truthout--2020-09-22--Romney Says He’ll Back Rush to Name Ginsburg Successor

Sen. Mitt Romney ( R-Utah ) announced on Tuesday that he would support the process of naming and confirming a nominee for the Supreme Court from President Trump to fill the vacancy created by the recent passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
Two recent polls , however , show that most Americans want the process slowed down to allow the winner of November ’ s presidential election to make that decision .
“ I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the President ’ s nominee .
If the nominee reaches the Senate floor , I intend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Romney said in a statement regarding his decision .
Also on Tuesday , Trump on Twitter said he would name his Supreme Court pick this weekend .
“ I will be announcing my Supreme Court Nominee on Saturday , at the White House !
” the president wrote .
Some had held out hope that the Utah senator would not support a vote before the November presidential election , which is just 42 days away , and would further support allowing the winner of that election — either Trump , or his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — to make the eventual pick for the high court .
To prevent rushing through the nomination before the election , however , every senator in the Democratic Party ( including those who caucus with them ) , plus four Republican senators , would have to pledge not to support the process .
Only two Republicans so far — Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — have made such a proclamation .
With Romney ’ s announcement on Tuesday , however , it ’ s almost a certainty that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Many legal experts have noted that the push to replace Ginsburg , who died on Friday , is hypocritical , as Republicans refused to even consider hearings for then-President Barack Obama ’ s judicial nominee when he sought to fill a seat left vacant by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016 .
GOP lawmakers justified their refusal to act at the time by arguing the American people should have a say in the matter through that year ’ s presidential election , even though it was 10 months away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year ’ s presidential race , Republicans have changed their tune , insisting that a replacement be named and voted on before voters have a say in who the next president will be .
As for the American people , two polls out this week demonstrate they do not agree with the GOP ’ s move to rush a lifetime judicial appointment to the highest court in the country .
Instead , a majority of the people want the same standard used in 2016 to be applied this time around , too .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ found that 50 percent of Americans want the winner of this year ’ s presidential race to pick the Supreme Court ’ s next justice .
Only 37 percent said that Trump should make the pick , regardless of whether he ’ s the winner or not .
Respondents in a Reuters/Ipsos poll , also published this week , voiced more opposition to the move by Republicans .
Less than a quarter of Americans ( 23 percent ) , according to that poll , said Trump should make the pick right now or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election , while 62 percent said that the eventual winner of the election should make the pick .
Notably within that poll , 5 in 10 Republican respondents also said the eventual winner of the presidential election should be the one to decide .
Since 1975 , it has typically taken around 70 days for a Supreme Court nominee to receive a vote in the Senate regarding their appointment .
With the election day set to occur 42 days from now , there ’ s a high possibility that Trump , who is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be losing his election fight against Biden at the moment , could lose the election but have his nominee confirmed nonetheless after the election takes place .

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) announced on Tuesday that he would support the process of naming and confirming a nominee for the Supreme Court from President Trump to fill the vacancy created by the recent passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Two recent polls, however, show that most Americans want the process slowed down to allow the winner of November’s presidential election to make that decision.
“I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the President’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications,” Romney said in a statement regarding his decision.
Also on Tuesday, Trump on Twitter said he would name his Supreme Court pick this weekend.
“I will be announcing my Supreme Court Nominee on Saturday, at the White House!” the president wrote.
Some had held out hope that the Utah senator would not support a vote before the November presidential election, which is just 42 days away, and would further support allowing the winner of that election — either Trump, or his main rival, Democratic nominee Joe Biden — to make the eventual pick for the high court. To prevent rushing through the nomination before the election, however, every senator in the Democratic Party (including those who caucus with them), plus four Republican senators, would have to pledge not to support the process.
Only two Republicans so far — Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — have made such a proclamation. With Romney’s announcement on Tuesday, however, it’s almost a certainty that a vote before the election will happen.
Many legal experts have noted that the push to replace Ginsburg, who died on Friday, is hypocritical, as Republicans refused to even consider hearings for then-President Barack Obama’s judicial nominee when he sought to fill a seat left vacant by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016. GOP lawmakers justified their refusal to act at the time by arguing the American people should have a say in the matter through that year’s presidential election, even though it was 10 months away.
Just six weeks out from this year’s presidential race, Republicans have changed their tune, insisting that a replacement be named and voted on before voters have a say in who the next president will be.
As for the American people, two polls out this week demonstrate they do not agree with the GOP’s move to rush a lifetime judicial appointment to the highest court in the country. Instead, a majority of the people want the same standard used in 2016 to be applied this time around, too.
A Politico/Morning Consult poll published this week found that 50 percent of Americans want the winner of this year’s presidential race to pick the Supreme Court’s next justice. Only 37 percent said that Trump should make the pick, regardless of whether he’s the winner or not.
Respondents in a Reuters/Ipsos poll, also published this week, voiced more opposition to the move by Republicans. Less than a quarter of Americans (23 percent), according to that poll, said Trump should make the pick right now or during the lame duck session after the election, while 62 percent said that the eventual winner of the election should make the pick. Notably within that poll, 5 in 10 Republican respondents also said the eventual winner of the presidential election should be the one to decide.
Since 1975, it has typically taken around 70 days for a Supreme Court nominee to receive a vote in the Senate regarding their appointment. With the election day set to occur 42 days from now, there’s a high possibility that Trump, who is projected by a number of analysts to be losing his election fight against Biden at the moment, could lose the election but have his nominee confirmed nonetheless after the election takes place.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-09-22--Trump Fuels March Toward Fascism With “Anarchist Jurisdictions” Edict

President Trump and his administration have taken several overt steps down the jagged path of fascism over the past week .
On September 17 , Trump announced the creation of the “ 1776 commission ” to establish “ patriotic education ” against what his administration has deemed unpatriotic influences such as The 1619 Project , a New York Times Magazine series about the history of slavery .
At a Minnesota rally on September 18 , Trump lavished praise upon the “ good genes ” of his overwhelmingly white audience in a state known for its history of Scandinavian migration ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ openly broadcasting his ongoing eugenics fixation .
Meanwhile , in another report that reeks of eugenics , a whistleblower alleges that a doctor has been performing unwanted hysterectomies on migrants incarcerated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia .
Then , on September 19 , Trump casually suggested that he could sign an executive order prohibiting Joe Biden from being president , months after refusing to commit to leaving office if he loses the November election and weeks after “ joking ” about holding on to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on September 21 , the Justice Department declared New York City , Seattle and Portland to be “ anarchist jurisdictions , ” in a move to withhold funding from cities with Democratic leaders whose decisions don ’ t meet with approval from the Trump administration .
Meanwhile , the Supreme Court vacancy created by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg has now also raised the specter of Trump further attacking reproductive rights and civil liberties .
Scholars and pundits have debated whether Trump is “ really ” a fascist for years now .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in that definitional debate , analyzing Trump and Trumpism in relation to the shifting history of fascism ( understood broadly ) , without necessarily applying that label unequivocally , lends significant clarity to many aspects of his ultranationalist , white supremacist authoritarianism .
The words of the renowned scholar of fascism Robert Paxton provide us with a clue for understanding how threats of “ 12 more years ” are part of the same agenda as the “ 1776 commission ” and forced sterilization .
Paxton argues that “ Fascism is a system of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reinforce the unity , energy , and purity of communities in which liberal democracy stands accused of producing division and decline.
” Along those lines , in his speech on “ patriotic education , ” Trump argued that “ the Left is attempting to … divide Americans by race.
” He continued to claim that “ Critical race theory , the 1619 Project , and the crusade against American history is toxic propaganda , ideological poison that , if not removed , will dissolve the civic bonds that tie us together .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allow towns and states around the country to vote for the educational policies and school boards that they choose , Trump asserts the need to step in to protect “ our country ” from the destructive results of liberal democracy which include “ left-wing rioting and mayhem.
” Our political system is failing , the right argues , because “ the Democrats are the antifa party , ” as Ann Coulter phrased it .
The right wing argues that local democratic leaders , no longer partners in American prosperity , condone “ rioting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mischaracterizes anarchism as chaos when in fact it is a form of anti-hierarchical revolutionary socialism .
In order to protect property and maintain “ order , ” Trump sent federal officers to Portland and threatened to surpass the authority of governors and send in the National Guard — and is now threatening to withdraw funding from New York , Seattle and Portland .
If the opposition party is actually undermining the pillars of the nation , as such warped right-wing claims suggest , then it would follow that the right-wing defense of “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refusal to relinquish power to Biden come November , since according to Trump , “ the Nov 3rd Election result may NEVER BE ACCURATELY DETERMINED , which is what some want.
” ( His predictions of inaccuracy stem from his baseless claims that mail-in ballots are prone to fraud and tampering . )
Of course , that ’ s only the part that Trump feels comfortable saying out loud .
Unlike interwar fascists , Trump can ’ t explicitly target democracy because the concept , though not its actual substance , is revered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ however , in this portrait of fascistic renewal to protect the “ purity ” of the community has been the far right lament at the country ’ s changing demographics and values .
After all , according to Trump , who wanted to trade Puerto Rico for Greenland , “ a lot of it is about the genes , isn ’ t it ?
Don ’ t you believe ?
The racehorse theory .
You think we ’ re so different ?
You have good genes in Minnesota.
” The concept of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makes sense if one believes another group does not .
As the right increasingly embraces a violent backlash against Black Lives Matter and accelerates its racist xenophobia , it is not difficult to envision the racialized foils that form a necessary contrast for Trump ’ s eugenicist rhetoric .
Indeed , the association between ideological purity and demographic purity ( articulated with varying degrees of openness ) has been a mainstay of right-wing politics for generations .
This rhetoric takes physical form in the cages that imprison migrant children and the unwanted surgical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights , bodily autonomy , and their humanity .
While such examples conjure the horrors of the Nazis for many readers , Nazis developed both their eugenicist theories and their plan to eliminate “ undesirable ” populations through the use of concentration camps and other means in part by studying the racist history of the United States .
And so , while the history of fascism is certainly germane to analyzing the authoritarianism we are witnessing from the White House , we must never forget that , as Aimé Césaire famously argued , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ European colonialism brought home to Europe .
Fascism has been but one facet of a larger and longer history of white supremacy , imperialism and genocide .
The United States has played a prominent role in this history — a history that Trump doesn ’ t want us or our children to know about .

