csmonitor--2020-07-30--‘Mayday 1971’ is a close-up look at largest US mass arrest

In late 1970 , a collection of disparate , fractious groups began organizing a massive protest against the Vietnam War .
Planned for Washington the following year , the event was billed as a “ disruptive but nonviolent ” protest .
In the words of the organizers , “ If the government won ’ t stop the war , we ’ ll stop the government.
” Some called themselves the “ Mayday Tribe.
” This protest and its aftermath is the subject of “ Mayday 1971 : A White House at War , a Revolt in the Streets , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biggest Mass Arrest ” by Lawrence Roberts , who participated in the event .
Later a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter and editor , Roberts is a careful observer and he deftly organizes a complex , multifaceted series of events into a coherent , fast moving , and fascinating story .
The demonstrations started with a week-long protest by the Vietnam Veterans Against the War , led by a savvy and charismatic former naval officer named John Kerry .
The Nixon administration ’ s clumsy and ham-handed effort to limit the veterans ’ protests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the American public that the government was treating the former servicemen unfairly .
The president ’ s team was determined to manage the main event more effectively .
The next round of protesters were more diverse and less disciplined .
Armed with a permit that allowed them to camp near the National Mall , they promised to block roads and bridges to bring the city to a halt .
As the number of protesters swelled , the Nixon team suddenly revoked the permit and brought in troops to reinforce the District of Columbia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through the city , police officers arrested them indiscriminately .
The number arrested soon overwhelmed the facilities available to house them .
So the police got creative : An outdoor practice football field was converted into a makeshift jail that housed thousands of people behind a chain link fence without sufficient food , shelter , or sanitary facilities .
They were not permitted to make calls or contact lawyers .
Eventually , some 12,000 people were detained , the largest mass arrest in American history .
The goal was to get protestors off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ required falsified arrest records .
Eventually the district 's public defenders – then often regarded as the nation ’ s best – were allowed to get involved .
With the help of several judges committed to rigorous due process for the accused , virtually all the prisoners were freed .
Initially , the administration won praise for containing the demonstration and the president ’ s men celebrated .
Nixon said to his aides , “ I think we should have clubbed a few more of the bastards.
” Even media outlets like The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been jailed , and eventually the first-hand accounts of their experiences were published .
As evidence of civil liberties violations emerged , the White House found itself under intense , withering criticism .
The tide of opinion turned quickly and the protests became widely regarded as a huge defeat for the Nixon team .
This is a complex story with dozens of actors and events taking place simultaneously at different locations .
Roberts effectively organizes the book by retelling the story through the eyes of several key participants .
Readers get to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's police chief ; protest leaders Rennie Davis and David Dellinger ; a special assistant to President Nixon named Egil “ Bud ” Krogh Jr. ; an undercover police officer named John O ’ Connor , who was embedded with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War ; and the heroic , hard-charging Barbara Bowman , who directed the Public Defender Service .
The Mayday protest has largely faded from popular memory with the passage of time , but the legal cases that followed had a profound impact .
Before the Mayday demonstrations , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and location of protests .
Those restrictions were swept away and the rights of citizens to express their views were increased .
Without the precedents set by the Mayday protests , events like the Million Man March and the annual Right to Life demonstrations could easily have been banned .
Other resulting judicial decisions curtailed police authority to make mass arrests and affirmed the rights of demonstrators to receive fair warning before being arrested .
Still another case gave individuals the right of action against federal officials for violations of their First Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Historical events can leave a lasting legacy , even as the urgency and details themselves cease to matter .
The Mayday protests did not shut down the government or shorten the war .
But they did help establish new standards for civil liberties , which are being tested today , as evidenced by President Donald Trump ’ s deployment of federal security forces to quell protests against racism and police brutality in Portland , Oregon .
Thanks to Roberts , we now have a better picture of what those long-ago protesters really accomplished @

In late 1970, a collection of disparate, fractious groups began organizing a massive protest against the Vietnam War. Planned for Washington the following year, the event was billed as a “disruptive but nonviolent” protest. In the words of the organizers, “If the government won’t stop the war, we’ll stop the government.” Some called themselves the “Mayday Tribe.”
This protest and its aftermath is the subject of “Mayday 1971: A White House at War, a Revolt in the Streets, and the Untold History of America’s Biggest Mass Arrest” by Lawrence Roberts, who participated in the event. Later a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter and editor, Roberts is a careful observer and he deftly organizes a complex, multifaceted series of events into a coherent, fast moving, and fascinating story.
The demonstrations started with a week-long protest by the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, led by a savvy and charismatic former naval officer named John Kerry. The Nixon administration’s clumsy and ham-handed effort to limit the veterans’ protests backfired: It seemed to much of the American public that the government was treating the former servicemen unfairly. The president’s team was determined to manage the main event more effectively.
The next round of protesters were more diverse and less disciplined. Armed with a permit that allowed them to camp near the National Mall, they promised to block roads and bridges to bring the city to a halt. As the number of protesters swelled, the Nixon team suddenly revoked the permit and brought in troops to reinforce the District of Columbia police. As the dispersed demonstrators spread through the city, police officers arrested them indiscriminately.
The number arrested soon overwhelmed the facilities available to house them. So the police got creative: An outdoor practice football field was converted into a makeshift jail that housed thousands of people behind a chain link fence without sufficient food, shelter, or sanitary facilities. They were not permitted to make calls or contact lawyers. Eventually, some 12,000 people were detained, the largest mass arrest in American history.
The goal was to get protestors off the street, even if doing so required falsified arrest records. Eventually the district's public defenders – then often regarded as the nation’s best – were allowed to get involved. With the help of several judges committed to rigorous due process for the accused, virtually all the prisoners were freed.
Initially, the administration won praise for containing the demonstration and the president’s men celebrated. Nixon said to his aides, “I think we should have clubbed a few more of the bastards.” Even media outlets like The Washington Post applauded.
But several reporters had been jailed, and eventually the first-hand accounts of their experiences were published. As evidence of civil liberties violations emerged, the White House found itself under intense, withering criticism. The tide of opinion turned quickly and the protests became widely regarded as a huge defeat for the Nixon team.
This is a complex story with dozens of actors and events taking place simultaneously at different locations. Roberts effectively organizes the book by retelling the story through the eyes of several key participants. Readers get to know Jerry Vernon Wilson, the district's police chief; protest leaders Rennie Davis and David Dellinger; a special assistant to President Nixon named Egil “Bud” Krogh Jr.; an undercover police officer named John O’Connor, who was embedded with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War; and the heroic, hard-charging Barbara Bowman, who directed the Public Defender Service.
The Mayday protest has largely faded from popular memory with the passage of time, but the legal cases that followed had a profound impact. Before the Mayday demonstrations, the district government regularly limited the size and location of protests. Those restrictions were swept away and the rights of citizens to express their views were increased. Without the precedents set by the Mayday protests, events like the Million Man March and the annual Right to Life demonstrations could easily have been banned.
Other resulting judicial decisions curtailed police authority to make mass arrests and affirmed the rights of demonstrators to receive fair warning before being arrested. Still another case gave individuals the right of action against federal officials for violations of their First Amendment rights of free speech and assembly.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Historical events can leave a lasting legacy, even as the urgency and details themselves cease to matter. The Mayday protests did not shut down the government or shorten the war. But they did help establish new standards for civil liberties, which are being tested today, as evidenced by President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal security forces to quell protests against racism and police brutality in Portland, Oregon.
Thanks to Roberts, we now have a better picture of what those long-ago protesters really accomplished.


