vox--2020-06-27--The US’s new surge in coronavirus cases, explained

The past week gave America an ugly reminder that the threat of the coronavirus pandemic is far from over .
Cases are rapidly rising again .
The nation on Wednesday hit a new record for daily new infections , and then hit another record the next day .
There ’ s some debate about whether this is the “ second wave ” of infections , or whether it ’ s a continuation of the first wave that began in early 2020 and never really ended .
But what ’ s clear is the US is now suffering from a rapid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that ’ s yet to translate to a rising death toll , likely because rises and falls in deaths tend to lag behind rises and falls in overall cases .
But between Monday and Thursday , the US went from nearly 31,000 reported cases in one day to more than 41,000 .
Arizona , Florida , Texas , and several other states in the South and West are among the hardest hit .
President Donald Trump and his allies have suggested that the increase is due to a spike in testing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that out .
The number of cases has increased more quickly than the number of tests , with the percentage of tests that are coming back positive — an indicator of the seriousness of an outbreak — rising above 10 , 15 , and even 20 percent in some states .
( The recommended positive rate is below 5 percent . )
It ’ s a significant shift from much of May and June , when testing increased , cases plateaued nationwide , the positive rate fell across the country , and it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measures were working to constrain the growth of the coronavirus .
So what went wrong ?
The simple answer is states started to relax the restrictions and reopen their economies — giving employers , employees , and their patrons a chance to go back out into the world and interact , fueling new cases .
It ’ s possible to lift restrictions slowly and safely , and a few states are meeting the benchmarks that experts recommend to do that .
But most never fully controlled their outbreaks , instead forging ahead with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partisanship is to blame .
Under Trump , the federal government and some states appeared to prioritize the economy over public health , voicing discontent with the restrictions .
Trump called to “ LIBERATE ” states from shutdowns .
Some Americans took up that messaging , reopening their businesses and going back out .
Mask-wearing became a politicized issue , and segments of the population rejected face coverings and many other precautions against Covid-19 .
The effects were sadly predictable .
Citing research on the 1918 flu pandemic and newer studies , experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the spread of the coronavirus , and ending the restrictions would lead to a spike in cases as long as other preventive measures weren ’ t put in place .
But experts ’ warnings were not heeded .
“ It ’ s a situation that didn ’ t have to be , ” Jaime Slaughter-Acey , an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota , told me .
“ For almost three months , you had opportunities to be proactive with respect to mitigating the Covid-19 pandemic and to help normalize culture to adopt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transmissions as well as the development of Covid-19 complications .
… It was not prioritized over the economy.
” The result : America is now in the middle of a predictable , preventable wave of Covid-19 cases — worsening what was already the most widespread coronavirus crisis in the world .
Different states are suffering this time around In the first wave of Covid-19 cases , the New York City region was the hardest hit , with New York , New Jersey , and Connecticut leading the country in Covid-19 cases and deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other parts of the Northeast , Michigan , and Louisiana .
The more recent wave has hit the South and West , with cases rising in Arizona ( 125 percent increase in daily new cases over two weeks ) , Florida ( 216 percent ) , and Texas ( 174 percent ) , but also alarming increases in cases in Georgia ( 103 percent ) , Mississippi ( 82 percent ) , Nevada ( 104 percent ) , North Carolina ( 22 percent ) , Oklahoma ( 261 percent ) , and South @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of these states have seen their positive rate increase , indicating the rise in cases isn ’ t just a result of more testing .
In most of these states , it ’ s not quite right to say they ’ re going through second waves — because many of them never really got their first wave under control .
Instead , they have seen a steady rise in coronavirus cases , culminating in the exponential growth of the past few days and weeks .
Many states “ never got to flat , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the research institute RTI International , told me .
“ That means the states didn ’ t get to very good compliance with the public health interventions that we all need to take to make sure the outbreak doesn ’ t continue to grow.
” Arizona , for example , saw a steady increase in coronavirus cases for months before the most recent exponential spike .
There was never a sustained decline , as this chart shows : While coronavirus outbreaks can be concentrated locally , the current ones appear to cover whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporting a high number of cases in many states , especially across the South .
This was not inevitable .
Connecticut , New Jersey , and New York , for example , all managed to suppress their coronavirus cases after suffering the worst of the pandemic , and have all kept their coronavirus cases down .
Others , like Maryland and Rhode Island , have managed to keep their coronavirus case counts suppressed as well .
The difference is that the states seeing the biggest increases were some of the slowest to close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outbreak and some of the quickest to open back up again .
Texas ’ s stay-at-home order , for example , was one of the shortest in the US — lasting less than a month , according to the New York Times .
As those orders have ended , people have trickled out , interacted , and spread the coronavirus .
( Since the incubation period can be up to two weeks , there ’ s a lag between when the virus starts spreading and when cases are reported . )
In some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be hitting a younger demographic , too .
Some Texas and Florida counties , for example , reported that people under 30 made up a growing share — and even a majority — of coronavirus cases .
That ’ s likely a result of young people being the most willing to go out and about as social distancing ends , perhaps because they perceive themselves as being at lower risk .
While young people are at lower risk , and that could lead to a lower death toll from the current wave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of examples of younger patients getting sick , experiencing longer-term complications , and dying .
Relaxed social distancing is likely to blame Across the board , experts were pretty clear on why states are seeing increases in Covid-19 cases : relaxed restrictions that enforced social distancing .
“ The economies are opening up .
People are starting to venture out .
They ’ re interacting with others more , ” Slaughter-Acey said .
“ That creates opportunities for transmission.
” The research increasingly shows social distancing measures worked to reduce the spread of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Affairs concluded : The reverse , then , is likely true : Without social distancing measures , places are more likely to see a rise in Covid-19 cases .
That ’ s what the epidemiological evidence from past disease outbreaks suggests .
Several studies of the 1918 flu pandemic found places that took quicker and more aggressive steps to enforce social distancing saved lives .
But this research also shows the consequences of pulling back restrictions too early : A 2007 study in JAMA found that when St. Louis — widely praised for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eased its school closures , public gathering ban , and other restrictions , it saw a rise in deaths .
Here ’ s how that looks in chart form , with the line chart representing excess flu deaths and the black and gray bars below showing when social distancing measures were in place .
The highest peak comes after social distancing measures were lifted , with the death rate falling only after they were reinstated .
This did not just happen in St. Louis .
Analyzing data from 43 cities , the JAMA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country .
Howard Markel , an author of the study and the director of the University of Michigan ’ s Center for the History of Medicine , described the results as a bunch of “ double-humped epi curves ” — officials instituted social distancing measures , saw flu cases fall , then pulled back the measures and saw flu cases rise again .
As a whole , the US is essentially experiencing that second hump in the epi curve : After states managed to suppress the growth of coronavirus cases with social distancing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now cases are on the rise again .
This doesn ’ t necessarily mean everything has to be shut down again .
When the pandemic first hit the US , many states were quick to close down as many public places as possible because there was little understanding of which places were at greatest risk for coronavirus transmission .
Now , we have a better — although still far from perfect — understanding of how the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus works .
For example , outdoor spaces seem to be much safer , with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ droplets to float from person to person and the warmer weather , humidity , and UV light also potentially playing a role .
That suggests that states could probably keep parks , beaches , and other outdoor venues open — as long as people follow recommended safety practices , like wearing a mask and keeping 6 feet from others .
Along those lines , personal precautions seem to be more effective than initially expected .
Several recent studies have found masks alone reduce transmission .
Some experts hypothesize — and early research suggests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in containing Covid-19 outbreaks in several Asian countries where their use is widespread , like South Korea and Japan .
All of that is to suggest that some places , especially those outside , could safely reopen or stay open with the proper precautions .
The key , experts said , is to take the process slowly .
States should open things up bit by bit through various phases to see what leads to an unmanageable spike in coronavirus cases and what doesn ’ t , while building up a public health surveillance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — that can pick up those increases .
Over time , that approach can strike a balance between public health needs and reclaiming some sense of normalcy .
“ Since this is new and we don ’ t have data and experience to guide us , it makes sense to take things slowly , ” Lauren Meyers , a mathematical biologist at the University of Texas Austin , told me .
“ Relax things bit by bit , and see if it ’ s working .
If we relax a few measures , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks ; if it ’ s not going up , maybe we can relax a bit more.
