truthout--2020-10-09--After Hurricanes, Toxic Spills and Pollutants Threaten Gulf Coast Communities

After Hurricane Laura barreled through southwest Louisiana in late August , independent environmental scientist and chemist Wilma Subra began testing for contaminants in local waterways .
In this region crowded with oil and gas infrastructure , pollution appears to be widespread .
Heading west from her home in New Iberia , Subra said there are “ large , large areas of oily sheen floating on the water , and you see large areas of oily sheen in the vegetation in the marsh all around these oil and gas facilities.
” Subra has been searching for evidence of heavy metals — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for diabetes , high blood pressure , and several types of cancer , and lead , which can cause damage to the brain and nervous system — as well as bacteria from sewage spills .
Her hope is to communicate potential health risks to the people returning home following the storm .
Wading through contaminated water or sediment can bring on “ respiratory problems and skin rashes , ” Subra said .
“ But then it can lead to a lot more serious conditions.
” A patchwork of federal and state agencies , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contractors , bear the responsibility of cleaning up these messes .
But in Gulf Coast states , outdated infrastructure , incomplete reporting , and lax environmental regulations make the extent of spills and leaks from hurricanes difficult to assess .
Subra , as well as environmental groups , have done testing for years to fill in gaps left by agencies that lack jurisdiction or a budget to test extensively .
Major storms often spur hazardous spills .
Fifteen years ago , Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused nearly 11 million gallons of crude oil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In 2017 , Hurricane Harvey set off dozens of toxic leaks in Houston ’ s floodwaters , many of which went unreported for days or weeks , if publicly documented at all .
A 2018 report by the Southern Environmental Law Center , or SELC , showed that aging or abandoned infrastructure such as offshore rigs , wells , and pipelines are particularly vulnerable to storm damage .
Sierra Weaver , a senior attorney at SELC , said that assessing the extent of damage is difficult because small-scale spills and leaks from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are often a chronic problem .
“ If we don ’ t even know the full extent of the impacts , then we don ’ t know how to address them , ” she said .
In the days following Hurricane Laura , the Environmental Protection Agency reported that it received notice of 31 oil and chemical spills related to the storm .
The reports are documented in a database maintained by the Coast Guard and reveal only basic information : the name of the company , location of the facility , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But there are no details about the type of substance released .
Monitoring the short and long-term effects of these incidents is also challenging .
An emergency declaration issued by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality ahead of Laura extended pollution monitoring deadlines for companies , which were already less strict than Texas ’ .
The state has thousands of orphaned oil wells without owners to hold accountable .
If a spill reported to the Coast Guard is identified as oil and it ’ s within three miles of Louisiana ’ s shoreline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Louisiana Oil Spill Coordinator ’ s Office , said Sam Jones , coordinator of the agency .
As of September 7 , the office identified 65 “ individual incidents of unauthorized discharges of oil ” caused by Laura , according to an internal report .
Jones said with help from owners , contractors , and partner agencies , “ we ’ ve been able to contain them in the immediate containment zone.
” The agency is still getting calls about oily sheen over the water , Jones said , and they respond “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a press release on September 11 , Louisiana environmental regulators wrote they would test water around Lake Charles due to reports of foul odors and poor water quality .
However , the agency did not warn of any potential risks , instead claiming the smell could be coming from die-offs of fish and vegetation .
It “ cautioned observers against assuming any sheen or dark material on water is from oil.
” An environmental scientist for the agency said in the release that the decaying material “ releases substances that can look exactly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not.
” Just three weeks after Hurricane Laura , Hurricane Sally made landfall near the border of Florida and Alabama .
The storm damaged boats and barges near Pensacola , causing fuel and oil leaks in local waters .
Ten days later , oil washed up on the beaches at Perdido Key .
In an email , a spokesperson from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection said the department “ is coordinating with the US Coast Guard and Florida Fish and Wildlife to identify pollution sources , and working with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and cleanup.
” As the storm approached the Alabama coast , environmental group Mobile Baykeeper kept a close eye on a massive coal ash pond at Alabama Power ’ s Plant Barry , located just 20 miles upstream of Mobile Bay .
Sally spared the pit , but heavy rain , flooding , and subsequent power outages caused 51 separate sewage spills in Mobile and Baldwin counties that the Baykeeper is currently tracking .
Sewage spills can be caused by heavy rain inundating aging infrastructure or by pump stations going offline during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not just a problem during hurricanes , however : In coastal Alabama , sewage spills are a longstanding issue and some municipalities have failed to adequately report them to the Alabama Department of Environmental Management , which is responsible for issuing permits and regulating stormwater runoff .
Exposure to viruses and bacteria in untreated sewage can cause health effects ranging from respiratory infections to gastrointestinal issues to paralysis , according to an EPA report .
“ Sewage in our waterways carries pathogens , ” said Casi Callaway , executive director of Mobile Baykeeper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your health and should be avoided at all costs.
” The problem stems from aging infrastructure , Callaway added .
“ We have to better prepare , ” she said , “ which includes things like properly closing the coal ash pond , significantly upgrading our sewage treatment facilities , burying power lines so that we ’ re not dealing with the danger and the risks of downed power all over both of our counties.
” Spills and leaks are going to keep happening unless major actions are taken to protect facilities and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Weaver , from SELC .
“ We know hurricanes are getting stronger , we know they ’ re getting more frequent , we know these impacts have already caused significant problems in the Gulf , ” she said .
“ The risks are only going to get worse as climate change and sea level rise make storms increase in frequency and in strength .
”

After Hurricane Laura barreled through southwest Louisiana in late August, independent environmental scientist and chemist Wilma Subra began testing for contaminants in local waterways. In this region crowded with oil and gas infrastructure, pollution appears to be widespread. Heading west from her home in New Iberia, Subra said there are “large, large areas of oily sheen floating on the water, and you see large areas of oily sheen in the vegetation in the marsh all around these oil and gas facilities.”
Subra has been searching for evidence of heavy metals — including arsenic, which can increase risk for diabetes, high blood pressure, and several types of cancer, and lead, which can cause damage to the brain and nervous system — as well as bacteria from sewage spills. Her hope is to communicate potential health risks to the people returning home following the storm. Wading through contaminated water or sediment can bring on “respiratory problems and skin rashes,” Subra said. “But then it can lead to a lot more serious conditions.”
A patchwork of federal and state agencies, as well as private companies and their contractors, bear the responsibility of cleaning up these messes. But in Gulf Coast states, outdated infrastructure, incomplete reporting, and lax environmental regulations make the extent of spills and leaks from hurricanes difficult to assess. Subra, as well as environmental groups, have done testing for years to fill in gaps left by agencies that lack jurisdiction or a budget to test extensively.
Major storms often spur hazardous spills. Fifteen years ago, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused nearly 11 million gallons of crude oil to pour into the Gulf of Mexico. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey set off dozens of toxic leaks in Houston’s floodwaters, many of which went unreported for days or weeks, if publicly documented at all. A 2018 report by the Southern Environmental Law Center, or SELC, showed that aging or abandoned infrastructure such as offshore rigs, wells, and pipelines are particularly vulnerable to storm damage.
Sierra Weaver, a senior attorney at SELC, said that assessing the extent of damage is difficult because small-scale spills and leaks from facilities, drilling sites, or pipelines are often a chronic problem. “If we don’t even know the full extent of the impacts, then we don’t know how to address them,” she said.
In the days following Hurricane Laura, the Environmental Protection Agency reported that it received notice of 31 oil and chemical spills related to the storm. The reports are documented in a database maintained by the Coast Guard and reveal only basic information: the name of the company, location of the facility, and date and time of the incident. But there are no details about the type of substance released.
Monitoring the short and long-term effects of these incidents is also challenging. An emergency declaration issued by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality ahead of Laura extended pollution monitoring deadlines for companies, which were already less strict than Texas’. The state has thousands of orphaned oil wells without owners to hold accountable.
If a spill reported to the Coast Guard is identified as oil and it’s within three miles of Louisiana’s shoreline, it becomes the responsibility of the Louisiana Oil Spill Coordinator’s Office, said Sam Jones, coordinator of the agency. As of September 7, the office identified 65 “individual incidents of unauthorized discharges of oil” caused by Laura, according to an internal report. Jones said with help from owners, contractors, and partner agencies, “we’ve been able to contain them in the immediate containment zone.”
The agency is still getting calls about oily sheen over the water, Jones said, and they respond “as quickly as we can.”
In a press release on September 11, Louisiana environmental regulators wrote they would test water around Lake Charles due to reports of foul odors and poor water quality. However, the agency did not warn of any potential risks, instead claiming the smell could be coming from die-offs of fish and vegetation. It “cautioned observers against assuming any sheen or dark material on water is from oil.” An environmental scientist for the agency said in the release that the decaying material “releases substances that can look exactly like an oil sheen. But it’s not.”