The designation of three U.S. cities as “anarchist jurisdictions” was one of several steps toward fascism this week.
President Trump and his administration have taken several overt steps down the jagged path of fascism over the past week.
On September 17, Trump announced the creation of the “1776 commission” to establish “patriotic education” against what his administration has deemed unpatriotic influences such as The 1619 Project, a New York Times Magazine series about the history of slavery.
At a Minnesota rally on September 18, Trump lavished praise upon the “good genes” of his overwhelmingly white audience in a state known for its history of Scandinavian migration (i.e. the Minnesota Vikings), openly broadcasting his ongoing eugenics fixation. Meanwhile, in another report that reeks of eugenics, a whistleblower alleges that a doctor has been performing unwanted hysterectomies on migrants incarcerated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia.
Then, on September 19, Trump casually suggested that he could sign an executive order prohibiting Joe Biden from being president, months after refusing to commit to leaving office if he loses the November election and weeks after “joking” about holding on to power beyond his term limit.
And on September 21, the Justice Department declared New York City, Seattle and Portland to be “anarchist jurisdictions,” in a move to withhold funding from cities with Democratic leaders whose decisions don’t meet with approval from the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court vacancy created by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg has now also raised the specter of Trump further attacking reproductive rights and civil liberties.
Scholars and pundits have debated whether Trump is “really” a fascist for years now. But regardless of where one comes down in that definitional debate, analyzing Trump and Trumpism in relation to the shifting history of fascism (understood broadly), without necessarily applying that label unequivocally, lends significant clarity to many aspects of his ultranationalist, white supremacist authoritarianism.
The words of the renowned scholar of fascism Robert Paxton provide us with a clue for understanding how threats of “12 more years” are part of the same agenda as the “1776 commission” and forced sterilization. Paxton argues that “Fascism is a system of political authority and social order intended to reinforce the unity, energy, and purity of communities in which liberal democracy stands accused of producing division and decline.”
Along those lines, in his speech on “patriotic education,” Trump argued that “the Left is attempting to … divide Americans by race.” He continued to claim that “Critical race theory, the 1619 Project, and the crusade against American history is toxic propaganda, ideological poison that, if not removed, will dissolve the civic bonds that tie us together. It will destroy our country.”
Analyzing Trump in relation to the shifting history of fascism lends significant clarity to many aspects of his ultranationalist, white supremacist authoritarianism.
Rather than allow towns and states around the country to vote for the educational policies and school boards that they choose, Trump asserts the need to step in to protect “our country” from the destructive results of liberal democracy which include “left-wing rioting and mayhem.”
Our political system is failing, the right argues, because “the Democrats are the antifa party,” as Ann Coulter phrased it. The right wing argues that local democratic leaders, no longer partners in American prosperity, condone “rioting” in “anarchist jurisdictions.” Trump mischaracterizes anarchism as chaos when in fact it is a form of anti-hierarchical revolutionary socialism. In order to protect property and maintain “order,” Trump sent federal officers to Portland and threatened to surpass the authority of governors and send in the National Guard — and is now threatening to withdraw funding from New York, Seattle and Portland.
If the opposition party is actually undermining the pillars of the nation, as such warped right-wing claims suggest, then it would follow that the right-wing defense of “democracy” could even entail the undemocratic refusal to relinquish power to Biden come November, since according to Trump, “the Nov 3rd Election result may NEVER BE ACCURATELY DETERMINED, which is what some want.” (His predictions of inaccuracy stem from his baseless claims that mail-in ballots are prone to fraud and tampering.)
Of course, that’s only the part that Trump feels comfortable saying out loud. Unlike interwar fascists, Trump can’t explicitly target democracy because the concept, though not its actual substance, is revered by most Americans. More fundamental, however, in this portrait of fascistic renewal to protect the “purity” of the community has been the far right lament at the country’s changing demographics and values. After all, according to Trump, who wanted to trade Puerto Rico for Greenland, “a lot of it is about the genes, isn’t it? Don’t you believe? The racehorse theory. You think we’re so different? You have good genes in Minnesota.”
The concept of a group having “good genes” only makes sense if one believes another group does not. As the right increasingly embraces a violent backlash against Black Lives Matter and accelerates its racist xenophobia, it is not difficult to envision the racialized foils that form a necessary contrast for Trump’s eugenicist rhetoric. Indeed, the association between ideological purity and demographic purity (articulated with varying degrees of openness) has been a mainstay of right-wing politics for generations. This rhetoric takes physical form in the cages that imprison migrant children and the unwanted surgical procedures that deprive migrants of their reproductive rights, bodily autonomy, and their humanity.
While such examples conjure the horrors of the Nazis for many readers, Nazis developed both their eugenicist theories and their plan to eliminate “undesirable” populations through the use of concentration camps and other means in part by studying the racist history of the United States. And so, while the history of fascism is certainly germane to analyzing the authoritarianism we are witnessing from the White House, we must never forget that, as Aimé Césaire famously argued, “Hitlerism” was a kind of European colonialism brought home to Europe.
Fascism has been but one facet of a larger and longer history of white supremacy, imperialism and genocide. The United States has played a prominent role in this history — a history that Trump doesn’t want us or our children to know about.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-09-22--Survivors of Forced Sterilization in California Prisons Are Speaking Out

