vox--2020-06-26--How Black Lives Matter shifted public opinion

When protests for black lives erupted across the country in May , the images were inspiring if not surprising : In big cities like Los Angeles , New York , and Washington , DC , protesters filled massive boulevards for miles in the middle of a pandemic .
Meanwhile , in small , mostly white towns across the country , hundreds of people gathered to chant “ Black lives matter ” and “ no justice , no peace ” in the middle of the day .
It felt like a moment not seen for generations .
Now , weeks later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether they ’ re fighting for trans lives , toppling Confederate statues , or calling for the removal of other racist symbols like the Confederate flag .
But with the media no longer covering protests well into the night , it can be hard to gauge the strength and popularity of the current marches .
And even if people continue to rally in the streets , the question remains : How can activists sustain the momentum that has moved people to question the deep-rooted racism in American systems like policing ?
Megan Ming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the University of Washington and a visiting professor at Harvard University , told Vox that there are a few things activists and allies must do to achieve even greater wins through November and in the coming years .
These steps involve public education and a greater recognition of how protest shifts public opinion .
“ Protest is key , ” she said , but the movement can ’ t end in the street .
As she points out in her book , Civil Rights and the Making of the Modern American State , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state-building by first shifting public opinion , then creating change within political and legal structures .
And according to polls , opinion is already shifting : In 2015 , just 51 percent of Americans believed racism is a big problem in the US ; now 76 percent of Americans do .
Ming Francis also noted how sustaining the movement will require that big philanthropy do more to fund grassroots movements that are Black-led , particularly Black-woman led .
I talked to Francis about the parallels and differences between the modern movement and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the early 20th century , and the lessons this early movement teaches us about longevity .
Our interview has been edited for clarity .
Demonstrations kicked off about a month ago , with people around the country and world taking to the streets to protest the killing of Black people and other ills like systemic racism and police brutality .
What about this period seems different to you , if anything , especially in comparison to the early 20th-century movements you study ?
I am certain that something feels different this time .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ but particularly different from earlier Black Lives Matter protests from 2014 , 2015 , and 2016 .
Initially , when everything popped off , I was like , “ Here we go again .
People are going to go for about a day or a week then aren ’ t going to care.
” But then , the endurance and longevity of these protests , the size of these protests — they are inspiring .
In terms of how big and diverse they are , you get the sense that it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are saying we deserve to live , do not kill us , and that this American democracy does not extend to us .
But you ’ re seeing it ’ s not just them that are making this claim .
Other people are making this claim , and we know there ’ s strength in numbers .
The history of protest in this country is that when there ’ s more people , politicians pay attention .
With the Black Lives Matter protests in 2014 and 2015 , it wasn ’ t just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gave it lip service , pushed it to the side , and treated protesters like nuisances .
But this time it ’ s clear that protests are a force to be reckoned with , and the Democratic establishment needs to wake up and pay attention to what protesters are saying .
Right now what you are hearing in the streets are the feelings , thoughts , pain , rage , and frustrations of the nation — not just a small section of it .
It is now clear that a growing number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are trying to raise that as an issue and believe that we must address it to move forward .
These people feel that their own understanding of what it means to be a citizen in this country is not complete because certain people in this country are not treated as full people .
It ’ s been interesting , inspiring , and beautiful to watch so many of the protests taking place .
And what tangible outcomes have you noticed ?
One of the things I ’ m seeing that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re in in American politics is that people are dreaming and imagining a different way forward , a different type of politics .
That is really cool .
There are those who have been used to the idea that the way you get change is through democratic politics .
That you sign a petition ( which is still good ) , try to get legislation passed , and try to get a court a victory .
You try to get reform inside of the institution .
But now we see Black people leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we reject that .
Your institutions do not work .
We can never actually be free and be considered full citizens inside your institution.
” People are imagining new ways to be , with new forms of transparency , accountability , and harm reduction .
We are seeing that pop up all over , like with CHAZ in Seattle , Washington .
It ’ s an example that a different world is possible .
That is what I see as different .
And in comparison to movements of the 20th century , what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terms of what is different about this moment in comparison to the mid-20th century and early 20th century civil rights struggle is I think there is a frustration that is even more urgent than it was in some ways in the ’ 60s .
Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 , there were not yet big pieces of legislation from the government .
The federal government had not protected the rights of Black people in this country .
So much of the protests were about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in housing , and getting rid of Jim Crow — that separate could never be equal .
But then that falls .
Things were supposed to be better .
White people were supposed to stop killing Black people .
We played by your rules and got the Civil Rights Act in 1964 .
We also eventually got Obama .
Blacks got the highest office in this country and you still kill us .
So it doesn ’ t matter if we were the president of this country , you still don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is different about this moment than in the past is that all of the work and playing by the rules and focusing on electoral politics for change as the main way change happens , that doesn ’ t work anymore .
It ’ s clear that you have not just younger Black people , but middle-aged and older Black people who are frustrated and understand that something new needs to happen , that something more transformative needs to happen .
“ The endurance and longevity of these protests , the size of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ d like to talk more about the idea that this kind of action and urgency is no longer just a “ Black thing.
” What ’ s going on with non-Black people that is making them get involved this time around ?
I ’ ve thought about this a lot .
Why are there so many non-Black people who are suddenly so concerned ?
I think it ’ s two things .
First , it ’ s the layering of the pandemic on top of old-fashioned white supremacy .
The pandemic has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They have been having conversations about health and health care , and it has been very clear to people that there is structural inequality in the system .