” A key element of this — and one in which states have generally failed — is having a plan to pull back the reopening should things go badly again .
“ One of the most important parts of this whole reopening experiment is knowing when to slow down reopening based on public health criteria , ” Abraar Karan , a doctor at Brigham and Women ’ s Hospital and Harvard , told me .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so important to have a public health surveillance system.
” And if things spiral out of control again , a community really might have to shut everything down again to get things under control .
“ What we want to do is to avoid a situation where the only measure that ’ s going to turn things around is a full-blown shelter-in-place order , ” Meyers said .
“ However , if we are throwing caution to the wind , and we ’ re not taking these small steps to protect ourselves , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where that is the only thing we can do to prevent overwhelming surges in hospitalizations and alarming numbers of deaths.
” It ’ s not clear what states will do now At this point , it ’ s not clear if local and state officials will take the precautions that experts recommend .
The federal government could encourage stronger action .
But the Trump administration has largely been absent in recent weeks — stopping daily coronavirus briefings , denying there ’ s a new spike in Covid-19 cases at all , and generally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House guidances have also suggested that the Trump administration wants to leave the bulk of the problem to states , local governments , and private actors .
In some cases , the administration has encouraged the opposite of what experts have called for .
Trump has repeatedly pushed states to reopen their economies — in what now was very clearly a premature move .
He has also taken bizarre stances , like his remarks that the US should slow down testing and that masks may do more harm than good .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many of Trump ’ s supporters and Republicans in general take what Trump says seriously .
When Trump downplays the threat of Covid-19 and the benefits of masks , his followers listen — and that likely makes his backers more resistant to their local and state leaders taking aggressive action against new coronavirus outbreaks .
In that context , it ’ s not a coincidence that most of the states suffering the worst now are led by Republican governors .
Then there ’ s the economy .
Although research suggests that getting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the economy in the long term , closing places down now does mean short- or medium-term economic pain .
Local and state leaders have to balance those tensions .
Still , things may eventually get so bad that officials feel compelled to act regardless .
Following reports of some hospitals in Texas nearing capacity due to a surge in Covid-19 , Gov .
Greg Abbott moved to slow down his state ’ s reopening , keeping some businesses at reduced capacity or shut down entirely and closing down bars .
( This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state to reopen , overruling local governments that tried to stay closed . )
Aside from government action , perhaps people will act on their own .
Even after state and local governments moved to reopen , people were at times slow to embrace a rosy view of the situation with Covid-19 and chose to stay home anyway .
As people see the effects of the coronavirus firsthand in their communities , they might be driven to strictly social distance again regardless of what their political leaders tell them to do .
How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , from individual decisions to government actions , will decide just how bad and long-lasting this new spike in coronavirus cases is .
But some of the surge , experts said , is already baked in — it ’ s likely going to take weeks for new measures , should they come , to take effect and start leading to a drop in Covid-19 cases .
“ We have to start putting on the brakes long before we get to hospital capacity , ” Meyers said .
“ New York threw on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t really until early or mid-April that deaths finally reached their peak and started subsiding .
You can put on the brakes today , but you won ’ t see the impact until several weeks out.
” That ’ s why it was important to act before the situation got to this point , and why it was so dangerous for officials to relax social distancing measures before Covid-19 cases began to fall .
Several states are now seeing — and will continue to suffer from — the consequences .
Every day at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

The past week gave America an ugly reminder that the threat of the coronavirus pandemic is far from over. Cases are rapidly rising again. The nation on Wednesday hit a new record for daily new infections, and then hit a new record again and again over the next two days.
There’s some debate about whether this is the “second wave” of infections, or whether it’s a continuation of the first wave that began in early 2020 and never really ended. But what’s clear is the US is now suffering from a rapid rise in coronavirus cases. So far, that’s yet to translate to a rising death toll, possibly because rises and falls in deaths tend to lag behind rises and falls in overall cases.
But between Monday and Friday, the US went from more than 30,000 reported cases in one day to more than 45,000. Arizona, Florida, Texas, and several other states in the South and West are among the hardest hit.
President Donald Trump and his allies have suggested that the increase is due to a spike in testing, but the data doesn’t bear that out. The number of cases has increased more quickly than the number of tests, with the percentage of tests coming back positive — an indicator of the seriousness of an outbreak — rising above 10, 15, and even 20 percent in some states. (The recommended positive rate is below 5 percent.)
It’s a significant shift from much of May and June, when testing increased, cases plateaued nationwide, the positive rate fell across the country, and it finally looked like restrictions and social distancing measures were working to constrain the growth of the coronavirus.
So what went wrong? The simple answer is states started to relax their restrictions and reopen their economies — giving employers, employees, and patrons a chance to go back out into the world and interact, fueling new cases.
It’s possible to lift restrictions slowly and safely, and a few states are meeting the benchmarks that experts recommend to do that. But most never fully controlled their outbreaks, instead forging ahead with reopening.
A mix of carelessness and partisanship is to blame. Under Trump, the federal government and some states appeared to prioritize the economy over public health, voicing discontent with the restrictions. Trump called to “LIBERATE” states from shutdowns. Some Americans took up that messaging, reopening their businesses and going back out. Mask-wearing became a politicized issue, and segments of the population rejected face coverings and other precautions against Covid-19.
The effects were sadly predictable. Citing research on the 1918 flu pandemic and newer studies, experts pointed out that lockdowns worked to slow the spread of the coronavirus, and ending the restrictions would lead to a spike in cases as long as other preventive measures weren’t put in place. But experts’ warnings were not heeded.
“It’s a situation that didn’t have to be,” Jaime Slaughter-Acey, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, told me. “For almost three months, you had opportunities to be proactive with respect to mitigating the Covid-19 pandemic and to help normalize culture to adopt practices that would stem the tide of transmissions as well as the development of Covid-19 complications. … It was not prioritized over the economy.”
The result: America is now in the middle of a predictable, preventable wave of Covid-19 cases — worsening what was already the most widespread coronavirus crisis in the world.
Different states are suffering this time around
In the first wave of Covid-19 cases, the New York City region was the hardest hit, with New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut leading the country in Covid-19 cases and deaths. There were also significant outbreaks in other parts of the Northeast, Michigan, and Louisiana.
The more recent wave has hit the South and West, with cases rising in Arizona (a 125 percent increase in daily new cases over two weeks), Florida (250 percent), and Texas (177 percent), but also alarming increases in cases in Alabama (20 percent), California (74 percent), Georgia (112 percent), Mississippi (74 percent), Nevada (103 percent), North Carolina (15 percent), Oklahoma (212 percent), and South Carolina (107 percent). Most of these states have seen their test positive rates increase, indicating the rise in cases isn’t just a result of more testing.
In most of these states, it’s not quite right to say they’re going through second waves — because many of them never really got their first wave under control. Instead, they have seen a steady rise in coronavirus cases, culminating in the exponential growth of the past few days and weeks.
Many states “never got to flat,” Pia MacDonald, an epidemiologist at the research institute RTI International, told me. “That means the states didn’t get to very good compliance with the public health interventions that we all need to take to make sure the outbreak doesn’t continue to grow.”
Arizona, for example, saw a steady increase in coronavirus cases for months before the most recent exponential spike. There was never a sustained decline, as this chart shows:
While coronavirus outbreaks can be concentrated locally, the current ones appear to cover whole states — with a majority of counties reporting a high number of cases in many states, especially across the South.
This was not inevitable. Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York, for example, all managed to suppress their coronavirus case numbers after suffering the worst of the pandemic, and have all kept their cases down. Others, like Maryland and Rhode Island, have managed to keep their coronavirus case counts suppressed as well.
The difference is that the states seeing the biggest increases were some of the slowest to close down their economies in response to the outbreak and some of the quickest to open back up again. Texas’s stay-at-home order, for example, was one of the shortest in the US — lasting less than a month, according to the New York Times. As those orders have ended, people have trickled out, interacted, and spread the coronavirus. (Since the incubation period can last up to two weeks, there’s a lag between when the virus starts spreading and when cases are reported.)
The increases in Covid-19 cases coincide with the Black Lives Matter protests, but the research and data so far suggest the protests didn’t cause a significant spike in coronavirus spread. Experts argue that may be a result of the demonstrations mostly taking place outside and protesters embracing steps, such as wearing masks, that mitigate the risk of transmission.