Just three weeks after Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Sally made landfall near the border of Florida and Alabama. The storm damaged boats and barges near Pensacola, causing fuel and oil leaks in local waters. Ten days later, oil washed up on the beaches at Perdido Key. In an email, a spokesperson from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection said the department “is coordinating with the US Coast Guard and Florida Fish and Wildlife to identify pollution sources, and working with the responsible parties to initiate containment, removal, and cleanup.”
As the storm approached the Alabama coast, environmental group Mobile Baykeeper kept a close eye on a massive coal ash pond at Alabama Power’s Plant Barry, located just 20 miles upstream of Mobile Bay. Sally spared the pit, but heavy rain, flooding, and subsequent power outages caused 51 separate sewage spills in Mobile and Baldwin counties that the Baykeeper is currently tracking.
Sewage spills can be caused by heavy rain inundating aging infrastructure or by pump stations going offline during prolonged power outages. They’re not just a problem during hurricanes, however: In coastal Alabama, sewage spills are a longstanding issue and some municipalities have failed to adequately report them to the Alabama Department of Environmental Management, which is responsible for issuing permits and regulating stormwater runoff.
Exposure to viruses and bacteria in untreated sewage can cause health effects ranging from respiratory infections to gastrointestinal issues to paralysis, according to an EPA report.
“Sewage in our waterways carries pathogens,” said Casi Callaway, executive director of Mobile Baykeeper. “It’s hazardous to your health and should be avoided at all costs.”
The problem stems from aging infrastructure, Callaway added. “We have to better prepare,” she said, “which includes things like properly closing the coal ash pond, significantly upgrading our sewage treatment facilities, burying power lines so that we’re not dealing with the danger and the risks of downed power all over both of our counties.”
Spills and leaks are going to keep happening unless major actions are taken to protect facilities and the communities living near them, said Weaver, from SELC. “We know hurricanes are getting stronger, we know they’re getting more frequent, we know these impacts have already caused significant problems in the Gulf,” she said. “The risks are only going to get worse as climate change and sea level rise make storms increase in frequency and in strength.”
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--2020-10-09--Trump Has Made Hundreds of Millions From Foreign Business Interests Since 2016

President Donald Trump is making hundreds of millions from foreign business dealings during his time in the White House , an OpenSecrets analysis of personal financial disclosures found .
Trump earned more than $ 200 million in income from his interests in foreign countries since 2016 and reported nearly $ 95 million of that income from foreign business dealings in his two most recent financial disclosures on file with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics , according to OpenSecrets analysis of data from personal financial disclosures .
Trump ’ s financial disclosures , filed as recently as July 2020 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million from foreign business interests in 2019 .
The president continued to hold at least $ 73 million and up to $ 150 million in foreign assets through a revocable trust at the end of 2019 , evidence suggesting Trump has continued to profit from foreign business interests to an even greater extent than The New York Times ’ review of Trump ’ s tax returns exposed .
The New York Times ’ reporting shed new light on Trump ’ s taxes and business dealings during his time at the White House , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entanglements for a sitting U.S. president .
Trump reportedly earned at least $ 73 million in 2017 and 2018 from his properties abroad , according to the review of Trump ’ s tax returns .
But Trump ’ s refusal to release his actual tax returns leaves gaps in disclosure , and financial disclosures analyzed by OpenSecrets reveal that Trump continued to profit from foreign business interests even more than the Times reporting shows .
Trump is the first president since the Watergate Era who failed to publicly release his tax returns .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ income in ranges , details about Trump ’ s exact profits are hidden from the American public .
This leaves voters in the dark about potential financial entanglements with foreign interests even as the president shapes foreign policy .
Tax returns provide a peek at Trump ’ s reported profits while personal financial disclosures can help identify potential conflicts of interest by tracking aspects of Trump ’ s finances such as income and assets .
Trump-branded properties charged the federal government at least $ 1.1 million since Trump took office with even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ special interests .
But Trump paid just $ 750 in federal income taxes each year during his first two years in office .
While the Trump Organization pledged to contribute all profits from foreign governments to the U.S. Treasury , it reported giving just $ 105,000 last year .
But Trump is paying hefty taxes to foreign governments : he and his companies reportedly paid $ 145,400 in taxes to India and $ 156,824 to the Philippines .
The comparably small sums contributed to Treasury raise questions about what is and isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s foreign profit contributions since details of the calculations have been hidden from the American public .
Saudi Arabia ’ s government alone reportedly spent more at Trump International Hotel in the four months after Trump won the 2016 election than the entire Trump Organization donated to cover foreign profits any year of his presidency .
Some of Trump ’ s most seemingly lucrative properties have also been his biggest losers .
Trump ’ s businesses in both Ireland and Scotland are losing money but they generated the most income for Trump personally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s business deals in Scotland raked in more money than businesses in any other country with more than $ 119 million in reported income since 2016 .
Trump ’ s businesses in Ireland made him more than $ 54 million during that time .
Despite the businesses lining Trump ’ s own pockets , the Trump Organization recently applied for bailout money from Scotland and Ireland to cover expenses due to the coronavirus pandemic .
The New York Times review of Trump ’ s tax returns found that a licensing deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 million during his first two years in office .
Trump ’ s Philippine business dealings earned him at least another $ 2 million in 2019 , according to his most recent personal financial disclosure , a higher range than any other year since at least 2016 .
Since 2016 , Trump made more than $ 2.6 million from business dealings in India with at least $ 1.1 million coming from business in the country during his first year as president .
Since the personal financial disclosures show some amounts in ranges , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from India since 2016 could be as high as $ 17.1 million .
While income from some of Trump ’ s foreign business assets has tapered off with each passing year of his presidency , others have done the opposite .
Personal financial disclosures show Trump making more than $ 335,000 from business in the United Arab Emirates in 2019 , a higher amount than any of the three prior years .
Trump ’ s UAE golf club was promoted by foreign agents in materials distributed for the Dubai Department of Tourism that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UAE have revved up lobbying spending during the Trump administration .
They spent more than $ 81 million on foreign influence operations targeting the U.S. since 2016 and around $ 25 million last year alone .
Trump ’ s personal income from business interests in Turkey topped $ 1.3 million since 2016 and may have been as high as $ 8 million .
Turkish businessman Mehmet Ali Yalcindag helped negotiate the licensing deal for Trump ’ s properties in Turkey .
Yalcindag has since lobbied the Trump administration on U.S. policy toward Turkey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Council , which has spent more than $ 1.6 millon on foreign lobbying and influence operations targeting the U.S. since 2018 .
Since Trump took office the Turkish government-linked council started holding its annual conference at Trump International Hotel , just blocks from the White House in Washington , D.C. Turkey isn ’ t the only country where Trump ’ s foreign financial entanglements are not limited to his business interests overseas .
Representatives from at least 33 foreign governments have visited Trump ’ s D.C. hotel since Trump was elected president , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s acceptance of that business and accompanying payments has raised questions among some constitutional scholars and ethics experts since the Constitution ’ s emoluments clauses bar the president from accepting payments from a foreign state without approval from Congress .
Three petitions involving challenges to Trump ’ s business activities under the emoluments clauses are pending before the U.S. Supreme Court , which has a seat left open by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg that Trump is rushing to fill with nominee Amy Coney Barrett before Election Day .

President Donald Trump is making hundreds of millions from foreign business dealings during his time in the White House, an OpenSecrets analysis of personal financial disclosures found.
Trump earned more than $200 million in income from his interests in foreign countries since 2016 and reported nearly $95 million of that income from foreign business dealings in his two most recent financial disclosures on file with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, according to OpenSecrets analysis of data from personal financial disclosures.
Trump’s financial disclosures, filed as recently as July 2020, show Trump reported earning over $47 million from foreign business interests in 2019. The president continued to hold at least $73 million and up to $150 million in foreign assets through a revocable trust at the end of 2019, evidence suggesting Trump has continued to profit from foreign business interests to an even greater extent than The New York Times’ review of Trump’s tax returns exposed.
The New York Times’ reporting shed new light on Trump’s taxes and business dealings during his time at the White House, revealing an unprecedented level of foreign business entanglements for a sitting U.S. president. Trump reportedly earned at least $73 million in 2017 and 2018 from his properties abroad, according to the review of Trump’s tax returns. But Trump’s refusal to release his actual tax returns leaves gaps in disclosure, and financial disclosures analyzed by OpenSecrets reveal that Trump continued to profit from foreign business interests even more than the Times reporting shows.
Trump is the first president since the Watergate Era who failed to publicly release his tax returns. And because personal financial disclosures report most income in ranges, details about Trump’s exact profits are hidden from the American public. This leaves voters in the dark about potential financial entanglements with foreign interests even as the president shapes foreign policy.
Tax returns provide a peek at Trump’s reported profits while personal financial disclosures can help identify potential conflicts of interest by tracking aspects of Trump’s finances such as income and assets.