csmonitor--2020-07-30--How a vocal minority is keeping coronavirus hoaxes alive

As the world races to find a vaccine and a treatment for COVID-19 , there is seemingly no antidote in sight for the burgeoning outbreak of coronavirus conspiracy theories , hoaxes , anti-mask myths , and sham cures .
The phenomenon , unfolding largely on social media , escalated this week when President Donald Trump retweeted a false video about an anti-malaria drug being a cure for the virus and it was revealed that Russian intelligence is spreading disinformation about the crisis through English-language websites .
Experts worry the torrent of bad information is dangerously undermining efforts to slow the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States hit 150,000 Wednesday , by far the highest in the world , according to the tally kept by Johns Hopkins University .
Over a half-million people have died in the rest of the world .
Hard-hit Florida reported 216 deaths , breaking the single-day record it set a day earlier .
Texas confirmed 313 additional deaths , pushing its total to 6,190 , while South Carolina ’ s death toll passed 1,500 this week , more than doubling over the past month .
In Georgia , hospitalizations have more than doubled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a real challenge in terms of trying to get the message to the public about what they can really do to protect themselves and what the facts are behind the problem , '' said Michael Osterholm , head of the University of Minnesota ’ s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy .
He said the fear is that “ people are putting themselves in harm ’ s way because they don ’ t believe the virus is something they have to deal with.
” Rather than fade away in the face of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , fed by mixed messages from officials , transmitted by social media , amplified by leaders like Mr. Trump , and mutating when confronted with contradictory facts .
“ You don ’ t need masks .
There is a cure , ” Dr. Stella Immanuel promised in a video that promoted hydroxychloroquine .
“ You don ’ t need people to be locked down.
” The truth : Federal regulators last month revoked their authorization of the drug as an emergency treatment amid growing evidence it doesn ’ t work and can have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were effective , it wouldn ’ t negate the need for masks and other measures to contain the outbreak .
None of that stopped Mr. Trump , who has repeatedly praised the drug , from retweeting the video .
Twitter and Facebook began removing the video Monday for violating policies on COVID-19 misinformation , but it had already been seen more than 20 million times .
Many of the claims in Dr. Immanuel ’ s video are widely disputed by medical experts .
She has made even more bizarre pronouncements in the past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and some other conditions can be caused by having sex with demons , that McDonald 's and Pokemon promote witchcraft , that alien DNA is used in medical treatments , and that half-human “ reptilians ” work in the government .
Other baseless theories and hoaxes have alleged that the virus isn ’ t real or that it ’ s a bioweapon created by the U.S. or its adversaries .
One hoax from the outbreak ’ s early months claimed new 5G towers were spreading the virus through microwaves .
Another popular story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to use COVID-19 vaccines to implant microchips in all 7 billion people on the planet .
Then there are the political theories – that doctors , journalists , and federal officials are conspiring to lie about the threat of the virus to hurt Mr. Trump politically .
Social media has amplified the claims and helped believers find each other .
The flood of misinformation has posed a challenge for Facebook , Twitter , and other platforms , which have found themselves accused of censorship for taking down virus misinformation .
Facebook CEO Mark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s video during an often-contentious congressional hearing Wednesday .
“ We did take it down because it violates our policies , ” Mr. Zuckerberg said .
U.S. Rep. David Cicilline , a Rhode Island Democrat leading the hearing , responded by noting that 20 million people saw the video before Facebook acted .
“ Doesn ’ t that suggest that your platform is so big , that even with the right policies in place , you can ’ t contain deadly content ?
” Mr. Cicilline asked Mr. Zuckerberg .
It was n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus , and experts say it 's not likely to be the last .
A professionally made 26-minute video that alleges the government 's top infectious-disease expert , Dr. Anthony Fauci , manufactured the virus and shipped it to China was watched more than 8 million times before the platforms took action .
The video , titled “ Plandemic , '' also warned that masks could make you sick – the false claim Facebook cited when it removed the video down from its site .
Judy Mikovits , the discredited doctor behind “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appear on the show “ America This Week ” on the Sinclair Broadcast Group .
But the company , which operates TV stations in 81 U.S. markets , canceled the segment , saying it was “ not appropriate '' to air .
This week , U.S. government officials speaking on condition of anonymity cited what they said was a clear link between Russian intelligence and websites with stories designed to spread disinformation on the coronavirus in the West .
Russian officials rejected the accusations .
Of all the bizarre and myriad claims about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proving to be among the most stubborn .
New York City resident Carlos Lopez said he wears a mask when required to do so but doesn ’ t believe it is necessary .
“ They ’ re politicizing it as a tool , ” he said .
“ I think it ’ s more to try to get Trump to lose .
It ’ s more a scare tactic.
” He is in the minority .
A recent AP/NORC poll said 3 in 4 Americans – Democrats and Republicans alike – support a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skeptics are a vocal minority and have come together to create social media pages where many false claims about mask safety are shared .
Facebook has removed some of the pages – such as the group Unmasking America !
, which had nearly 10,000 members – but others remain .
Early in the pandemic , medical authorities themselves were the source of much confusion regarding masks .
In February , officials like the U.S. surgeon general urged Americans not to stockpile masks because they were needed by medical personnel and might not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials changed their tune when it became apparent that the virus could spread among people showing no symptoms .
Yet Mr. Trump remained reluctant to use a mask , mocked his rival Joe Biden for wearing one and suggested people might be covering their faces just to hurt him politically .
He did an abrupt about-face this month , claiming that he had always supported masks – then later retweeted Dr. Immanuel 's video against masks .
The mixed signals hurt , Dr. Fauci acknowledged in an interview with NPR this month .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he said .
Many of the claims around masks allege harmful effects , such as blocked oxygen flow or even a greater chance of infection .
The claims have been widely debunked by doctors .
Dr. Maitiu O Tuathail of Ireland grew so concerned about mask misinformation he posted an online video of himself comfortably wearing a mask while measuring his oxygen levels .
The video has been viewed more than 20 million times .
“ While face masks don ’ t lower your oxygen levels , COVID definitely does , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authorities are often being dismissed by those who say requiring people to wear masks is a step toward authoritarianism .
“ Unless you make a stand , you will be wearing a mask for the rest of your life , '' tweeted Simon Dolan , a British businessman who has sued the government over its COVID-19 restrictions .
Mr. Trump ’ s reluctant , ambivalent , and late embrace of masks hasn ’ t convinced some of his strongest supporters , who have concocted ever more elaborate theories to explain his change of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speaking in code and doesn ’ t really support masks .
Dr. O Tuathail witnessed just how unshakable COVID-19 misinformation can be when , after broadcasting his video , he received emails from people who said he cheated or didn ’ t wear the mask long enough to feel the negative effects .
That ’ s not surprising , according to University of Central Florida psychology professor Chrysalis Wright , who studies misinformation .
She said conspiracy theory believers often engage in mental gymnastics to make their beliefs conform with reality .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already think they know , ” she said .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
AP writers Beatrice Dupuy in New York , Eric Tucker in Washington , and Amy Forliti in Minneapolis contributed to this report .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