People are open to talking about race a little bit when it comes to matters of health .
Everyone has been experiencing a health crisis , so the American public has been primed that there ’ s social inequalities around health .
And then the big thing here is : People can ’ t go anywhere !
There are no trips , no vacations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brunches .
There ’ s no real way for them to escape .
As somebody who teaches Black politics and civil rights in this country , I am always shocked by how much we do not know .
Part of the reason why so many white Americans know so little about the Black experience in America is because they choose not to know .
It is willful .
For white people to not know that Black people are treated a particular way by the police means they are hiding under a rock .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s through The Wire or a friend or something that they perhaps saw .
They choose not to learn more about it .
What ’ s happening now is people are forced to consume social media and the news much more than they had before .
For a good number of Americans , who perhaps never really paid that much attention to police brutality and or systemic racism in this country , they have time to listen , read , and think about their own culpability in creating a system where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Over the past few weeks , we ’ ve seen the different ways people take action at the protests .
This has led to a conversation about the merits of nonviolence over violence .
We have seen less media coverage , particularly cable news media coverage , of the protests once the looting stopped .
From what you ’ ve observed , what is the role of violence and nonviolence in bringing about reform ?
Also , is this even a question that we should still be asking ?
I think it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the protests started taking place , that was a frame or narrative for the media to harp on , like , “ Look !
There ’ s nonviolence and violence , and everybody should be nonviolent.
” Then they pointed to a number of civil rights heroes and demonstrations as a way to shame and undermine the protests .
I found that harmful and distracting .
And it ’ s interesting that they ’ d focus on the violence of protesters even more than they would focus on the violence of policing over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s been said by many activists , journalists , and scholars that for people to say the only type of acceptable protest is nonviolent protest — that comes from a place of ignorance of the actual full Black freedom struggle in this country .
Violence and nonviolence have always existed together at the same time .
Anger and rage have always served a useful purpose .
Even in fighting for one ’ s life , people want a clean and neat movement .
And the thing about rights-making and progress in this country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to one movement that has produced and led to a more democratic United States that ’ s been tight and clean .
That ’ s just not the way it happens .
In thinking about the NAACP ’ s civil rights work in the early 20th century , how did they sustain their movement over so many years ?
What ’ s fascinating is they were a group of Black people in the early 20th century and you can imagine the kind of violent racism there was in this country .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lot of people will say , “ Why focus on the imagination and on a Utopian vision ?
” Well , that ’ s the only thing that has pushed Black people forward in this country .
The civil rights movement in the ’ 60s was impossible until it happened .
All these things are impossible until they happen .
The NAACP actually imagined a world in which Black people ’ s lives are protected and treated equally .
The United States was not protecting Black people ’ s lives — in fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the peak of lynching , and the NAACP was focused on not accepting that fate and organizing to actually end the lynching and mob violence against Black people as well as other rights around voting , education , and housing .
“ For a good number of Americans ... they have time to listen , read , and think about their own culpability in creating a system where Black lives aren ’ t valued ” So it sounds like their sheer will to fight injustice and the belief that freedom could be theirs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their platform and made progress .
Yes , and they focus on a number of different areas , which is important for the current protest to think about in terms of what comes next .
We constantly hear today that the only thing Black Lives Matter does is protest in the street and that what they need to be doing is trying to change some formal institution .
But with the history of the NAACP , they first focused their energy on changing public opinion because they knew that demonstrations in the street @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black people would do a lot to impact public opinion .
They knew they had to change public opinion around members of Congress .
They couldn ’ t just go directly to members of Congress .
You need public opinion to create formal institutional change .
What we know as legal scholars is that the Supreme Court rarely leads ; it mostly follows the whims of change in society .
If you want legal change , if you want political change , then it means you need to , at the same time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That is crucial .
The NAACP first focused on that and then they moved inside of politics .
It ’ s fascinating because they were unsure of what to do .
They try to get statements from President Woodrow Wilson and President Warren G. Harding condemning lynching .
Both men eventually do put out statements , but lynching still continues .
They also try to pass an anti-lynching bill in Congress .
( Yes , it ’ s 2020 , and we ’ re still trying ! )
It passes the House but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That didn ’ t work , but they got far and that ’ s tremendous .
Then in 1923 , they won a landmark criminal procedure case where the Supreme Court basically said you can not have mob-dominated trials since they violate the due process clause of the 14th Amendment .
This is extraordinary .
Court wins are always incremental victories ; it ’ s not like everything immediately changed .
But court precedent is important , and this was the first time in a criminal procedure case that the Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on due process grounds , to say that this Jim Crow trial was not done appropriately .
So what lessons does the early NAACP movement teach us about the power of the current movements and the power to sustain them ?
One , it affirms the importance of the protests .
We ’ ve seen tremendous changes in public opinion .
I didn ’ t think I ’ d see this kind of thing in my lifetime , that 60 percent of Americans now believe there needs to be transformative , large-scale change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ big changes in the allowance of police unions and policing and school districts ending contracts with the police .
And this is in predominantly white areas in some cases .
The NAACP affirmed that protests and public opinion work reaches the hearts and minds of Americans .
The protests are going to fade away , but I don ’ t see that work ending .
I think that work is just going to carry over into formal politics .
I ’ m really interested and excited about November in terms of the number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the different cities and towns and states that these protests have touched .
It ’ s clear that these protests have struck a chord with people , and that ’ s not going to end in July .
One of the things we can learn from the NAACP is to carry that momentum forward and to bring these protests inside of formal politics .