In some places, the rise in cases appears to be hitting a younger demographic. Some Texas and Florida counties, for example, reported that people under 30 made up a growing share — and even a majority — of coronavirus cases.
That’s likely a result of young people being the most willing to go out and about as social distancing ends, perhaps because they perceive themselves as being at lower risk. While young people are at lower risk, and that could lead to a lower death toll from the current wave of cases, there are still plenty of examples of younger patients getting sick, experiencing longer-term complications, and dying.
Relaxed social distancing is likely to blame
Across the board, experts were pretty clear on why states are seeing increases in Covid-19 cases: relaxed restrictions that enforced social distancing.
“The economies are opening up. People are starting to venture out. They’re interacting with others more,” Slaughter-Acey said. “That creates opportunities for transmission.”
The research increasingly shows social distancing measures worked to reduce the spread of the coronavirus. One study in Health Affairs concluded:
Adoption of government-imposed social distancing measures reduced the daily growth rate by 5.4 percentage points after 1–5 days, 6.8 after 6–10 days, 8.2 after 11–15 days, and 9.1 after 16–20 days. Holding the amount of voluntary social distancing constant, these results imply 10 times greater spread by April 27 without [shelter-in-place orders] (10 million cases) and more than 35 times greater spread without any of the four measures (35 million).
The reverse, then, is likely true: Without social distancing measures, places are more likely to see a rise in Covid-19 cases.
That’s what the epidemiological evidence from past disease outbreaks suggests. Several studies of the 1918 flu pandemic found places that took quicker and more aggressive steps to enforce social distancing saved lives. But this research also shows the consequences of pulling back restrictions too early: A 2007 study in JAMA found that when St. Louis — widely praised for its response to the 1918 pandemic — eased its school closures, public gathering ban, and other restrictions, it saw a rise in deaths.
Here’s how that looks in chart form, with the line chart representing excess flu deaths and the black and gray bars below showing when social distancing measures were in place. The highest peak comes after social distancing measures were lifted, with the death rate falling only after they were reinstated.
This did not just happen in St. Louis. Analyzing data from 43 cities, the JAMA study found this pattern repeatedly across the country. Howard Markel, an author of the study and the director of the University of Michigan’s Center for the History of Medicine, described the results as a bunch of “double-humped epi curves” — officials instituted social distancing measures, saw flu cases fall, then pulled back the measures and saw flu cases rise again.
As a whole, the US is essentially experiencing that second hump in the epi curve: After states managed to suppress the growth of coronavirus cases with social distancing measures, they eased up, and now cases are on the rise again.
This doesn’t necessarily mean everything has to be shut down again. When the pandemic first hit the US, many states were quick to close down as many public places as possible because there was little understanding of which places were at greatest risk for coronavirus transmission. Now, we have a better — although still far from perfect — understanding of how the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus works.
For example, outdoor spaces seem to be much safer, with the open air making it harder for respiratory droplets to float from person to person, and the warmer weather, humidity, and UV light also potentially playing a role. That suggests that states could probably keep parks, beaches, and other outdoor venues open — as long as people follow recommended safety practices, like wearing a mask and keeping 6 feet from others.
Along those lines, personal precautions seem to be more effective than initially expected. Several recent studies have found masks alone reduce transmission. Some experts hypothesize — and early research suggests — that masks played a significant role in containing Covid-19 outbreaks in several Asian countries where their use is widespread, like South Korea and Japan.
All of that is to suggest that some places, especially those outside, could safely reopen or stay open with the proper precautions.
The key, experts said, is to take the process slowly. States should open things up bit by bit through various phases to see what leads to an unmanageable spike in coronavirus cases and what doesn’t, while building up a public health surveillance system — through testing and contact tracing — that can pick up those increases. Over time, that approach can strike a balance between public health needs and reclaiming some sense of normalcy.
“Since this is new and we don’t have data and experience to guide us, it makes sense to take things slowly,” Lauren Ancel Meyers, a mathematical biologist at the University of Texas Austin, told me. “Relax things bit by bit, and see if it’s working. If we relax a few measures, we watch the data for a few weeks; if it’s not going up, maybe we can relax a bit more.”
A key element of this — and one in which states have generally failed — is having a plan to pull back the reopening should things go badly again. “One of the most important parts of this whole reopening experiment is knowing when to slow down reopening based on public health criteria,” Abraar Karan, a doctor at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard, told me. “It’s why it’s so important to have a public health surveillance system.”
And if things spiral out of control again, a community really might have to shut everything down again to get things under control. “What we want to do is to avoid a situation where the only measure that’s going to turn things around is a full-blown shelter-in-place order,” Meyers said. “However, if we are throwing caution to the wind, and we’re not taking these small steps to protect ourselves, we may find ourselves in a situation where that is the only thing we can do to prevent overwhelming surges in hospitalizations and alarming numbers of deaths.”
It’s not clear what states will do now
At this point, it’s not clear if local and state officials will take the precautions that experts recommend.
The federal government could encourage stronger action. But the Trump administration has largely been absent in recent weeks — stopping daily coronavirus briefings, denying there’s a new spike in Covid-19 cases at all, and generally commenting little on the recent trends. White House guidances have also suggested that the Trump administration wants to leave the bulk of the problem to states, local governments, and private actors.
In some cases, the administration has encouraged the opposite of what experts have called for. Trump has repeatedly pushed states to reopen their economies — in what now very clearly was a premature move. He has also taken bizarre stances, like his remarks that the US should slow down testing and that masks may do more harm than good.
The problem for local and state officials is many of Trump’s supporters and Republicans in general take what Trump says seriously. When Trump downplays the threat of Covid-19 and the benefits of masks, his followers listen — and that likely makes his backers more resistant to their local and state leaders taking aggressive action against new coronavirus outbreaks. In that context, it’s not a coincidence that most of the states suffering the worst now are led by Republican governors.
Then there’s the economy. Although research suggests that getting a disease outbreak under control is ultimately better for the economy in the long term, closing places down now does mean short- or medium-term economic pain. Local and state leaders have to balance those tensions.
Still, things may eventually get so bad that officials feel compelled to act regardless. Following reports of some hospitals in Texas nearing capacity due to a surge in Covid-19 cases, Gov. Greg Abbott moved to slow down his state’s reopening, keeping some businesses at reduced capacity or shut down entirely and closing down bars. (This came after months of Abbott pushing the state to reopen, overruling local governments that tried to stay closed.)
Aside from government action, perhaps people will act on their own. Even after state and local governments moved to reopen, people were at times slow to embrace a rosy view of the situation with Covid-19 and chose to stay home anyway. As people see the effects of the coronavirus firsthand in their communities, they might be driven to strictly social distance again regardless of what their political leaders tell them to do.
How all of these factors could come together, from individual decisions to government actions, will decide just how bad and long-lasting this new spike in coronavirus cases is. But some of the surge, experts said, is already baked in — it’s likely going to take weeks for new measures, should they come, to take effect and start leading to a drop in Covid-19 cases.
“We have to start putting on the brakes long before we get to hospital capacity,” Meyers said. “New York threw on the brakes in mid-March. It wasn’t really until early or mid-April that deaths finally reached their peak and started subsiding. You can put on the brakes today, but you won’t see the impact until several weeks out.”
That’s why it was important to act before the situation got to this point, and why it was so dangerous for officials to relax social distancing measures before Covid-19 cases began to fall. Several states are now seeing — and will continue to suffer from — the consequences.


vox--2020-06-27--Protesters win a new investigation into Elijah McClain’s death

The circumstances of Elijah McClain ’ s death are as horrifying as any of the killings now infamous in the age of Black Lives Matter .
Last year , McClain lost his life less than a week after encountering police on a walk home in Aurora , Colorado .
McClain , who was anemic , regularly wore a ski mask because he quickly grew cold .
Last August , a resident spotted him wearing his mask while returning home from the store , called the police , and reported him as “ sketchy.
” According to video from body camera @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrived , they immediately marched up to McClain and accosted him .
McClain grew tense as officers grabbed and restrained him .
During the altercation , officers placed McClain in a chokehold , threatened to have him bitten by their police dog , and deliberately obstructed the view of their body cameras , all while McClain pleaded for help , begged for forgiveness , and explained he meant no one any harm .
McClain threw up several times during the arrest and was handcuffed behind his back .