As the world races to find a vaccine and a treatment for COVID-19, there is seemingly no antidote in sight for the burgeoning outbreak of coronavirus conspiracy theories, hoaxes, anti-mask myths, and sham cures.
The phenomenon, unfolding largely on social media, escalated this week when President Donald Trump retweeted a false video about an anti-malaria drug being a cure for the virus and it was revealed that Russian intelligence is spreading disinformation about the crisis through English-language websites.
Experts worry the torrent of bad information is dangerously undermining efforts to slow the virus, whose death toll in the United States hit 150,000 Wednesday, by far the highest in the world, according to the tally kept by Johns Hopkins University. Over a half-million people have died in the rest of the world.
Hard-hit Florida reported 216 deaths, breaking the single-day record it set a day earlier. Texas confirmed 313 additional deaths, pushing its total to 6,190, while South Carolina’s death toll passed 1,500 this week, more than doubling over the past month. In Georgia, hospitalizations have more than doubled since July 1.
“It is a real challenge in terms of trying to get the message to the public about what they can really do to protect themselves and what the facts are behind the problem," said Michael Osterholm, head of the University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy.
He said the fear is that “people are putting themselves in harm’s way because they don’t believe the virus is something they have to deal with.”
Rather than fade away in the face of new evidence, the claims have flourished, fed by mixed messages from officials, transmitted by social media, amplified by leaders like Mr. Trump, and mutating when confronted with contradictory facts.
“You don’t need masks. There is a cure,” Dr. Stella Immanuel promised in a video that promoted hydroxychloroquine. “You don’t need people to be locked down.”
The truth: Federal regulators last month revoked their authorization of the drug as an emergency treatment amid growing evidence it doesn’t work and can have deadly side effects. Even if it were effective, it wouldn’t negate the need for masks and other measures to contain the outbreak.
None of that stopped Mr. Trump, who has repeatedly praised the drug, from retweeting the video. Twitter and Facebook began removing the video Monday for violating policies on COVID-19 misinformation, but it had already been seen more than 20 million times.
Many of the claims in Dr. Immanuel’s video are widely disputed by medical experts. She has made even more bizarre pronouncements in the past, saying that cysts, fibroids, and some other conditions can be caused by having sex with demons, that McDonald's and Pokemon promote witchcraft, that alien DNA is used in medical treatments, and that half-human “reptilians” work in the government.
Other baseless theories and hoaxes have alleged that the virus isn’t real or that it’s a bioweapon created by the U.S. or its adversaries. One hoax from the outbreak’s early months claimed new 5G towers were spreading the virus through microwaves. Another popular story held that Microsoft founder Bill Gates plans to use COVID-19 vaccines to implant microchips in all 7 billion people on the planet.
Then there are the political theories – that doctors, journalists, and federal officials are conspiring to lie about the threat of the virus to hurt Mr. Trump politically.
Social media has amplified the claims and helped believers find each other. The flood of misinformation has posed a challenge for Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms, which have found themselves accused of censorship for taking down virus misinformation.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was questioned about Dr. Immanuel’s video during an often-contentious congressional hearing Wednesday.
“We did take it down because it violates our policies,” Mr. Zuckerberg said.
U.S. Rep. David Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat leading the hearing, responded by noting that 20 million people saw the video before Facebook acted.
“Doesn’t that suggest that your platform is so big, that even with the right policies in place, you can’t contain deadly content?” Mr. Cicilline asked Mr. Zuckerberg.
It wasn't the first video containing misinformation about the virus, and experts say it's not likely to be the last.
A professionally made 26-minute video that alleges the government's top infectious-disease expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci, manufactured the virus and shipped it to China was watched more than 8 million times before the platforms took action. The video, titled “Plandemic," also warned that masks could make you sick – the false claim Facebook cited when it removed the video down from its site.
Judy Mikovits, the discredited doctor behind “Plandemic,” had been set to appear on the show “America This Week” on the Sinclair Broadcast Group. But the company, which operates TV stations in 81 U.S. markets, canceled the segment, saying it was “not appropriate" to air.
This week, U.S. government officials speaking on condition of anonymity cited what they said was a clear link between Russian intelligence and websites with stories designed to spread disinformation on the coronavirus in the West. Russian officials rejected the accusations.
Of all the bizarre and myriad claims about the virus, those regarding masks are proving to be among the most stubborn.
New York City resident Carlos Lopez said he wears a mask when required to do so but doesn’t believe it is necessary.
“They’re politicizing it as a tool,” he said. “I think it’s more to try to get Trump to lose. It’s more a scare tactic.”
He is in the minority. A recent AP/NORC poll said 3 in 4 Americans – Democrats and Republicans alike – support a national mask mandate.
Still, mask skeptics are a vocal minority and have come together to create social media pages where many false claims about mask safety are shared. Facebook has removed some of the pages – such as the group Unmasking America!, which had nearly 10,000 members – but others remain.
Early in the pandemic, medical authorities themselves were the source of much confusion regarding masks. In February, officials like the U.S. surgeon general urged Americans not to stockpile masks because they were needed by medical personnel and might not be effective in everyday situations.
Public health officials changed their tune when it became apparent that the virus could spread among people showing no symptoms.
Yet Mr. Trump remained reluctant to use a mask, mocked his rival Joe Biden for wearing one and suggested people might be covering their faces just to hurt him politically. He did an abrupt about-face this month, claiming that he had always supported masks – then later retweeted Dr. Immanuel's video against masks.
The mixed signals hurt, Dr. Fauci acknowledged in an interview with NPR this month.
“The message early on became confusing,” he said.
Many of the claims around masks allege harmful effects, such as blocked oxygen flow or even a greater chance of infection. The claims have been widely debunked by doctors.
Dr. Maitiu O Tuathail of Ireland grew so concerned about mask misinformation he posted an online video of himself comfortably wearing a mask while measuring his oxygen levels. The video has been viewed more than 20 million times.
“While face masks don’t lower your oxygen levels, COVID definitely does,” he warned.
Yet trusted medical authorities are often being dismissed by those who say requiring people to wear masks is a step toward authoritarianism.
“Unless you make a stand, you will be wearing a mask for the rest of your life," tweeted Simon Dolan, a British businessman who has sued the government over its COVID-19 restrictions.
Mr. Trump’s reluctant, ambivalent, and late embrace of masks hasn’t convinced some of his strongest supporters, who have concocted ever more elaborate theories to explain his change of heart. Some say he was actually speaking in code and doesn’t really support masks.
Dr. O Tuathail witnessed just how unshakable COVID-19 misinformation can be when, after broadcasting his video, he received emails from people who said he cheated or didn’t wear the mask long enough to feel the negative effects.
That’s not surprising, according to University of Central Florida psychology professor Chrysalis Wright, who studies misinformation. She said conspiracy theory believers often engage in mental gymnastics to make their beliefs conform with reality.
“People only want to hear what they already think they know,” she said.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP writers Beatrice Dupuy in New York, Eric Tucker in Washington, and Amy Forliti in Minneapolis contributed to this report.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-07-30--New chapter in DACA saga: US no longer accepts new applications