You also explore movement funding in your work .
What can you say about funders in this moment and how they ’ re working to help sustain the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exciting now is the number of small donors that support the movement .
Oftentimes , when we think of social justice movements , we think of big philanthropy and big donors .
If anything , one of the things this moment has highlighted is the lack of proximity of big philanthropy and how out of touch big philanthropy actually is with Black-led , especially Black women-led , organizations .
This has always been an issue with philanthropy and highlights the structural disparities in giving around social and racial justice issues .
You should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but they are not , in part because philanthropy doesn ’ t necessarily like to fund direct action .
They have been very slow to fund anything that is anti-capitalist and anything that smells of abolition .
If big philanthropy were to start funding Black-led organizations at a greater capacity , what would the impact of that be ?
If big philanthropy supported Black women-led organizations at the level where they support white male-led organizations , this movement and protest could ’ ve come sooner .
Money isn ’ t everything , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but if big philanthropy actually came and supported the imagination of Black women organizers and activists , so much could be possible in this country .
To close out , what are the top three steps the movement needs to take to keep this going through November and in years to come ?
First , people need to continue to educate themselves about the depths of white supremacy and systemic racism in this country .
It doesn ’ t mean reading just two books and say , “ I ’ m anti-racist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do more work .
You have to challenge yourself on things you may not agree with .
Public education also means that people , communities , and institutions actually examine the past ways that they have contributed to the unmattering of black lives .
One of the things we like to do is just move forward and say , “ We ’ re going to do better in the future.
” How , when you don ’ t even know what you did ?
Your corporation , your wealth , is built on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better in the future does not yet address the past .
Second , people need to understand the role and importance of protests .
People are a bit confused about the importance of protests , so moving forward people need to understand the importance of protests for large-scale , long-term change in this country .
Protest is key .
And third , the movement must combine the protests in the streets with protests inside of formal political and legal institutions .
That will propel the movement forward .
It can ’ t end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end in the transformation of political and legal structures in this country .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

When protests for black lives erupted across the country in May, the images were inspiring if not surprising: In big cities like Los Angeles, New York, and Washington, DC, protesters filled massive boulevards for miles in the middle of a pandemic. Meanwhile, in small, mostly white towns across the country, hundreds of people gathered to chant “Black lives matter” and “no justice, no peace” in the middle of the day. It felt like a moment not seen for generations.
Now, weeks later, activists are still organizing marches, whether they’re fighting for trans lives, toppling Confederate statues, or calling for the removal of other racist symbols like the Confederate flag. But with the media no longer covering protests well into the night, it can be hard to gauge the strength and popularity of the current marches. And even if people continue to rally in the streets, the question remains: How can activists sustain the momentum that has moved people to question the deep-rooted racism in American systems like policing?
Megan Ming Francis, a political science professor at the University of Washington and a visiting professor at Harvard University, told Vox that there are a few things activists and allies must do to achieve even greater wins through November and in the coming years. These steps involve public education and a greater recognition of how protest shifts public opinion. “Protest is key,” she said, but the movement can’t end in the street.
As she points out in her book, Civil Rights and the Making of the Modern American State, the NAACP from 1909 to 1923 mobilized state-building by first shifting public opinion, then creating change within political and legal structures. And according to polls, opinion is already shifting: In 2015, just 51 percent of Americans believed racism is a big problem in the US; now 76 percent of Americans do. Ming Francis also noted how sustaining the movement will require that big philanthropy do more to fund grassroots movements that are Black-led, particularly Black-woman led.
I talked to Francis about the parallels and differences between the modern movement and the NAACP’s civil rights efforts in the early 20th century, and the lessons this early movement teaches us about longevity. Our interview has been edited for clarity.
Fabiola Cineas
Demonstrations kicked off about a month ago, with people around the country and world taking to the streets to protest the killing of Black people and other ills like systemic racism and police brutality. What about this period seems different to you, if anything, especially in comparison to the early 20th-century movements you study?
Megan Ming Francis
I am certain that something feels different this time. It is different from all past movements but particularly different from earlier Black Lives Matter protests from 2014, 2015, and 2016. Initially, when everything popped off, I was like, “Here we go again. People are going to go for about a day or a week then aren’t going to care.” But then, the endurance and longevity of these protests, the size of these protests — they are inspiring.
In terms of how big and diverse they are, you get the sense that it’s not just Black people. Black people are saying we deserve to live, do not kill us, and that this American democracy does not extend to us. But you’re seeing it’s not just them that are making this claim. Other people are making this claim, and we know there’s strength in numbers. The history of protest in this country is that when there’s more people, politicians pay attention. With the Black Lives Matter protests in 2014 and 2015, it wasn’t just Republicans but the Democratic establishment also basically gave it lip service, pushed it to the side, and treated protesters like nuisances. But this time it’s clear that protests are a force to be reckoned with, and the Democratic establishment needs to wake up and pay attention to what protesters are saying.
Right now what you are hearing in the streets are the feelings, thoughts, pain, rage, and frustrations of the nation — not just a small section of it. It is now clear that a growing number of people are empathetic to Black pain; they are trying to raise that as an issue and believe that we must address it to move forward. These people feel that their own understanding of what it means to be a citizen in this country is not complete because certain people in this country are not treated as full people. It’s been interesting, inspiring, and beautiful to watch so many of the protests taking place.
Fabiola Cineas
And what tangible outcomes have you noticed?
