in the Caucasus region showed the most progress. It shot up 15 places on the Global Peace Index to 99. This was largely due to a nonviolent revolution in 2018 that restored much of its democracy. Since Sunday, however, Armenia has been embroiled in a dangerous war over disputed territory with its neighbor Azerbaijan. That country, with an authoritarian leader, ranks only 120 on the index.
Just who started this war is not yet clear. Yet the answer would be telling. Is democracy a deterrent to war? And do dictators initiate external conflicts more often to retain power? Perhaps the way this war ends will shed light on which of the two governments needed to fight a foreign enemy.
Among some experts, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has the greater incentive to rally his people around the flag. The pandemic has greatly reduced revenue from exports of oil and gas. Social grievances, especially over police brutality, are piling up. During a short military skirmish with Armenia in July, a pro-government demonstration quickly turned against the regime.
Mr. Aliyev has reason to worry over his popularity. He also has turned to Turkey for military help, fired an official in charge of peace talks with Armenia, and spent millions on advanced weapons.
In contrast, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is known for his role as a no-violence activist who led the protests that brought down an authoritarian government. His view of security is less in building up the military and more in fighting corruption, improving rule of law, and encouraging self-governance. While he faces tough political opponents from the previous regime, he remains popular.
Since the 1990s, the two countries have struggled over Nagorno-Karabakh, a majority-ethnic Armenian enclave under Azerbaijan’s jurisdiction. As Armenia has moved toward full democracy, the conflict has become a test of whether that form of government better allows grievances to be addressed and reduces nationalist aggression as a way to distract from domestic problems.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
In the past decade, during a time of global decline in democracy, the vast majority of the increase in armed conflict has taken place in authoritarian regimes, according to the Institute for Economics & Peace. In addition, authoritarian regimes spent 3.7% of gross national product on military expenditures in 2019. Full democracies spent only 1.4% of GDP.
The current Armenia-Azerbaijan war may end with outside mediation by big powers. Yet the real end to the underlying conflict will come with a full blossoming of democracy in both countries. In recent centuries, progress against violence has been linked to a rise in freedom and equality.


csmonitor--2020-09-28--What to watch for in Tuesday's presidential debate

President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden will square off on Tuesday in their first presidential debate .
With five weeks to go until the Nov. 3 general election , the stakes are high .
The televised debate , to be hosted in Cleveland , will likely cover a range of topics , from Mr. Trump ’ s tax history to the government ’ s coronavirus response , as well as the political fight surrounding the Supreme Court .
Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden will likely use the debate stage to rally their base as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ face-to-face match-up comes after The New York Times revealed that Mr. Trump , a wealthy former businessman and reality television star , paid only $ 750 in federal income taxes in both 2016 and 2017 , and no federal income taxes in 10 of the previous 15 years through 2017 .
The report , which Mr. Trump called “ total fake news , ” gives Mr. Biden a fresh opening to make his case that his working-class roots better position him to understand the economic struggles of everyday Americans than the billionaire occupying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also faced persistent questions , based on his statements about a rigged election , about whether he will accept the voting results should he lose .
With millions at home watching , how will he respond if Mr. Biden pushes him to commit to a peaceful transfer of power ?
Both candidates will scuffle over Mr. Trump ’ s nomination of Amy Barrett to the Supreme Court .
Mr. Trump has been using his pick to rally his conservative voter base and distract from his record on the coronavirus and other matters , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a conservative Supreme Court ’ s potential threats to health care and abortion rights .
For Mr. Biden , the debate will serve as sort of a reintroduction .
While he has held limited events in some states and given media interviews , the coronavirus pandemic has largely rendered him off-stage for months .
That has allowed Mr. Biden to keep the focus where he wants it : on Mr. Trump and his performance in office .
But on Tuesday , the Democratic nominee will have to make his own case for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ avoiding some of the verbal mishaps that have beset him throughout his political career .
With Mr. Biden leading in polls , a strong outing could place Mr. Trump in even worse shape .
A weak one could reshape the race .
Faced with alarming coronavirus statistics or unrest in the streets , Mr. Trump has been quick to blame Democratic officials , activists , scientists – anybody but him .
One of Biden ’ s goals will be making sure the public understands that Mr. Trump is the one in charge .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ advantage , as he often tries to do with the economy .
Voters like to see a president take responsibility – for the good and the bad .
John Geer , an expert on voter opinion at Vanderbilt University , wonders if Mr. Trump will react poorly to sharp or unfriendly queries from moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News .
“ Will Trump have a tough time answering non-softball questions ?
” Mr. Geer said .
As Mr. Trump ’ s campaign rallies show , he can fire off falsehoods in machine-gun fashion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ common claim that the U.S. economy was operating at historic levels before the pandemic ( it wasn ’ t ) and that the virus has largely dissipated ( it hasn ’ t ) .
Attempting to constantly pin Mr. Trump to the truth could turn Mr. Biden into a real-time fact-checker – possibly to the Democrat ’ s detriment .
“ It ’ s a big mistake to try and do that , ” said Aaron Kall , the director of debate at the University of Michigan .
“ You have to focus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has worried aloud about reacting to Trump ’ s propensity for ad hominem attacks .
On the campaign trail , the former vice president has sometimes shown flashes of temper , getting his “ Irish up ” as he calls it .
Mr. Trump in a tweet on Sunday went as far as to suggest Mr. Biden will be on performance-enhancing drugs during the debate , signaling that perhaps there is little he will not do or say to rattle Mr. Biden and disrupt the proceedings .
Polls show that Mr. Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s mental fitness has registered with some voters .
Mr. Trump ’ s team will be looking for moments where Biden seems flustered or unsure to exploit as a viral video .
“ If the president lies , call it a lie .
If he attacks Biden personally , just shrug it off and not get personal , ” Mr. Geer said .
“ Biden needs to continue to be presidential and tough , even if there is some mud on his suit jacket.
” This story was reported by Reuters .