The Trump administration said Tuesday that it will reject new applications and shorten renewal periods for an Obama-era program that shields young people from deportation , taking a defiant stance after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to let it be scrapped completely .
The move , detailed in a memo from Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf , ended a month of uncertainty about how the administration would respond to its Supreme Court defeat in an election year that has President Donald Trump looking for ways to energize his base .
Mr. Wolf said the administration may try to end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again , casting it as a law enforcement issue that could contribute to illegal immigration .
He said the federal government needs more time to consider next steps , presenting the measures as a temporary change .
“ DACA makes clear that , for certain large classes of individuals , DHS will at least tolerate , if not affirmatively sanction , their ongoing violation of the immigration laws , ” Mr. Wolf wrote in the memo .
About 650,000 people are part of DACA , which allows young immigrants who were brought to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and shields them from deportation .
Roughly 66,000 more would be eligible if new applications were accepted because they met the age requirement – 15 – after the Trump administration tried to end the program in 2017 , according to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute .
The government will deny all new applications , limit renewals to one year instead of two , and deny requests by DACA recipients to visit their home countries unless there are “ exceptional circumstances.
” Recipients may seek permission to return home for family events , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasons , though the Trump administration has generally denied them .
The Supreme Court ruled last month that Mr. Trump failed to follow rule-making procedures when he tried to end the program , but the justices kept a window open for him to try again .
The White House has been devising plans to make another push to end DACA , though it was not immediately clear whether it would make the politically sensitive move before November ’ s election .
Democratic rival Joe Biden wants to keep DACA unconditionally .
A federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the program should be restored to its original form , but the administration was mum until Tuesday on whether it would start accepting new applications .
The White House anticipates legal challenges .
The administration ’ s monthlong silence had unnerved many DACA recipients and those who wanted to join .
U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm of Maryland , an appointee of President Barack Obama , has given the administration until the end of Friday to update the U.S .
Citizenship and Immigration Services ’ website and start adequately explaining why applications @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Trump administration ’ s authority to roll back parts of the program .
“ This is a move that is in defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling and a federal court ruling , ” said Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia , an immigration law professor at Penn State Law in University Park , Pennsylvania .
“ It ’ s a lawless landscape that we are in.
” The Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition accused the administration of further marginalizing immigrants .
The American Business Immigration Coalition called it economically harmful .
And the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its years-long fight to prevent the program ’ s demise .
Laura Mendoza , a program manager at The Resurrection Project in Chicago , joined DACA in 2013 and will have to renew next year .
She said the $ 495 annual renewal fee would be difficult for many to pay .
“ It ’ s infuriating that we continue to be the punching bag for the administration , ” she said of fellow DACA recipients .
“ The administration is slowly dismantling the program.
” Mr. Wolf , the Homeland Security chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fee will be a burden on DACA recipients who will have to apply annually instead of every other year , effectively doubling the cost .
He said the department would consider lowering the fee .
Mr. Trump has tried unsuccessfully to work with Congress on a broader immigration package that would couple DACA with tougher enforcement measures .
He has said lately that he would announce sweeping new steps on immigration , a promise he reiterated Tuesday .
“ We ’ re going to work with a lot of people on DACA , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And we ’ re also working on an immigration bill , a merit-based system , which is what I ’ ve wanted for a long time.
” Mr. Trump said he would make DACA recipients “ happy ” without saying how .
Top Democrats urged for a legislative solution that would allow for a pathway to U.S. citizenship .
“ With the presidential election just three months away , it ’ s clear the president will do everything possible to rally his supporters at the expense of Dreamers , ” according to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee , referring to the name often used for DACA recipients .
“ They shouldn ’ t have to live under the constant fear that DACA protections will be ripped away at any moment.
” This story was reported by The Associated Press .
AP writers Zeke Miller and Jill Colvin in Washington contributed to this report .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

The Trump administration said Tuesday that it will reject new applications and shorten renewal periods for an Obama-era program that shields young people from deportation, taking a defiant stance after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to let it be scrapped completely.
The move, detailed in a memo from Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf, ended a month of uncertainty about how the administration would respond to its Supreme Court defeat in an election year that has President Donald Trump looking for ways to energize his base.
Mr. Wolf said the administration may try to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program again, casting it as a law enforcement issue that could contribute to illegal immigration. He said the federal government needs more time to consider next steps, presenting the measures as a temporary change.
“DACA makes clear that, for certain large classes of individuals, DHS will at least tolerate, if not affirmatively sanction, their ongoing violation of the immigration laws,” Mr. Wolf wrote in the memo.
About 650,000 people are part of DACA, which allows young immigrants who were brought to the country as children to legally work and shields them from deportation. Roughly 66,000 more would be eligible if new applications were accepted because they met the age requirement – 15 – after the Trump administration tried to end the program in 2017, according to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute.
The government will deny all new applications, limit renewals to one year instead of two, and deny requests by DACA recipients to visit their home countries unless there are “exceptional circumstances.” Recipients may seek permission to return home for family events, such as funerals or weddings, and other reasons, though the Trump administration has generally denied them.
The Supreme Court ruled last month that Mr. Trump failed to follow rule-making procedures when he tried to end the program, but the justices kept a window open for him to try again.
The White House has been devising plans to make another push to end DACA, though it was not immediately clear whether it would make the politically sensitive move before November’s election. Democratic rival Joe Biden wants to keep DACA unconditionally.
A federal judge in Maryland ruled earlier this month that the program should be restored to its original form, but the administration was mum until Tuesday on whether it would start accepting new applications. The White House anticipates legal challenges.
The administration’s monthlong silence had unnerved many DACA recipients and those who wanted to join. U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm of Maryland, an appointee of President Barack Obama, has given the administration until the end of Friday to update the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ website and start adequately explaining why applications are rejected.
Legal experts were skeptical of the Trump administration’s authority to roll back parts of the program.
“This is a move that is in defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling and a federal court ruling,” said Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, an immigration law professor at Penn State Law in University Park, Pennsylvania. “It’s a lawless landscape that we are in.”
Immigrant rights advocates blasted the move as cruel.
The Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition accused the administration of further marginalizing immigrants. The American Business Immigration Coalition called it economically harmful. And the American Civil Liberties Union vowed to continue its years-long fight to prevent the program’s demise.
Laura Mendoza, a program manager at The Resurrection Project in Chicago, joined DACA in 2013 and will have to renew next year. She said the $495 annual renewal fee would be difficult for many to pay.
“It’s infuriating that we continue to be the punching bag for the administration,” she said of fellow DACA recipients. “The administration is slowly dismantling the program.”
Mr. Wolf, the Homeland Security chief, acknowledged that the $495 renewal fee will be a burden on DACA recipients who will have to apply annually instead of every other year, effectively doubling the cost. He said the department would consider lowering the fee.
Mr. Trump has tried unsuccessfully to work with Congress on a broader immigration package that would couple DACA with tougher enforcement measures. He has said lately that he would announce sweeping new steps on immigration, a promise he reiterated Tuesday.
“We’re going to work with a lot of people on DACA,” Mr. Trump told reporters. “And we’re also working on an immigration bill, a merit-based system, which is what I’ve wanted for a long time.”
Mr. Trump said he would make DACA recipients “happy” without saying how.
Top Democrats urged for a legislative solution that would allow for a pathway to U.S. citizenship.
“With the presidential election just three months away, it’s clear the president will do everything possible to rally his supporters at the expense of Dreamers,” according to a statement from U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, referring to the name often used for DACA recipients. “They shouldn’t have to live under the constant fear that DACA protections will be ripped away at any moment.”
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP writers Zeke Miller and Jill Colvin in Washington contributed to this report.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-07-30--All sides claim victory in Portland as federal agents pull back