Megan Ming Francis
One of the things I’m seeing that’s a testament to the moment we’re in in American politics is that people are dreaming and imagining a different way forward, a different type of politics. That is really cool. There are those who have been used to the idea that the way you get change is through democratic politics. That you sign a petition (which is still good), try to get legislation passed, and try to get a court a victory. You try to get reform inside of the institution. But now we see Black people leading the way saying, “No, we reject that. Your institutions do not work. We can never actually be free and be considered full citizens inside your institution.” People are imagining new ways to be, with new forms of transparency, accountability, and harm reduction. We are seeing that pop up all over, like with CHAZ in Seattle, Washington. It’s an example that a different world is possible. That is what I see as different.
Fabiola Cineas
And in comparison to movements of the 20th century, what specific comparisons do you draw?
Megan Ming Francis
In terms of what is different about this moment in comparison to the mid-20th century and early 20th century civil rights struggle is I think there is a frustration that is even more urgent than it was in some ways in the ’60s. Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, there were not yet big pieces of legislation from the government. The federal government had not protected the rights of Black people in this country. So much of the protests were about securing federal protections in the workplace, in housing, and getting rid of Jim Crow — that separate could never be equal.
But then that falls. Things were supposed to be better. White people were supposed to stop killing Black people. We played by your rules and got the Civil Rights Act in 1964. We also eventually got Obama. Blacks got the highest office in this country and you still kill us. So it doesn’t matter if we were the president of this country, you still don’t see us as full people. What is different about this moment than in the past is that all of the work and playing by the rules and focusing on electoral politics for change as the main way change happens, that doesn’t work anymore. It’s clear that you have not just younger Black people, but middle-aged and older Black people who are frustrated and understand that something new needs to happen, that something more transformative needs to happen.
“The endurance and longevity of these protests, the size of these protests — they are inspiring”
Fabiola Cineas
I’d like to talk more about the idea that this kind of action and urgency is no longer just a “Black thing.” What’s going on with non-Black people that is making them get involved this time around?
Megan Ming Francis
I’ve thought about this a lot. Why are there so many non-Black people who are suddenly so concerned? I think it’s two things. First, it’s the layering of the pandemic on top of old-fashioned white supremacy. The pandemic has forced people [to stay] home. They have been having conversations about health and health care, and it has been very clear to people that there is structural inequality in the system. People are open to talking about race a little bit when it comes to matters of health. Everyone has been experiencing a health crisis, so the American public has been primed that there’s social inequalities around health. And then the big thing here is: People can’t go anywhere! There are no trips, no vacations to be had. No dinner or brunches. There’s no real way for them to escape.
As somebody who teaches Black politics and civil rights in this country, I am always shocked by how much we do not know. Part of the reason why so many white Americans know so little about the Black experience in America is because they choose not to know. It is willful. For white people to not know that Black people are treated a particular way by the police means they are hiding under a rock. Most people have some inkling — whether it’s through The Wire or a friend or something that they perhaps saw. They choose not to learn more about it. What’s happening now is people are forced to consume social media and the news much more than they had before. For a good number of Americans, who perhaps never really paid that much attention to police brutality and or systemic racism in this country, they have time to listen, read, and think about their own culpability in creating a system where Black lives aren’t valued.
Fabiola Cineas
Over the past few weeks, we’ve seen the different ways people take action at the protests. This has led to a conversation about the merits of nonviolence over violence. We have seen less media coverage, particularly cable news media coverage, of the protests once the looting stopped. From what you’ve observed, what is the role of violence and nonviolence in bringing about reform? Also, is this even a question that we should still be asking?
Megan Ming Francis
I think it’s a tremendously helpful question. When the protests started taking place, that was a frame or narrative for the media to harp on, like, “Look! There’s nonviolence and violence, and everybody should be nonviolent.” Then they pointed to a number of civil rights heroes and demonstrations as a way to shame and undermine the protests. I found that harmful and distracting. And it’s interesting that they’d focus on the violence of protesters even more than they would focus on the violence of policing over decades in their newsrooms.
It’s been said by many activists, journalists, and scholars that for people to say the only type of acceptable protest is nonviolent protest — that comes from a place of ignorance of the actual full Black freedom struggle in this country. Violence and nonviolence have always existed together at the same time. Anger and rage have always served a useful purpose. Even in fighting for one’s life, people want a clean and neat movement. And the thing about rights-making and progress in this country is you can’t point me to one movement that has produced and led to a more democratic United States that’s been tight and clean. That’s just not the way it happens.
Fabiola Cineas
In thinking about the NAACP’s civil rights work in the early 20th century, how did they sustain their movement over so many years?
Megan Ming Francis
What’s fascinating is they were a group of Black people in the early 20th century and you can imagine the kind of violent racism there was in this country. This is the importance of the imagination. A lot of people will say, “Why focus on the imagination and on a Utopian vision?” Well, that’s the only thing that has pushed Black people forward in this country. The civil rights movement in the ’60s was impossible until it happened. All these things are impossible until they happen. The NAACP actually imagined a world in which Black people’s lives are protected and treated equally. The United States was not protecting Black people’s lives — in fact they were lynching people. It was the peak of lynching, and the NAACP was focused on not accepting that fate and organizing to actually end the lynching and mob violence against Black people as well as other rights around voting, education, and housing.
“For a good number of Americans ... they have time to listen, read, and think about their own culpability in creating a system where Black lives aren’t valued”
Fabiola Cineas
So it sounds like their sheer will to fight injustice and the belief that freedom could be theirs was the foundation for how they sustained their platform and made progress.