When the paramedics arrived , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sedative ketamine .
McClain slipped into cardiac arrest on the way to the hospital .
Three days later , he was declared brain-dead and taken off life support .
Despite his tragic death and having committed no crime , the initial investigation found no criminal wrongdoing by officers .
However , in the weeks following this year ’ s national uprising against police brutality , new attention was brought to McClain ’ s story , breathing life back into the case .
On June 25 , Colorado Governor Jared Polis ordered prosecutors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s death .
“ Elijah McClain should be alive today , and we owe it to his family to take this step and elevate the pursuit of justice in his name to a statewide concern , ” Polis said in a statement posted to Twitter .
Floyd ’ s case brings new attention to old police killings McClain is one of the many people killed by the police whose case has gained new attention following the protests against George Floyd ’ s killing .
In recent weeks , Google searches for McClain ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unknown nationally in the year since he was killed .
So far , more than 3 million people have signed an online petition calling for justice for McClain .
The new attention is thanks in part to the activism of friends and family and in part to the new groundswell of social media campaigns advocating with comics , pictures , and artist renderings of McClain and other Black people killed by the police .
Much of the content of these social media campaigns contrast the care and restraint that police have displayed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who shot nine Black parishioners in South Carolina , against the force used on Black citizens like Walter Scott , who was shot in the back after fleeing a traffic stop .
The comparison posts cut sharply for McClain , who was killed in Aurora , Colorado , the same city where police successfully apprehended a white man who shot and killed 12 people at a movie theater .
The political coattails of the George Floyd protests have elevated others killed by the police , including Breonna Taylor in Louisville and Javier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the statistics for police killings , which have hovered around 1,000 people annually since 2015 .
Likewise , the protests have also brought renewed scrutiny to police impropriety in the murders .
As witnessed in George Floyd ’ s case , Rayshard Brooks ’ s case , and more broadly in the televised brutality toward peaceful protesters , officers regularly have omitted crucial details in documents and statements after employing excessive force toward civilians .
Just this week , after stonewalling , the Philadelphia Police Department apologized for excessive use of force against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exposed the department for using tear gas against trapped protesters .
Individual bungled police cases combined with the large-scale controversies following protests have resulted in more calls for accountability and transparency around police use of force for cases old and new .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

The circumstances of Elijah McClain’s death are as horrifying as any of the killings now infamous in the age of Black Lives Matter. Last year, McClain lost his life less than a week after encountering police on a walk home in Aurora, Colorado. McClain, who was anemic, regularly wore a ski mask because he quickly grew cold. Last August, a resident spotted him wearing his mask while returning home from the store, called the police, and reported him as “sketchy.”
According to video from body camera footage and news reports, when officers arrived, they immediately marched up to McClain and accosted him. McClain grew tense as officers grabbed and restrained him. During the altercation, officers placed McClain in a chokehold, threatened to have him bitten by their police dog, and deliberately obstructed the view of their body cameras, all while McClain pleaded for help, begged for forgiveness, and explained he meant no one any harm.
McClain threw up several times during the arrest and was handcuffed behind his back. When the paramedics arrived, they injected him with 500 milligrams of the sedative ketamine. McClain slipped into cardiac arrest on the way to the hospital. Three days later, he was declared brain-dead and taken off life support.
Despite his tragic death and having committed no crime, the initial investigation found no criminal wrongdoing by officers. However, in the weeks following this year’s national uprising against police brutality, new attention was brought to McClain’s story, breathing life back into the case.
On June 25, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis ordered prosecutors to reopen the investigation into McClain’s death.
“Elijah McClain should be alive today, and we owe it to his family to take this step and elevate the pursuit of justice in his name to a statewide concern,” Polis said in a statement posted to Twitter.
Floyd’s case brings new attention to old police killings
McClain is one of the many people killed by the police whose case has gained new attention following the protests against George Floyd’s killing. In recent weeks, Google searches for McClain’s name have spiked after remaining relatively unknown nationally in the year since he was killed. So far, more than 3 million people have signed an online petition calling for justice for McClain.
The new attention is thanks in part to the activism of friends and family and in part to the new groundswell of social media campaigns advocating with comics, pictures, and artist renderings of McClain and other Black people killed by the police.
Much of the content of these social media campaigns contrast the care and restraint that police have displayed in arresting white citizens such as Dylann Roof, who shot nine Black parishioners in South Carolina, against the force used on Black citizens like Walter Scott, who was shot in the back after fleeing a traffic stop. The comparison posts cut sharply for McClain, who was killed in Aurora, Colorado, the same city where police successfully apprehended a white man who shot and killed 12 people at a movie theater.
The political coattails of the George Floyd protests have elevated others killed by the police, including Breonna Taylor in Louisville and Javier Ambler in Austin. These names humanize the statistics for police killings, which have hovered around 1,000 people annually since 2015. Likewise, the protests have also brought renewed scrutiny to police impropriety in the murders.
As witnessed in George Floyd’s case, Rayshard Brooks’s case, and more broadly in the televised brutality toward peaceful protesters, officers regularly have omitted crucial details in documents and statements after employing excessive force toward civilians. Just this week, after stonewalling, the Philadelphia Police Department apologized for excessive use of force against protesters after a New York Times investigation exposed the department for using tear gas against trapped protesters.
Individual bungled police cases combined with the large-scale controversies following protests have resulted in more calls for accountability and transparency around police use of force, for cases old and new.


vox--2020-06-27--“It’s ideologue meets grifter”: How Bill Barr made Trumpism possible

Last Friday , Attorney General Bill Barr announced that US Attorney for the Southern District of New York , Geoffrey Berman , was “ stepping down ” from his position .
The announcement caught everyone by surprise , including Berman , who quickly denied that he had any plans to resign .
But the following day Barr announced that Trump had dismissed Berman , putting an end to the bizarre standoff ( though Trump , later in the day , claimed he was “ not involved ” in Berman ’ s firing ) .
In any other administration , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been conducting investigations of the president ’ s allies would be scandalous .
But this is not a typical administration and this is not a typical Department of Justice .
Under Barr , the DOJ has become a political instrument for the president .
Whether it ’ s misleading the public about the Mueller report or using tear gas to disperse peaceful protesters so that Trump could stage a photo op , or trying to fire Berman , Barr has repeatedly sacrificed the dignity of his office in order to please his boss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much about Barr ’ s history , it ’ s hard to make sense of his behavior .
Having already served as AG under George H.W .
Bush ’ s administration , Barr had a solid reputation as a serious guy .
When he reemerged in 2018 as Trump ’ s pick for attorney general , he was widely seen as a creature of the Republican establishment , and his selection was “ greeted with a measure of relief ” within the DOJ , according to the New York Times .
But events @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than willing accomplice in Trump ’ s slow-motion destruction of democratic norms .
Which raises the question : Why has someone like Bill Barr given himself over to an aspiring authoritarian like Trump ?
To get some answers , I reached out to David Rohde , an editor at the New Yorker who profiled Barr for the magazine back in January .
Beyond the obvious questions , I wanted to know who Barr really is and what ’ s driving his political decision-making in this moment .
As Rohde put it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ’ 80s ” who is “ fully committed ” to protecting Trump .
We talk about the ideology animating Barr ’ s loyalty to Trump and why there ’ s no going back for him at this point .
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows .
What ’ s the most important thing people should know about William Barr ?
I think the most important thing to understand is that he has one of the most extreme views of how powerful an American president should be .
What does that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not believe that we should have three co-equal branches of government .
He believes the president should be more powerful than Congress and the courts .
In his mind , that ’ s the only thing that can keep the country safe when it is threatened by war , natural disaster , or economic collapse .
He believes that is what the founders intended .
I wonder why Barr ’ s radicalism wasn ’ t reflected in the commentary when he was first nominated by Trump .
The conventional wisdom at the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ type .
Why do you think this was missed ?
Barr has held these views consistently throughout his life .
But he was seen as a traditionalist when Trump nominated him to be attorney general .
In hindsight , it looks like the extremism of Barr ’ s views didn ’ t emerge during his first tenure as attorney general because the president he served then , George H. W. Bush , was a traditionalist .
Bush had witnessed Nixon ’ s abuses and resignation .
Bush accepted that the three branches were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump , obviously , is completely different .
Trump is contemptuous of post-Watergate norms and of congressional and judicial oversight .