President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden will square off on Tuesday in their first presidential debate. With five weeks to go until the Nov. 3 general election, the stakes are high.
The televised debate, to be hosted in Cleveland, will likely cover a range of topics, from Mr. Trump’s tax history to the government’s coronavirus response, as well as the political fight surrounding the Supreme Court. Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden will likely use the debate stage to rally their base as well as to appeal to undecided voters.
The face-to-face match-up comes after The New York Times revealed that Mr. Trump, a wealthy former businessman and reality television star, paid only $750 in federal income taxes in both 2016 and 2017, and no federal income taxes in 10 of the previous 15 years through 2017.
The report, which Mr. Trump called “total fake news,” gives Mr. Biden a fresh opening to make his case that his working-class roots better position him to understand the economic struggles of everyday Americans than the billionaire occupying the White House.
Mr. Trump has also faced persistent questions, based on his statements about a rigged election, about whether he will accept the voting results should he lose. With millions at home watching, how will he respond if Mr. Biden pushes him to commit to a peaceful transfer of power?
Both candidates will scuffle over Mr. Trump’s nomination of Amy Barrett to the Supreme Court. Mr. Trump has been using his pick to rally his conservative voter base and distract from his record on the coronavirus and other matters, while Mr. Biden has been warning of a conservative Supreme Court’s potential threats to health care and abortion rights.
Biden’s moment?
For Mr. Biden, the debate will serve as sort of a reintroduction. While he has held limited events in some states and given media interviews, the coronavirus pandemic has largely rendered him off-stage for months.
That has allowed Mr. Biden to keep the focus where he wants it: on Mr. Trump and his performance in office. But on Tuesday, the Democratic nominee will have to make his own case for the presidency, while giving concise answers and avoiding some of the verbal mishaps that have beset him throughout his political career.
With Mr. Biden leading in polls, a strong outing could place Mr. Trump in even worse shape. A weak one could reshape the race.
Coronavirus, protests, the economy
Faced with alarming coronavirus statistics or unrest in the streets, Mr. Trump has been quick to blame Democratic officials, activists, scientists – anybody but him. One of Biden’s goals will be making sure the public understands that Mr. Trump is the one in charge.
Trump could use his office to his advantage, as he often tries to do with the economy. Voters like to see a president take responsibility – for the good and the bad.
John Geer, an expert on voter opinion at Vanderbilt University, wonders if Mr. Trump will react poorly to sharp or unfriendly queries from moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News. “Will Trump have a tough time answering non-softball questions?” Mr. Geer said.
Potential for misinformation
As Mr. Trump’s campaign rallies show, he can fire off falsehoods in machine-gun fashion. Examples include the Republican’s common claim that the U.S. economy was operating at historic levels before the pandemic (it wasn’t) and that the virus has largely dissipated (it hasn’t).
Attempting to constantly pin Mr. Trump to the truth could turn Mr. Biden into a real-time fact-checker – possibly to the Democrat’s detriment.
“It’s a big mistake to try and do that,” said Aaron Kall, the director of debate at the University of Michigan. “You have to focus on your own agenda.”
Mudslinging
Mr. Biden has worried aloud about reacting to Trump’s propensity for ad hominem attacks. On the campaign trail, the former vice president has sometimes shown flashes of temper, getting his “Irish up” as he calls it.
Mr. Trump in a tweet on Sunday went as far as to suggest Mr. Biden will be on performance-enhancing drugs during the debate, signaling that perhaps there is little he will not do or say to rattle Mr. Biden and disrupt the proceedings.
Polls show that Mr. Trump’s frequent questioning of Mr. Biden’s mental fitness has registered with some voters. Mr. Trump’s team will be looking for moments where Biden seems flustered or unsure to exploit as a viral video.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“If the president lies, call it a lie. If he attacks Biden personally, just shrug it off and not get personal,” Mr. Geer said. “Biden needs to continue to be presidential and tough, even if there is some mud on his suit jacket.”
This story was reported by Reuters.


csmonitor--2020-09-28--In Iran, outrage over patriarchy spurs change

“ There is an emerging and fast-growing trend among different layers of the Iranian public to demand answers and accountability , ” says a sociology teacher in Tehran .
Such was the level of anger at the girl ’ s murder that parliament finally passed a law against child abuse that had been stalled for 11 years , and it is moving on a bill to criminalize violence against women .
A recent court ruling , sentencing a man to just nine years in jail for the “ honor killing ” murder of his daughter , sparked unusual public outrage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for 15 years for removing her head covering in public . )
Then parents ridiculed the Education Ministry for removing two girls from the cover of a third grade math textbook , leaving only boys in the illustration .
The tug of war over the role of women in Iranian society – a battle that has been going on since the Islamic Revolution in 1979 – has taken a new turn .
First there was popular outrage in Iran over the sentence handed down to a farmer who killed his own 14-year-old daughter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killing .
Last month the father was sentenced to just nine years imprisonment for the murder , despite calls from even hidebound Iranian conservatives for “ severe ” punishment .
Then popular anger was stoked again when third grade math books were handed out in classrooms this month .
The cover image had been modified – removing two girls but leaving three boys – because from an “ aesthetic and psychological point of view , ” the Ministry of Education said in a statement , the scene was “ overcrowded.
” The two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gender discrimination in Iran , and the popular outcry has forced change on the ruling elite .
They are the latest incidents in the constant tug of war over the role of women in Iranian society .
Ever since the 1979 revolution , it has pitted a traditional patriarchal Islamic system bent on imposing control and restrictions on women – such as one-sided divorce laws and the mandatory wearing of a hijab head covering – against increasingly powerful demands by women for equal rights and recognition .
“ There is an emerging and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iranian public to demand answers and accountability , ” says an Iranian sociologist , a lecturer at a university in Tehran who asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the issues .
The lenient court ruling in Romina ’ s case was widely denounced as a case study in women ’ s inequality and the diminished value of girls .
By contrast , a woman was recently sentenced to 15 years in prison for removing her headscarf in public .
“ Romina ’ s father picked up the sickle in full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because he was aware of the anti-women laws of this country , ” fumed female journalist Niloufar Hamedi on Twitter .
The father had checked with a lawyer before the murder , to be sure he would avoid the death penalty .
In the case of the math textbook , parents saw a government ploy to literally render girls invisible .
They forced the education minister to apologize and launched a campaign to put new covers on the books that often include an image of the late Iranian mathematician Maryam Mirzakhani , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to win the prestigious Fields Medal , the math equivalent of the Nobel Prize .
“ The wrath against the [ honor killing ] verdict has not been exclusive to elites , intellectuals , and women ’ s rights activists , ” says the university sociology lecturer .
“ It ’ s been more far-reaching and has been expressed even by conservative-minded people.
” Popular anger over the gruesome murder in May of Romina , a schoolgirl who ran away from home with her older boyfriend , led the Iranian parliament to approve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now called “ Romina ’ s law , ” that had been stalled for 11 years .
Another law that would criminalize sexual and physical abuse of women , first written 10 years ago , is also moving forward , albeit slowly .
The textbook cover change has prompted many parents to seek to hide the offending image .
When the father of a third grader visited a stationery shop in Tehran recently , the owner offered him three different images of Ms. Mirzakhani – the math medal winner who taught at Stanford @ @ @ @ @ @ @ customers today with different photos of Maryam , asking me to print them on the cover .
Who are these sick people [ officials behind the removal ] ?
” he wondered .
“ They can ’ t even tolerate pictures of two little girls in hijab ?
” In mid-September , the uproar prompted the minister of education , Mohsen Haji Mirzaee , to issue a formal apology , saying there was “ tastelessness behind such a decision.
” He also praised Iran ’ s support for female education : “ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ access to education has been entirely abolished , ” he said .
“ Today , no girl is deprived of education in any spot in this country.
” Indeed , Iran is renowned for the most widely and highly educated female population in the region .
Women fill 60 % of the country ’ s university places .
Despite challenges , Iranian women from Iran have been ministers , lawmakers , professors , lawyers , firefighters , and even an astronaut and Nobel Peace Prize laureate .
But the controversy has exposed again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ names and images , with one former official recently putting the figure at 70 % in favor of boys .
Research into the “ role and status of women ” in Persian textbooks by the state-funded Center for Cultural Studies and Research in Humanities found in 2007 that only 16 % of 3,029 names used were female , only 37 women were among the 782 prominent figures mentioned in lessons , and only one woman was listed among 122 notable personalities .
Agreeing that the cover “ should not have been changed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bureau is responsible for the math book , Hassan Maleki , demands that critics “ should be fair.
” “ Why don ’ t they see the cover on the science book for the same grade ?
” he asks .
“ The kids on that book are all girls .
This indicates that there is no negative approach toward girls , ” he argues .
The covers of most school textbooks in Iran show either boys or girls , but not both .
This seeks “ to institutionalize gender segregation among children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concept from such very early stages , ” worries the Tehran sociologist .
For her part , the cover designer , Nasim Bahary , says she was surprised by the Education Ministry ’ s move , because she thought she had already complied with “ multiple censorship orders ” imposed in 2013 that led to the previous cover design showing both girls and boys .
But it was no surprise to Ebrahim Asgharzadeh , one of the student leaders of the 1979 U.S. Embassy seizure in Tehran , who today is a reformist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ of women ] and gender segregation has hit rock bottom , ” he said in an Instagram post .
He urged his daughter to “ paste the photo of Mirzakhani on the cover of the book and take pride in being a girl.
” An Iranian researcher contributed to this report .