The Trump administration and Oregon leaders declared victory after it was announced that United States agents guarding a federal courthouse during violent demonstrations in Portland will pull back , but it was n't clear the agreement will reduce tensions that have led to more than two months of protests .
Oregon Gov .
Kate Brown said Wednesday agents with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement will begin leaving the city 's downtown area on Thursday , but Acting Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security Chad Wolf would n't specify where they would go .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Portland until the Trump administration was assured the agreement was working and the Oregon State Police was sufficiently protecting federal property .
Many demonstrators are peaceful , but smaller numbers have thrown fireworks , flares , rocks , and ball bearings at federal agents , used green lasers to blind them , and spread graffiti over the face of the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse .
President Donald Trump earlier this month sent federal authorities as protests against racial injustice increasingly targeted U.S. government property , including the stately courthouse in downtown Portland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposite effect , reinvigorating demonstrations with a new focus : getting rid of the federal presence .
The deescalation plan calls for the U.S .
Marshals Service and Federal Protective Service agents to remain inside a fence set up around the federal courthouse , along with some state police , to keep protesters out .
State police will also be outside the fence to keep protesters back .
`` I want to be clear about this , the entire DHS law enforcement presence in Portland will remain in Portland , whether they 're @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or a different location , '' Mr. Wolf said on a call with reporters .
Oregon State Police Superintendent Travis Hampton said his agency would deploy a special operations team and some uniformed troopers to the courthouse for a two-week rotation .
The agency hopes its efforts will allow the protective fence to be removed and `` restore a semblance of normalcy , while meeting community expectations and our obligations to protect the federal property , '' Mr. Hampton said , adding that the troopers were Oregonians .
Tyler Smith worked flipping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's giving away free food to protesters in the park across from the courthouse .
The stand was until recently known as Riot Ribs but is being run by new volunteers after a dispute over donated money .
`` I think that 's a great idea , '' he said of the agreement to pull back the U.S. agents .
`` I 've been thinking this needs to be handled by the state or by the city for some time , '' Mr. Smith said , adding that because Oregon state police troopers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ softer approach with protesters .
The agreement also calls for the U.S. government to clean the graffiti off of the courthouse , which is federal property .
Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler has previously said the federal government refused to clean the courthouse , contributing to the impression that the entire city was under siege .
Mr. Trump declared victory shortly after the announcement , tweeting that federal agents prevented Portland from being `` burned and beaten to the ground . ''
The conflicts between protesters and the federal agents have been limited to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and have not affected the rest of the city , which has been much more subdued amid the coronavirus pandemic .
Mr. Wheeler , meanwhile , also claimed a win in a Twitter post .
`` The federal occupation of our community has brought a new kind of fear to our streets .
Federal agents nearly killed a demonstrator , and their presence has led to increased violence and vandalism in our downtown core , '' he said .
Like many other protests nationwide touched off by the killing of George Floyd at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Portland demonstrations sought to highlight and call for an end to racial injustice , but they had increasingly focused on federal property even before the U.S. agents arrived .
Ms. Brown cautioned Wednesday that the lower visibility of the federal agents – and their ultimate departure – wo n't immediately resolve the conflict at the courthouse .
`` The violence , the property destruction , which includes burning of trash cans and throwing of rocks , that must stop , '' the governor told The Associated Press .
Many protesters want the Portland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers used tear gas on protesters multiple times before federal agents arrived .
Ms. Brown said the departure of the federal agents was a chance to address that anger and begin to make improvements in community policing .
`` This was a political theater for the Trump administration to bring federal troops into Portland streets .
It was about winning political points with their base , '' she said .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
Mr. Balsamo reported from Washington .
AP writers Zeke Miller and Colleen Long in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

The Trump administration and Oregon leaders declared victory after it was announced that United States agents guarding a federal courthouse during violent demonstrations in Portland will pull back, but it wasn't clear the agreement will reduce tensions that have led to more than two months of protests.
Oregon Gov. Kate Brown said Wednesday agents with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement will begin leaving the city's downtown area on Thursday, but Acting Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security Chad Wolf wouldn't specify where they would go. He insisted a federal presence would remain in Portland until the Trump administration was assured the agreement was working and the Oregon State Police was sufficiently protecting federal property.
Many demonstrators are peaceful, but smaller numbers have thrown fireworks, flares, rocks, and ball bearings at federal agents, used green lasers to blind them, and spread graffiti over the face of the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse.
President Donald Trump earlier this month sent federal authorities as protests against racial injustice increasingly targeted U.S. government property, including the stately courthouse in downtown Portland. The deployment appeared to have the opposite effect, reinvigorating demonstrations with a new focus: getting rid of the federal presence.
The deescalation plan calls for the U.S. Marshals Service and Federal Protective Service agents to remain inside a fence set up around the federal courthouse, along with some state police, to keep protesters out. State police will also be outside the fence to keep protesters back.
"I want to be clear about this, the entire DHS law enforcement presence in Portland will remain in Portland, whether they're staying inside the courthouse, next door, or a different location," Mr. Wolf said on a call with reporters.
Oregon State Police Superintendent Travis Hampton said his agency would deploy a special operations team and some uniformed troopers to the courthouse for a two-week rotation. The agency hopes its efforts will allow the protective fence to be removed and "restore a semblance of normalcy, while meeting community expectations and our obligations to protect the federal property," Mr. Hampton said, adding that the troopers were Oregonians.
Tyler Smith worked flipping burgers Wednesday afternoon at a stand that's giving away free food to protesters in the park across from the courthouse. The stand was until recently known as Riot Ribs but is being run by new volunteers after a dispute over donated money.
"I think that's a great idea," he said of the agreement to pull back the U.S. agents.
"I've been thinking this needs to be handled by the state or by the city for some time," Mr. Smith said, adding that because Oregon state police troopers are Oregonian, they might take a softer approach with protesters.
The agreement also calls for the U.S. government to clean the graffiti off of the courthouse, which is federal property. Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler has previously said the federal government refused to clean the courthouse, contributing to the impression that the entire city was under siege.
Mr. Trump declared victory shortly after the announcement, tweeting that federal agents prevented Portland from being "burned and beaten to the ground." The conflicts between protesters and the federal agents have been limited to roughly two square blocks around the courthouse and have not affected the rest of the city, which has been much more subdued amid the coronavirus pandemic.
Mr. Wheeler, meanwhile, also claimed a win in a Twitter post.
"The federal occupation of our community has brought a new kind of fear to our streets. Federal agents nearly killed a demonstrator, and their presence has led to increased violence and vandalism in our downtown core," he said.
Like many other protests nationwide touched off by the killing of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, the Portland demonstrations sought to highlight and call for an end to racial injustice, but they had increasingly focused on federal property even before the U.S. agents arrived.
Ms. Brown cautioned Wednesday that the lower visibility of the federal agents – and their ultimate departure – won't immediately resolve the conflict at the courthouse.
"The violence, the property destruction, which includes burning of trash cans and throwing of rocks, that must stop," the governor told The Associated Press.
Many protesters want the Portland Police Bureau defunded and are angry that officers used tear gas on protesters multiple times before federal agents arrived. Ms. Brown said the departure of the federal agents was a chance to address that anger and begin to make improvements in community policing.
"This was a political theater for the Trump administration to bring federal troops into Portland streets. It was about winning political points with their base," she said.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. Mr. Balsamo reported from Washington. AP writers Zeke Miller and Colleen Long in Washington contributed to this report.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-07-30--'He was my leader': John Lewis to be celebrated in MLK's church