Trump has enabled Barr to pursue his decades-long goal of increasing the power of the presidency .
And Barr has enabled Trump to stonewall congressional investigations to an extent not seen since Nixon .
It ’ s an ideologue meets grifter .
But the idea of “ checks and balances ” is literally the basis of our constitutional system .
Why does he find it so inadequate ?
He believes that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s been the presidency that has been able to intervene when we ’ ve faced war or economic calamity or natural disaster .
And Congress has dithered and the courts simply don ’ t have the mechanisms to respond .
He really believes this in his bones .
In fact , I just spoke to someone who knows him well , who works closely with him , and he told me that Barr is fully committed , that he stands by every action he ’ s taken in this administration , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to trying to fire the US attorney in Manhattan this weekend .
And this person said that Barr is doing these actions because he himself believes in empowering the presidency .
It is not because he ’ s being pressured or bullied by Trump .
Yes , he ’ s fully committed .
And if you pay attention to what he ’ s been saying for decades , nothing he ’ s doing now is all that surprising .
He ’ s been calling for tough law-and-order policies for a long time .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was nothing new .
When the Rodney King riots erupted in the 1990s , Barr was attorney general for George H.W .
Bush .
He sent thousands of federal agents out to Los Angeles to put down the riots and saw it as a missed opportunity to crack down on gangs in Los Angeles .
He agreed to bring charges against the officers who beat Rodney King , but he complained it was a missed opportunity and federal civil rights charges should have been brought against the gangs as well .
So the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea of overwhelming force to bring order , is something he ’ s advocated for decades .
It ’ s not something that he ’ s mouthing for Trump .
The thing about Barr is that he ’ s sort of a quiet revolutionary , or at least that ’ s the way he comes across in your profile .
He understands how power works and he ’ s willing to methodically transform the system from within .
Very much so .
I mean , it ’ s funny watching interviews with him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how he speaks , but what he is saying is very far right and deeply conservative across the board .
And his actions are extraordinary , at times unprecedented , for an attorney general , from dispatching National Guard troops from multiple states all over DC , to setting up a command bunker where he oversaw all of that , to removing prosecutors and pushing for lower sentences for the president ’ s allies .
He speaks carefully but his actions are anything but measured .
How important is Barr ’ s Catholicism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can ’ t read his mind and I can ’ t say for sure what role his faith plays , but he ’ s pretty open about what he believes and why he believes it .
He has said things in the past that showed a kind of moral conservatism .
He said , for example , that he thought crime was a result of moral failings , not poverty , at a Federalist Society symposium in the ’ 90s .
He ’ s aggressively backed tough sentences in the past and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feels that people who are religiously observant are mocked in popular culture and that practicing one ’ s religion consistently is under assault today by liberal elites in the United States .
Barr gave a speech at Notre Dame in 2019 that most people are not aware of but it ’ s incredibly revealing .
What stands out to me isn ’ t his religiosity but his profound hostility to secular culture , which he calls “ organized destruction ” and an engine of “ moral relativism.
” He really does see himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ religious and cultural struggle , doesn ’ t he ?
Yeah , he does .
And again , I just spoke today with someone who works closely with him .
He told me that Barr is convinced that mail-in ballots are a source of mob rule , that he ’ s worried about mob rule in the US .
He complains that tech companies , when they label the president ’ s tweets , are taking away the free press rights of conservatives .
In other words , all of these banal conservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — he really believes them .
He ’ s a culture warrior from the ’ 80s , but he ’ s back in the position of attorney general 40 years later and fighting the same battles .
The obsession with cultural decline is worth lingering on because it really does seem like the guiding motivation for Barr .
In that Notre Dame speech , he basically blames every “ social pathology ” ( from depression to suicide rates to violence and drug addiction ) on secularism .
Do you know what he means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ founding fathers believed that for American democracy to succeed , Americans had to be religiously observant , because religion provides a mechanism for people to control their behavior and to not abuse their power , and so those moral guideposts should come from religion , not from the government itself .
And he felt that the courts made a variety of decisions in the 1960s that produced a bunch of toxic social changes .
What does he actually want ?
Does he want a theocracy ?
No , he wants a presidential republic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two ways : impeachment and reelection every four years .
He sees federal judges declaring Trump ’ s travel ban illegal or independent counsels like Robert Mueller investigating the president as improper infringements on presidential power by the judicial and legislative branches .
They ’ re denying the president his legitimate constitutional right to run the executive branch as he sees fit .
In a speech last fall at the Federalist Society , he said part of the reason he joined the Trump administration was to halt the weakening of the presidency that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump era , that judges and Democrats in Congress were setting dangerous precedents that would leave the country with a powerless president who couldn ’ t hold the country together in a crisis .
What I hear when I listen to him speak is someone who has decided that democracy is too problematic , that the culture has been hijacked , and that the only response is to exercise power from the top down .
Well , I think what Barr believes is that the Hollywood cultural elite is forcing cultural change that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news media and Hollywood together are exaggerating the number of liberals in the country .
And I think he believes that liberals engage in the same sort of rough-and-tumble politics as Trump .
So there ’ s a sense that this is a game for power and you either win or lose .
There ’ s a fierce belief among Barr and other administration officials that whatever Trump ’ s problems and behavioral issues , and there are lots of them , they still believe Trump is delivering on a conservative agenda .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ basically replied , “ Of course we support this president and of course we ’ re going to continue working for him.
” And what decisions or what changes is Barr reacting against ?
He cites Roe v. Wade as the primary example .
And he blames a wide variety of social problems , from children born out of wedlock to drug addiction , on what he claims is an unremitting assault on religion and traditional values by militant secularists .
Barr has this reputation as a very shrewd operator but it does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ room lately .
Clearing protesters from Lafayette Square and the attempt to remove Berman , the US attorney in New York , were both off politically .
Barr mishandled them .
I think that how Trump has responded to the pandemic and the George Floyd demonstrations gives me the sense that both Trump and Barr are off their game .
The fact that Trump and Barr lost two major Supreme Court decisions last week , that Berman so openly defied Barr ’ s order to resign , shows that their political capital could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an argument that Trump and Barr are just out of touch with the sentiment of this country right now .
As I was saying earlier , Barr is still mouthing the same “ law and order ” talking points you heard in the ’ 80s .
And even in interviews now , Barr will acknowledge that racism exists but he rejects the idea that there ’ s systemic racism in this country .
He clearly doesn ’ t feel the sense of urgency that so many Americans feel .
For better or worse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last stand , right ?
There ’ s no going back at this point .
He ’ s all in .
Again , the person I spoke to who ’ s close to Barr says he really believes what he ’ s doing is right .
And friends of Barr have told me that none of these views are new .
And he has nothing to lose .
He ’ s had a long , successful career .
Nothing is more important to him than this right now .
And I was told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the November election and the remainder of Trump ’ s term .
He is fully committed to seeing this through .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

On July 28, Attorney General Bill Barr appeared before the House Judiciary Committee to face questions from lawmakers over the Trump administration’s use of force in nationwide protests and his intervention in cases involving the president’s former advisers.
It was a contentious appearance. Barr defended his controversial actions and sparred with Democrats, who believe, as Rep. Jerrold Nadler (NY) put it, that he has “aided and abetted the worst failings of the president.”
The hearing was the latest turn in Barr’s tumultuous — and troubling — stint as the nation’s top law enforcement officer.
Under Barr, the Department of Justice has become a political instrument for President Trump. Whether it’s misleading the public about the Mueller report or using tear gas to disperse peaceful protesters so that Trump could stage a photo op, Barr has repeatedly sacrificed the dignity of his office in order to please his boss.
If you don’t know much about Barr’s history, it’s hard to make sense of his behavior. Having already served as AG under George H.W. Bush’s administration, Barr had a solid reputation as a serious guy. When he reemerged in 2018 as Trump’s pick for attorney general, he was widely seen as a creature of the Republican establishment, and his selection was “greeted with a measure of relief” within the DOJ, according to the New York Times.
But events since have shown him to be a more than willing accomplice in Trump’s slow-motion destruction of democratic norms. Which raises the question: Why has someone like Bill Barr given himself over to an aspiring authoritarian like Trump?