“There is an emerging and fast-growing trend among different layers of the Iranian public to demand answers and accountability,” says a sociology teacher in Tehran.
Such was the level of anger at the girl’s murder that parliament finally passed a law against child abuse that had been stalled for 11 years, and it is moving on a bill to criminalize violence against women.
How does change come to a traditional society? In Iran, a lenient sentence for the murder of a 14-year-old girl and the removal of girls’ images from a math textbook are fueling anger at the patriarchy.
A recent court ruling, sentencing a man to just nine years in jail for the “honor killing” murder of his daughter, sparked unusual public outrage. (A woman was recently imprisoned for 15 years for removing her head covering in public.) Then parents ridiculed the Education Ministry for removing two girls from the cover of a third grade math textbook, leaving only boys in the illustration.
The tug of war over the role of women in Iranian society – a battle that has been going on since the Islamic Revolution in 1979 – has taken a new turn.
First there was popular outrage in Iran over the sentence handed down to a farmer who killed his own 14-year-old daughter, Romina, in a so-called honor killing.
Last month the father was sentenced to just nine years imprisonment for the murder, despite calls from even hidebound Iranian conservatives for “severe” punishment.
Then popular anger was stoked again when third grade math books were handed out in classrooms this month. The cover image had been modified – removing two girls but leaving three boys – because from an “aesthetic and psychological point of view,” the Ministry of Education said in a statement, the scene was “overcrowded.”
Why We Wrote This How does change come to a traditional society? In Iran, a lenient sentence for the murder of a 14-year-old girl and the removal of girls’ images from a math textbook are fueling anger at the patriarchy.
The two episodes have shone fresh light on systematic gender discrimination in Iran, and the popular outcry has forced change on the ruling elite.
They are the latest incidents in the constant tug of war over the role of women in Iranian society. Ever since the 1979 revolution, it has pitted a traditional patriarchal Islamic system bent on imposing control and restrictions on women – such as one-sided divorce laws and the mandatory wearing of a hijab head covering – against increasingly powerful demands by women for equal rights and recognition.
Demand for accountability
“There is an emerging and fast-growing trend among different layers of the Iranian public to demand answers and accountability,” says an Iranian sociologist, a lecturer at a university in Tehran who asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the issues.
The lenient court ruling in Romina’s case was widely denounced as a case study in women’s inequality and the diminished value of girls. By contrast, a woman was recently sentenced to 15 years in prison for removing her headscarf in public.
“Romina’s father picked up the sickle in full consciousness and beheaded his teenage daughter, because he was aware of the anti-women laws of this country,” fumed female journalist Niloufar Hamedi on Twitter. The father had checked with a lawyer before the murder, to be sure he would avoid the death penalty.
In the case of the math textbook, parents saw a government ploy to literally render girls invisible. They forced the education minister to apologize and launched a campaign to put new covers on the books that often include an image of the late Iranian mathematician Maryam Mirzakhani, who in 2014 became the only woman ever to win the prestigious Fields Medal, the math equivalent of the Nobel Prize.
“The wrath against the [honor killing] verdict has not been exclusive to elites, intellectuals, and women’s rights activists,” says the university sociology lecturer. “It’s been more far-reaching and has been expressed even by conservative-minded people.”
Popular anger over the gruesome murder in May of Romina, a schoolgirl who ran away from home with her older boyfriend, led the Iranian parliament to approve measures criminalizing child abuse and neglect, now called “Romina’s law,” that had been stalled for 11 years.
Another law that would criminalize sexual and physical abuse of women, first written 10 years ago, is also moving forward, albeit slowly.
From Instagram feed View caption Hide caption In an Instagram post, Iranian artist Nasim Bahary expresses surprise that Iran’s Ministry of Education removed two girls from her original 2013 design for the cover of a Third Grade math textbook. The change caused public uproar in Iran about gender discrimination, resulting in a government apology.
Parents get book recovered
The textbook cover change has prompted many parents to seek to hide the offending image. When the father of a third grader visited a stationery shop in Tehran recently, the owner offered him three different images of Ms. Mirzakhani – the math medal winner who taught at Stanford University.
“I have had eight customers today with different photos of Maryam, asking me to print them on the cover. Who are these sick people [officials behind the removal]?” he wondered. “They can’t even tolerate pictures of two little girls in hijab?”
In mid-September, the uproar prompted the minister of education, Mohsen Haji Mirzaee, to issue a formal apology, saying there was “tastelessness behind such a decision.”
He also praised Iran’s support for female education: “The old-time discrimination that characterized women’s access to education has been entirely abolished,” he said. “Today, no girl is deprived of education in any spot in this country.”
Achievement and hurdles
Indeed, Iran is renowned for the most widely and highly educated female population in the region. Women fill 60% of the country’s university places. Despite challenges, Iranian women from Iran have been ministers, lawmakers, professors, lawyers, firefighters, and even an astronaut and Nobel Peace Prize laureate.
But the controversy has exposed again how Iranian textbooks are slanted toward masculine names and images, with one former official recently putting the figure at 70% in favor of boys.
Research into the “role and status of women” in Persian textbooks by the state-funded Center for Cultural Studies and Research in Humanities found in 2007 that only 16% of 3,029 names used were female, only 37 women were among the 782 prominent figures mentioned in lessons, and only one woman was listed among 122 notable personalities.
Agreeing that the cover “should not have been changed,” the deputy minister of education whose bureau is responsible for the math book, Hassan Maleki, demands that critics “should be fair.”
“Why don’t they see the cover on the science book for the same grade?” he asks. “The kids on that book are all girls. This indicates that there is no negative approach toward girls,” he argues.
The covers of most school textbooks in Iran show either boys or girls, but not both. This seeks “to institutionalize gender segregation among children and to indirectly teach them the very concept from such very early stages,” worries the Tehran sociologist.
For her part, the cover designer, Nasim Bahary, says she was surprised by the Education Ministry’s move, because she thought she had already complied with “multiple censorship orders” imposed in 2013 that led to the previous cover design showing both girls and boys.
But it was no surprise to Ebrahim Asgharzadeh, one of the student leaders of the 1979 U.S. Embassy seizure in Tehran, who today is a reformist politician.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“The policy of elimination [of women] and gender segregation has hit rock bottom,” he said in an Instagram post. He urged his daughter to “paste the photo of Mirzakhani on the cover of the book and take pride in being a girl.”
An Iranian researcher contributed to this report.