Revelations about forced hysterectomies at an ICE facility in Georgia have forced a reckoning with the long history of sterilizations in the U.S. — particularly of Black , Brown , poor and disabled people — and the way this procedure has continued in jails and prisons to the present day .
We speak with Kelli Dillon , who was sterilized at the Central California Women ’ s Facility in Chowchilla in 2001 and who is featured in the documentary Belly of the Beast , which tells the stories of women subjected to unwanted sterilization behind bars in California .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for simply requesting medical records .
“ If we begin to press … we are reprimanded and sometimes put in lockdown , ” says Dillon , who in 2006 became the first survivor of sterilization abuse to sue the California Department of Corrections for damages .
Between 2006 and 2010 , the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation sterilized nearly 150 women without required state approval .
“ Forced sterilization is genocide , ” notes filmmaker Erika Cohn , who directed Belly of the Beast and spent nearly a decade making it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 16 and will premiere on PBS ’ s “ Independent Lens ” on November 23 .
This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
The horrific exposure of forced hysterectomies at an ICE jail in Georgia has forced a reckoning with the U.S. ’ s long history of sterilizations — particularly of Black , Brown , poor and disabled people — and the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prisons to the present day .
We ’ ll go now to California , where a new documentary is bringing one of these disturbing stories to light .
In 2001 , Kelli Dillon was sterilized at the Central California Women ’ s Facility in Chowchilla .
The mother of two in her early twenties was told she was going into surgery for ovarian cysts .
She later learned she had been given a hysterectomy .
Dillon was not alone .
According to a report from Reveal at The Center for Investigative Reporting , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation sterilized nearly 150 women without required state approval .
Prison staff reportedly targeted and coerced women who they thought were likely to return to prison .
Up to a hundred more may have undergone the same treatment as far back as 1997 .
The revelations were a chilling reminder of the 20th century eugenics program , in which 32 states , including California , forcibly sterilized people — many poor , disabled and people of color — for decades .
In 2006 , Kelli Dillon became the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the California Department of Corrections for damages .
Belly of the Beast tells her story and chronicles her fight to hold the state of California accountable .
This is the film ’ s trailer .
COREY JOHNSON : There is a culture of secrecy in California .
SURVIVOR 1 : I have some fear .
What kind of repercussions will I get for coming on and talking about this ?
KELLI DILLON : I always been a fighter .
But it wasn ’ t truly birthed until I was in prison .
SURVIVOR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fibroid .
SURVIVOR 4 : I was told that I had cancer cells .
KELLI DILLON : When I came out , I felt like something was wrong .
ROBIN LEVI : We were getting hundreds of letters about medical abuses every month .
INTERVIEWER : When was the first time a doctor told you that you may be missing your ovaries ?
KELLI DILLON : No one ever told me that .
I have been intentionally sterilized , and I have been lied to .
CYNTHIA CHANDLER : The law prohibits sterilizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ birth control .
But they were doing it anyway .
COREY JOHNSON : One of the challenges with this story is you ultimately have to get to intent .
And then that ’ s when the doctor said , “ Well , that ’ s cheaper than welfare.
” KELLI DILLON : I was looking at these documents , that was confirming , as a Black woman , my life wasn ’ t [ bleep ] .
PROTESTERS : No more abuse !
No more abuse !
No more abuse !
No more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very much intimidated by whom I was going up against .
CYNTHIA CHANDLER : The state has admitted that they have done these illegal surgeries , but we don ’ t actually know who they did them on .
UNIDENTIFIED : Inmates become numbers .
They don ’ t get names .
And that ’ s what makes it easy to abuse them .
SEN. HANNAH–BETH JACKSON : Women in California being coercively sterilized is absolutely revolting .
KELLI DILLON : We have yet to get an apology .
We have yet to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be made accountable .
AMY GOODMAN : That ’ s the trailer for Belly of the Beast .
We ’ re joined now by Kelli Dillon herself , whose fight against the California Department of Corrections is the subject of Belly of the Beast , also the founder of community empowerment organization Back to Basics in Los Angeles .
And in Salt Lake City , Utah , we ’ re joined by the film ’ s director , Erika Cohn .
We welcome you both to Democracy Now !
Well , Kelli , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Go back to 2006 .
Again , you became the first survivor of sterilization abuse to sue the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for damages .
In 2014 , California banned coerced sterilizations , and many people say it ’ s largely because of what you started in 2006 .
Take us back to when you were imprisoned and what happened to you .
KELLI DILLON : As I ’ m sitting here listening to the stories that Dawn Wooten is expressing about some of the detainees in the ICE facility , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ story of what was happening .
I was 19 years old when I was first sent to prison .
And at the age of 23 , I had some regular , you know , I will say , female issues that I was seeking out the doctor for .
And then I was told that I had an abnormal Pap smear and that I would need a cone biopsy to check that out .
And so I agreed to it .
And we discussed cancer .
Me and the doctor , we discussed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I want a hysterectomy ?
I was young at the time , very much uneducated , didn ’ t really know the procedures or any other medical options .
And I was scared of cancer , like most of us are .
And I said , “ OK , yes , if you find cancer , then you could perform the hysterectomy.
” But when he went in to do the cone biopsy and to also remove what they say possibly was some cysts , he intentionally cut off the blood supply to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what was a sterilization on me .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Kelli , when — how soon afterwards did you realize that something was wrong with what they had done to you ?
And could you tell us about what it was like to trace back the sequence of events of what they had done to you ?
KELLI DILLON : Yes .
So , you know , I tell people that , spiritually , of course we feel connected to certain things .
And immediately coming out of the surgery , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number one , I was scared if I had cancer , but then I just felt different .
Just in the days of recovery , it just felt like something wasn ’ t right .
But I didn ’ t pay it any attention .
I just thought maybe it was just my nerves .
And when the doctor came in and told me that he didn ’ t find any cancer , didn ’ t tell me anything else , you know , I was relieved .
But then , several months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ menopausal symptoms at the age of 24 .
I had hot flashes , heart palpitations and just different things that was happening to me .
And I said , “ No , something has to be going on.
” And when I began to question or write the staff in the prison to see , well , what happened to me , to get some answers as to what happened in surgery , they began to start giving me the runaround .
So , actually , it took , with the help of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social activist attorney by the name of Cynthia Chandler , who ’ s also in the film — it took us about a year or so for us to get my medical records , to actually fight , to write , to almost sue them just for the medical records .
And when I finally got them , she was the one who told me , as she read through the medical records , that I had been intentionally sterilized .
And that ’ s something , you know , that people need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have access to that medical information .
And it ’ s withheld , even though to everyone else it just may seem like a privilege to ask for a copy of a procedure that happened to you .
But for us , we are withheld that information .
And if we begin to press , as you guys discussed in the ICE detention center , we are reprimanded and also sometimes put in lockdown or different situations .
We ’ re punished to go after those medical records .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the — why did you finally decide to come forward and talk about your experience ?
KELLI DILLON : Yes .
It took a lot of nerve for me to even first sue them for what had happened while still incarcerated .
I had received a lot of different threats from the medical staff , the chief medical officer , as well as some of the correctional officers that was in there , about the repercussions that I will face if I continue on in my lawsuit .
But the question is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you found out that something like this would happen to you ?
And I just felt like I could not allow CDC to continue on .
But the real press of me wanting to seek justice had a lot to do with the fact that I had begun to see other women that was around my age , around childbearing age , of between maybe 24 to 35 years of age , coming back with all of these hysterectomies .
And even though we didn ’ t say that they were “ the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is coined in Georgia , but I began to see that , well , what is happening , that mostly African American women or women of color come in very healthy , strong , childbearing women , and then all of a sudden we need all of these hysterectomies .
And so , for that — the fight wasn ’ t just for me .
The fight was also for my sisters that I had saw that had been wronged , as well .
It ’ s just that I had the privilege @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assist me in the journey .
AMY GOODMAN : I want to go to another clip from the new documentary , Belly of the Beast .
AMY GOODMAN : So , that ’ s a clip from Belly of the Beast .
And we want to bring in the film ’ s director , Erika Cohn .
Erika , through your research , you determined that between 1997 and 2013 , over 1,400 sterilizations were performed .
Can you talk about this shocking figure and the work you did , the years you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ERIKA COHN : Thank you so much for having me .
We calculated that — between California state audit and prison records , that nearly , as you mentioned , 1,400 sterilization procedures occurred between 1997 and 2013 .
And since 2014 , since a bill was passed in California rendering sterilization for the purpose of birth control illegal — which I think it ’ s important to know it was already illegal , according to state , federal and international law — California is required to report the number of sterilization procedures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessity around each procedure .
And , you know , one of the ways that California was able to find a loophole around these procedures previously was because they were able to classify them as medically necessary , when we know , in many instances , these procedures actually were not medically necessary .
And so , I believe that accountability , holding our institutions accountable , is the only way that we can prevent future abuses like these from happening .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Erika Cohn , of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years , there ’ s actually a much longer history of this .
For instance , it ’ s been well documented that in Puerto Rico in the late 1940s and 1950s , there was a systemic sterilization of women of childbearing age .
Estimates about one-third of all women of childbearing age in Puerto Rico were sterilized during that period , again , as a family planning or birth control system without any kind of explanation to the women of what was actually happening .
Informed consent didn ’ t come until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requirement .
So there ’ s been a long history in this country of this type of oppression of women , hasn ’ t there ?
ERIKA COHN : Absolutely , yes .
Forced sterilization is genocide .
And the legacy of forced sterilization in the United States is deeply rooted in white supremacy .
And my actual connection to the story comes from that eugenics history .
You know , I was first introduced to Cynthia Chandler in 2010 , the attorney who ’ s featured in the film , through a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspired by her work at Justice Now , specifically the Let Our Families Have a Future campaign , which really exposed the multiple ways that prisons destroy the basic human rights of family , one of the most heinous being the illegal sterilizations primarily targeting women of color .
And as a Jewish woman who grew up in Salt Lake City 25 years ago , the phrase “ Never again ” was always profoundly in the back of my mind .
And when I learned there was a different kind of genocide happening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bars , I knew that I wanted to get involved .
And initially it was by becoming a volunteer with Justice Now , and later becoming a volunteer legal advocate working with over 150 people who were incarcerated in California ’ s women ’ s prisons .
And as you see in the film and as you ’ re talking about , that history of eugenics in the United States is not something that we talk about a lot .
When we hear the word “ eugenics , ” we think of Nazi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But , actually , what we don ’ t talk about is the founding of the eugenics movement in the United States and actually how Nazi Germany came to California to learn from our eugenics leaders to take our policies and practices back .
AMY GOODMAN : We ’ re going to leave it there but do Part 2 and have a continued conversation with you .
I do want to give Kelli the last word .
You have 10 seconds .
What would justice look like for you ?
KELLI DILLON @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a petition that ’ s on www.BellyOfTheBeastFilm.org — I mean dotcom , excuse me — and what we ’ re trying to do is seek compensation , in order to — all the survivors to not only be identified , but to be notified , because there ’ s a lot of hidden victims .
And so , we ’ re looking for compensation for not only the survivors , but for the ones that are unknown , as well .
AMY GOODMAN : Kelli Dillon , thanks so much for being with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Erika Cohn , director of Belly of the Beast .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
Thanks so much .