To get some answers, I reached out last month to David Rohde, an editor at the New Yorker who profiled Barr for the magazine in January. In this conversation, which originally ran in late June, I ask Rohde who Barr really is and what’s driving his political decision-making in this moment. As Rohde put it, Barr is “a culture warrior from the ’80s” who is “fully committed” to protecting Trump. We talk about the ideology animating Barr’s loyalty to Trump and why there’s no going back for him at this point.
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.
Sean Illing
What’s the most important thing people should know about William Barr?
David Rohde
I think the most important thing to understand is that he has one of the most extreme views of how powerful an American president should be.
Sean Illing
What does that mean?
David Rohde
It means that he does not believe that we should have three co-equal branches of government. He believes the president should be more powerful than Congress and the courts. In his mind, that’s the only thing that can keep the country safe when it is threatened by war, natural disaster, or economic collapse. He believes that is what the founders intended.
Sean Illing
I wonder why Barr’s radicalism wasn’t reflected in the commentary when he was first nominated by Trump. The conventional wisdom at the time was that he was a banal establishment type. Why do you think this was missed?
David Rohde
Barr has held these views consistently throughout his life. But he was seen as a traditionalist when Trump nominated him to be attorney general. In hindsight, it looks like the extremism of Barr’s views didn’t emerge during his first tenure as attorney general because the president he served then, George H. W. Bush, was a traditionalist. Bush had witnessed Nixon’s abuses and resignation. Bush accepted that the three branches were co-equal.
Working as attorney general for Donald Trump, obviously, is completely different. Trump is contemptuous of post-Watergate norms and of congressional and judicial oversight. Trump has enabled Barr to pursue his decades-long goal of increasing the power of the presidency. And Barr has enabled Trump to stonewall congressional investigations to an extent not seen since Nixon. It’s an ideologue meets grifter.
Sean Illing
But the idea of “checks and balances” is literally the basis of our constitutional system. Why does he find it so inadequate?
David Rohde
He believes that if you look at American history, it’s been the presidency that has been able to intervene when we’ve faced war or economic calamity or natural disaster. And Congress has dithered and the courts simply don’t have the mechanisms to respond. He really believes this in his bones.
In fact, I just spoke to someone who knows him well, who works closely with him, and he told me that Barr is fully committed, that he stands by every action he’s taken in this administration, from clearing Lafayette Park with tear gas to trying to fire the US attorney in Manhattan this weekend. And this person said that Barr is doing these actions because he himself believes in empowering the presidency. It is not because he’s being pressured or bullied by Trump.
Sean Illing
So he’s a real ideological warrior?
David Rohde
Yes, he’s fully committed. And if you pay attention to what he’s been saying for decades, nothing he’s doing now is all that surprising. He’s been calling for tough law-and-order policies for a long time. His reaction to the demonstrations in Washington was nothing new.
When the Rodney King riots erupted in the 1990s, Barr was attorney general for George H.W. Bush. He sent thousands of federal agents out to Los Angeles to put down the riots and saw it as a missed opportunity to crack down on gangs in Los Angeles. He agreed to bring charges against the officers who beat Rodney King, but he complained it was a missed opportunity and federal civil rights charges should have been brought against the gangs as well.
So the idea of dominating the streets, the idea of overwhelming force to bring order, is something he’s advocated for decades. It’s not something that he’s mouthing for Trump.
Sean Illing
The thing about Barr is that he’s sort of a quiet revolutionary, or at least that’s the way he comes across in your profile. He understands how power works and he’s willing to methodically transform the system from within.
David Rohde
Very much so. I mean, it’s funny watching interviews with him. He’s very measured in how he speaks, but what he is saying is very far right and deeply conservative across the board. And his actions are extraordinary, at times unprecedented, for an attorney general, from dispatching National Guard troops from multiple states all over DC, to setting up a command bunker where he oversaw all of that, to removing prosecutors and pushing for lower sentences for the president’s allies. He speaks carefully but his actions are anything but measured.
Sean Illing
How important is Barr’s Catholicism to his moral and political project?
David Rohde
I can’t read his mind and I can’t say for sure what role his faith plays, but he’s pretty open about what he believes and why he believes it. He has said things in the past that showed a kind of moral conservatism. He said, for example, that he thought crime was a result of moral failings, not poverty, at a Federalist Society symposium in the ’90s. He’s aggressively backed tough sentences in the past and today for drug crimes. And he feels that people who are religiously observant are mocked in popular culture and that practicing one’s religion consistently is under assault today by liberal elites in the United States.
Sean Illing
Barr gave a speech at Notre Dame in 2019 that most people are not aware of but it’s incredibly revealing. What stands out to me isn’t his religiosity but his profound hostility to secular culture, which he calls “organized destruction” and an engine of “moral relativism.” He really does see himself on the front lines of an epic religious and cultural struggle, doesn’t he?
David Rohde
Yeah, he does. And again, I just spoke today with someone who works closely with him. He told me that Barr is convinced that mail-in ballots are a source of mob rule, that he’s worried about mob rule in the US. He complains that tech companies, when they label the president’s tweets, are taking away the free press rights of conservatives. In other words, all of these banal conservative talking points you hear all the time — he really believes them. He’s a culture warrior from the ’80s, but he’s back in the position of attorney general 40 years later and fighting the same battles.
Sean Illing
The obsession with cultural decline is worth lingering on because it really does seem like the guiding motivation for Barr. In that Notre Dame speech, he basically blames every “social pathology” (from depression to suicide rates to violence and drug addiction) on secularism.
Do you know what he means by that?
David Rohde
He argues that the founding fathers believed that for American democracy to succeed, Americans had to be religiously observant, because religion provides a mechanism for people to control their behavior and to not abuse their power, and so those moral guideposts should come from religion, not from the government itself. And he felt that the courts made a variety of decisions in the 1960s that produced a bunch of toxic social changes.
Sean Illing
What does he actually want? Does he want a theocracy?
David Rohde
No, he wants a presidential republic where the chief executive is judged in two ways: impeachment and reelection every four years. He sees federal judges declaring Trump’s travel ban illegal or independent counsels like Robert Mueller investigating the president as improper infringements on presidential power by the judicial and legislative branches. They’re denying the president his legitimate constitutional right to run the executive branch as he sees fit.
In a speech last fall at the Federalist Society, he said part of the reason he joined the Trump administration was to halt the weakening of the presidency that he felt was going on in the Trump era, that judges and Democrats in Congress were setting dangerous precedents that would leave the country with a powerless president who couldn’t hold the country together in a crisis.
Sean Illing
What I hear when I listen to him speak is someone who has decided that democracy is too problematic, that the culture has been hijacked, and that the only response is to exercise power from the top down.
David Rohde
Well, I think what Barr believes is that the Hollywood cultural elite is forcing cultural change that most Americans oppose, and that the news media and Hollywood together are exaggerating the number of liberals in the country. And I think he believes that liberals engage in the same sort of rough-and-tumble politics as Trump. So there’s a sense that this is a game for power and you either win or lose.
There’s a fierce belief among Barr and other administration officials that whatever Trump’s problems and behavioral issues, and there are lots of them, they still believe Trump is delivering on a conservative agenda. And one person close to Barr just basically replied, “Of course we support this president and of course we’re going to continue working for him.”
Sean Illing
And what decisions or what changes is Barr reacting against?
David Rohde
He cites Roe v. Wade as the primary example. And he blames a wide variety of social problems, from children born out of wedlock to drug addiction, on what he claims is an unremitting assault on religion and traditional values by militant secularists.
Sean Illing
Barr has this reputation as a very shrewd operator but it does seem like he’s misreading the room lately.
David Rohde
Clearing protesters from Lafayette Square and the attempt to remove Berman, the US attorney in New York, were both off politically. Barr mishandled them. I think that how Trump has responded to the pandemic and the George Floyd demonstrations gives me the sense that both Trump and Barr are off their game. The fact that Trump and Barr lost two major Supreme Court decisions last week, that Berman so openly defied Barr’s order to resign, shows that their political capital could be decreasing.
So there’s an argument that Trump and Barr are just out of touch with the sentiment of this country right now. As I was saying earlier, Barr is still mouthing the same “law and order” talking points you heard in the ’80s. And even in interviews now, Barr will acknowledge that racism exists but he rejects the idea that there’s systemic racism in this country. He clearly doesn’t feel the sense of urgency that so many Americans feel.
Sean Illing
For better or worse, Barr sees this moment as his last stand, right? There’s no going back at this point.