csmonitor--2020-09-28--More nations ending soccer’s gender wage gap: ‘This could change things’

“ Women in Sierra Leone often stop playing football young because they don ’ t see a future there , ” she says .
“ This could change things for the generation behind us.
” Rashidatu Kamara , who plays for Sierra Leone ’ s national team , is using her first paycheck since pay was equalized to finish building her parents ’ house , and pay school fees for her younger siblings .
The newest members of that club – which includes Australia , New Zealand , Norway , and England – are Brazil and Sierra Leone , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this month .
Though such explicit sexism has receded , the business of soccer still treats men and women differently , female players say in many countries – especially when it comes to pay .
Yet a small but growing cohort of countries is offering their women ’ s national teams as much as the men ’ s , which many athletes and commentators view as a major symbolic victory .
Brazil ’ s women ’ s soccer team is a powerhouse , routinely ranked in the top 10 around the world .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that for decades , until 1981 , Brazilian women weren ’ t even allowed to play .
When she was playing soccer as a child , Rashidatu Kamara never had reason to believe she couldn ’ t be one of the boys .
From the time she was 8 years old , they welcomed her into pickup games in their neighborhood cemetery in Freetown , Sierra Leone .
Soon , she was so good that her friends would nearly come to blows about whose side she was going to play for that day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to doubt that a girl could play , ” she says .
That came later , when Ms. Kamara was called up to her national team .
The first time she represented her country in a tournament abroad , she made $ 300 , a princely sum to the child of a fisherman from a poor neighborhood .
But it paled in comparison with the $ 2,000 the men made each time they put on their green , white , and blue uniforms for an international match .
So when Sierra Leone ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it was equalizing payment for its men ’ s and women ’ s national teams , players like Ms. Kamara greeted the announcement with no small measure of pride .
“ Women in Sierra Leone often stop playing football young because they don ’ t see a future there , ” she says .
“ This could change things for the generation behind us.
” Sierra Leone ’ s announcement comes on the heels of a similar one by Brazil ’ s soccer federation in early September .
The two countries join @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including Australia , New Zealand , Norway , and England , to offer their women ’ s national teams as much as the men for the same work .
In the soccer world , where equality for the women ’ s game is a bitter and very much ongoing fight , many view the policies as major symbolic victories .
“ If we want the women ’ s game to improve , we have to sow before we can reap – and that means making pay equal ” before popularity can be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ugandan journalist covering African women ’ s soccer .
“ These women stand on the field wearing the flag of their countries just like the men do – there ’ s no reason not to treat those experiences with equal value.
” Equal pay for the Sierra Leonean and Brazilian teams has special resonance in Africa and Latin America , where women ’ s soccer has been particularly neglected .
In one of the world ’ s greatest soccer powerhouses , Brazil , for instance , women were formally banned from playing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1981 .
Such violent sports as soccer , the law stated , were “ not suitable for the female body.
” ( Similar bans were in place in several European countries until the early 1970s . )
And when the coronavirus pandemic hit Africa in 2020 , the Confederation of African Football announced that it was canceling the women ’ s continental championship .
The men ’ s tournament , meanwhile , was simply postponed .
It sets an important example when a national football federation puts equality before public opinion at home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sports commentator and columnist .
“ Brazilian society still treats soccer as a male sport , ” she says .
At the same time , she and others note that equal pay for national teams is only a small piece of the puzzle in making soccer less sexist .
National team pay policies can be a “ PR move ” to make a country ’ s football federation look good while deflecting from more systemic problems , says Ms. Komugisha , who advocates for pay equity in women ’ s soccer in Africa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national team is routinely ranked in the world ’ s top 10 – doesn ’ t have a domestic professional league .
The country ’ s best players often leave the country to play for European and American leagues , and in 2017 , several members of the national squad quit at once , saying they were “ exhausted from years of disrespect and lack of support ” from the country ’ s soccer federation .
Fernanda Stulpen played goalkeeper for Brazil ’ s national team in 2006 .
She says she never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay when she was on the team .
“ The fact that we received anything at that time already helped so much , since the majority [ of women players in Brazil ] got nothing , ” Ms. Stulpen says .
Her biggest hope is that the change in pay can boost the value placed on women ’ s soccer .
Brazil is also home to arguably the best female soccer player of all time : six-time FIFA player of the year Marta Vieira da Silva , who is also the World Cup @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or woman .
Yet Brazilians often refer to her as “ Pelé in a skirt , ” setting her up as only an echo of the country ’ s most famous male player .
“ The [ payments ] are equal now , but the conditions to get to them are not , ” Ms. Ruiz says .
One of the greatest stumbling blocks to truly equal pay is FIFA , soccer ’ s global governing body , which doles out prize money for global tournaments like the World Cup .
In 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million in prize money for teams participating in the men ’ s World Cup , including $ 38 million that went directly to France , the winner .
By contrast , FIFA offered $ 30 million in prize money for the Women ’ s World Cup the following year .
The champions , the United States , received $ 4 million , about 10 % of the men ’ s takings .
FIFA has argued that the discrepancy results from the difference in revenue .
“ I think sometimes FIFA can be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explain progress or lack thereof , ” says Brenda Elsey , professor of history at Hofstra University in New York and co-host of the sports and feminism podcast “ Burn It All Down.
” FIFA ’ s lack of support for the women ’ s game , she says , makes it easy for member countries to follow suit .
Part of the problem , many say , is that soccer ’ s powerful governing bodies remain largely a boys ’ club .
The president of FIFA has never been a woman , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secretary-general , Senegalese diplomat Fatma Samoura , only four years ago .
Meanwhile , only three of FIFA ’ s 211 member states currently have a national soccer federation run by a woman .
Two of them are the United States and Turks and Caicos Islands .
The third is Sierra Leone .
The Sierra Leonean association ’ s president , Isha Johansen , “ has been championing women and girls ’ football for a long time , ” says Ms. Komugisha , the Ugandan commentator and activist .
So it wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to see Sierra Leone step out in front of the field in terms of equalizing pay .
For Ms. Kamara , the team ’ s first payment of $ 2,000 was more than anything she ’ d ever seen .
She ’ s using it , she says , to finish building her parents ’ house and to pay the school fees of her younger siblings .
“ I tell women to be successful in this game , you have to eat , sleep , breathe football .
It is about your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everything , ” she says .