When John Lewis is mourned , revered , and celebrated at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on Thursday , he returns to a sacred place imbued with civil rights history .
The arc of Mr. Lewis ’ legacy of activism will once again be tied to Ebenezer ’ s former pastor Martin Luther King Jr. , whose sermons Mr. Lewis discovered while scanning the radio dial as a 15-year-old boy growing up in then-segregated Alabama .
Dr. King continued to inspire Mr. Lewis ’ civil rights work for the next 65 years as he fought segregation during sometimes bloody marches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across the South , and later during his long tenure in the U.S. Congress .
Former President Barack Obama will be attending Thursday ’ s funeral and is expected to address mourners , according to a person familiar with the arrangements who was not authorized to speak publicly .
President George W. Bush ’ s office said the former president and first lady Laura Bush also will attend .
“ He was my hero , ” Ebenezer ’ s senior pastor , The Rev .
Raphael Warnock , said in an interview late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the line , at the risk of life and limb.
” “ He read the Gospel , and he actually believed it – love your enemies , ” added Rev .
Warnock , who will officiate the funeral .
When Mr. Lewis was 15 , he heard Mr. King ’ s sermons on WRMA , a radio station in Montgomery , Alabama , he recalled in an interview for the Southern Oral History Program .
“ Later I saw him on many occasions in Nashville while I was in school between 1958 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ In a sense , he was my leader.
” Mr. King was “ the person who , more than any other , continued to influence my life , who made me who I was , ” Mr. Lewis wrote in his 1998 autobiography , “ Walking with the Wind.
” By the summer of 1963 , Mr. Lewis was addressing thousands of people during the March on Washington , speaking shortly before Mr. King gave his “ I Have a Dream ” speech .
He spoke then about Black people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that resonate vividly in today ’ s times .
“ My friends , let us not forget that we are involved in a serious social revolution , ” Mr. Lewis told the huge crowd on the Washington Mall .
“ To those who have said , ‘ Be patient and wait , ’ we have long said that we can not be patient , ” he added .
“ We do not want our freedom gradually , but we want to be free now !
We are tired .
We are tired of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tired of seeing our people locked up in jail over and over again.
” In 1965 , Mr. Lewis was beaten by Alabama state troopers in the city of Selma in what became known as “ Bloody Sunday.
” Last Sunday , his casket was carried across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma .
The wagon rolled over a carpet of rose petals on the bridge that spans the Alabama River .
On the south side of the bridge , where Mr. Lewis was attacked by the law officers , family members placed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , marking the spot where Mr. Lewis spilled his blood and suffered a head injury .
Mr. Lewis was later awarded the Medal of Freedom by the nation ’ s first Black president in 2011 .
He spent more than three decades in Congress , and his district included most of Atlanta .
On Monday , a memorial service at the U.S. Capitol in Washington drew congressional leaders from both parties .
Mr. Lewis was the first Black lawmaker to lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda .
On Wednesday he was lauded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ceremony at the Georgia Capitol , where people paid their final respects to the civil rights icon in one of the last memorials .
Mr. Lewis was a member of Ebenezer , and “ it was my honor to serve as pastor to John Lewis , a man of faith and a true American patriot who selflessly risked life and limb in the sacred cause of truth-telling and justice-making in the world , ” Rev .
Warnock said in a statement before the funeral .
“ He was wounded for America ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by his bruises we are healed , ” Rev .
Warnock added .
“ Today we weep .
Tomorrow we continue the work of healing that was his life ’ s work.
” This story was reported by The Associated Press .
AP Writers Aamer Madhani and Zeke Miller in Washington contributed .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

When John Lewis is mourned, revered, and celebrated at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on Thursday, he returns to a sacred place imbued with civil rights history.
The arc of Mr. Lewis’ legacy of activism will once again be tied to Ebenezer’s former pastor Martin Luther King Jr., whose sermons Mr. Lewis discovered while scanning the radio dial as a 15-year-old boy growing up in then-segregated Alabama.
Dr. King continued to inspire Mr. Lewis’ civil rights work for the next 65 years as he fought segregation during sometimes bloody marches, Greyhound bus “Freedom Rides” across the South, and later during his long tenure in the U.S. Congress.
Mr. Lewis died July 17 at age 80.
Former President Barack Obama will be attending Thursday’s funeral and is expected to address mourners, according to a person familiar with the arrangements who was not authorized to speak publicly. President George W. Bush’s office said the former president and first lady Laura Bush also will attend.
“He was my hero,” Ebenezer’s senior pastor, The Rev. Raphael Warnock, said in an interview late Wednesday. “He laid it all on the line, at the risk of life and limb.”
“He read the Gospel, and he actually believed it – love your enemies,” added Rev. Warnock, who will officiate the funeral.
When Mr. Lewis was 15, he heard Mr. King’s sermons on WRMA, a radio station in Montgomery, Alabama, he recalled in an interview for the Southern Oral History Program.
“Later I saw him on many occasions in Nashville while I was in school between 1958 and ‘61,” Mr. Lewis said. “In a sense, he was my leader.”
Mr. King was “the person who, more than any other, continued to influence my life, who made me who I was,” Mr. Lewis wrote in his 1998 autobiography, “Walking with the Wind.”
By the summer of 1963, Mr. Lewis was addressing thousands of people during the March on Washington, speaking shortly before Mr. King gave his “I Have a Dream” speech. He spoke then about Black people beaten by police and jailed – themes that resonate vividly in today’s times.
“My friends, let us not forget that we are involved in a serious social revolution,” Mr. Lewis told the huge crowd on the Washington Mall.
“To those who have said, ‘Be patient and wait,’ we have long said that we cannot be patient,” he added. “We do not want our freedom gradually, but we want to be free now! We are tired. We are tired of being beaten by policemen. We are tired of seeing our people locked up in jail over and over again.”
In 1965, Mr. Lewis was beaten by Alabama state troopers in the city of Selma in what became known as “Bloody Sunday.”
Last Sunday, his casket was carried across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma. The wagon rolled over a carpet of rose petals on the bridge that spans the Alabama River. On the south side of the bridge, where Mr. Lewis was attacked by the law officers, family members placed red roses that the carriage rolled over, marking the spot where Mr. Lewis spilled his blood and suffered a head injury.
Mr. Lewis was later awarded the Medal of Freedom by the nation’s first Black president in 2011.
He spent more than three decades in Congress, and his district included most of Atlanta.
On Monday, a memorial service at the U.S. Capitol in Washington drew congressional leaders from both parties. Mr. Lewis was the first Black lawmaker to lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda. On Wednesday he was lauded as a warrior and hero during a ceremony at the Georgia Capitol, where people paid their final respects to the civil rights icon in one of the last memorials.
Mr. Lewis was a member of Ebenezer, and “it was my honor to serve as pastor to John Lewis, a man of faith and a true American patriot who selflessly risked life and limb in the sacred cause of truth-telling and justice-making in the world,” Rev. Warnock said in a statement before the funeral.
“He was wounded for America’s transgressions, crushed for our iniquities and by his bruises we are healed,” Rev. Warnock added. “Today we weep. Tomorrow we continue the work of healing that was his life’s work.”
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP Writers Aamer Madhani and Zeke Miller in Washington contributed.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-07-31--Tracking the anti-science wave: Commentary on the roots of distrust