Trump-branded properties charged the federal government at least $1.1 million since Trump took office with even more flowing in from foreign government officials and special interests. But Trump paid just $750 in federal income taxes each year during his first two years in office. While the Trump Organization pledged to contribute all profits from foreign governments to the U.S. Treasury, it reported giving just $105,000 last year. But Trump is paying hefty taxes to foreign governments: he and his companies reportedly paid $145,400 in taxes to India and $156,824 to the Philippines.
The comparably small sums contributed to Treasury raise questions about what is and isn’t included in the Trump Organization’s foreign profit contributions since details of the calculations have been hidden from the American public. Saudi Arabia’s government alone reportedly spent more at Trump International Hotel in the four months after Trump won the 2016 election than the entire Trump Organization donated to cover foreign profits any year of his presidency.
Some of Trump’s most seemingly lucrative properties have also been his biggest losers. Trump’s businesses in both Ireland and Scotland are losing money but they generated the most income for Trump personally, according to his financial disclosures.
Trump’s business deals in Scotland raked in more money than businesses in any other country with more than $119 million in reported income since 2016. Trump’s businesses in Ireland made him more than $54 million during that time.
Despite the businesses lining Trump’s own pockets, the Trump Organization recently applied for bailout money from Scotland and Ireland to cover expenses due to the coronavirus pandemic.
The New York Times review of Trump’s tax returns found that a licensing deal in the Philippines earned at least $3 million during his first two years in office. Trump’s Philippine business dealings earned him at least another $2 million in 2019, according to his most recent personal financial disclosure, a higher range than any other year since at least 2016. Since 2016, Trump made more than $2.6 million from business dealings in India with at least $1.1 million coming from business in the country during his first year as president. Since the personal financial disclosures show some amounts in ranges, this means Trump’s personal income from India since 2016 could be as high as $17.1 million. While income from some of Trump’s foreign business assets has tapered off with each passing year of his presidency, others have done the opposite. Personal financial disclosures show Trump making more than $335,000 from business in the United Arab Emirates in 2019, a higher amount than any of the three prior years. Trump’s UAE golf club was promoted by foreign agents in materials distributed for the Dubai Department of Tourism that same year. Foreign interests from the UAE have revved up lobbying spending during the Trump administration. They spent more than $81 million on foreign influence operations targeting the U.S. since 2016 and around $25 million last year alone. Trump’s personal income from business interests in Turkey topped $1.3 million since 2016 and may have been as high as $8 million. Turkish businessman Mehmet Ali Yalcindag helped negotiate the licensing deal for Trump’s properties in Turkey. Yalcindag has since lobbied the Trump administration on U.S. policy toward Turkey and is chairman of the Turkey-US Business Council, which has spent more than $1.6 millon on foreign lobbying and influence operations targeting the U.S. since 2018. Since Trump took office the Turkish government-linked council started holding its annual conference at Trump International Hotel, just blocks from the White House in Washington, D.C. Turkey isn’t the only country where Trump’s foreign financial entanglements are not limited to his business interests overseas. Representatives from at least 33 foreign governments have visited Trump’s D.C. hotel since Trump was elected president, according to 1100 Pennsylvania. Trump’s acceptance of that business and accompanying payments has raised questions among some constitutional scholars and ethics experts since the Constitution’s emoluments clauses bar the president from accepting payments from a foreign state without approval from Congress. Three petitions involving challenges to Trump’s business activities under the emoluments clauses are pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, which has a seat left open by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg that Trump is rushing to fill with nominee Amy Coney Barrett before Election Day. Researcher Alex Baumgart contributed to this report.
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--2020-10-10--Trump May Have Illegally Funded His 2016 Campaign With a Business Loan

The New York Times continued its explosive reporting on President Donald Trump ’ s tax records on Friday by divulging that he engineered an eight-figure windfall shortly before contributing $ 10 million to his “ self-funded ” 2016 presidential campaign — which sparked fresh calls for probing the president ’ s tax and business practices .
“ The more we learn about what Trump is hiding in his tax returns , the worse it looks , ” Tax March tweeted Friday with a link to the report .
The group is leading a coalition of progressive organizations behind the # @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country ’ s “ utterly rigged ” tax system , as demonstrated by Trump ’ s actions .
The latest piece for the Times ‘ investigation into Trump tax documents obtained by the newspaper — which kicked off last month with a bombshell exposé detailing how he paid little-to-no federal income taxes in the years leading up to his presidency — generated concerns the president illegally funded his campaign with a business loan .
Times journalists Susanne Craig , Mike McIntire , and Russ Buettner report that as Trump struggled to raise money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he secured “ more than $ 21 million in what experts describe as highly unusual one-off payments from the Las Vegas hotel he owns with his friend the casino mogul Phil Ruffin.
” As the trio of journalists detail : The tax records , by their nature , do not specify whether the more than $ 21 million in payments from the Trump-Ruffin hotel helped prop up Mr. Trump ’ s campaign , his businesses , or both .
But they do show how the cash flowed , in a chain of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then directly to Mr. Trump himself .
The bulk of the money went through a company called Trump Las Vegas Sales and Marketing that had little previous income , no clear business purpose and no employees .
The Trump-Ruffin joint venture wrote it all off as a business expense .
The report raises concerns about potential legal problems related to both claiming the tax deduction and whether the payments are technically campaign contributions .
Just weeks before the 2016 election , “ the Trump-Ruffin partnership borrowed $ 30 million from City National Bank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Times .
“ Mr .
Trump signed the loan documents in New York City , but tax records show that Mr. Ruffin personally guaranteed nearly the entire amount , should the company ever be unable to pay.
” “ The partnership was not required to disclose on its tax returns how the borrowed money would be spent , ” the reporters note .
“ But the timing of the loan , combined with the partnership ’ s lack of available cash that year , strongly suggests that the loan funded the millions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Campaign Legal Center ( CLC ) president and former Republican chairman of the Federal Election Commission Trevor Potter said in a statement Friday that “ if Trump took out a bank loan in the LLC ’ s name for the purpose of financing his election , then the Trump campaign violated its legal reporting requirements by failing to disclose the loan , and failing to disclose that Trump ’ s Vegas property was used as collateral.
” “ If Trump secretly financed his 2016 campaign using an undisclosed bank loan backed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been illegally deprived of important information about the true sources of Trump ’ s financial support , ” he said .
“ Additionally , if the LLC took a tax deduction for the payments to Trump , it would mean that Trump secretly relied on taxpayers to help subsidize his 2016 campaign.
” “ Disclosure to voters in 2016 would have been important , since Trump ’ s claim that he was self-financing his campaign was central to his campaign message , and created a veneer of credibility for him to accuse rivals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Potter added .
“ Voters had a right to know where Trump was getting the money for his campaign.
” The Times report goes on to detail Ruffin ’ s friendship with the president and years serving as a “ wingman for Mr. Trump ’ s political ambitions.
” Jennifer Renzelman , a spokesperson for Ruffin , told the newspaper that the 85-year-old was not involved in the day-to-day operations of the hotel in question and that “ all tax statements go to the people who work on his taxes.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report “ yet another politically motivated hit piece inaccurately smearing a standard business deal , ” and said that “ during his years as a successful businessman , Donald Trump was longtime partners with Phil Ruffin and earned whatever payments he received.
” Meanwhile , tax and campaign finance experts , reporters , and other political commentators highlighted the legal concerns raised and called for further investigation :

Trump’s tax documents obtained by The New York Times raise questions about the legality of a 2016 contribution.
The New York Times continued its explosive reporting on President Donald Trump’s tax records on Friday by divulging that he engineered an eight-figure windfall shortly before contributing $10 million to his “self-funded” 2016 presidential campaign — which sparked fresh calls for probing the president’s tax and business practices.
“The more we learn about what Trump is hiding in his tax returns, the worse it looks,” Tax March tweeted Friday with a link to the report. The group is leading a coalition of progressive organizations behind the #WePaidMore campaign to raise awareness about the country’s “utterly rigged” tax system, as demonstrated by Trump’s actions.
The latest piece for the Times‘ investigation into Trump tax documents obtained by the newspaper — which kicked off last month with a bombshell exposé detailing how he paid little-to-no federal income taxes in the years leading up to his presidency — generated concerns the president illegally funded his campaign with a business loan.
Times journalists Susanne Craig, Mike McIntire, and Russ Buettner report that as Trump struggled to raise money for his White House run in 2016, he secured “more than $21 million in what experts describe as highly unusual one-off payments from the Las Vegas hotel he owns with his friend the casino mogul Phil Ruffin.”
As the trio of journalists detail:
The tax records, by their nature, do not specify whether the more than $21 million in payments from the Trump-Ruffin hotel helped prop up Mr. Trump’s campaign, his businesses, or both. But they do show how the cash flowed, in a chain of transactions, to several Trump-controlled companies and then directly to Mr. Trump himself. The bulk of the money went through a company called Trump Las Vegas Sales and Marketing that had little previous income, no clear business purpose and no employees. The Trump-Ruffin joint venture wrote it all off as a business expense.
The report raises concerns about potential legal problems related to both claiming the tax deduction and whether the payments are technically campaign contributions.