Megan Ming Francis
Yes, and they focus on a number of different areas, which is important for the current protest to think about in terms of what comes next. We constantly hear today that the only thing Black Lives Matter does is protest in the street and that what they need to be doing is trying to change some formal institution. But with the history of the NAACP, they first focused their energy on changing public opinion because they knew that demonstrations in the street and publicizing the deaths and lynching of Black people would do a lot to impact public opinion. They knew they had to change public opinion around members of Congress. They couldn’t just go directly to members of Congress. You need public opinion to create formal institutional change. What we know as legal scholars is that the Supreme Court rarely leads; it mostly follows the whims of change in society. If you want legal change, if you want political change, then it means you need to, at the same time or before, shift public opinion. That is crucial.
The NAACP first focused on that and then they moved inside of politics. It’s fascinating because they were unsure of what to do. They try to get statements from President Woodrow Wilson and President Warren G. Harding condemning lynching. Both men eventually do put out statements, but lynching still continues. They also try to pass an anti-lynching bill in Congress. (Yes, it’s 2020, and we’re still trying!) It passes the House but it dies in committee in the Senate. That didn’t work, but they got far and that’s tremendous. Then in 1923, they won a landmark criminal procedure case where the Supreme Court basically said you cannot have mob-dominated trials since they violate the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. This is extraordinary. Court wins are always incremental victories; it’s not like everything immediately changed. But court precedent is important, and this was the first time in a criminal procedure case that the Supreme Court interfered in a state court trial, on due process grounds, to say that this Jim Crow trial was not done appropriately.
Fabiola Cineas
So what lessons does the early NAACP movement teach us about the power of the current movements and the power to sustain them?
Megan Ming Francis
One, it affirms the importance of the protests. We’ve seen tremendous changes in public opinion. I didn’t think I’d see this kind of thing in my lifetime, that 60 percent of Americans now believe there needs to be transformative, large-scale change in policing. That has led to big changes in the allowance of police unions and policing and school districts ending contracts with the police. And this is in predominantly white areas in some cases. The NAACP affirmed that protests and public opinion work reaches the hearts and minds of Americans.
The protests are going to fade away, but I don’t see that work ending. I think that work is just going to carry over into formal politics. I’m really interested and excited about November in terms of the number of proposals that might be in place in the different cities and towns and states that these protests have touched. It’s clear that these protests have struck a chord with people, and that’s not going to end in July. One of the things we can learn from the NAACP is to carry that momentum forward and to bring these protests inside of formal politics.
Fabiola Cineas
You also explore movement funding in your work. What can you say about funders in this moment and how they’re working to help sustain the movement going forward?
Megan Ming Francis
What’s exciting now is the number of small donors that support the movement. Oftentimes, when we think of social justice movements, we think of big philanthropy and big donors. If anything, one of the things this moment has highlighted is the lack of proximity of big philanthropy and how out of touch big philanthropy actually is with Black-led, especially Black women-led, organizations. This has always been an issue with philanthropy and highlights the structural disparities in giving around social and racial justice issues. You should see big philanthropy all over these issues, but they are not, in part because philanthropy doesn’t necessarily like to fund direct action. They have been very slow to fund anything that is anti-capitalist and anything that smells of abolition.
Fabiola Cineas
If big philanthropy were to start funding Black-led organizations at a greater capacity, what would the impact of that be?
Megan Ming Francis
If big philanthropy supported Black women-led organizations at the level where they support white male-led organizations, this movement and protest could’ve come sooner. Money isn’t everything, and money doesn’t make movements, but if big philanthropy actually came and supported the imagination of Black women organizers and activists, so much could be possible in this country.
Fabiola Cineas
To close out, what are the top three steps the movement needs to take to keep this going through November and in years to come?
Megan Ming Francis
First, people need to continue to educate themselves about the depths of white supremacy and systemic racism in this country. It doesn’t mean reading just two books and say, “I’m anti-racist!” No, you have to do more work. You have to challenge yourself on things you may not agree with. Public education also means that people, communities, and institutions actually examine the past ways that they have contributed to the unmattering of black lives. One of the things we like to do is just move forward and say, “We’re going to do better in the future.” How, when you don’t even know what you did? Your corporation, your wealth, is built on Black people. Saying you will do better in the future does not yet address the past.
Second, people need to understand the role and importance of protests. People are a bit confused about the importance of protests, so moving forward people need to understand the importance of protests for large-scale, long-term change in this country. Protest is key.
And third, the movement must combine the protests in the streets with protests inside of formal political and legal institutions. That will propel the movement forward. It can’t end in the streets; it has to end in the transformation of political and legal structures in this country.


What day is it today?

Today is Friday , June 26 , 2020 , at least in the continental United States .
It is already Saturday , June 27 , 2020 , in some parts of the world .
To some degree , time is an illusion .
We are bound by its forward passage , being the third-dimensional creatures we are , but the perceptions we have placed upon time have been invented .
Humans invented the year .
Humans invented the month .
Humans invented the day , the hour , the minute , the second .
These distinctions are not arbitrary — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Earth to orbit the sun — but their creation was not inevitable .
Our numerical system is likely base-10 because we have 10 fingers ; the way we understand time is almost entirely dependent on the fact that we evolved on this planet , circling this sun .
Time , at least as we understand it , is also a byproduct of capitalism .
In his seminal 1967 economic paper “ Work-Discipline and Industrial Capitalism , ” E. P. Thompson notes that in early human cultures , delineations of time were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up and went down , when the seasons changed .