In 1890 , as the Russian Flu raged , a conspiracy emerged , linking the disease to the suspicious new electric light technology .
If there is a vacuum in scientific or political authorities ’ accounts , conspiracies fill the void .
This happens with increasing frequency whenever there is a gap in trust in the process of scientific endeavor .
“ People have an epistemic need to know the truth and they also have an existential need to feel safe , ” Karen Douglas , a professor of psychology at the University of Kent who studies conspiracy theories , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outbreak of COVID-19 has elevated , among other bad suppositions , the notion that the 5G technology emanates the disease .
Such conspiracy theories have contributed to some Americans ’ reluctance to buy into public health measures .
Skeptics and those on the fence hesitate to accept social distancing measures and mask mandates , or outright spurn them .
This “ general anti-science , anti-authority , anti-vaccine feeling ” has hampered the United States ’ ability to control the outbreak , Anthony Fauci , the long-serving director of the National Institute of Allergy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ June .
Indeed , the U.S. continues to break records for new cases of COVID-19 , even as many other nations have seen declines .
Dr. Fauci ’ s comment highlighted the connection between science , public health , and power structures , drawing on the increasingly apparent fact that anti-science sentiment has become increasingly visible in the United States in recent years .
This anti-science feeling has historical parallels in the U.S. , and carries certain consequences .
The 1960s saw a wave of anti-science sentiment .
In his 1970 text “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Baker traces the backlash of the anti-science movements of the sixties to the funding model of most scientific research which relied upon the apparatus of the state ( in other words , military research ) .
In the minds of the protesters , according to Baker , military tech and science were interchangeable .
This , similar to how the modern anti-vaccination movement objects to the public-private partnerships of the medical establishment , created a general skepticism of science .
Anti-war protestors , in this account , viewed the lack of critical engagement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ synonymous with complicity in pro-war activities .
Following the 1960s protest period , it was conservatives and churchgoers who lost faith in scientific endeavors .
Between 1974 and 2010 , as Gordon Gauchat , at the time affiliated with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill , explains in a 2012 research paper , conservatives became “ increasingly distrustful of science , ” while public faith in science across America generally was stable .
During the Obama and Bush administrations , a major concern of institutions like the National Academies of Science @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of science .
The early 2000s was seen as a period in American life in which scientific inquiry was very polarized .
Indeed , Professor Gauchat ’ s study “ [ calls ] into question whether the cultural authority of science can provide the political consensus it once did in the 1960s.
” American conservatives came to see science as a politically-loaded endeavor .
They were skeptical of climate science , and some fundamentalist quarters rejected scientific theories like evolution by mutation and natural selection .
This was not a clean break with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is not necessarily explained by a lack of education as is sometimes suggested .
In Professor Gauchet ’ s view , scientific literacy is not as much of a problem as is the unwillingness to accept scientific authority on cultural and political matters .
The relationship between science and the powers that be influences the way we view science in general , which in turn impacts our likelihood of accepting public health policies .
Moreover , those who distrust public institutions tend to distrust science .
High polarization and low institutional trust @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scientists in the U.S. are at the mercy of public views about U.S. institutions when they do not actively engage in the policy sphere .
Science is not necessarily a value neutral venture , as scientists like Stanford neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky and the late Harvard evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould have pointed out .
The political implications of science can alienate people who begin to view their ideology as at odds with scientific enterprise .
In times of crisis conspiracy theories can claim the gaps in authority in the public consciousness .
Contrary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ received praise for its response to the coronavirus outbreak .
The first confirmed case in the country was documented on February 28th .
Since mid-April , the country has averaged less than ten new cases a day , and has , as of this writing , a total of 1,204 confirmed cases .
The country publicly estimates a total of 1,560 confirmed and probable cases .
One factor that may have played a role in the success of the country ’ s attempt to eliminate the virus is the buy-in to cultural authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , New Zealanders ’ trust in government has been on the rise , even during the pandemic .
If we had more scientific input on science-heavy policy matters , perhaps the United States would have had a better response to the virus .
A 2015 survey of 3,748 American-based scientists by Pew Research Center revealed that the majority , 87 % , agreed with the statement that , “ Scientists should take an active role in public policy debates about issues related to science and technology.
” Science communicators like astrophysicist Neil deGrasse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should engage in politics more .
“ If we go forward allowing people in charge to cherry-pick science , that is not an informed democracy , ” Dr. Tyson told one interviewer .
“ We should fear the future of our nation in all the ways that science matters to that future ... if that is how people are making decisions.
” Perhaps the way forward is to have scientists more actively and openly involved in policy debates .
That may make it harder for officials to cherry-pick , and more difficult for @ @ @ @ @ @ @

In 1890, as the Russian Flu raged, a conspiracy emerged, linking the disease to the suspicious new electric light technology. If there is a vacuum in scientific or political authorities’ accounts, conspiracies fill the void. This happens with increasing frequency whenever there is a gap in trust in the process of scientific endeavor.
“People have an epistemic need to know the truth and they also have an existential need to feel safe,” Karen Douglas, a professor of psychology at the University of Kent who studies conspiracy theories, told Forbes in May.
The current outbreak of COVID-19 has elevated, among other bad suppositions, the notion that the 5G technology emanates the disease. Such conspiracy theories have contributed to some Americans’ reluctance to buy into public health measures. Skeptics and those on the fence hesitate to accept social distancing measures and mask mandates, or outright spurn them.
This “general anti-science, anti-authority, anti-vaccine feeling” has hampered the United States’ ability to control the outbreak, Anthony Fauci, the long-serving director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told CNN in June.
Indeed, the U.S. continues to break records for new cases of COVID-19, even as many other nations have seen declines.
Science and anti-science
Dr. Fauci’s comment highlighted the connection between science, public health, and power structures, drawing on the increasingly apparent fact that anti-science sentiment has become increasingly visible in the United States in recent years.
This anti-science feeling has historical parallels in the U.S., and carries certain consequences.
The 1960s saw a wave of anti-science sentiment. In his 1970 text “Modern Physics and Antiphysics,” Adolph Baker traces the backlash of the anti-science movements of the sixties to the funding model of most scientific research which relied upon the apparatus of the state (in other words, military research).
In the minds of the protesters, according to Baker, military tech and science were interchangeable. This, similar to how the modern anti-vaccination movement objects to the public-private partnerships of the medical establishment, created a general skepticism of science. Anti-war protestors, in this account, viewed the lack of critical engagement by scientists on political matters to be synonymous with complicity in pro-war activities.
Following the 1960s protest period, it was conservatives and churchgoers who lost faith in scientific endeavors. Between 1974 and 2010, as Gordon Gauchat, at the time affiliated with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, explains in a 2012 research paper, conservatives became “increasingly distrustful of science,” while public faith in science across America generally was stable.
During the Obama and Bush administrations, a major concern of institutions like the National Academies of Science became preserving the “cultural authority” of science. The early 2000s was seen as a period in American life in which scientific inquiry was very polarized. Indeed, Professor Gauchat’s study “[calls] into question whether the cultural authority of science can provide the political consensus it once did in the 1960s.”
American conservatives came to see science as a politically-loaded endeavor. They were skeptical of climate science, and some fundamentalist quarters rejected scientific theories like evolution by mutation and natural selection. This was not a clean break with science but a gradual separation, and it is not necessarily explained by a lack of education as is sometimes suggested. In Professor Gauchet’s view, scientific literacy is not as much of a problem as is the unwillingness to accept scientific authority on cultural and political matters.
A matter of trust
The relationship between science and the powers that be influences the way we view science in general, which in turn impacts our likelihood of accepting public health policies. Moreover, those who distrust public institutions tend to distrust science. High polarization and low institutional trust equals low trust in expert opinions.
Scientists in the U.S. are at the mercy of public views about U.S. institutions when they do not actively engage in the policy sphere. Science is not necessarily a value neutral venture, as scientists like Stanford neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky and the late Harvard evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould have pointed out. The political implications of science can alienate people who begin to view their ideology as at odds with scientific enterprise. In times of crisis conspiracy theories can claim the gaps in authority in the public consciousness.
Contrary to the U.S., New Zealand has received praise for its response to the coronavirus outbreak. The first confirmed case in the country was documented on February 28th. Since mid-April, the country has averaged less than ten new cases a day, and has, as of this writing, a total of 1,204 confirmed cases. The country publicly estimates a total of 1,560 confirmed and probable cases.
One factor that may have played a role in the success of the country’s attempt to eliminate the virus is the buy-in to cultural authority on the matter. In recent years, New Zealanders’ trust in government has been on the rise, even during the pandemic.
If we had more scientific input on science-heavy policy matters, perhaps the United States would have had a better response to the virus.
A 2015 survey of 3,748 American-based scientists by Pew Research Center revealed that the majority, 87%, agreed with the statement that, “Scientists should take an active role in public policy debates about issues related to science and technology.” Science communicators like astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson have made the case that scientists should engage in politics more.
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 we go forward allowing people in charge to cherry-pick science, that is not an informed democracy,” Dr. Tyson told one interviewer. “We should fear the future of our nation in all the ways that science matters to that future... if that is how people are making decisions.”
Perhaps the way forward is to have scientists more actively and openly involved in policy debates. That may make it harder for officials to cherry-pick, and more difficult for the public to accept junk theories.