Revelations about forced hysterectomies at an ICE facility in Georgia have forced a reckoning with the long history of sterilizations in the U.S. — particularly of Black, Brown, poor and disabled people — and the way this procedure has continued in jails and prisons to the present day. We speak with Kelli Dillon, who was sterilized at the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla in 2001 and who is featured in the documentary Belly of the Beast, which tells the stories of women subjected to unwanted sterilization behind bars in California. She says incarcerated women are “punished” for simply requesting medical records. “If we begin to press … we are reprimanded and sometimes put in lockdown,” says Dillon, who in 2006 became the first survivor of sterilization abuse to sue the California Department of Corrections for damages. Between 2006 and 2010, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation sterilized nearly 150 women without required state approval. “Forced sterilization is genocide,” notes filmmaker Erika Cohn, who directed Belly of the Beast and spent nearly a decade making it. The film opens in theaters on October 16 and will premiere on PBS’s “Independent Lens” on November 23.
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González.
The horrific exposure of forced hysterectomies at an ICE jail in Georgia has forced a reckoning with the U.S.’s long history of sterilizations — particularly of Black, Brown, poor and disabled people — and the way this procedure has continued in jails and prisons to the present day.
We’ll go now to California, where a new documentary is bringing one of these disturbing stories to light. In 2001, Kelli Dillon was sterilized at the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla. The mother of two in her early twenties was told she was going into surgery for ovarian cysts. She later learned she had been given a hysterectomy.
Dillon was not alone. According to a report from Reveal at The Center for Investigative Reporting, between 2006 and ’10, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation sterilized nearly 150 women without required state approval. Prison staff reportedly targeted and coerced women who they thought were likely to return to prison. Up to a hundred more may have undergone the same treatment as far back as 1997. The revelations were a chilling reminder of the 20th century eugenics program, in which 32 states, including California, forcibly sterilized people — many poor, disabled and people of color — for decades.
In 2006, Kelli Dillon became the first survivor of sterilization abuse to sue the California Department of Corrections for damages. Belly of the Beast tells her story and chronicles her fight to hold the state of California accountable. This is the film’s trailer.
COREY JOHNSON: There is a culture of secrecy in California. SURVIVOR 1: I have some fear. What kind of repercussions will I get for coming on and talking about this? KELLI DILLON: I always been a fighter. But it wasn’t truly birthed until I was in prison. SURVIVOR 2: They did a pelvic exam. SURVIVOR 3: He said I had a fibroid. SURVIVOR 4: I was told that I had cancer cells. KELLI DILLON: When I came out, I felt like something was wrong. ROBIN LEVI: We were getting hundreds of letters about medical abuses every month. INTERVIEWER: When was the first time a doctor told you that you may be missing your ovaries? KELLI DILLON: No one ever told me that. I have been intentionally sterilized, and I have been lied to. CYNTHIA CHANDLER: The law prohibits sterilizing people in prison for the purpose of birth control. But they were doing it anyway. COREY JOHNSON: One of the challenges with this story is you ultimately have to get to intent. And then that’s when the doctor said, “Well, that’s cheaper than welfare.” KELLI DILLON: I was looking at these documents, that was confirming, as a Black woman, my life wasn’t [bleep]. PROTESTERS: No more abuse! No more abuse! No more abuse! No more abuse! KELLI DILLON: I was very much intimidated by whom I was going up against. CYNTHIA CHANDLER: The state has admitted that they have done these illegal surgeries, but we don’t actually know who they did them on. UNIDENTIFIED: Inmates become numbers. They don’t get names. And that’s what makes it easy to abuse them. SEN. HANNAH–BETH JACKSON: Women in California being coercively sterilized is absolutely revolting. KELLI DILLON: We have yet to get an apology. We have yet to be acknowledged. The state has to be made accountable.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s the trailer for Belly of the Beast. We’re joined now by Kelli Dillon herself, whose fight against the California Department of Corrections is the subject of Belly of the Beast, also the founder of community empowerment organization Back to Basics in Los Angeles. And in Salt Lake City, Utah, we’re joined by the film’s director, Erika Cohn.
We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Well, Kelli, let’s begin with you. Go back to 2006. Again, you became the first survivor of sterilization abuse to sue the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for damages. In 2014, California banned coerced sterilizations, and many people say it’s largely because of what you started in 2006. Take us back to when you were imprisoned and what happened to you.
KELLI DILLON: As I’m sitting here listening to the stories that Dawn Wooten is expressing about some of the detainees in the ICE facility, those stories ring so parallel to my story of what was happening.
I was 19 years old when I was first sent to prison. And at the age of 23, I had some regular, you know, I will say, female issues that I was seeking out the doctor for. And then I was told that I had an abnormal Pap smear and that I would need a cone biopsy to check that out. And so I agreed to it.
And we discussed cancer. Me and the doctor, we discussed that if they found cancer, would I want a hysterectomy? I was young at the time, very much uneducated, didn’t really know the procedures or any other medical options. And I was scared of cancer, like most of us are. And I said, “OK, yes, if you find cancer, then you could perform the hysterectomy.”
But when he went in to do the cone biopsy and to also remove what they say possibly was some cysts, he intentionally cut off the blood supply to my ovaries and then began to perform what was a sterilization on me.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Kelli, when — how soon afterwards did you realize that something was wrong with what they had done to you? And could you tell us about what it was like to trace back the sequence of events of what they had done to you?
KELLI DILLON: Yes. So, you know, I tell people that, spiritually, of course we feel connected to certain things. And immediately coming out of the surgery, I just felt like, OK — number one, I was scared if I had cancer, but then I just felt different. Just in the days of recovery, it just felt like something wasn’t right. But I didn’t pay it any attention. I just thought maybe it was just my nerves. And when the doctor came in and told me that he didn’t find any cancer, didn’t tell me anything else, you know, I was relieved.
But then, several months after that, I began to experience menopausal symptoms at the age of 24. I had hot flashes, heart palpitations and just different things that was happening to me. And I said, “No, something has to be going on.” And when I began to question or write the staff in the prison to see, well, what happened to me, to get some answers as to what happened in surgery, they began to start giving me the runaround.
So, actually, it took, with the help of an agency called Justice Now and a social activist attorney by the name of Cynthia Chandler, who’s also in the film — it took us about a year or so for us to get my medical records, to actually fight, to write, to almost sue them just for the medical records. And when I finally got them, she was the one who told me, as she read through the medical records, that I had been intentionally sterilized.
And that’s something, you know, that people need to know, is that we don’t have access to that medical information. And it’s withheld, even though to everyone else it just may seem like a privilege to ask for a copy of a procedure that happened to you. But for us, we are withheld that information. And if we begin to press, as you guys discussed in the ICE detention center, we are reprimanded and also sometimes put in lockdown or different situations. We’re punished to go after those medical records.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yeah, and in terms of the — why did you finally decide to come forward and talk about your experience?
KELLI DILLON: Yes. It took a lot of nerve for me to even first sue them for what had happened while still incarcerated. I had received a lot of different threats from the medical staff, the chief medical officer, as well as some of the correctional officers that was in there, about the repercussions that I will face if I continue on in my lawsuit. But the question is, like: What would you do if you found out that something like this would happen to you? And I just felt like I could not allow CDC to continue on.
But the real press of me wanting to seek justice had a lot to do with the fact that I had begun to see other women that was around my age, around childbearing age, of between maybe 24 to 35 years of age, coming back with all of these hysterectomies. And even though we didn’t say that they were “the uterus collector,” like that doctor is coined in Georgia, but I began to see that, well, what is happening, that mostly African American women or women of color come in very healthy, strong, childbearing women, and then all of a sudden we need all of these hysterectomies. And so, for that — the fight wasn’t just for me. The fight was also for my sisters that I had saw that had been wronged, as well. It’s just that I had the privilege of having an actual legal team to assist me in the journey.
AMY GOODMAN: I want to go to another clip from the new documentary, Belly of the Beast.
SURVIVOR 1: You gave me a hysterectomy for severe cramps. SURVIVOR 2: They did a pelvic exam. SURVIVOR 3: He gave me some kind of a test and said I had some — a fibroid. SURVIVOR 4: I was told that I had cancer cells. SURVIVOR 5: They told me that I had to have my ovaries removed. I had no choice. SURVIVOR 4: We actually need to call them the surgeries of the month, because they were happening so frequently. So many people were getting hysterectomies. That was a cure-all. That’s what it was.
AMY GOODMAN: So, that’s a clip from Belly of the Beast. And we want to bring in the film’s director, Erika Cohn. Erika, through your research, you determined that between 1997 and 2013, over 1,400 sterilizations were performed. Can you talk about this shocking figure and the work you did, the years you’ve spent on this documentary?
ERIKA COHN: Thank you so much for having me.
We calculated that — between California state audit and prison records, that nearly, as you mentioned, 1,400 sterilization procedures occurred between 1997 and 2013. And since 2014, since a bill was passed in California rendering sterilization for the purpose of birth control illegal — which I think it’s important to know it was already illegal, according to state, federal and international law — California is required to report the number of sterilization procedures performed each year, and prove medical necessity around each procedure. And, you know, one of the ways that California was able to find a loophole around these procedures previously was because they were able to classify them as medically necessary, when we know, in many instances, these procedures actually were not medically necessary. And so, I believe that accountability, holding our institutions accountable, is the only way that we can prevent future abuses like these from happening.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Erika Cohn, of course, these situations happening in the last 20 years, there’s actually a much longer history of this. For instance, it’s been well documented that in Puerto Rico in the late 1940s and 1950s, there was a systemic sterilization of women of childbearing age. Estimates about one-third of all women of childbearing age in Puerto Rico were sterilized during that period, again, as a family planning or birth control system without any kind of explanation to the women of what was actually happening. Informed consent didn’t come until the 1970s or ’80s as a requirement. So there’s been a long history in this country of this type of oppression of women, hasn’t there?
ERIKA COHN: Absolutely, yes. Forced sterilization is genocide. And the legacy of forced sterilization in the United States is deeply rooted in white supremacy. And my actual connection to the story comes from that eugenics history.
You know, I was first introduced to Cynthia Chandler in 2010, the attorney who’s featured in the film, through a mutual friend. And I was really inspired by her work at Justice Now, specifically the Let Our Families Have a Future campaign, which really exposed the multiple ways that prisons destroy the basic human rights of family, one of the most heinous being the illegal sterilizations primarily targeting women of color. And as a Jewish woman who grew up in Salt Lake City 25 years ago, the phrase “Never again” was always profoundly in the back of my mind. And when I learned there was a different kind of genocide happening through imprisonment, through forced sterilization behind bars, I knew that I wanted to get involved. And initially it was by becoming a volunteer with Justice Now, and later becoming a volunteer legal advocate working with over 150 people who were incarcerated in California’s women’s prisons.
And as you see in the film and as you’re talking about, that history of eugenics in the United States is not something that we talk about a lot. When we hear the word “eugenics,” we think of Nazi Germany. We think of the Holocaust. But, actually, what we don’t talk about is the founding of the eugenics movement in the United States and actually how Nazi Germany came to California to learn from our eugenics leaders to take our policies and practices back.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to —
ERIKA COHN: And so, historic —
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to leave it there but do Part 2 and have a continued conversation with you. I do want to give Kelli the last word. You have 10 seconds. What would justice look like for you?
KELLI DILLON: So, right now we have a petition that’s on www.BellyOfTheBeastFilm.org — I mean dotcom, excuse me — and what we’re trying to do is seek compensation, in order to — all the survivors to not only be identified, but to be notified, because there’s a lot of hidden victims. And so, we’re looking for compensation for not only the survivors, but for the ones that are unknown, as well.
AMY GOODMAN: Kelli Dillon, thanks so much for being with us. As well, thank you to Erika Cohn, director of Belly of the Beast. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. Thanks so much.