But as industrialization became the norm , time became a mechanized system that no longer served those who ’ d invented it .
We increasingly served at the beck and call of time , for that is how those who possessed capital could best regulate those who performed the labor .
For we are now at a point where sociologists are discussing the “ problem ” of leisure .
And a part of the problem is : how did it come to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marriage of convenience with industrial capitalism , was the agent which converted men to new valuations of time ; which taught children even in their infancy to improve each shining hour ; and which saturated men ’ s minds with the equation , time is money .
One recurrent form of revolt within Western industrial capitalism , whether bohemian or beatnik , has often taken the form of flouting the urgency of respectable timevalues .
And the interesting question arises : if Puritanism was a necessary part of the work-ethos which enabled the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poverty-stricken economies of the past , will the Puritan valuation of time begin to decompose as the pressures of poverty relax ?
Is it decomposing already ?
Will men begin to lose that restless urgency , that desire to consume time purposively , which most people carry just as they carry a watch on their wrists ?
But it remains that on some base level , we will always understand time .
The sun comes up , the sun goes down .
Though we might be inside , where that process is more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our insideness does not obscure the day and night cycle .
What is lost , as each day blends into the next , in vaguely similar ways , is the mechanistic definition of time , the capitalist definition of time , the industrial definition of time .
We do not know what day it is , but we do know when there is a new day .
To live inside is to lose distinction .
There is a numbing effect that occurs when each day is the same , when our schedules are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gulf of undifferentiated time .
And yet isn ’ t this how so many of the less privileged around the world , forced to work jobs involving menial labor , day after day after day , already live ?
Isn ’ t this why we invented the weekend ?
Has this quarantine simply shown to those of us with more economic privilege that our “ free time ” was always a mirage , which could disappear before our eyes , by giving us so much “ free ” time ?
I have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and when I need to orient myself in time , I look at it .
But even the usefulness of my calendar has started to fray around the edges .
I began writing this story because I couldn ’ t quite believe it was a Thursday , even as I knew it had to be a Thursday .
But it might as well not be .
A cycle that bears the sun across our sky until it sets in the west is a reality ; “ Thursday ” is an invention .
Is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t know .
I will update this article daily until we don ’ t need it anymore .
I hope there is a time when we know it is Thursday or Tuesday or June 17 without having to look at a calendar or ask each other or Google .
I hope there is a time when going outside to see the sun doesn ’ t feel like exposing yourself to toxic levels of radiation .
( I know I should be taking walks ; every time , I feel like I ’ m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a time in which all this “ free ” time no longer feels like a period we must exploit for maximum value .
I hope there is a time when I remember what it ’ s like to grab lunch with a friend , to watch dogs play in the surf , to breathe in the air and just be .
Until then , find a way to make time have meaning for you .
Read a long book .
Cook an elaborate meal .
Take up knitting .
Write an epic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve always meant to get to .
Sleep .
Remember that time doesn ’ t own you , and that you own time .
This will be over someday , a part of the past .
It will someday be a memory .
Hang on to that .
I ’ ll see you outside again .
For now , it is Friday , June 26 , 2020 .
In some parts of the world , it is Saturday , June 27 , 2020 .
Are you a “ What day is it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our official theme song .
It ’ s written by composer Laura Stratford , and it is wonderful .

Today is Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at least in the continental United States. It is already Thursday, July 2, 2020, in some parts of the world. Life isn’t resuming gracefully, but the herky jerky train wreck of America’s reopening certainly speaks to some desire to exit this quarantine period. And so “What Day Is It Today” will exit the stage, too. For now, at least.
To some degree, time is an illusion. We are bound by its forward passage, being the third-dimensional creatures we are, but the perceptions we have placed upon time have been invented. Humans invented the year. Humans invented the month. Humans invented the day, the hour, the minute, the second.
These distinctions are not arbitrary — it really does take about 365 days for the Earth to orbit the sun — but their creation was not inevitable. Our numerical system is likely base-10 because we have 10 fingers; the way we understand time is almost entirely dependent on the fact that we evolved on this planet, circling this sun.
Time, at least as we understand it, is also a byproduct of capitalism. In his seminal 1967 economic paper “Work-Discipline and Industrial Capitalism,” E. P. Thompson notes that in early human cultures, delineations of time were broad understandings of when the sun came up and went down, when the seasons changed. But as industrialization became the norm, time became a mechanized system that no longer served those who’d invented it. We increasingly served at the beck and call of time, for that is how those who possessed capital could best regulate those who performed the labor.
Thompson writes:
For we are now at a point where sociologists are discussing the “problem” of leisure. And a part of the problem is: how did it come to be a problem ? Puritanism, in its marriage of convenience with industrial capitalism, was the agent which converted men to new valuations of time; which taught children even in their infancy to improve each shining hour; and which saturated men’s minds with the equation, time is money. One recurrent form of revolt within Western industrial capitalism, whether bohemian or beatnik, has often taken the form of flouting the urgency of respectable timevalues. And the interesting question arises: if Puritanism was a necessary part of the work-ethos which enabled the industrialized world to break out of the poverty-stricken economies of the past, will the Puritan valuation of time begin to decompose as the pressures of poverty relax? Is it decomposing already? Will men begin to lose that restless urgency, that desire to consume time purposively, which most people carry just as they carry a watch on their wrists?