csmonitor--2020-07-31--Q&A with Alexander Keyssar, author of ‘Why Do We Still Have the Electoral College?’

It ’ s the question many voters ask themselves every four years : Why elect America ’ s president with a system as arcane as the Electoral College ?
For an institution so unpopular , it has proved surprisingly durable – surviving more than two centuries of complaints and confusion .
Alexander Keyssar , a professor of history and social policy at Harvard Kennedy School , attempts to answer that question in his book “ Why Do We Still Have the Electoral College ?
” Narrating its history from the U.S .
Constitutional Convention to today , Professor Keyssar explores @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and how it has lasted .
With the country approaching another election in November , Professor Keyssar spoke with the Monitor about his book .
Q : In the book , you discuss why the Electoral College still exists – not whether it should .
Why take that approach ?
There have been many , many books and articles on the pros and cons , and I don ’ t think that I or anybody else has much to add to that debate .
What grabbed me was the question that is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problematic the Electoral College is , how has it endured ?
It ’ s also the question I think several hundred million Americans ask themselves every year – why do we still do this ?
Q : If it ’ s so unpopular , how did we get the Electoral College in the first place ?
When they gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 , the framers really didn ’ t know how the president should be chosen .
The default position was that Congress would choose , but all sorts of other ideas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the governors choose the president .
Another was to have some sort of independent electors .
They also discussed the possibility of a national popular vote .
But they couldn ’ t come to an agreement .
At the end of the summer they took a week ’ s vacation and left a committee in charge of straightening it out .
It was that committee which came up with the idea .
Q : How long did it take for people to start looking for something better ?
Even in the 1790s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ signs that what they had designed was not working smoothly .
What was also happening right away was the formation of [ political ] parties .
And when you start getting these partisan interests , they start gaming the system – for example , shifting from winner-take-all votes to district elections .
The dissatisfactions with the system were so great that between 1813 and 1826 , constitutional amendments to significantly revise the electoral system were introduced in every Congress .
Four of those constitutional amendments were actually passed by the Senate by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was passed by the Senate and failed by just a couple of votes in the House .
Q : Why has the Electoral College survived despite so much pushback ?
There are three pieces to the answer and they ’ re all important .
One is that partisan factors intervened repeatedly .
Parties who thought they had an advantage with one system didn ’ t want to get rid of it .
The second factor is that the institution was sufficiently complicated that changing any one part meant that you had to change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difficult to reach consensus .
The third factor is that between the 1870s and the 1970s , the white South fiercely opposed the adoption of a national popular vote because its leaders were convinced that would reduce their power and jeopardize the system of white supremacy they had put into place .
Q : What do you make of the partisanship that helps to keep the Electoral College alive ?
As polls have shown since the 1940s , the American people have been significantly more in favor of reform than their political leaders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people in a democratic country that the person who wins the most votes should become president .
The resistance to reform comes much more from the professional politicians who are calculating their partisan interests .
Politicians who have thrived in a particular electoral system are often the people least likely to want to change the system .

It’s the question many voters ask themselves every four years: Why elect America’s president with a system as arcane as the Electoral College? For an institution so unpopular, it has proved surprisingly durable – surviving more than two centuries of complaints and confusion.
Alexander Keyssar, a professor of history and social policy at Harvard Kennedy School, attempts to answer that question in his book “Why Do We Still Have the Electoral College?” Narrating its history from the U.S. Constitutional Convention to today, Professor Keyssar explores how the system came to be, and how it has lasted.
With the country approaching another election in November, Professor Keyssar spoke with the Monitor about his book.
Q: In the book, you discuss why the Electoral College still exists – not whether it should. Why take that approach?
There have been many, many books and articles on the pros and cons, and I don’t think that I or anybody else has much to add to that debate. What grabbed me was the question that is the title of the book: Given how problematic the Electoral College is, how has it endured? It’s also the question I think several hundred million Americans ask themselves every year – why do we still do this?
Q: If it’s so unpopular, how did we get the Electoral College in the first place?
When they gathered in Philadelphia in 1787, the framers really didn’t know how the president should be chosen. The default position was that Congress would choose, but all sorts of other ideas were proposed. One proposal was to have the governors choose the president. Another was to have some sort of independent electors. They also discussed the possibility of a national popular vote. But they couldn’t come to an agreement.
At the end of the summer they took a week’s vacation and left a committee in charge of straightening it out. It was that committee which came up with the idea.
Q: How long did it take for people to start looking for something better?
Even in the 1790s, the first elections, there were signs that what they had designed was not working smoothly. What was also happening right away was the formation of [political] parties. And when you start getting these partisan interests, they start gaming the system – for example, shifting from winner-take-all votes to district elections. The dissatisfactions with the system were so great that between 1813 and 1826, constitutional amendments to significantly revise the electoral system were introduced in every Congress. Four of those constitutional amendments were actually passed by the Senate by the requisite two-thirds majority. One year it was passed by the Senate and failed by just a couple of votes in the House.
Q: Why has the Electoral College survived despite so much pushback?
There are three pieces to the answer and they’re all important. One is that partisan factors intervened repeatedly. Parties who thought they had an advantage with one system didn’t want to get rid of it. The second factor is that the institution was sufficiently complicated that changing any one part meant that you had to change other parts. That made it more difficult to reach consensus. The third factor is that between the 1870s and the 1970s, the white South fiercely opposed the adoption of a national popular vote because its leaders were convinced that would reduce their power and jeopardize the system of white supremacy they had put into place.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Q: What do you make of the partisanship that helps to keep the Electoral College alive?
As polls have shown since the 1940s, the American people have been significantly more in favor of reform than their political leaders. There is a common-sensical view among people in a democratic country that the person who wins the most votes should become president. The resistance to reform comes much more from the professional politicians who are calculating their partisan interests. Politicians who have thrived in a particular electoral system are often the people least likely to want to change the system.