“Women in Sierra Leone often stop playing football young because they don’t see a future there,” she says. “This could change things for the generation behind us.”
Rashidatu Kamara, who plays for Sierra Leone’s national team, is using her first paycheck since pay was equalized to finish building her parents’ house, and pay school fees for her younger siblings.
The newest members of that club – which includes Australia, New Zealand, Norway, and England – are Brazil and Sierra Leone, which both announced they had equalized pay earlier this month.
For years, the U.S. women’s soccer team has accused its federation of gender discrimination. Meanwhile, a handful of other countries’ leagues have been making waves, vowing to pay male and female players the same.
Though such explicit sexism has receded, the business of soccer still treats men and women differently, female players say in many countries – especially when it comes to pay. Yet a small but growing cohort of countries is offering their women’s national teams as much as the men’s, which many athletes and commentators view as a major symbolic victory.
Brazil’s women’s soccer team is a powerhouse, routinely ranked in the top 10 around the world. So it might come as a surprise that for decades, until 1981, Brazilian women weren’t even allowed to play.
When she was playing soccer as a child, Rashidatu Kamara never had reason to believe she couldn’t be one of the boys.
From the time she was 8 years old, they welcomed her into pickup games in their neighborhood cemetery in Freetown, Sierra Leone. Soon, she was so good that her friends would nearly come to blows about whose side she was going to play for that day.
“They never gave me reason to doubt that a girl could play,” she says.
Why We Wrote This For years, the U.S. women’s soccer team has accused its federation of gender discrimination. Meanwhile, a handful of other countries’ leagues have been making waves, vowing to pay male and female players the same.
That came later, when Ms. Kamara was called up to her national team. The first time she represented her country in a tournament abroad, she made $300, a princely sum to the child of a fisherman from a poor neighborhood. But it paled in comparison with the $2,000 the men made each time they put on their green, white, and blue uniforms for an international match.
So when Sierra Leone’s sports ministry announced earlier this month that it was equalizing payment for its men’s and women’s national teams, players like Ms. Kamara greeted the announcement with no small measure of pride.
“Women in Sierra Leone often stop playing football young because they don’t see a future there,” she says. “This could change things for the generation behind us.”
Sierra Leone’s announcement comes on the heels of a similar one by Brazil’s soccer federation in early September. The two countries join a small but growing cohort of countries, including Australia, New Zealand, Norway, and England, to offer their women’s national teams as much as the men for the same work.
In the soccer world, where equality for the women’s game is a bitter and very much ongoing fight, many view the policies as major symbolic victories.
“If we want the women’s game to improve, we have to sow before we can reap – and that means making pay equal” before popularity can be equal, says Usher Komugisha, a Ugandan journalist covering African women’s soccer. “These women stand on the field wearing the flag of their countries just like the men do – there’s no reason not to treat those experiences with equal value.”
Once banned from playing
Equal pay for the Sierra Leonean and Brazilian teams has special resonance in Africa and Latin America, where women’s soccer has been particularly neglected. In one of the world’s greatest soccer powerhouses, Brazil, for instance, women were formally banned from playing, even recreationally, from the 1940s until 1981. Such violent sports as soccer, the law stated, were “not suitable for the female body.” (Similar bans were in place in several European countries until the early 1970s.)
And when the coronavirus pandemic hit Africa in 2020, the Confederation of African Football announced that it was canceling the women’s continental championship. The men’s tournament, meanwhile, was simply postponed.
Courtesy of Rashidatu Kamara View caption Hide caption Rashidatu Kamara, a player for Sierra Leone's national women's soccer team, says she hopes pay equity between the men's and women's teams will inspire more girls and women to continue playing. "This could change things for the generation behind us," she says.
It sets an important example when a national football federation puts equality before public opinion at home, says Marília Ruiz, a Brazilian sports commentator and columnist.
“Brazilian society still treats soccer as a male sport,” she says.
At the same time, she and others note that equal pay for national teams is only a small piece of the puzzle in making soccer less sexist. National team pay policies can be a “PR move” to make a country’s football federation look good while deflecting from more systemic problems, says Ms. Komugisha, who advocates for pay equity in women’s soccer in Africa.
Brazil, for example – whose national team is routinely ranked in the world’s top 10 – doesn’t have a domestic professional league. The country’s best players often leave the country to play for European and American leagues, and in 2017, several members of the national squad quit at once, saying they were “exhausted from years of disrespect and lack of support” from the country’s soccer federation.
Fernanda Stulpen played goalkeeper for Brazil’s national team in 2006. She says she never could have imagined a pledge for equalized pay when she was on the team.
“The fact that we received anything at that time already helped so much, since the majority [of women players in Brazil] got nothing,” Ms. Stulpen says. Her biggest hope is that the change in pay can boost the value placed on women’s soccer.
Brazil is also home to arguably the best female soccer player of all time: six-time FIFA player of the year Marta Vieira da Silva, who is also the World Cup’s leading goal scorer – man or woman. Yet Brazilians often refer to her as “Pelé in a skirt,” setting her up as only an echo of the country’s most famous male player.
“The [payments] are equal now, but the conditions to get to them are not,” Ms. Ruiz says.
FIFA prize money
One of the greatest stumbling blocks to truly equal pay is FIFA, soccer’s global governing body, which doles out prize money for global tournaments like the World Cup. In 2018, the federation set aside $400 million in prize money for teams participating in the men’s World Cup, including $38 million that went directly to France, the winner. By contrast, FIFA offered $30 million in prize money for the Women’s World Cup the following year. The champions, the United States, received $4 million, about 10% of the men’s takings. FIFA has argued that the discrepancy results from the difference in revenue.
“I think sometimes FIFA can be a device for [national] federations to explain progress or lack thereof,” says Brenda Elsey, professor of history at Hofstra University in New York and co-host of the sports and feminism podcast “Burn It All Down.” FIFA’s lack of support for the women’s game, she says, makes it easy for member countries to follow suit.
Part of the problem, many say, is that soccer’s powerful governing bodies remain largely a boys’ club. The president of FIFA has never been a woman, and the organization named its first female secretary-general, Senegalese diplomat Fatma Samoura, only four years ago. Meanwhile, only three of FIFA’s 211 member states currently have a national soccer federation run by a woman. Two of them are the United States and Turks and Caicos Islands.
The third is Sierra Leone.
The Sierra Leonean association’s president, Isha Johansen, “has been championing women and girls’ football for a long time,” says Ms. Komugisha, the Ugandan commentator and activist.
So it wasn’t a surprise, Ms. Komugisha says, to see Sierra Leone step out in front of the field in terms of equalizing pay.
For Ms. Kamara, the team’s first payment of $2,000 was more than anything she’d ever seen. She’s using it, she says, to finish building her parents’ house and to pay the school fees of her younger siblings.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“I tell women to be successful in this game, you have to eat, sleep, breathe football. It is about your passion. The money isn’t everything,” she says.
“But the money is helpful too.”