truthout--2020-09-22--Biden Campaign Rakes in Three Times More Funds Than Trump in August

In a matter of months , Democratic nominee Joe Biden erased President Donald Trump ’ s once-massive financial advantage that he ’ d been building up since the early days of his presidency .
Some Democratic strategists called Trump ’ s mountain of campaign cash “ insurmountable.
” But record-smashing fundraising by the Biden campaign — and free spending from the Trump camp — helped Democrats catch up and actually surpass the Republican reelection effort .
Biden ’ s campaign raised $ 210 million in August , more than tripling the Trump campaign ’ s $ 62 million haul , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden banked $ 80 million while Trump only saved $ 8 million , allowing Biden to report more cash on hand for the first time this cycle .
Biden ’ s August haul is particularly large because the Biden Victory Fund — a joint fundraising committee between Biden ’ s campaign and the Democratic National Committee — transferred nearly $ 52 million to the campaign .
Between all presidential committees , including political parties and joint fundraising committees , Biden ’ s edge is even larger , sitting on $ 466 million to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to numbers released by the campaigns .
Democrats have enjoyed unprecedented fundraising this cycle amid supporters ’ fervent opposition to Trump .
That enthusiasm helped Biden rake in nearly $ 65 million from small donors — excluding money from donors to his joint fundraising committee — in August alone , bringing his total from small donors to $ 204 million .
That ’ s already almost twice the amount of small donor cash 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton raised through the entire election cycle .
It ’ s in addition to an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Street donors .
The 2020 election was upended last week by the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , who served on the high court for 27 years .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) released a statement shortly after her death stating Trump ’ s nominee to replace the liberal justice would get a vote before the full Senate .
That announcement only bolstered Democrats ’ fundraising prowess .
Democratic fundraising firm ActBlue announced it raised $ 100 million for Democratic candidates within a day and a half @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sudden Supreme Court battle occurring less than two months before Election Day could change the dynamic of the 2020 election .
Whether Democrats can spend all of their money in time is another question .
Voters are already casting their ballots in key swing states such as Pennsylvania , Minnesota and North Carolina .
Still , Biden has outspent Trump on TV ads up to this point , and he ’ s gotten far more support from outside groups .
Plus , his campaign has almost unlimited resources to target potential supporters who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ online ads .
If all votes were cast today , Biden would have an advantage , according to polls .
FiveThirtyEight gives Biden a 6.8-point lead over Trump nationally , and Biden enjoys a modest lead in each of the major swing states .