Just weeks before the 2016 election, “the Trump-Ruffin partnership borrowed $30 million from City National Bank in Los Angeles,” according to the Times. “Mr. Trump signed the loan documents in New York City, but tax records show that Mr. Ruffin personally guaranteed nearly the entire amount, should the company ever be unable to pay.”
“The partnership was not required to disclose on its tax returns how the borrowed money would be spent,” the reporters note. “But the timing of the loan, combined with the partnership’s lack of available cash that year, strongly suggests that the loan funded the millions of dollars in payments to Mr. Trump.”
Forgive me if my eyes deceive me, but I think this @nytimes report insinuates that Donald Trump, an alleged billionaire, laundered an 8-figure sum from business operations in 2016 to fund his campaign. https://t.co/Xgfwzg61eo — Greg Greene (@ggreeneva) October 9, 2020
Campaign Legal Center (CLC) president and former Republican chairman of the Federal Election Commission Trevor Potter said in a statement Friday that “if Trump took out a bank loan in the LLC’s name for the purpose of financing his election, then the Trump campaign violated its legal reporting requirements by failing to disclose the loan, and failing to disclose that Trump’s Vegas property was used as collateral.”
“If Trump secretly financed his 2016 campaign using an undisclosed bank loan backed by a billionaire developer, then voters have been illegally deprived of important information about the true sources of Trump’s financial support,” he said. “Additionally, if the LLC took a tax deduction for the payments to Trump, it would mean that Trump secretly relied on taxpayers to help subsidize his 2016 campaign.”
“Disclosure to voters in 2016 would have been important, since Trump’s claim that he was self-financing his campaign was central to his campaign message, and created a veneer of credibility for him to accuse rivals of being beholden to wealthy special interests,” Potter added. “Voters had a right to know where Trump was getting the money for his campaign.”
The Times report goes on to detail Ruffin’s friendship with the president and years serving as a “wingman for Mr. Trump’s political ambitions.” Jennifer Renzelman, a spokesperson for Ruffin, told the newspaper that the 85-year-old was not involved in the day-to-day operations of the hotel in question and that “all tax statements go to the people who work on his taxes.”
White House spokesperson Judd Deere called the report “yet another politically motivated hit piece inaccurately smearing a standard business deal,” and said that “during his years as a successful businessman, Donald Trump was longtime partners with Phil Ruffin and earned whatever payments he received.”
Meanwhile, tax and campaign finance experts, reporters, and other political commentators highlighted the legal concerns raised and called for further investigation:
This certainly *appears* to be a scheme to make a massive, illegal campaign contribution. We should probably get real answers, like from a congressional investigation, instead of quotes from a White House spokesman. https://t.co/ThOSYZzFDG — Matt Fuller (@MEPFuller) October 9, 2020
If these payments were not for actual business expenses (and they don't appear to be), deducting them would be illegal. If they were also used to fund his presidential campaign, they would be illegal campaign contributions. #Vote —then prosecute. https://t.co/crTcblK8yH — Richard Stengel (@stengel) October 9, 2020
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--2020-10-10--College Students Face Higher Rates of Food Insecurity Than Average US Household

When university presidents were surveyed in spring of 2020 about what they felt were the most pressing concerns of COVID-19 , college students going hungry didn ’ t rank very high .
Just 14 % of the presidents listed food or housing insecurity among their top five concerns .
Granted , these academic leaders had plenty of other things to worry about .
Some 86 % said they were worried about fall enrollment — a concern that has shown itself to be a legitimate one , especially in light of the fact that low-income students have been dropping out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ alarming rates.
” As researchers who specialize in the study of food insecurity , we see the dropout rate as being related to a host of underlying issues .
And not having enough to eat is one of them .
Data support this view .
The signs of this growing problem – known as food insecurity – began to emerge when the COVID-19 epidemic was beginning to take its toll .
One spring 2020 report found that 38 % of students at four-year universities were food-insecure in the previous 30 days .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 33 % in the fall of 2019 .
College students , clearly , warrant special attention as a group .
These rates of food insecurity are more than three times the rate of that in all U.S. households , which was estimated to be 10.5 % in 2019 .
Historically , estimates of food insecurity among college students have ranged from 10 % to 75 % , according to 50 studies from U.S. academic institutions carried out from 2009 to before the COVID-19 pandemic .
This is not just a matter of growling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and health issue .
When students don ’ t really know if they ’ ll be able to get enough to eat , it can lead to a series of problems that make it harder to stay in school .
For instance , it can affect academic performance and sleep quality .
It can also lead to poor mental and physical health outcomes for college students .
Food insecurity can also result in disrupted eating patterns if there is not enough food or the variety or quality of what someone eats is low @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fight hunger in their student bodies have varied widely .
They include campus food pantries , emergency cash assistance and nutrition education through noncredit classes or workshops .
These strategies were put to the test during the spring 2020 semester , when nearly three in five students said they had trouble meeting their own basic needs during the pandemic .
College food pantries saw big increases in demand .
Others said they were getting less donated food .
This made it even harder to meet the rising food needs of students .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ or regional food banks , which have been dealing with greater demand than they are able to meet during the pandemic .
The many students who are attending college remotely will , of course , have less access to campus resources like food pantries .
Other potential ways to get more food are government programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program , known as SNAP .
Yet the majority of able-bodied students are not eligible .
Long-standing restrictions , like the college SNAP rule , prevent full-time students from receiving these benefits .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ assumption that most students can rely on their parents to get enough to eat .
However , college students have vastly different levels of financial support .
Some students can rely on their parents for everything and others can not rely on their parents for anything .
Decreased reliance on parental financial support is especially common for first-generation students and students of color , who now make up 45 % of enrolled college students .
Under normal circumstances , many college students might rely on part-time jobs to pay for their food .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the pandemic said that job insecurity was a problem for them , according to the Hope Center for College , Community , and Justice # RealCollege survey .
As the number of jobless young Americans remains elevated , unemployment and underemployment remain a problem .
Jobless students face a potential double threat of less money for food and unemployment benefits cutting off their access to SNAP because the program requires most students to work at least part time .
Attempts have been made at both the federal and state levels to meet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Lawmakers have focused on temporarily suspending eligibility requirements or expanding the criteria for participating in nutrition assistance programs .
Seventeen bills aiming to address food insecurity among college students were introduced to Congress during the 2019-2020 legislative session .
However , these proposals failed to gain momentum , and the four COVID-19 stimulus bills to date have not addressed the hunger needs of college students .
Notably , some students were ineligible to personally receive a CARES Act stimulus relief payment because they were claimed as dependents by their parents .
Universities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ensure students are aware of all available campus resources and services .
They can also potentially help students apply for federal assistance benefits .
Campus food pantries are not a fully effective and efficacious solution for the scale of college food insecurity , but they can be a good interim solution to increase access to food for students .
Campuses without food pantries can start one , making use of resources the College and University Food Bank Alliance provides .
Schools with food pantries can try to get them to reach more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lean on one another for support .
The Alabama Campus Coalition for Basic Needs is a great example of this .
It brings together 10 universities across the state of Alabama collectively working to address student food insecurity .
Matthew J. Landry receives funding support from the National Institutes of Health .
He is currently a Science Policy Fellow for the American Society for Nutrition .
These organizations had no role in this article .
Heather Eicher-Miller receives or has received funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture , the National Institutes of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rural Health , the University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research , Eli Lilly and Company , and Purdue University .
She has served as a consultant to Colletta Consulting , Mead Johnson , the National Dairy Council , the Indiana Dairy Association , and the American Egg Board .
She has previously received travel support to present research findings from the Institute of Food Technologists and International Food Information Council .
However , these organizations had no role in this article .
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Low-income students have been dropping out at high rates amid the pandemic in part due to lack of access to food.
When university presidents were surveyed in spring of 2020 about what they felt were the most pressing concerns of COVID-19, college students going hungry didn’t rank very high.
Just 14% of the presidents listed food or housing insecurity among their top five concerns.
Granted, these academic leaders had plenty of other things to worry about. Some 86% said they were worried about fall enrollment — a concern that has shown itself to be a legitimate one, especially in light of the fact that low-income students have been dropping out of college at what one headline described as “alarming rates.”
As researchers who specialize in the study of food insecurity, we see the dropout rate as being related to a host of underlying issues. And not having enough to eat is one of them.
Data support this view. The signs of this growing problem – known as food insecurity – began to emerge when the COVID-19 epidemic was beginning to take its toll.
One spring 2020 report found that 38% of students at four-year universities were food-insecure in the previous 30 days. That was up 5 percentage points from 33% in the fall of 2019.
College students, clearly, warrant special attention as a group. These rates of food insecurity are more than three times the rate of that in all U.S. households, which was estimated to be 10.5% in 2019.
Historically, estimates of food insecurity among college students have ranged from 10% to 75%, according to 50 studies from U.S. academic institutions carried out from 2009 to before the COVID-19 pandemic.