But it remains that on some base level, we will always understand time. The sun comes up, the sun goes down. Though we might be inside, where that process is more difficult to witness, the fact of our insideness does not obscure the day and night cycle. What is lost, as each day blends into the next, in vaguely similar ways, is the mechanistic definition of time, the capitalist definition of time, the industrial definition of time. We do not know what day it is, but we do know when there is a new day.
To live inside is to lose distinction. There is a numbing effect that occurs when each day is the same, when our schedules are subsumed by what feels like an endless gulf of undifferentiated time. And yet isn’t this how so many of the less privileged around the world, forced to work jobs involving menial labor, day after day after day, already live? Isn’t this why we invented the weekend? Has this quarantine simply shown to those of us with more economic privilege that our “free time” was always a mirage, which could disappear before our eyes, by giving us so much “free” time?
I have a wall calendar hanging above my desk, and when I need to orient myself in time, I look at it. But even the usefulness of my calendar has started to fray around the edges. I began writing this story because I couldn’t quite believe it was a Thursday, even as I knew it had to be a Thursday. But it might as well not be. A cycle that bears the sun across our sky until it sets in the west is a reality; “Thursday” is an invention. Is it still necessary? I don’t know.
What’s important to remember is that time doesn’t own you. You own time. This will be over someday, a part of the past. It will someday be a memory. Hang on to that. I’ll see you outside again.
This story was originally published Friday, March 27, 2020.
Are you a “What day is it today?” superfan? Check out our official theme song. It’s written by composer Laura Stratford, and it is wonderful.


vox--2020-06-26--The EU will bar American travelers because of US coronavirus spread

The European Union will reportedly block most Americans from traveling to the bloc even as those countries reopen to other travelers , a policy that reflects the United States ’ s failure to fully control the coronavirus pandemic .
The European Union restricted nonessential travel to most of its member-states under rules in effect until at least June 30 .
But starting July 1 , European countries are loosening some of those measures and allowing travel again from more than a dozen countries — including China ( if Beijing allows EU travelers too ) — that meet certain criteria , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Right now , the United States doesn ’ t make the cut .
This is not altogether surprising .
Europe was once the epicenter of the coronavirus crisis , with Italy , Spain , and France some of the hardest hit countries in the bloc .
Aggressive lockdown measures drove down cases , and many European countries have slowly reopened .
And while there have been spikes across the continent , overall , Europe ’ s cases have declined .
The United States had long since overtaken Europe as the epicenter of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allies overseas , America is now seeing a massive surge in cases in some states .
As of June 26 , the United States has confirmed more than 2.4 million coronavirus cases and recorded more than 124,000 deaths , according to data from Johns Hopkins University .
On Friday , the United States confirmed a record 40,000 new coronavirus cases nationwide .
The New York Times ’ s Matina Stevis-Gridneff first reported Friday that EU officials had finalized the list of acceptable countries Friday after what she described as “ tortuous negotiations ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in being excluded , and travelers from other countries , including Russia , are also barred from visiting .
Still , this is a dramatic decision from some of America ’ s closest allies , and it has serious implications for trade and travel , especially as both the US and Europe seek to rebuild their economies in the aftermath of the pandemic .
The EU ban should be a wake-up call for the US .
But will it be ?
On March 11 , as the number of coronavirus cases began to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Donald Trump announced a travel ban on anyone arriving from the 26 Schengen zone countries of the European Union .
( The ban was expanded a few days later to include Ireland and the United Kingdom . )
Trump touted the decision as a way to protect Americans , though some doubted its effectiveness in really slowing the spread of the virus , which was already circulating in communities around the US .
The abrupt policy change also caused confusion about who could and couldn ’ t return to the US , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backfiring as a rush of people returned to US airports .
The announcement also caught European leaders by surprise .
They condemned the unilateral decision , adding yet another strain to the US ’ s transatlantic partnerships under Trump .
But , on March 17 , EU states agreed to bar nonessential travel on its external borders , which included the United States .
That has since been extended to the end of June .
Tensions also existed within the European Union , as some member-states temporarily sealed off their borders to other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus .
A hallmark of the Schengen zone is free and frictionless travel , and countries turning inward presented a real test for the EU during this crisis .
Since then , the EU has somewhat regrouped , including with a major pandemic recovery plan .
And unified travel rules would also help ; though individual EU countries can make their own rules on who can and can ’ t visit , embracing a consistent policy across member-states would eliminate the need for internal controls as the continent reopens for businesses and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every two weeks based on specific science and epidemiological criteria , according to the New York Times , which first reported on the possibility of a US ban earlier this week .
Even so , the EU extending a ban on American travel is a remarkable development .
The expectation in a global pandemic would be to see allies like the US and Europe working together ; instead , the coronavirus crisis has shown just how deeply the partnership has deteriorated — and how Trump ’ s “ America First ” foreign policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start of his administration , Trump has picked fights with European leaders on trade , NATO , the Iran deal , and random other things .
That has worn on the friendship , and an unprecedented global crisis has damaged it even more .
The US recently declined to participate in a global vaccine summit , a glaring absence as leaders from around the world pledged cooperation to find a vaccine .
European leaders have also criticized Trump ’ s decision to pull the US out of the World Health Organization .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ summit at the end of June ; Trump postponed it for obvious pandemic reasons but then tried to reschedule it in June as a sign of the US ’ s reopening .
German Chancellor Angela Merkel swiftly rejected the invitation , and Trump had to postpone again until September .
Once seen as a leader , rallying other countries to respond and coordinate in response to virus outbreaks , the US took a backseat internationally during the coronavirus and floundered at home .