csmonitor--2020-09-28--'I can't wait': Former refugees to cast first US votes on Nov. 3

They came fleeing war and persecution in countries like Myanmar , Eritrea , and Iraq , handpicked by the United States for resettlement under longstanding humanitarian traditions .
Now , tens of thousands of refugees welcomed into the U.S. during the Obama administration are American citizens , voting for the first time in what could be the most consequential presidential contest of their lifetimes .
With some states already sending out early ballots , the first-time voters from Arizona to Florida are excited but mindful of their responsibility in helping to choose the country ’ s next leader .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very resettlement program they benefited from and that President Donald Trump has hollowed out and could halt altogether in the fiscal year starting Oct. 1 .
“ Most refugees come to this county escaping political systems where the government is not their friend , ” said Hans Van de Weerd , vice president of resettlement for the International Rescue Committee , a top agency that brings refugees to the U.S. “ To have their voices be heard is very powerful.
” Republican and Democratic administrations resettled an average 95,000 refugees annually over four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that down to a cap of 18,000 .
Only about half that number have come in this year amid the coronavirus pandemic .
That downward trend seems likely to continue if Mr. Trump is reelected ; his Democratic challenger Joe Biden has promised to pump the annual refugee goal to 125,000 .
There are no voter registration figures for refugees , but the National Partnership for New Americans predicted that 860,000 immigrants of all kinds would gain that right this year by becoming citizens even in the face of barriers like an 83 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 640 to $ 1,170 .
Through its citizenship classes , the International Rescue Committee has helped around 6,000 refugees and other newcomers become Americans each of the last few years .
Other groups have also helped refugees become naturalized .
Department of Homeland Security figures in recent years have shown refugees and asylum-seekers are the immigrants most likely to gain citizenship , with a naturalization rate of over 70 % during their first decade in the country .
Refugees can apply for citizenship after five years as permanent residents .
Once they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote .
“ So many want to vote this time , ” said Basma Alawee , a refugee herself and an organizer for the Florida Immigrant Coalition who has been holding webinars helping other refugees prepare for Election Day .
Born in Iraq and now a U.S. citizen living in Jacksonville , Florida , Ms. Alawee said she also plans to cast her first presidential ballot Nov. 3 .
Here are a few other refugees around the U.S. voting for the first time : Bilal Alobaidi recalls elections in Iraq under Saddam Hussein @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was on the ballot .
The only possible choices were “ yes ” or “ no.
” “ And if you said ‘ no , ’ something bad could happen to you , ” said Mr. Alobaidi , who arrived in the U.S. in December 2013 .
He was resettled in Phoenix , a desert city with sweltering weather like that of his hometown Mosul , and was naturalized last year .
A former social worker with the International Organization for Migration , Mr. Alobaidi now works for the International Rescue Committee , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other services .
Mr. Alobaidi said he looks forward to voting for the candidate he chooses .
“ This is the first time I will practice democracy , ” he said .
“ I can ’ t wait.
” Bawi UK was a small child when his parents fled Myanmar , leaving him and his siblings to be cared for by their maternal grandmother .
Mr. UK said the family suffered discrimination as Christians in a predominantly Buddhist nation .
The military government was also trying to forcibly conscript his father .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ had to be a Buddhist ; to rent a house , you had to be Buddhist , ” said Mr. UK , a social work student at Rhode Island College and a youth leader at the Refugee Dream Center , an advocacy organization in Providence .
Nada Al-Rubaye said she never voted in her native Iraq , which she fled after her oldest son and several other family members were killed in the country ’ s widespread violence .
The Baghdad-born artist and another son spent a few years in Turkey , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A U.S. citizen since September 2019 , she now paints landscapes featuring the red rock outcroppings of her adopted Arizona and sells her paintings and jewelry online .
“ I am so excited !
” she said about the upcoming election , flashing a broad smile .
“ It ’ s so important for a person to feel like they belong to a country.
” Habtom Gezhey fled Eritrea after being conscripted to serve an indefinite number of years in the military .
Mr. Gezhey initially lived in a refugee camp in neighboring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2012 .
Now a truck driver hauling goods across the U.S. , Mr. Gezhey lives in Jacksonville with his wife , Eyerusalem , whom he met at the camp , and their two young children .
“ I ’ m ready to vote , ” said Mr. Gezhey .
“ We had no election in Eritrea , no Constitution.
” Jad “ Jay ” Jawad was 17 when his family sought refuge in the U.S. from death threats and conflict in Iraq .
The Saddam Hussein government had targeted Mr. Jawad ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frequented by the U.S. military .
The family resettled in Phoenix , where they all became U.S. citizens .
Mr. Jawad now runs a popular crepe restaurant in an upscale mall .
He and his wife , also an American citizen born in Iraq , are expecting a baby next spring .
“ When we left Baghdad , there was no democracy , ” he said .
“ Here , you can be part of the change.
” Lian Kual never cast a ballot in Myanmar , where elections were criticized as fraudulent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2008 , Mr. Kual initially fled his country for Malaysia , and in 2014 was resettled in Salt Lake City , where he works on the overnight shift stocking shelves at Walmart .
He was naturalized this year .
“ I feel so free to be part of the United States of America , ” he said .
“ I already registered [ to vote ] at the DMV , and now I ’ m waiting for my ballot .
It ’ s a really big deal.
” This story was reported by @ @ @ @