In a matter of months, Democratic nominee Joe Biden erased President Donald Trump’s once-massive financial advantage that he’d been building up since the early days of his presidency.
Some Democratic strategists called Trump’s mountain of campaign cash “insurmountable.” But record-smashing fundraising by the Biden campaign — and free spending from the Trump camp — helped Democrats catch up and actually surpass the Republican reelection effort.
Biden’s campaign raised $210 million in August, more than tripling the Trump campaign’s $62 million haul, according to Federal Election Commission filings. Biden banked $80 million while Trump only saved $8 million, allowing Biden to report more cash on hand for the first time this cycle.
Biden’s August haul is particularly large because the Biden Victory Fund — a joint fundraising committee between Biden’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee — transferred nearly $52 million to the campaign. Between all presidential committees, including political parties and joint fundraising committees, Biden’s edge is even larger, sitting on $466 million to Trump’s $325 million, according to numbers released by the campaigns.
Democrats have enjoyed unprecedented fundraising this cycle amid supporters’ fervent opposition to Trump. That enthusiasm helped Biden rake in nearly $65 million from small donors — excluding money from donors to his joint fundraising committee — in August alone, bringing his total from small donors to $204 million. That’s already almost twice the amount of small donor cash 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton raised through the entire election cycle. It’s in addition to an influx of campaign cash from wealthy Wall Street donors.
The 2020 election was upended last week by the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who served on the high court for 27 years. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) released a statement shortly after her death stating Trump’s nominee to replace the liberal justice would get a vote before the full Senate. That announcement only bolstered Democrats’ fundraising prowess. Democratic fundraising firm ActBlue announced it raised $100 million for Democratic candidates within a day and a half of Ginsburg’s passing.
The sudden Supreme Court battle occurring less than two months before Election Day could change the dynamic of the 2020 election. Whether Democrats can spend all of their money in time is another question. Voters are already casting their ballots in key swing states such as Pennsylvania, Minnesota and North Carolina. Still, Biden has outspent Trump on TV ads up to this point, and he’s gotten far more support from outside groups. Plus, his campaign has almost unlimited resources to target potential supporters who have not yet registered to vote with online ads.
If all votes were cast today, Biden would have an advantage, according to polls. FiveThirtyEight gives Biden a 6.8-point lead over Trump nationally, and Biden enjoys a modest lead in each of the major swing states.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-09-22--Front-Runner for Supreme Court Criticized “Roe v. Wade” and Affordable Care Act

Democrats sounded the alarm about the potential Supreme Court nomination of federal appeals court Judge Amy Coney Barrett over her ties to the Federalist Society and criticism of Roe v. Wade .
Despite opposing former President Barack Obama ’ s nomination of Merrick Garland 11 months ahead of the 2016 election , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , has already announced that the upper chamber will vote on President Donald Trump ’ s nominee to replace late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg despite her “ fervent wish ” to “ not be replaced until a new president is installed.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to replace Ginsburg , and Barrett has emerged as the apparent front-runner .
“ I ’ m saving her for Ginsburg , ” Trump said of Barrett when he tapped Brett Kavanaugh to replace former Justice Anthony Kennedy in 2018 , according to Axios .
Barrett , 48 , has been a cause of concern for Democrats since her confirmation to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017 .
The former clerk for the late Justice Antonin Scalia is considered to be a strict constructionist .
Barrett criticized Roe v. Wade , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ probably ” let the precedent stand .
“ The fundamental element — that the woman has a right to choose abortion — will probably stand , ” she said during a speech at Notre Dame , according to the student newspaper .
“ The controversy right now is about funding .
It ’ s a question of whether abortions will be publicly or privately funded.
” But Barrett later said that the court was likely to chip away at some abortion protections in 2016 .
“ I think the question of whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you know , how many restrictions can be put on clinics — I think that would change , ” she said in 2016 , according to The New York Times .
Democrats also raised concerns about Barrett ’ s strict Catholicism .
Sen. Dianne Feinstein , D-Calif. , angered some conservatives when she pressed Barrett on her religious beliefs during her 2017 confirmation .
“ You have a long history of believing that your religious beliefs should prevail , ” Feinstein said at the time .
“ The dogma lives loudly within you.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a judge to impose that judge ’ s personal convictions — whether they arise from faith or anywhere else — on the law.
” Barrett responded .
The New York Times reported that Barrett and her husband , who are parents to seven children , are members of an obscure group called People of Praise .
“ Members of the group swear a lifelong oath of loyalty , called a covenant , to one another , and are assigned and are accountable to a personal adviser , called a ‘ head ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for women , ” the report read .
“ The group teaches that husbands are the heads of their wives and should take authority over the family.
” According to The Times , the group describes itself as a “ charismatic Christian community.
” The “ heads and handmaids give direction on important decisions , including whom to date or marry , where to live , whether to take a job or buy a home and how to raise children.
” Craig Lent , one of the group ’ s leaders , told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ nefarious or controversial.
” “ We don ’ t try to control people , ” he said .
“ And there ’ s never any guarantee that the leader is always right .
You have to discern and act in the Lord.
” Barrett is also a former member of the Federalist Society , the group which bankrolled Kavanaugh ’ s nomination and has been largely responsible for vetting conservative judges for Trump to appoint to federal courts .
If confirmed by the Senate , Barrett may possibly weigh in on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court ’ s decision which upheld the law .
“ Chief Justice Roberts pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute , ” she wrote in 2017 .
The court is scheduled to hear arguments in a lawsuit challenging Obamacare one week following the election .
“ Amy Coney Barrett meets Donald Trump ’ s two main litmus tests , ” Nan Aron , the president of progressive advocacy group Alliance for Justice , told The New York Times .
“ She has made clear she would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care away from millions of people and undermine a woman ’ s reproductive freedom.
” Though some associates and former classmates argued that Barrett was not ideological in her legal opinions , Politico described her frontrunner status as a potential “ coup for Catholic culture warriors 25 years in the making and a high point in the right ’ s decades-long project of reshaping the judiciary.
” “ She was kind of the Manchurian candidate , ” one former colleague at Notre Dame Law School told the outlet .
“ She ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way along.
” Despite Barrett ’ s claim during her confirmation hearing that she would “ never impose my own personal convictions upon the law , ” Democrats have raised alarm over comments she made in 2012 about being a “ different kind of lawyer.
” Barrett reportedly told students at Notre Dame that a “ legal career is but a means to an end … and that end is building the Kingdom of God .
”