Why It Matters
This is not just a matter of growling stomachs. This is a straight-up education and health issue.
When students don’t really know if they’ll be able to get enough to eat, it can lead to a series of problems that make it harder to stay in school. For instance, it can affect academic performance and sleep quality. It can also lead to poor mental and physical health outcomes for college students.
Food insecurity can also result in disrupted eating patterns if there is not enough food or the variety or quality of what someone eats is low.
Campus Food Pantries
Previous strategies by colleges and universities to fight hunger in their student bodies have varied widely. They include campus food pantries, emergency cash assistance and nutrition education through noncredit classes or workshops.
These strategies were put to the test during the spring 2020 semester, when nearly three in five students said they had trouble meeting their own basic needs during the pandemic.
College food pantries saw big increases in demand. Others said they were getting less donated food. This made it even harder to meet the rising food needs of students.
Campus food pantries largely rely on local or regional food banks, which have been dealing with greater demand than they are able to meet during the pandemic.
The many students who are attending college remotely will, of course, have less access to campus resources like food pantries.
Federal Help
Other potential ways to get more food are government programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP. Yet the majority of able-bodied students are not eligible. Long-standing restrictions, like the college SNAP rule, prevent full-time students from receiving these benefits.
Such regulatory hurdles were created under the assumption that most students can rely on their parents to get enough to eat. However, college students have vastly different levels of financial support. Some students can rely on their parents for everything and others cannot rely on their parents for anything.
Decreased reliance on parental financial support is especially common for first-generation students and students of color, who now make up 45% of enrolled college students.
Under normal circumstances, many college students might rely on part-time jobs to pay for their food.
Two-thirds of the students who were employed before the pandemic said that job insecurity was a problem for them, according to the Hope Center for College, Community, and Justice #RealCollege survey. As the number of jobless young Americans remains elevated, unemployment and underemployment remain a problem.
Jobless students face a potential double threat of less money for food and unemployment benefits cutting off their access to SNAP because the program requires most students to work at least part time.
Attempts have been made at both the federal and state levels to meet the basic food needs of college students. Lawmakers have focused on temporarily suspending eligibility requirements or expanding the criteria for participating in nutrition assistance programs.
Seventeen bills aiming to address food insecurity among college students were introduced to Congress during the 2019-2020 legislative session. However, these proposals failed to gain momentum, and the four COVID-19 stimulus bills to date have not addressed the hunger needs of college students. Notably, some students were ineligible to personally receive a CARES Act stimulus relief payment because they were claimed as dependents by their parents.
Short-term Solutions
Universities and colleges can make it a priority to ensure students are aware of all available campus resources and services. They can also potentially help students apply for federal assistance benefits.
Campus food pantries are not a fully effective and efficacious solution for the scale of college food insecurity, but they can be a good interim solution to increase access to food for students.
Campuses without food pantries can start one, making use of resources the College and University Food Bank Alliance provides. Schools with food pantries can try to get them to reach more students.
Universities and colleges can also lean on one another for support. The Alabama Campus Coalition for Basic Needs is a great example of this. It brings together 10 universities across the state of Alabama collectively working to address student food insecurity.
Matthew J. Landry receives funding support from the National Institutes of Health. He is currently a Science Policy Fellow for the American Society for Nutrition. These organizations had no role in this article.
Heather Eicher-Miller receives or has received funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Federal Office of Rural Health, the University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research, Eli Lilly and Company, and Purdue University. She has served as a consultant to Colletta Consulting, Mead Johnson, the National Dairy Council, the Indiana Dairy Association, and the American Egg Board. She has previously received travel support to present research findings from the Institute of Food Technologists and International Food Information Council. However, these organizations had no role in this article.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
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--2020-10-10--Biden-Harris Campaign Releases Plan Addressing Relations With Tribal Nations

Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris released detailed plans to uphold federal trust responsibilities by addressing health disparities , restoring tribal lands and providing economic opportunity for tribal nations Thursday .
The 15-page plan says a Biden administration will build on efforts made by the Obama administration , “ which were instrumental in rebuilding trust , good faith and respect for the tribal-federal relationship.
” The plan was released prior to a meeting Thursday with tribal leaders in Arizona .
At the forefront of the plan are goals to strengthen the nation-to-nation relationship between tribal nations and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House Tribal Nations Conference , a space for tribal leaders to meet directly with the president and his staff to address issues in their communities .
The campaign promises to appoint Native people to high-level government positions , and nominate judges with a keen understanding of federal Indian law .
Three Native Americans currently serve in the federal courts : President Barack Obama appointed U.S. District Judge Diane Humetewa , Hopi , in Arizona , and U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson , Native Hawaiian , in Hawaii ; and President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Choctaw , in the Northern District of Texas .
The Biden-Harris campaign also promises to launch a budget task force under the White House Council on Native American Affairs to understand funding shortfalls to ultimately decide whether to make Indian Country ’ s funding “ advanced ” or “ mandatory , ” instead of discretionary .
In addressing the coronavirus , the plan says Native people have among the country ’ s highest per capita infection rates , citing they are 3.3 times more likely to die from the virus than whites @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead a decisive public health response to COVID-19 through free testing , development of a safe and effective vaccine , and through ensuring tribal governments are respected in reopening decisions .
“ I am pleased to provide my personal support and endorsement to Vice President Biden and Senator Harris to be our next President and Vice President of the United States , ” said Gila River Indian Community Governor Stephen Lewis .
“ Their Plan for Tribal Nations , and their record over decades of service make it clear that they understand Tribal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that they will tackle our challenges head-on if elected.
” Earlier this year , Lewis and Navajo Nation Vice President Myron Lizer met with Trump in Arizona , where they discussed the coronavirus and $ 8 billion in federal relief funding set aside for tribes .
In restoring tribal lands , the plan promises to make it easier to place lands into trust , a controversial topic after the Trump administration has threatened to take the Mashpee Wampanoag Nation ’ s land out of trust in recent months .
“ Taking land @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and proposing to cut Indian Child Welfare by 35 percent are just a few examples of Trump ’ s failed policies for Indian Country , ” Chairperson of the Sault Ste .
Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Aaron A .
Payment said .
“ So I am excited about the recently released Biden-Harris Plan for Tribal Nations , which will honor the treaty and trust responsibility .
I am voting pro-tribal sovereignty and supporting Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
” On climate change , the plan says it will aim to achieve net-zero @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It says it will ensure investments in clean energy reach Native people by setting a goal that disadvantaged communities , including Native communities , will receive 40 percent of overall benefits .
The issue of violence against Native women is addressed in the plan .
It says it will partner with tribes and women ’ s advocates by providing support for tribal justice systems , increasing data collection methods , and directing the Department of Justice to investigate cases of missing and murdered Indigenous women .
Rep. Deb Haaland , Laguna and Jemez @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support for the Biden-Harris campaign ’ s plan , saying it “ lays out a strong path forward for Indian Country.
” She added : “ I am also especially appreciative of Joe Biden ’ s commitment to the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women which has plagued our communities for far too long.
” The Trump administration also has taken steps to address missing and murdered Indigenous peoples .
Last November , Trump signed an executive order establishing the Operation Lady Justice Task Force , which aims to create protocols for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ murdered Native American persons cases and to improve data and information collection .
It established seven offices across the U.S. tasked with helping coordinate efforts with local , federal and tribal law enforcement to solve cold cases .
At his meeting with tribal leaders in Arizona , Trump also announced a presidential proclamation declaring May 5 National Missing and Murdered American Indians and Alaska Natives Awareness Day .
Trump has been a strong supporter of the Native American community , his deputy national press secretary Courtney Parella said Thursday .
“ The president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preparedness , response and recovery for American Indians and Alaska Natives , and he remains committed to finding solutions to prominent issues faced by Native Americans , from access to better education to rural development and more , ” Parella said in an email to Indian Country Today .
“ President Trump will leave no American behind as he delivers the Great American Comeback , and that includes our tribal communities.
” Regarding infrastructure , the Biden-Harris plan affirms goals to build and repair roads , highways and bridges in tribal communities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 6 bridges in Indian Country were deficient or functionally obsolete .
A Biden administration , the plan says , also will invest $ 20 billion in rural broadband infrastructure and work with the Federal Communications Commission to reform its Lifeline program to offer low-income Americans subsidies to access high-speed internet .
The plan states it will create a “ Small Business Opportunity Fund ” that will leverage more than $ 150 million in new capital for Native businesses and others .
It says this fund will spur $ 50 billion in public-private venture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and growth .
On the education side , the Biden and Harris campaign adds it will invest in public and Bureau of Indian Education schools by tripling funding for Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act .
This will ultimately provide resources for schools to support low income students .
It also says part of Biden ’ s $ 100 billion plan to invest in public school will include a set-aside portion for tribal schools .
Biden and Harris also plan to recruit and retain Native teachers by working with tribal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ teaching programs in education .
Their plan will include tribal colleges and universities in increased funding for other minority-serving institutions including historically Black colleges and universities .