They came fleeing war and persecution in countries like Myanmar, Eritrea, and Iraq, handpicked by the United States for resettlement under longstanding humanitarian traditions.
Now, tens of thousands of refugees welcomed into the U.S. during the Obama administration are American citizens, voting for the first time in what could be the most consequential presidential contest of their lifetimes.
With some states already sending out early ballots, the first-time voters from Arizona to Florida are excited but mindful of their responsibility in helping to choose the country’s next leader. The winner will decide the future of the very resettlement program they benefited from and that President Donald Trump has hollowed out and could halt altogether in the fiscal year starting Oct. 1.
“Most refugees come to this county escaping political systems where the government is not their friend,” said Hans Van de Weerd, vice president of resettlement for the International Rescue Committee, a top agency that brings refugees to the U.S. “To have their voices be heard is very powerful.”
Republican and Democratic administrations resettled an average 95,000 refugees annually over four decades, but the Trump government whittled that down to a cap of 18,000. Only about half that number have come in this year amid the coronavirus pandemic.
That downward trend seems likely to continue if Mr. Trump is reelected; his Democratic challenger Joe Biden has promised to pump the annual refugee goal to 125,000.
There are no voter registration figures for refugees, but the National Partnership for New Americans predicted that 860,000 immigrants of all kinds would gain that right this year by becoming citizens even in the face of barriers like an 83% increase in naturalization fees, from $640 to $1,170.
Through its citizenship classes, the International Rescue Committee has helped around 6,000 refugees and other newcomers become Americans each of the last few years. Other groups have also helped refugees become naturalized.
Department of Homeland Security figures in recent years have shown refugees and asylum-seekers are the immigrants most likely to gain citizenship, with a naturalization rate of over 70% during their first decade in the country. Refugees can apply for citizenship after five years as permanent residents.
Once they become Americans, they can register and vote.
“So many want to vote this time,” said Basma Alawee, a refugee herself and an organizer for the Florida Immigrant Coalition who has been holding webinars helping other refugees prepare for Election Day.
Born in Iraq and now a U.S. citizen living in Jacksonville, Florida, Ms. Alawee said she also plans to cast her first presidential ballot Nov. 3.
Here are a few other refugees around the U.S. voting for the first time:
Bilal Alobaidi recalls elections in Iraq under Saddam Hussein when only the leader’s name was on the ballot. The only possible choices were “yes” or “no.”
“And if you said ‘no,’ something bad could happen to you,” said Mr. Alobaidi, who arrived in the U.S. in December 2013.
He was resettled in Phoenix, a desert city with sweltering weather like that of his hometown Mosul, and was naturalized last year.
A former social worker with the International Organization for Migration, Mr. Alobaidi now works for the International Rescue Committee, helping other refugees in Arizona find housing and other services.
Mr. Alobaidi said he looks forward to voting for the candidate he chooses.
“This is the first time I will practice democracy,” he said. “I can’t wait.”
Bawi UK was a small child when his parents fled Myanmar, leaving him and his siblings to be cared for by their maternal grandmother.
Mr. UK said the family suffered discrimination as Christians in a predominantly Buddhist nation. The military government was also trying to forcibly conscript his father.
“To run for office, you had to be a Buddhist; to rent a house, you had to be Buddhist,” said Mr. UK, a social work student at Rhode Island College and a youth leader at the Refugee Dream Center, an advocacy organization in Providence.
Nada Al-Rubaye said she never voted in her native Iraq, which she fled after her oldest son and several other family members were killed in the country’s widespread violence.
The Baghdad-born artist and another son spent a few years in Turkey, but in 2013 were settled in Phoenix.
A U.S. citizen since September 2019, she now paints landscapes featuring the red rock outcroppings of her adopted Arizona and sells her paintings and jewelry online.
“I am so excited!” she said about the upcoming election, flashing a broad smile. “It’s so important for a person to feel like they belong to a country.”
Habtom Gezhey fled Eritrea after being conscripted to serve an indefinite number of years in the military.
Mr. Gezhey initially lived in a refugee camp in neighboring Ethiopia before being resettled in Florida in 2012.
Now a truck driver hauling goods across the U.S., Mr. Gezhey lives in Jacksonville with his wife, Eyerusalem, whom he met at the camp, and their two young children.
“I’m ready to vote,” said Mr. Gezhey. “We had no election in Eritrea, no Constitution.”
Jad “Jay” Jawad was 17 when his family sought refuge in the U.S. from death threats and conflict in Iraq.
The Saddam Hussein government had targeted Mr. Jawad’s father as a manager at a hotel frequented by the U.S. military. The family resettled in Phoenix, where they all became U.S. citizens.
Mr. Jawad now runs a popular crepe restaurant in an upscale mall. He and his wife, also an American citizen born in Iraq, are expecting a baby next spring.
“When we left Baghdad, there was no democracy,” he said. “Here, you can be part of the change.”
Lian Kual never cast a ballot in Myanmar, where elections were criticized as fraudulent during decades of military rule.
In 2008, Mr. Kual initially fled his country for Malaysia, and in 2014 was resettled in Salt Lake City, where he works on the overnight shift stocking shelves at Walmart. He was naturalized this year.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“I feel so free to be part of the United States of America,” he said. “I already registered [to vote] at the DMV, and now I’m waiting for my ballot. It’s a really big deal.”
This story was reported by The Associated Press.


csmonitor--2020-09-28--Judge temporarily postpones Trump administration's ban on TikTok