Democrats sounded the alarm about the potential Supreme Court nomination of federal appeals court Judge Amy Coney Barrett over her ties to the Federalist Society and criticism of Roe v. Wade.
Despite opposing former President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland 11 months ahead of the 2016 election, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has already announced that the upper chamber will vote on President Donald Trump’s nominee to replace late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg despite her “fervent wish” to “not be replaced until a new president is installed.”
Trump vowed to choose a woman to replace Ginsburg, and Barrett has emerged as the apparent front-runner.
“I’m saving her for Ginsburg,” Trump said of Barrett when he tapped Brett Kavanaugh to replace former Justice Anthony Kennedy in 2018, according to Axios.
Barrett, 48, has been a cause of concern for Democrats since her confirmation to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017. The former clerk for the late Justice Antonin Scalia is considered to be a strict constructionist. Barrett criticized Roe v. Wade, though she acknowledged that the court would “probably” let the precedent stand.
“The fundamental element — that the woman has a right to choose abortion — will probably stand,” she said during a speech at Notre Dame, according to the student newspaper. “The controversy right now is about funding. It’s a question of whether abortions will be publicly or privately funded.”
But Barrett later said that the court was likely to chip away at some abortion protections in 2016.
“I think the question of whether people can get very late-term abortions — you know, how many restrictions can be put on clinics — I think that would change,” she said in 2016, according to The New York Times.
Democrats also raised concerns about Barrett’s strict Catholicism. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., angered some conservatives when she pressed Barrett on her religious beliefs during her 2017 confirmation.
“You have a long history of believing that your religious beliefs should prevail,” Feinstein said at the time. “The dogma lives loudly within you.”
“It’s never appropriate for a judge to impose that judge’s personal convictions — whether they arise from faith or anywhere else — on the law.” Barrett responded.
The New York Times reported that Barrett and her husband, who are parents to seven children, are members of an obscure group called People of Praise.
“Members of the group swear a lifelong oath of loyalty, called a covenant, to one another, and are assigned and are accountable to a personal adviser, called a ‘head’ for men and a ‘handmaid’ for women,” the report read. “The group teaches that husbands are the heads of their wives and should take authority over the family.”
According to The Times, the group describes itself as a “charismatic Christian community.” The “heads and handmaids give direction on important decisions, including whom to date or marry, where to live, whether to take a job or buy a home and how to raise children.”
Craig Lent, one of the group’s leaders, told The Times that the group was neither “nefarious or controversial.”
“We don’t try to control people,” he said. “And there’s never any guarantee that the leader is always right. You have to discern and act in the Lord.”
Barrett is also a former member of the Federalist Society, the group which bankrolled Kavanaugh’s nomination and has been largely responsible for vetting conservative judges for Trump to appoint to federal courts.
If confirmed by the Senate, Barrett may possibly weigh in on the future of Obamacare after previously criticizing the Supreme Court’s decision which upheld the law.
“Chief Justice Roberts pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute,” she wrote in 2017.
The court is scheduled to hear arguments in a lawsuit challenging Obamacare one week following the election.
“Amy Coney Barrett meets Donald Trump’s two main litmus tests,” Nan Aron, the president of progressive advocacy group Alliance for Justice, told The New York Times. “She has made clear she would invalidate the A.C.A. and take health care away from millions of people and undermine a woman’s reproductive freedom.”
Though some associates and former classmates argued that Barrett was not ideological in her legal opinions, Politico described her frontrunner status as a potential “coup for Catholic culture warriors 25 years in the making and a high point in the right’s decades-long project of reshaping the judiciary.”
“She was kind of the Manchurian candidate,” one former colleague at Notre Dame Law School told the outlet. “She’s been groomed for this moment all the way along.”
Despite Barrett’s claim during her confirmation hearing that she would “never impose my own personal convictions upon the law,” Democrats have raised alarm over comments she made in 2012 about being a “different kind of lawyer.”
Barrett reportedly told students at Notre Dame that a “legal career is but a means to an end … and that end is building the Kingdom of God.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-09-22--Trump Wrongly Asserts “Virtually Nobody” Young Is Harmed by COVID

Speaking at a political rally in Swanton , Ohio , on Monday evening , President Trump wrongly claimed that COVID-19 is a disease that only affects the elderly and urged schools to reopen their doors by arguing that “ virtually nobody ” young is affected by it .
“ It affects elderly people .
Elderly people with heart problems and other problems , ” Trump said to the crowd .
“ If they have other problems that ’ s what it really affects , that ’ s it .
You know in some states , thousands of people — nobody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people have “ a hell of an immune system ” that helps them fend off the coronavirus better .
“ It affects virtually nobody ” who is young , Trump declared .
“ It ’ s an amazing thing.
” “ By the way , open your schools , ” he added .
The comments by the president are inaccurate and dangerous : Plenty of young people are affected by the disease , although not at the same rate as older people .
And though the mortality rate among the young is low @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well .
Indeed , from March through July , more than 500 kids under the age of 18 were hospitalized because of coronavirus .
From the start of the pandemic through September 16 , more than 60 children 14 years of age and younger have died from COVID , and hundreds of young people between the ages of 15 and 24 have also succumbed to the disease so far .
Overall , based on incomplete data that it was able to collect from states , the American Academy of Pediatrics reports that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with coronavirus since the start of the pandemic .
It appears that in-person instruction at schools might be playing a role in increasing the spread of the virus .
From September 3 to 17 , at least 74,553 new cases of infections among children had been identified .
This is a 15 percent increase in infections among young people compared to the previous two-week period .
Experts caution that the long-term effects of COVID-19 among children are not yet known .
New studies and a better understanding of this coronavirus have also suggested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once thought in the spread of infections .
This makes reopening schools a risky endeavor , particularly for family members who may come into contact with children who may be carrying the virus without exhibiting any symptoms .
The message to take coronavirus seriously , however , appears to be largely ignored by a substantial segment of Trump ’ s base of support , which was noticeable on Monday night .
Earlier in the evening , before Trump took the stage , Ohio Lt. Gov .
Jon Husted , a Republican , spoke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wear masks .
His request was received with boos from the audience despite his pointing out that the mask he was wearing was in support of the president ’ s reelection .
During an interview on Monday evening on “ The Daily Show , ” Anthony Fauci , a member of the White House ’ s coronavirus task force and the leading expert on infectious diseases in the U.S. , was asked about some Americans ’ refusal to take the disease seriously .
He called such resistance toward simple , scientifically proven methods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the overall goal of stopping its spread .
“ One of the things that I think gets in the way is that we are in such a divisive state in society that it tends to get politicized , ” Fauci said to host Trevor Noah .
“ It ’ s almost one side versus the other.
” He disparaged the idea of people taking “ sides ” on the issue , adding that the situation is “ totally unfortunate because this is a purely public health issue , ” not a political one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you wear a mask , keep social distancing , avoid crowds , wash your hands , do things outdoors more than indoors , there ’ s nothing political about that , ” Fauci explained .
“ That ’ s a public health message that we know works .
”

Hundreds of thousands of children under the age of 18 have been diagnosed with the disease.
Speaking at a political rally in Swanton, Ohio, on Monday evening, President Trump wrongly claimed that COVID-19 is a disease that only affects the elderly and urged schools to reopen their doors by arguing that “virtually nobody” young is affected by it.
“It affects elderly people. Elderly people with heart problems and other problems,” Trump said to the crowd. “If they have other problems that’s what it really affects, that’s it. You know in some states, thousands of people — nobody young.”
He also said that young people have “a hell of an immune system” that helps them fend off the coronavirus better.
“It affects virtually nobody” who is young, Trump declared. “It’s an amazing thing.”
“By the way, open your schools,” he added.
The comments by the president are inaccurate and dangerous: Plenty of young people are affected by the disease, although not at the same rate as older people. And though the mortality rate among the young is low, several children have died from COVID as well.
Indeed, from March through July, more than 500 kids under the age of 18 were hospitalized because of coronavirus. From the start of the pandemic through September 16, more than 60 children 14 years of age and younger have died from COVID, and hundreds of young people between the ages of 15 and 24 have also succumbed to the disease so far.
Overall, based on incomplete data that it was able to collect from states, the American Academy of Pediatrics reports that at least 587,000 children have been diagnosed with coronavirus since the start of the pandemic.
It appears that in-person instruction at schools might be playing a role in increasing the spread of the virus. From September 3 to 17, at least 74,553 new cases of infections among children had been identified. This is a 15 percent increase in infections among young people compared to the previous two-week period.
Experts caution that the long-term effects of COVID-19 among children are not yet known. New studies and a better understanding of this coronavirus have also suggested that children play a bigger role than once thought in the spread of infections. This makes reopening schools a risky endeavor, particularly for family members who may come into contact with children who may be carrying the virus without exhibiting any symptoms.
The message to take coronavirus seriously, however, appears to be largely ignored by a substantial segment of Trump’s base of support, which was noticeable on Monday night. Earlier in the evening, before Trump took the stage, Ohio Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, a Republican, spoke to the audience, encouraging them to wear masks. His request was received with boos from the audience despite his pointing out that the mask he was wearing was in support of the president’s reelection.
During an interview on Monday evening on “The Daily Show,” Anthony Fauci, a member of the White House’s coronavirus task force and the leading expert on infectious diseases in the U.S., was asked about some Americans’ refusal to take the disease seriously. He called such resistance toward simple, scientifically proven methods to combat the coronavirus as problematic toward the overall goal of stopping its spread.
“One of the things that I think gets in the way is that we are in such a divisive state in society that it tends to get politicized,” Fauci said to host Trevor Noah. “It’s almost one side versus the other.”
He disparaged the idea of people taking “sides” on the issue, adding that the situation is “totally unfortunate because this is a purely public health issue,” not a political one.
“When I’m telling you wear a mask, keep social distancing, avoid crowds, wash your hands, do things outdoors more than indoors, there’s nothing political about that,” Fauci explained. “That’s a public health message that we know works.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-09-22--Activists Fight Florida Proposal to Impose Harsh Penalties on Protesters