It also says it will protect funding for the Johnson-O ’ Malley Program , aiding in promoting Native history and culture in schools .
On student debt , Biden promises to cancel $ 10,000 of federal student loan debt and forgive all undergraduate tuition-related debt from two and four year public colleges , including tribal colleges and universities .
The plan addresses Native people serving in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demographic groups .
To protect them , the duo says they will expand services to address homelessness and aid in applying for home loan grants .
On voting , Biden promises to restore the Voting Rights Act and to establish a first-of-its-kind Native American Voting Rights Task Force to ensure equal access to voter registration and polling sites .

Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris released detailed plans to uphold federal trust responsibilities by addressing health disparities, restoring tribal lands and providing economic opportunity for tribal nations Thursday.
The 15-page plan says a Biden administration will build on efforts made by the Obama administration, “which were instrumental in rebuilding trust, good faith and respect for the tribal-federal relationship.”
The plan was released prior to a meeting Thursday with tribal leaders in Arizona.
At the forefront of the plan are goals to strengthen the nation-to-nation relationship between tribal nations and the federal government by reinstating the annual White House Tribal Nations Conference, a space for tribal leaders to meet directly with the president and his staff to address issues in their communities.
The campaign promises to appoint Native people to high-level government positions, and nominate judges with a keen understanding of federal Indian law. Three Native Americans currently serve in the federal courts: President Barack Obama appointed U.S. District Judge Diane Humetewa, Hopi, in Arizona, and U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson, Native Hawaiian, in Hawaii; and President Donald Trump appointed U.S. District Judge Ada Elene Brown, Choctaw, in the Northern District of Texas.
The Biden-Harris campaign also promises to launch a budget task force under the White House Council on Native American Affairs to understand funding shortfalls to ultimately decide whether to make Indian Country’s funding “advanced” or “mandatory,” instead of discretionary.
In addressing the coronavirus, the plan says Native people have among the country’s highest per capita infection rates, citing they are 3.3 times more likely to die from the virus than whites.
The Biden-Harris ticket says it will lead a decisive public health response to COVID-19 through free testing, development of a safe and effective vaccine, and through ensuring tribal governments are respected in reopening decisions.
“I am pleased to provide my personal support and endorsement to Vice President Biden and Senator Harris to be our next President and Vice President of the United States,” said Gila River Indian Community Governor Stephen Lewis. “Their Plan for Tribal Nations, and their record over decades of service make it clear that they understand Tribal sovereignty and their trust responsibilities to Tribes and that they will tackle our challenges head-on if elected.”
Earlier this year, Lewis and Navajo Nation Vice President Myron Lizer met with Trump in Arizona, where they discussed the coronavirus and $8 billion in federal relief funding set aside for tribes.
In restoring tribal lands, the plan promises to make it easier to place lands into trust, a controversial topic after the Trump administration has threatened to take the Mashpee Wampanoag Nation’s land out of trust in recent months.
“Taking land out of trust, de-establishing reservations, and proposing to cut Indian Child Welfare by 35 percent are just a few examples of Trump’s failed policies for Indian Country,” Chairperson of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Aaron A. Payment said. “So I am excited about the recently released Biden-Harris Plan for Tribal Nations, which will honor the treaty and trust responsibility. I am voting pro-tribal sovereignty and supporting Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.”
On climate change, the plan says it will aim to achieve net-zero emissions by no later than 2050. It says it will ensure investments in clean energy reach Native people by setting a goal that disadvantaged communities, including Native communities, will receive 40 percent of overall benefits.
The issue of violence against Native women is addressed in the plan.
It says it will partner with tribes and women’s advocates by providing support for tribal justice systems, increasing data collection methods, and directing the Department of Justice to investigate cases of missing and murdered Indigenous women.
Rep. Deb Haaland, Laguna and Jemez Pueblo, of New Mexico added her support for the Biden-Harris campaign’s plan, saying it “lays out a strong path forward for Indian Country.” She added: “I am also especially appreciative of Joe Biden’s commitment to the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women which has plagued our communities for far too long.”
The Trump administration also has taken steps to address missing and murdered Indigenous peoples.
Last November, Trump signed an executive order establishing the Operation Lady Justice Task Force, which aims to create protocols for law enforcement to respond to missing and murdered Native American persons cases and to improve data and information collection. It established seven offices across the U.S. tasked with helping coordinate efforts with local, federal and tribal law enforcement to solve cold cases.
At his meeting with tribal leaders in Arizona, Trump also announced a presidential proclamation declaring May 5 National Missing and Murdered American Indians and Alaska Natives Awareness Day.
Trump has been a strong supporter of the Native American community, his deputy national press secretary Courtney Parella said Thursday.
“The president provided $8 billion to address coronavirus preparedness, response and recovery for American Indians and Alaska Natives, and he remains committed to finding solutions to prominent issues faced by Native Americans, from access to better education to rural development and more,” Parella said in an email to Indian Country Today. “President Trump will leave no American behind as he delivers the Great American Comeback, and that includes our tribal communities.”
Regarding infrastructure, the Biden-Harris plan affirms goals to build and repair roads, highways and bridges in tribal communities, saying in 2019, almost 1 in 6 bridges in Indian Country were deficient or functionally obsolete.
A Biden administration, the plan says, also will invest $20 billion in rural broadband infrastructure and work with the Federal Communications Commission to reform its Lifeline program to offer low-income Americans subsidies to access high-speed internet.
The plan states it will create a “Small Business Opportunity Fund” that will leverage more than $150 million in new capital for Native businesses and others. It says this fund will spur $50 billion in public-private venture capital funds to entrepreneurs to create jobs and growth.
On the education side, the Biden and Harris campaign adds it will invest in public and Bureau of Indian Education schools by tripling funding for Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This will ultimately provide resources for schools to support low income students. It also says part of Biden’s $100 billion plan to invest in public school will include a set-aside portion for tribal schools.
Biden and Harris also plan to recruit and retain Native teachers by working with tribal colleges and universities to recruit and prepare teaching programs in education. Their plan will include tribal colleges and universities in increased funding for other minority-serving institutions including historically Black colleges and universities.
It also says it will protect funding for the Johnson-O’Malley Program, aiding in promoting Native history and culture in schools.
On student debt, Biden promises to cancel $10,000 of federal student loan debt and forgive all undergraduate tuition-related debt from two and four year public colleges, including tribal colleges and universities.
The plan addresses Native people serving in the military at higher rates than other demographic groups. To protect them, the duo says they will expand services to address homelessness and aid in applying for home loan grants.
On voting, Biden promises to restore the Voting Rights Act and to establish a first-of-its-kind Native American Voting Rights Task Force to ensure equal access to voter registration and polling sites.
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--2020-10-10--Trump’s Anti-Democratic Threats Are the Sign of a Desperate Campaign

With Trump trailing Biden both in national polls and key swing state polls , some within his campaign have , apparently , begun formulating a strategy to attempt to bypass the popular vote and simply hand-generate their own loyalists to send to the Electoral College .
How is this even conceivable ?
Many people in the U.S. assume that the choice of president is a democratic one .
Even while witnessing the winner of the popular vote losing in the Electoral College ( as in 2000 and 2016 ) , there ’ s an assumption that the choice of electors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a state-by-state basis .
It turns out , however , that this course of events is rooted more in habit than in constitutional doctrine .
In fact , the Constitution gives the states a bizarre ( and frankly , quite frightening ) level of discretion as to how they nominate their electors , and gives a large degree of wiggle room to a political candidate unwilling to accept the verdict of a popular vote defeat in any given state .
The most pertinent passage simply reads , “ Each State shall appoint , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may direct , a Number of Electors , equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress ; but no Senator or Representative , or person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States shall be appointed an Elector.
” Because so many scholars like to think that we live in a democratic age , few strategists since the 19th century — when several elections , including , most notoriously , that of 1876 , did end up being contested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ implications for mischief inherent in this single sentence .
Now , however , with Trump growing increasingly desperate , some within his campaign are apparently exploring the possibility of exploiting this line .
Two weeks , ago , The Atlantic published a long investigative piece by Barton Gellman , exploring all the ways the Trump campaign was planning to challenge state vote tallies if they ended up behind in the count after November 3 .
Among Gellman ’ s findings was that the campaign was in conversation with Republican state legislators in Pennsylvania @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the legislature — to convince them to name their own Trump-loyal electors should the state vote be close enough to allow Trump ’ s attorneys to challenge the results and to use the courts to gum up the vote count .
The allegation is just one many other explosive revelations in Gellman ’ s report .
If the election ends up being close , and if the result depends on a handful of swing states in which Republicans have majorities in the legislatures , this maneuver in particular could end up being extraordinarily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expanded on The Atlantic ’ s investigation , reporting that the Trump campaign has a six-state strategy to attempt an end-run around a popular vote defeat .
The states in questions are Arizona , Florida , Michigan , North Carolina , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — the first two of which have not only Republican-controlled legislatures but also Republican governors .