A federal judge on Sunday postponed a Trump administration order that would have banned the popular video sharing app TikTok from smartphone app stores in the United States around midnight .
A more comprehensive ban remains scheduled for November , about a week after the presidential election .
The judge , Carl Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia , did not agree to postpone the later ban .
The ruling followed an emergency hearing Sunday morning in which lawyers for TikTok argued that the administration ’ s app-store ban would infringe on First Amendment rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Earlier this year , President Donald Trump declared that TikTok , owned by Chinese company ByteDance , was a threat to national security and that it must either sell its U.S. operations to American companies or be barred from the country .
TikTok is still scrambling to firm up a deal tentatively struck a week ago in which it would partner with Oracle , a huge database-software company , and Walmart in an effort to win the blessing of both the Chinese and American governments .
In the meantime , it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. TikTok said in a statement that it was pleased with the court ruling and continues to work to turn its deal proposal into an actual agreement .
The Commerce Department , which is responsible for the specific orders banning TikTok , said it will comply with the judge ’ s order but intends to vigorously defend the administration ’ s efforts against the app .
Judge Nichols did not explain his reasoning publicly , and instead filed his judicial opinion under seal .
Initially both the U.S. government ’ s brief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ morning hearing were also due to be sealed from the public , although the court later relented .
In arguments to Judge Nichols , TikTok lawyer John Hall said that TikTok is more than an app , since it functions as a “ modern day version of a town square.
” “ If that prohibition goes into effect at midnight , the consequences immediately are grave , ’ ” Mr. Hall said .
“ It would be no different than the government locking the doors to a public forum , roping off that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a free exchange of ideas is necessary heading into a polarized election .
TikTok lawyers also argued that a ban on the app would affect the ability of tens of thousands of potential viewers and content creators to express themselves every month , and would also hurt its ability to hire new talent .
In addition , Mr. Hall argued that a ban would prevent existing users from automatically receiving security updates , eroding national security .
Justice Department lawyer Daniel Schwei said that Chinese companies are not purely private and are subject @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intelligence agencies .
The Justice Department has also argued that economic regulations of this nature generally are not subject to First Amendment scrutiny .
“ This is the most immediate national security threat , ” argued Mr. Schwei .
“ It is a threat today .
It is a risk today and therefore it deserves to be addressed today even while other things are ongoing and playing out.
” Mr. Schwei also argued that TikTok lawyers failed to prove the company would suffer irreparable business harm .
The Justice Department laid out its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a temporary injunction in a brief under seal , but it was unsealed in redacted form to protect confidential business information .
Mr. Trump set the process in motion with executive orders in August that declared TikTok and another Chinese app , WeChat , threats to national security .
The White House says the video service is a security risk because the personal information of its millions of U.S. users could be handed over to Chinese authorities .
Mr. Trump has given tentative approval to a proposed deal in which Oracle and Walmart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a new U.S. entity , TikTok Global .
But Mr. Trump also said he could retract his approval if Oracle doesn ’ t have “ total control ” of the company ; the president did not explain what he meant by that .
The deal remains unfinalized , and the two sides have also appeared at odds over the corporate structure of TikTok Global .
ByteDance said last week that it will still own 80 % of the U.S. entity after a financing round .
Oracle , meanwhile , put out a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the majority and ByteDance will have no ownership in TikTok Global.
” Government-owned media in China have criticized the deal as bullying and extortion .
ByteDance said Thursday it has applied for a Chinese technology export license after Beijing tightened control over exports last month in an effort to gain leverage over Washington ’ s attempt to force an outright sale of TikTok to U.S. owners .
China ’ s foreign ministry has said the government will “ take necessary measures ” to safeguard its companies but gave no indication what steps it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fate in the U.S. TikTok is also asking a federal court to declare Mr. Trump ’ s Aug. 6 executive order unlawful .
The Chinese firm said the president doesn ’ t have the authority to take these actions under the national-security law he cited ; that the ban violates TikTok ’ s First Amendment speech rights and Fifth Amendment due-process rights ; and that there ’ s no authority for the restrictions because they are not based on a national emergency .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .

A federal judge on Sunday postponed a Trump administration order that would have banned the popular video sharing app TikTok from smartphone app stores in the United States around midnight.
A more comprehensive ban remains scheduled for November, about a week after the presidential election. The judge, Carl Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, did not agree to postpone the later ban.
The ruling followed an emergency hearing Sunday morning in which lawyers for TikTok argued that the administration’s app-store ban would infringe on First Amendment rights and do irreparable harm to the business.
Earlier this year, President Donald Trump declared that TikTok, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, was a threat to national security and that it must either sell its U.S. operations to American companies or be barred from the country.
TikTok is still scrambling to firm up a deal tentatively struck a week ago in which it would partner with Oracle, a huge database-software company, and Walmart in an effort to win the blessing of both the Chinese and American governments. In the meantime, it is fighting to keep the app available in the U.S.
TikTok said in a statement that it was pleased with the court ruling and continues to work to turn its deal proposal into an actual agreement. The Commerce Department, which is responsible for the specific orders banning TikTok, said it will comply with the judge’s order but intends to vigorously defend the administration’s efforts against the app.
Judge Nichols did not explain his reasoning publicly, and instead filed his judicial opinion under seal. Initially both the U.S. government’s brief in the case and the entire Sunday morning hearing were also due to be sealed from the public, although the court later relented.
In arguments to Judge Nichols, TikTok lawyer John Hall said that TikTok is more than an app, since it functions as a “modern day version of a town square.”
“If that prohibition goes into effect at midnight, the consequences immediately are grave,’” Mr. Hall said. “It would be no different than the government locking the doors to a public forum, roping off that town square” at a time when a free exchange of ideas is necessary heading into a polarized election.
TikTok lawyers also argued that a ban on the app would affect the ability of tens of thousands of potential viewers and content creators to express themselves every month, and would also hurt its ability to hire new talent. In addition, Mr. Hall argued that a ban would prevent existing users from automatically receiving security updates, eroding national security.
Justice Department lawyer Daniel Schwei said that Chinese companies are not purely private and are subject to intrusive laws compelling their cooperation with intelligence agencies. The Justice Department has also argued that economic regulations of this nature generally are not subject to First Amendment scrutiny.
“This is the most immediate national security threat,” argued Mr. Schwei. “It is a threat today. It is a risk today and therefore it deserves to be addressed today even while other things are ongoing and playing out.”
Mr. Schwei also argued that TikTok lawyers failed to prove the company would suffer irreparable business harm.
The Justice Department laid out its objections to TikTok’s motion for a temporary injunction in a brief under seal, but it was unsealed in redacted form to protect confidential business information.
Mr. Trump set the process in motion with executive orders in August that declared TikTok and another Chinese app, WeChat, threats to national security. The White House says the video service is a security risk because the personal information of its millions of U.S. users could be handed over to Chinese authorities.
Mr. Trump has given tentative approval to a proposed deal in which Oracle and Walmart could initially own a combined 20% of a new U.S. entity, TikTok Global. But Mr. Trump also said he could retract his approval if Oracle doesn’t have “total control” of the company; the president did not explain what he meant by that.
The deal remains unfinalized, and the two sides have also appeared at odds over the corporate structure of TikTok Global. ByteDance said last week that it will still own 80% of the U.S. entity after a financing round. Oracle, meanwhile, put out a statement saying that Americans “will be the majority and ByteDance will have no ownership in TikTok Global.”
Government-owned media in China have criticized the deal as bullying and extortion. ByteDance said Thursday it has applied for a Chinese technology export license after Beijing tightened control over exports last month in an effort to gain leverage over Washington’s attempt to force an outright sale of TikTok to U.S. owners.
China’s foreign ministry has said the government will “take necessary measures” to safeguard its companies but gave no indication what steps it can take to affect TikTok’s fate in the U.S.
TikTok is also asking a federal court to declare Mr. Trump’s Aug. 6 executive order unlawful.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
The Chinese firm said the president doesn’t have the authority to take these actions under the national-security law he cited; that the ban violates TikTok’s First Amendment speech rights and Fifth Amendment due-process rights; and that there’s no authority for the restrictions because they are not based on a national emergency.
This story was reported by The Associated Press.