The American Civil Liberties Union joined Florida Democrats on Monday in condemning a proposed bill by Gov .
Ron DeSantis that would newly classify certain forms of protest as felonies and impose harsh penalties on some protesters .
Flanked by Republican lawmakers and law enforcement officials at an afternoon press conference in Winter Haven , DeSantis referred to Black Lives Matter protests in Portland , Oregon as he announced the proposed legislation .
“ I look at what goes on in Portland .
They ’ ll have people , they ’ ll arrest them , ” DeSantis said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They get their mugshot taken , then they get released .
It ’ s like a carousel ; on and on it goes.
” “ That ’ s not going to happen in here in Florida , ” the governor vowed .
The “ Combatting Violence , Disorder , and Looting and Law Enforcement Protection Act ” would make it a felony to “ obstruct traffic during an unpermitted protest , ” while absolving motorists of liability for “ injury or death caused if fleeing for safety from a mob.
” It would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gathered in a group of seven or more people “ to cause damage to property or injury to other persons , ” or to “ destroy public property ” or topple monuments .
Jailed protesters will not be granted bail until at least their first court appearance .
The proposed bill levies mandatory minimum prison sentences for striking law enforcement officers , including with projectiles , and contains an enhancement for throwing objects that strike officers or civilians , and for out-of-state protesters who even participate in a demonstration that turns violent .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Corrupt Organizations Act ( RICO ) liability to “ anyone who organizes or funds a violent or disorderly assembly.
” It also contains provisions barring state grants to municipalities that defund police , and terminates state benefits to anyone “ convicted of participating in a violent or disorderly assembly.
” State Democratic leaders decried the governor ’ s proposed bill .
“ The governor is attaching himself to [ President ] Donald Trump ’ s propaganda and manufacturing a non-existent law and order crisis in Florida , ” said state Senate Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s political fear-mongering to bolster a president ’ s re-election bid.
” “ Non-violent protest has been a critical and basic principle of this nation , and has repeatedly changed the course of history for the better , ” said state Sen. Bobby Powell .
“ The governor ’ s proposal has nothing to do with safeguarding that right .
This crackdown is just that — a government sledgehammer to permanently silence opposing voices.
” “ The governor could not name a single city , a single town , or a single community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violent protests , because there has been none , ” said state Sen. Perry Thurston .
“ The governor is attempting to link calls for justice to calls for anarchy , without any evidence to support such a claim.
” “ This is using a problem from somewhere else to strip the liberty of people in this state to voice their constitutional right to peacefully dissent , ” added Thurston .
“ And it ’ s the latest in a long line of efforts to quash the people ’ s ability to demand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
”

The proposed bill came on the same day the Department of Justice designated three cities as “anarchist jurisdictions.”
The American Civil Liberties Union joined Florida Democrats on Monday in condemning a proposed bill by Gov. Ron DeSantis that would newly classify certain forms of protest as felonies and impose harsh penalties on some protesters.
Flanked by Republican lawmakers and law enforcement officials at an afternoon press conference in Winter Haven, DeSantis referred to Black Lives Matter protests in Portland, Oregon as he announced the proposed legislation.
“I look at what goes on in Portland. They’ll have people, they’ll arrest them,” DeSantis said. “They’re all scraggly-looking Antifa-types. They get their mugshot taken, then they get released. It’s like a carousel; on and on it goes.”
“That’s not going to happen in here in Florida,” the governor vowed.
The “Combatting Violence, Disorder, and Looting and Law Enforcement Protection Act” would make it a felony to “obstruct traffic during an unpermitted protest,” while absolving motorists of liability for “injury or death caused if fleeing for safety from a mob.” It would also make it a felony for anyone gathered in a group of seven or more people “to cause damage to property or injury to other persons,” or to “destroy public property” or topple monuments. Jailed protesters will not be granted bail until at least their first court appearance.
Today I announced bold legislation that creates new criminal offenses and increases penalties for those who target law enforcement and participate in violent or disorderly assemblies. We will always stand with our men and women in uniform who keep our communities safe. pic.twitter.com/ITl5GmmrZJ — Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) September 21, 2020
The proposed bill levies mandatory minimum prison sentences for striking law enforcement officers, including with projectiles, and contains an enhancement for throwing objects that strike officers or civilians, and for out-of-state protesters who even participate in a demonstration that turns violent.
Furthermore, the measure attaches Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) liability to “anyone who organizes or funds a violent or disorderly assembly.” It also contains provisions barring state grants to municipalities that defund police, and terminates state benefits to anyone “convicted of participating in a violent or disorderly assembly.”
State Democratic leaders decried the governor’s proposed bill. “The governor is attaching himself to [President] Donald Trump’s propaganda and manufacturing a non-existent law and order crisis in Florida,” said state Senate Democratic Leader Audrey Gibson. “It’s political fear-mongering to bolster a president’s re-election bid.”
“Non-violent protest has been a critical and basic principle of this nation, and has repeatedly changed the course of history for the better,” said state Sen. Bobby Powell. “The governor’s proposal has nothing to do with safeguarding that right. This crackdown is just that — a government sledgehammer to permanently silence opposing voices.”
“The governor could not name a single city, a single town, or a single community in Florida that was the victim of violent protests, because there has been none,” said state Sen. Perry Thurston. “The governor is attempting to link calls for justice to calls for anarchy, without any evidence to support such a claim.”
“This is using a problem from somewhere else to strip the liberty of people in this state to voice their constitutional right to peacefully dissent,” added Thurston. “And it’s the latest in a long line of efforts to quash the people’s ability to demand change when the government refuses to listen.”
As folks suffer from FL’s broken unemployment system and lack of COVID19 relief @GovRonDeSantis announces legislation to punish protesters, creating CRIMINAL penalties, essentially trying to incarcerate MORE people. Fear mongering at it’s finest, all for election season too. — Rep. Anna V. Eskamani 🔨 (@AnnaForFlorida) September 21, 2020
I am extremely disturbed by the blatant #FirstAmendment violations in the Governor’s proposed legislation. This is unlawful, immoral, and wrong. https://t.co/NSawJ1LNYL — Annette Taddeo (She/Her/Ella) (@Annette_Taddeo) September 21, 2020
The ACLU of Florida also condemned the proposed legislation. “Gov. DeSantis’ proposal is undemocratic and hostile to Americans’ shared values,” said Micah Kubic, executive director of the ACLU of Florida. “This effort has one goal: silence, criminalize, and penalize Floridians who want to see justice for Black lives lost to racialized violence and brutality at the hands of law enforcement.” According to the U.S. Crisis Monitor — a joint project between the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED) and the Bridging Divides Initiative at Princeton University — over 93% of this year’s racial justice protests have been peaceful. DeSantis’ proposed bill came on the same day that the U.S. Department of Justice designated New York City, Seattle, and Portland — where anti-racism demonstrations continued 119 days after the Minneapolis police killing of George Floyd — as “anarchist jurisdictions.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.