The sentence in Salon ’ s report that ought to send chills down any observer ’ s spine is this one : “ Sources in the Republican Party , at both state and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is considering a plan to ‘ bypass ’ the popular vote results and install its own electors in key battleground states where the legislatures are controlled by Republicans.
” In other words , after months of Trump saying he could only lose through massive voter fraud , through a “ rigged ” election , the GOP ’ s closing strategy for November seems to be something along the lines of hoping against hope to pull out a popular vote victory , but , if need be , subsequently abandoning all pretense at majoritarian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sit idly by while a losing candidate is coronated by hand-picked electors .
In all likelihood , if such a scenario does unfold , it will do so with Department of Justice backing , since Attorney General William Barr seems to be laying the groundwork to also challenge the legitimacy of the vote count : The Department of Justice ’ s Public Integrity Section released new guidelines this week allowing for the investigation and prosecution of alleged voter fraud or miscellaneous irregularities committed by postal workers and other federal officials during the vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experts immediately expressed alarm that this was Barr once again putting his thumbs on the scales to benefit his boss .
They worried that , in the middle of a hotly contested election , the Department of Justice could announce indictments that , in the weeks leading up to the elections , played into Trump ’ s narrative about widespread fraud — even if that narrative then collapsed down the road , once the trials began .
None of Trump ’ s threats to the electoral process are coming from a position of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s people are even talking about such a strategy , and imagining ways to further undermine the public ’ s confidence in the electoral process , is a sign not of strength but of grievous weakness just three-and-a-half weeks out from the election .
After all , confident campaigns and politicians do not mull openly about ignoring the will of the people .
Instead , at this point in a campaign , they would normally be expected talk up their prospects of a knock-out win via the ballot box .
But for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less and less likely .
The polls after the first presidential debate showed a marked shift toward Biden .
And those numbers only solidified against the Republican Party after Trump contracted COVID and the White House became a hotspot that , seemingly , has infected more people by the hour over this past week .
In the swing states where Trump ’ s strategists are now mulling overriding the will of the electorate , the Republican candidate ’ s support is sagging — even as , in many of these states , early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words , his window for a genuine electoral win is closing , which is why the campaign ’ s rather frenetic efforts to look for alternative ways to get to the magic number of 270 electors to present to Congress seem only to be growing .
These political shenanigans are extraordinarily dangerous .
In undermining confidence in democracy , this strategy is embracing a politics in which strongmen leaders are chosen not by the people but by back-room deals between different power-players and different key institutions of state — a strategy in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disenfranchised , and one that relies on the threat of force , be it state-sanctioned or paramilitary , to put down that population ’ s protests when they come out against an illegitimate power-grab .
Perhaps that ’ s what Senator Mike Lee of Utah was intimating when he wrote a series of tweets earlier this week bluntly touting the notion that “ We are not a democracy ” and that that is a good thing .
Of course , in reality , it would be a terrible thing if the U.S. abandoned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of government “ of the people , by the people , for the people.
” Indeed , for anyone who cares about the prospects for democracy in this country , and abroad , that is a road we must , at all costs , avoid going down .

With Trump trailing Biden both in national polls and key swing state polls, some within his campaign have, apparently, begun formulating a strategy to attempt to bypass the popular vote and simply hand-generate their own loyalists to send to the Electoral College.
How is this even conceivable? Many people in the U.S. assume that the choice of president is a democratic one. Even while witnessing the winner of the popular vote losing in the Electoral College (as in 2000 and 2016), there’s an assumption that the choice of electors will follow the popular vote outcome on a state-by-state basis. It turns out, however, that this course of events is rooted more in habit than in constitutional doctrine.
In fact, the Constitution gives the states a bizarre (and frankly, quite frightening) level of discretion as to how they nominate their electors, and gives a large degree of wiggle room to a political candidate unwilling to accept the verdict of a popular vote defeat in any given state.
The most pertinent passage simply reads, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress; but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States shall be appointed an Elector.”
Because so many scholars like to think that we live in a democratic age, few strategists since the 19th century — when several elections, including, most notoriously, that of 1876, did end up being contested in Congress — have pondered the real implications for mischief inherent in this single sentence.
Now, however, with Trump growing increasingly desperate, some within his campaign are apparently exploring the possibility of exploiting this line.
Trump’s Reported Scheme to Bypass the Popular Vote
Two weeks, ago, The Atlantic published a long investigative piece by Barton Gellman, exploring all the ways the Trump campaign was planning to challenge state vote tallies if they ended up behind in the count after November 3. Among Gellman’s findings was that the campaign was in conversation with Republican state legislators in Pennsylvania — a swing state where Republicans control the legislature — to convince them to name their own Trump-loyal electors should the state vote be close enough to allow Trump’s attorneys to challenge the results and to use the courts to gum up the vote count.
The allegation is just one many other explosive revelations in Gellman’s report. If the election ends up being close, and if the result depends on a handful of swing states in which Republicans have majorities in the legislatures, this maneuver in particular could end up being extraordinarily important.
Earlier this week, Salon expanded on The Atlantic’s investigation, reporting that the Trump campaign has a six-state strategy to attempt an end-run around a popular vote defeat.
The states in questions are Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — the first two of which have not only Republican-controlled legislatures but also Republican governors. The sentence in Salon’s report that ought to send chills down any observer’s spine is this one: “Sources in the Republican Party, at both state and national levels, say that the campaign is considering a plan to ‘bypass’ the popular vote results and install its own electors in key battleground states where the legislatures are controlled by Republicans.”
In other words, after months of Trump saying he could only lose through massive voter fraud, through a “rigged” election, the GOP’s closing strategy for November seems to be something along the lines of hoping against hope to pull out a popular vote victory, but, if need be, subsequently abandoning all pretense at majoritarian government and counting on the public to sit idly by while a losing candidate is coronated by hand-picked electors.
In all likelihood, if such a scenario does unfold, it will do so with Department of Justice backing, since Attorney General William Barr seems to be laying the groundwork to also challenge the legitimacy of the vote count: The Department of Justice’s Public Integrity Section released new guidelines this week allowing for the investigation and prosecution of alleged voter fraud or miscellaneous irregularities committed by postal workers and other federal officials during the vote and vote count processes. Voting rights experts immediately expressed alarm that this was Barr once again putting his thumbs on the scales to benefit his boss. They worried that, in the middle of a hotly contested election, the Department of Justice could announce indictments that, in the weeks leading up to the elections, played into Trump’s narrative about widespread fraud — even if that narrative then collapsed down the road, once the trials began.
Trump’s Window for a Genuine Electoral Window Is Closing
None of Trump’s threats to the electoral process are coming from a position of strength. In fact, that Trump’s people are even talking about such a strategy, and imagining ways to further undermine the public’s confidence in the electoral process, is a sign not of strength but of grievous weakness just three-and-a-half weeks out from the election. After all, confident campaigns and politicians do not mull openly about ignoring the will of the people. Instead, at this point in a campaign, they would normally be expected talk up their prospects of a knock-out win via the ballot box.
But for Team Trump, that’s looking less and less likely. The polls after the first presidential debate showed a marked shift toward Biden. And those numbers only solidified against the Republican Party after Trump contracted COVID and the White House became a hotspot that, seemingly, has infected more people by the hour over this past week.
In the swing states where Trump’s strategists are now mulling overriding the will of the electorate, the Republican candidate’s support is sagging — even as, in many of these states, early voting has already begun. In other words, his window for a genuine electoral win is closing, which is why the campaign’s rather frenetic efforts to look for alternative ways to get to the magic number of 270 electors to present to Congress seem only to be growing.
These political shenanigans are extraordinarily dangerous. In undermining confidence in democracy, this strategy is embracing a politics in which strongmen leaders are chosen not by the people but by back-room deals between different power-players and different key institutions of state — a strategy in which large parts of the populace are effectively disenfranchised, and one that relies on the threat of force, be it state-sanctioned or paramilitary, to put down that population’s protests when they come out against an illegitimate power-grab. Perhaps that’s what Senator Mike Lee of Utah was intimating when he wrote a series of tweets earlier this week bluntly touting the notion that “We are not a democracy” and that that is a good thing.
Of course, in reality, it would be a terrible thing if the U.S. abandoned even its purported adherence to the idea of government “of the people, by the people, for the people.” Indeed, for anyone who cares about the prospects for democracy in this country, and abroad, that is a road we must, at all costs, avoid going down.
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--2020-10-10--I Was a Student of Amy Coney Barrett. She Isn’t an LGBTQ Ally.

During the first presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump , President Trump stated that some of Amy Coney Barrett ’ s “ biggest endorsers are very liberal people from Notre Dame.
” As a former law student of the Supreme Court nominee , and as the former Notre Dame LGBT Law Forum president , I disagree with this characterization of Professor Barrett ’ s support — and I would note that Professor Barrett refused numerous opportunities to support the LGBTQ students of Notre Dame .