David Rohde
He’s all in. Again, the person I spoke to who’s close to Barr says he really believes what he’s doing is right. And friends of Barr have told me that none of these views are new. And he has nothing to lose. He’s had a long, successful career. Nothing is more important to him than this right now. And I was told today Barr will absolutely be serving through the November election and the remainder of Trump’s term. He is fully committed to seeing this through.


vox--2020-06-27--Poll: 40 percent of Americans think the worst of the coronavirus is over, even as cases spike

A growing number of Americans of both political parties believe the worst of the coronavirus pandemic is over , even as the number of daily new cases is rapidly increasing nationwide .
A new survey from the Pew Research Center found that 40 percent of Americans now believe the worst of Covid-19 is in the past , up from 26 percent in early April .
That number includes the majority of Republicans , 61 percent of whom said the country has already suffered the worst of the pandemic .
Overall , the survey — taken June 16 to 22 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percentage point margin of error — found a strikingly deep ideological divide between how Republicans and Democrats think about the continued threat of the virus .
Democrats were much more likely to say they ’ re worried they may get Covid-19 and need to be hospitalized ; that they might spread the virus to other people ; and that they ’ re uncomfortable going to salons , restaurants , sporting events , or social gatherings .
For instance , the study found 65 percent of Republicans are now comfortable eating in a restaurant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This divide is one that is reflected in the clear difference in public officials ’ response to the coronavirus .
President Donald Trump has long downplayed the threat posed by Covid-19 , and has pushed states to reopen nonessential businesses .
That push was — until recently — widely embraced by his allies at the state level .
Some states with Republican governors , however , like Texas and Florida , have begun to scale back those reopenings amid increasing case counts .
Many Democrats , on the other hand , have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with some , like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden , arguing for mandating the wearing of masks in public .
Beyond partisan leanings , the study also found a racial divide in current attitudes on Covid-19 , with Black and Latinx Americans more likely to fear infection than white Americans .
Sixty-three and 73 percent of Black and Latinx Americans , respectively , said they were at least somewhat concerned they would become infected and require hospitalization ; 43 percent of white Americans said they had the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of greater concern to Black and Latinx respondents ; 72 percent of Black Americans and 79 percent of Latinx Americans were found to be at least somewhat concerned about being asymptomatic carriers , compared to 56 percent of white Americans with the same concern .
These findings reflect the work of multiple other studies showing that people ’ s political beliefs are one of the largest indicators of how they respond to the pandemic — as well as data and analyses that show Americans of color are more likely to be infected and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The study also revealed that Americans , overall , are united in one thing : They ’ re less scared now than they were in April .
Americans still have a lot of cause for concern , however .
After nearly two months of declining coronavirus cases across the US , cases have skyrocketed again over the last two weeks .
Between June 22 and 26 , the country went from having fewer than 25,000 new cases per day to more than 45,000 .
Friday , the US recorded its greatest one-day increase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases , according to the New York Times .
States like Arizona , Florida , and Texas and others throughout the South have been among the hardest hit .
Texas , one of the first states to begin reopening nonessential businesses , and Florida have already begun reversing their economic reopenings in response to the increase in cases .
On Friday , when Florida saw nearly 9,000 new cases and Texas nearly 6,000 , both states ordered bars shuttered .
As Vox ’ s German Lopez has explained , many states never actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their economy : The public was sent back into offices , restaurants , bars , and salons nationwide as the coronavirus was still circulating in their communities , leading to rising cases .
“ It ’ s a situation that didn ’ t have to be , ” Jaime Slaughter-Acey , an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota , told Lopez , adding that states failed to “ be proactive with respect to mitigating the Covid-19 pandemic and to help normalize culture to adopt practices that would stem the tide of transmissions as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Not all states have begun to see a spike in new infections — many of the states hit the hardest in the beginning of the pandemic , such as New York , New Jersey , and Connecticut , have been spared the increases .
While this could be attributed to a number of factors , epidemiologists believe these states have avoided large new caseloads by implementing strict social distancing policies and by promoting the wearing of masks .
As Lopez reports , what ’ s most important , experts say , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way the coronavirus manifests in humans , it can take two weeks — if not longer — to see the impact of any one change in policy .
Many experts recommend states be prepared to rapidly reintroduce restrictions when they see cases spike .
Lauren Meyers , a mathematical biologist at the University of Texas Austin , told Lopez : “ Relax things bit by bit , and see if it ’ s working .
If we relax a few measures , we watch the data for a few weeks ; if it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can relax a bit more.
” For now , however , the figures suggest it is not yet time to relax , and that the worst is not behind the US .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

A growing number of Americans of both political parties believe the worst of the coronavirus pandemic is over, even as the number of daily new cases is rapidly increasing nationwide.
A new survey from the Pew Research Center found that 40 percent of Americans now believe the worst of Covid-19 is in the past, up from 26 percent in early April. That number includes the majority of Republicans, 61 percent of whom said the country has already suffered the worst of the pandemic.
Overall, the survey — taken June 16 to 22, featuring 4,708 American adults and a 1.8 percentage point margin of error — found a strikingly deep ideological divide between how Republicans and Democrats think about the continued threat of the virus.
Democrats were much more likely to say they’re worried they may get Covid-19 and need to be hospitalized; that they might spread the virus to other people; and that they’re uncomfortable going to salons, restaurants, sporting events, or social gatherings. For instance, the study found 65 percent of Republicans are now comfortable eating in a restaurant, compared to 28 percent of Democrats.
This divide is one that is reflected in the clear difference in public officials’ response to the coronavirus. President Donald Trump has long downplayed the threat posed by Covid-19, and has pushed states to reopen nonessential businesses. That push was — until recently — widely embraced by his allies at the state level. Some states with Republican governors, however, like Texas and Florida, have begun to scale back those reopenings amid increasing case counts.
Many Democrats, on the other hand, have argued for a more cautious reopening, with some, like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, arguing for mandating the wearing of masks in public.
Beyond partisan leanings, the study also found a racial divide in current attitudes on Covid-19, with Black and Latinx Americans more likely to fear infection than white Americans.
Sixty-three and 73 percent of Black and Latinx Americans, respectively, said they were at least somewhat concerned they would become infected and require hospitalization; 43 percent of white Americans said they had the same fear. Asymptomatic spread was also of greater concern to Black and Latinx respondents; 72 percent of Black Americans and 79 percent of Latinx Americans were found to be at least somewhat concerned about being asymptomatic carriers, compared to 56 percent of white Americans with the same concern.
These findings reflect the work of multiple other studies showing that people’s political beliefs are one of the largest indicators of how they respond to the pandemic — as well as data and analyses that show Americans of color are more likely to be infected and die of Covid-19 than white Americans.
The study also revealed that Americans are increasingly united in one thing: They’re less scared now than they were in April.
Coronavirus cases are actually surging nationwide
Americans still have a lot of cause for concern, however. After nearly two months of declining coronavirus cases across the US, cases have skyrocketed again over the last two weeks. Between June 22 and 26, the country went from having fewer than 25,000 new cases per day to more than 45,000. Friday, the US recorded its greatest one-day increase in confirmed cases, documenting 45,498 new cases, according to the New York Times.
States like Arizona, Florida, and Texas and others throughout the South have been among the hardest hit. Texas, one of the first states to begin reopening nonessential businesses, and Florida have already begun reversing their economic reopenings in response to the increase in cases. On Friday, when Florida saw nearly 9,000 new cases and Texas nearly 6,000, both states ordered bars shuttered.
As Vox’s German Lopez has explained, many states never actually controlled their outbreaks before reopening sectors of their economy: The public was sent back into offices, restaurants, bars, and salons nationwide as the coronavirus was still circulating in their communities, leading to rising cases.
“It’s a situation that didn’t have to be,” Jaime Slaughter-Acey, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, told Lopez, adding that states failed to “be proactive with respect to mitigating the Covid-19 pandemic and to help normalize culture to adopt practices that would stem the tide of transmissions as well as the development of Covid-19 complications.”
Not all states have begun to see a spike in new infections — many of the states hit the hardest in the beginning of the pandemic, such as New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, have been spared the increases. While this could be attributed to a number of factors, epidemiologists believe these states have avoided large new caseloads by implementing strict social distancing policies and by promoting the wearing of masks.
As Lopez reports, what’s most important, experts say, is taking reopenings slowly. Because of the way the coronavirus manifests in humans, it can take two weeks — if not longer — to see the impact of any one change in policy. Many experts recommend states be prepared to rapidly reintroduce restrictions when they see cases spike.
Lauren Meyers, a mathematical biologist at the University of Texas Austin, told Lopez: “Relax things bit by bit, and see if it’s working. If we relax a few measures, we watch the data for a few weeks; if it’s not going up, maybe we can relax a bit more.”
For now, however, the figures suggest it is not yet time to relax, and that the worst is not behind the US.


vox--2020-06-27--Trump signs an executive order on prosecuting those who destroy monuments

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Friday directing federal law enforcement agencies to prosecute people who damage federal monuments — and to withhold portions of federal funding to cities that don ’ t protect statues from demonstrators .
The order marks the latest in Trump ’ s ongoing battle against protesters who have pushed for the removal of monuments and statues that memorialize Confederate leaders , and other figures who supported slavery , white supremacy , or colonialism .
Several monuments have been torn down or removed in recent weeks amid protests against police brutality and racism , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Alabama and Confederate Gen. Albert Pike in Washington , DC .
Trump responded to the removal of the statue in Washington by tweeting , “ These people should be immediately arrested .
A disgrace to our Country !
” and with the order , has provided a framework for arrests to be made .
The order directs the Department of Justice to “ prosecute to the fullest extent permitted under Federal law ” people who damage government monuments , participate in “ efforts to incite violence , ” or damage religious property @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by up to 10 years in prison .
Trump also included a directive to withhold federal funding to cities and local law enforcement agencies that have “ surrendered to mob rule ” by making no attempts to stop protesters from damaging monuments .
It ’ s unclear , however , to what extent the administration could actually enforce this provision .
Trump announced the edict on Twitter , hours after tweeting a poster from the FBI seeking information about 15 people alleged to have been involved in attempting to tear down a statue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Monday night , and calling for all 15 to face “ 10 year prison sentences !
” The statues of Confederates and others who advanced white supremacist ideals have become a campaign issue for the president as he re-engages with his reelection campaign .
Speaking to supporters in Arizona on Tuesday , Trump praised the US Park Police for breaking up the White House protest and preventing the statue of Jackson , who signed the 1830 Indian Removal Act , which led to the deaths of thousands of Native Americans , from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our history , they hate our values , and they hate everything we prize as Americans , ” Trump told the audience .
Protesters , however , have argued that the monuments — particularly Confederate ones honoring individuals who tried to destroy the United States — salute an ugly history that runs counter to the American values enshrined in the Constitution .
As Rep. Barbara Lee ( D-CA ) put it in unveiling legislation that would remove Confederate monuments from the US Capitol , “ Confederate statues and monuments still pay tribute to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
...
It is time to tell the truth about what these statues are : hateful symbols that have no place in our society.
” Symbols of white supremacy have been coming down nationwide Monuments — mostly to Confederate generals — have been coming down for several weeks amid ongoing demonstrations against police brutality and racism sparked by the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May .
Protesters have pulled down or defaced a number of statues , such as that of Confederate Gen. Williams Carter Wickham in Richmond , Virginia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down with ropes , and urinated on .
Some local public officials have chosen to take down statues through more official means , such as the Democratic mayor of Birmingham , Alabama , who told protesters preparing to pull down the city ’ s Confederate Soldiers and Sailors Monument : “ Allow me to finish the job for you.
” Monuments to slaveholding historical figures have also been targeted , as have those that featured racist themes .
Statues of George Washington were toppled in Portland and defaced in Baltimore last week .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ priest Junípero Serra , and “ The Star-Spangled Banner ” writer Francis Scott Key were taken down in San Francisco .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently ordered the removal of portraits from the US Capitol of former House Speakers who served in the Confederacy , and called for 11 statues of Confederate figures to be removed from the building ’ s Statuary Hall collection .
Nascar , which has long been associated with a largely white , Southern fan base , banned Confederate flags at its events following pressure from the organization ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wallace .
Trump has consistently opposed these changes , and quickly shut down conversation about changing the names of Army bases named after Confederate leaders after Pentagon officials said for the first time the names were open to discussion .
The order is the latest step in this opposition — although it is not clear that the president ’ s views match those of most Americans ; for example , a Quinnipiac University poll taken June 11 to 15 found 52 percent of Americans back the removal of Confederate monuments from public spaces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of error ) .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Friday directing federal law enforcement agencies to prosecute people who damage federal monuments — and to withhold portions of federal funding to cities that don’t protect statues from demonstrators.
The order marks the latest in Trump’s ongoing battle against protesters who have pushed for the removal of monuments and statues that memorialize Confederate leaders, and other figures who supported slavery, white supremacy, or colonialism. Several monuments have been torn down or removed in recent weeks amid protests against police brutality and racism, including statues of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee in Alabama and Confederate Gen. Albert Pike in Washington, DC.
Trump responded to the removal of the statue in Washington by tweeting, “These people should be immediately arrested. A disgrace to our Country!” and with the order, has provided a framework for arrests to be made.
The order directs the Department of Justice to “prosecute to the fullest extent permitted under Federal law” people who damage government monuments, participate in “efforts to incite violence,” or damage religious property. Damaging federal property can be punished by up to 10 years in prison.
Trump also included a directive to withhold federal funding to cities and local law enforcement agencies that have “surrendered to mob rule” by making no attempts to stop protesters from damaging monuments. It’s unclear, however, to what extent the administration could actually enforce this provision.
Trump announced the edict on Twitter, hours after tweeting a poster from the FBI seeking information about 15 people alleged to have been involved in attempting to tear down a statue of Andrew Jackson near the White House on Monday night, and calling for all 15 to face “10 year prison sentences!”
The statues of Confederates and others who advanced white supremacist ideals have become a campaign issue for the president as he re-engages with his reelection campaign. Speaking to supporters in Arizona on Tuesday, Trump praised the US Park Police for breaking up the White House protest and preventing the statue of Jackson, who signed the 1830 Indian Removal Act, which led to the deaths of thousands of Native Americans, from coming down.
The protesters “hate our history, they hate our values, and they hate everything we prize as Americans,” Trump told the audience.
Protesters, however, have argued that the monuments — particularly Confederate ones honoring individuals who tried to destroy the United States — salute an ugly history that runs counter to the American values enshrined in the Constitution.
As Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) put it in unveiling legislation that would remove Confederate monuments from the US Capitol, “Confederate statues and monuments still pay tribute to white supremacy and slavery in public spaces. ... It is time to tell the truth about what these statues are: hateful symbols that have no place in our society.”
Symbols of white supremacy have been coming down nationwide
Monuments — mostly to Confederate generals — have been coming down for several weeks amid ongoing demonstrations against police brutality and racism sparked by the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May.
Protesters have pulled down or defaced a number of statues, such as that of Confederate Gen. Williams Carter Wickham in Richmond, Virginia, which was spray painted, pulled down with ropes, and urinated on.
Some local public officials have chosen to take down statues through more official means, such as the Democratic mayor of Birmingham, Alabama, who told protesters preparing to pull down the city’s Confederate Soldiers and Sailors Monument: “Allow me to finish the job for you.”
Monuments to slaveholding historical figures have also been targeted, as have those that featured racist themes. Statues of George Washington were toppled in Portland and defaced in Baltimore last week. Likenesses of Ulysses S. Grant, Spanish priest Junípero Serra, and “The Star-Spangled Banner” writer Francis Scott Key were taken down in San Francisco.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently ordered the removal of portraits from the US Capitol of former House Speakers who served in the Confederacy, and called for 11 statues of Confederate figures to be removed from the building’s Statuary Hall collection.
Nascar, which has long been associated with a largely white, Southern fan base, banned Confederate flags at its events following pressure from the organization’s only Black full-time driver, Bubba Wallace.
Trump has consistently opposed these changes, and quickly shut down conversation about changing the names of Army bases named after Confederate leaders after Pentagon officials said for the first time the names were open to discussion.
The order is the latest step in this opposition — although it is not clear that the president’s views match those of most Americans; for example, a Quinnipiac University poll taken June 11 to 15 found 52 percent of Americans back the removal of Confederate monuments from public spaces (with a 2.7 percentage point margin of error).