During my time at Notre Dame Law , the University was reluctant to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ student-run organization that hosts events , panels and presentations for students and faculty on legal issues facing the LGBTQ community , and did not employ any openly LGBTQ tenure-track faculty .
However , as a private Catholic University , Notre Dame employed a slew of professors whose scholarship opposed the advancement of LGBTQ rights .
Despite numerous calls over the past four decades to change its anti-discrimination policy and include gender and sexual orientation as protected classes , Notre Dame continues to uphold the unfettered ability to discriminate as the university ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and professors have signed petitions over the years to extend the University ’ s nondiscrimination policy .
Professor Barrett has not .
During my law school years , both conservative and liberal law professors attended LGBT Law Forum events , or events co-sponsored with other affinity organizations , such as the Black Law Students Association and the Hispanic Law Students Association , even just to sit in and learn from our speakers impartially .
Professor Barrett did not .
You might say , maybe as a professor and as a judge in later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply too busy .
But , throughout those years , she found the time to deliver speeches and attend numerous panels , luncheons and events hosted by Notre Dame ’ s Federalist Society , a student-run conservative group that hosts events and panels for students and faculty , as well as events hosted by the Alliance Defending Freedom , an anti-LGBTQ hate group whose CEO recently attended Barrett ’ s Rose Garden confirmation .
Professor Barrett had the time to introduce a Federalist Society event , featuring homophobic Notre Dame alum Sherif Girgis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marriage ?
Man and Woman : A Defense .
She had the time to question the Obergefell decision , and claim that applying Title IX ’ s protections to trans individuals from discrimination in employment , housing , and more would be an interpretive “ strain.
” Not only has Barrett proven to be an anti-LGBTQ advocate in her public speeches and legal stance , she has a record of failing to serve as an ally to her Notre Dame Law students — in a time when we could have benefited from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ herself .
Many law professors have opted to speak personally to Notre Dame President Father John Jenkins and address the marginalization of Notre Dame ’ s LGBTQ students , as well as the importance of valuing students of color , but Professor Barrett , to my knowledge , has not .
In 2018 , when Professor Barrett ’ s colleague and my former professor , Gerard Bradley , wrote that “ people have had to live with irregular sexual relationships since the dawn of time .
But legalized same-sex marriage is different , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plagued societies before , ” numerous professors reached out to the LGBT Law Forum to offer support , and some staff even publicly condemned the comments .
Professor Barrett did not .
Professor Barrett chose not to attend one of the most contentious events in Notre Dame Law history — when Jim Obergefell , Greg Bourke and Michael De Leon , plaintiffs in the consolidated Obergefell cases , came to Notre Dame Law to speak about their experiences fighting for marriage equality before the Supreme Court .
Now , Michael De Leon and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happens to be a Notre Dame alum — say that Amy Coney Barrett ’ s appointment would present a “ potential threat to marriage equality , an issue settled by the Court just over five years ago , and would also present an opportunity for Barrett to foist her anti-LGBTQ sentiment on high-court decisions over several decades in the future.
” Other professors and alumni , regardless of their political affiliation ( and many of Catholic faith ) , reached out to support the LGBT Law Forum when law students wrote in to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , noting that marriage should be between a man and a woman and that the plaintiffs in the case are living “ in a way that defies the truth of the Catholic teaching on marriage.
” Professor Barrett did not .
During her time as a professor , Barrett expressed similar sentiments — including signing letters noting that marriage should be based on the indissoluble commitment of a man and a woman .
Many professors noted that , even if they disagreed with the Obergefell ruling as a matter of faith ( which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they understood the importance of having the plaintiffs speak to Notre Dame ’ s future attorneys .
Professor Barrett , again , did not reach out .
Reviewing these specific instances of Amy Coney Barrett ’ s relationship with Notre Dame ’ s LGBTQ community , you will notice a common theme — her unwillingness to support her students as an ally , and in many cases , her vocal anti-LGBTQ sentiments .
While Barrett has been criticized on numerous issues , from the possibility of her overturning Roe v. Wade to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I have to speak of what I know best : her actions as a professor and alum .
And based on that record , one thing is true : If Barrett takes the seat of former Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , who helped usher in progress for LGBTQ rights during her tenure , the LGBTQ community will not have an ally on the Supreme Court .

During the first presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, President Trump stated that some of Amy Coney Barrett’s “biggest endorsers are very liberal people from Notre Dame.” As a former law student of the Supreme Court nominee, and as the former Notre Dame LGBT Law Forum president, I disagree with this characterization of Professor Barrett’s support — and I would note that Professor Barrett refused numerous opportunities to support the LGBTQ students of Notre Dame.
During my time at Notre Dame Law, the University was reluctant to recognize the LGBT Law Forum, a student-run organization that hosts events, panels and presentations for students and faculty on legal issues facing the LGBTQ community, and did not employ any openly LGBTQ tenure-track faculty. However, as a private Catholic University, Notre Dame employed a slew of professors whose scholarship opposed the advancement of LGBTQ rights. Despite numerous calls over the past four decades to change its anti-discrimination policy and include gender and sexual orientation as protected classes, Notre Dame continues to uphold the unfettered ability to discriminate as the university’s right. Hundreds of alumni, students and professors have signed petitions over the years to extend the University’s nondiscrimination policy. Professor Barrett has not.
During my law school years, both conservative and liberal law professors attended LGBT Law Forum events, or events co-sponsored with other affinity organizations, such as the Black Law Students Association and the Hispanic Law Students Association, even just to sit in and learn from our speakers impartially. Professor Barrett did not. You might say, maybe as a professor and as a judge in later years, perhaps Amy Coney Barrett was simply too busy. But, throughout those years, she found the time to deliver speeches and attend numerous panels, luncheons and events hosted by Notre Dame’s Federalist Society, a student-run conservative group that hosts events and panels for students and faculty, as well as events hosted by the Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-LGBTQ hate group whose CEO recently attended Barrett’s Rose Garden confirmation.
Professor Barrett had the time to introduce a Federalist Society event, featuring homophobic Notre Dame alum Sherif Girgis, the author of, What is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense. She had the time to question the Obergefell decision, and claim that applying Title IX’s protections to trans individuals from discrimination in employment, housing, and more would be an interpretive “strain.” Not only has Barrett proven to be an anti-LGBTQ advocate in her public speeches and legal stance, she has a record of failing to serve as an ally to her Notre Dame Law students — in a time when we could have benefited from the allyship of a prominent professor such as herself.
Many law professors have opted to speak personally to Notre Dame President Father John Jenkins and address the marginalization of Notre Dame’s LGBTQ students, as well as the importance of valuing students of color, but Professor Barrett, to my knowledge, has not. In 2018, when Professor Barrett’s colleague and my former professor, Gerard Bradley, wrote that “people have had to live with irregular sexual relationships since the dawn of time. But legalized same-sex marriage is different, and worse, than anything that has plagued societies before,” numerous professors reached out to the LGBT Law Forum to offer support, and some staff even publicly condemned the comments. Professor Barrett did not.
Professor Barrett chose not to attend one of the most contentious events in Notre Dame Law history — when Jim Obergefell, Greg Bourke and Michael De Leon, plaintiffs in the consolidated Obergefell cases, came to Notre Dame Law to speak about their experiences fighting for marriage equality before the Supreme Court. Now, Michael De Leon and his husband Greg Bourke — who also happens to be a Notre Dame alum — say that Amy Coney Barrett’s appointment would present a “potential threat to marriage equality, an issue settled by the Court just over five years ago, and would also present an opportunity for Barrett to foist her anti-LGBTQ sentiment on high-court decisions over several decades in the future.”
If Barrett takes the seat of former Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who helped usher in progress for LGBTQ rights during her tenure, the LGBTQ community will not have an ally on the Supreme Court.
Other professors and alumni, regardless of their political affiliation (and many of Catholic faith), reached out to support the LGBT Law Forum when law students wrote in to the school newspaper disparaging the Obergefell ruling, noting that marriage should be between a man and a woman and that the plaintiffs in the case are living “in a way that defies the truth of the Catholic teaching on marriage.” Professor Barrett did not. During her time as a professor, Barrett expressed similar sentiments — including signing letters noting that marriage should be based on the indissoluble commitment of a man and a woman. Many professors noted that, even if they disagreed with the Obergefell ruling as a matter of faith (which a majority of Catholics do not), they understood the importance of having the plaintiffs speak to Notre Dame’s future attorneys. Professor Barrett, again, did not reach out.
Reviewing these specific instances of Amy Coney Barrett’s relationship with Notre Dame’s LGBTQ community, you will notice a common theme — her unwillingness to support her students as an ally, and in many cases, her vocal anti-LGBTQ sentiments. While Barrett has been criticized on numerous issues, from the possibility of her overturning Roe v. Wade to her qualifications — as her former student, I have to speak of what I know best: her actions as a professor and alum. And based on that record, one thing is true: If Barrett takes the seat of former Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who helped usher in progress for LGBTQ rights during her tenure, the LGBTQ community will not have an ally on the Supreme Court.
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.