That damaged the US ’ s reputation as a superpower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vacuum ; this is what happens when the United States looks inward .
Both have damaged the US ’ s global reputation .
And this will have real consequences for the United States .
Business travel to Europe has all but fizzled , and it will be difficult to resume with a ban — which could have consequences as the United States and Europe seek to rebuild their economies .
And while Europeans might be enjoying American-tourist-free zones , the decline of international travel has already hit countries like Italy and France quite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recovery even harder .
And the US ’ s spiraling coronavirus outbreak will also hurt US tourism , as Europeans , and pretty much anyone else , will be unlikely to visit , presuming Trump lifts the current travel bans and they ’ re allowed to .
Trump has embraced travel bans since he took office , which he has justified as a way to defend the country and protect national security .
Now , after its embarrassing coronavirus response , the US is on the receiving end , experiencing what it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ try to keep Americans out .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 European Union will reportedly block most Americans from traveling to the bloc even as those countries reopen to other travelers, a policy that reflects the United States’s failure to fully control the coronavirus pandemic.
The European Union restricted nonessential travel to most of its member-states under rules in effect until at least June 30. But starting July 1, European countries are loosening some of those measures and allowing travel again from more than a dozen countries — including China (if Beijing allows EU travelers too) — that meet certain criteria, including their ability to contain the coronavirus.
Right now, the United States doesn’t make the cut.
This is not altogether surprising. Europe was once the epicenter of the coronavirus crisis, with Italy, Spain, and France some of the hardest hit countries in the bloc. Aggressive lockdown measures drove down cases, and many European countries have slowly reopened. And while there have been spikes across the continent, overall, Europe’s cases have declined.
The US had long since overtaken Europe as the epicenter of the crisis. And, unlike its allies overseas, America is now seeing a massive surge in cases in some states. As of June 26, the US has confirmed more than 2.4 million coronavirus cases and recorded more than 124,000 deaths, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. On Friday, the US confirmed a record 40,000 new coronavirus cases nationwide.
The New York Times’s Matina Stevis-Gridneff first reported Friday that EU officials had finalized the list of acceptable countries Friday after what she described as “tortuous negotiations”:
The list was backed in principle by most E.U. ambassadors and does not require unanimous support, but still needs to be formalized in member states’ capitals as well as in the central European Union bureaucracy before taking effect July 1. Diplomats did not expect the list to change.
The US is not alone in being excluded, and travelers from other countries, including Russia, are also barred from visiting.
Still, this is a dramatic decision from some of America’s closest allies, and it has serious implications for trade and travel, especially as both the US and Europe seek to rebuild their economies in the aftermath of the pandemic.
The EU ban should be a wake-up call for the US. But will it be?
On March 11, as the number of coronavirus cases began to tick up in the US, President Donald Trump announced a travel ban on anyone arriving from the 26 Schengen zone countries of the European Union. (The ban was expanded a few days later to include Ireland and the United Kingdom.)
Trump touted the decision as a way to protect Americans, though some doubted its effectiveness in really slowing the spread of the virus, which was already circulating in communities around the US.
The abrupt policy change also caused confusion about who could and couldn’t return to the US, leading to chaos at airports and potentially backfiring as a rush of people returned to US airports.
The announcement also caught European leaders by surprise. They condemned the unilateral decision, adding yet another strain to the US’s transatlantic partnerships under Trump.
But, on March 17, EU states agreed to bar nonessential travel on its external borders, which included the US. That has since been extended to the end of June. Tensions also existed within the European Union, as some member-states temporarily sealed off their borders to other EU members in an attempt to contain the virus. A hallmark of the Schengen zone is free and frictionless travel, and countries turning inward presented a real test for the EU during this crisis.
Since then, the EU has somewhat regrouped, including with a major pandemic recovery plan. And unified travel rules would also help; though individual EU countries can make their own rules on who can and can’t visit, embracing a consistent policy across member-states would eliminate the need for internal controls as the continent reopens for businesses and tourism.
Travel restrictions will be reevaluated every two weeks based on specific science and epidemiological criteria, according to the New York Times, which first reported on the possibility of a US ban earlier this week.
Even so, the EU extending a ban on American travel is a remarkable development. The expectation in a global pandemic would be to see allies like the US and Europe working together; instead, the coronavirus crisis has shown just how deeply the partnership has deteriorated — and how Trump’s “America First” foreign policy has diminished US standing.
Since the start of his administration, Trump has picked fights with European leaders on trade, NATO, the Iran deal, and random other things. That has worn on the friendship, and an unprecedented global crisis has damaged it even more. The US recently declined to participate in a global vaccine summit, a glaring absence as leaders from around the world pledged cooperation to find a vaccine. European leaders have also criticized Trump’s decision to pull the US out of the World Health Organization.
The US was supposed to host the G-7 summit at the end of June; Trump postponed it for obvious pandemic reasons but then tried to reschedule it in June as a sign of the US’s reopening. German Chancellor Angela Merkel swiftly rejected the invitation, and Trump had to postpone again until September.
Once seen as a leader, rallying other countries to respond and coordinate on virus outbreaks, the US took a backseat internationally during the coronavirus and floundered at home. That damaged the US’s reputation as a superpower. It also revealed a global leadership vacuum; this is what happens when the United States looks inward. Both have damaged the US’s global reputation.
And this will have real consequences for the United States. Business travel to Europe has all but fizzled, and it will be difficult to resume with a ban — which could have consequences as the US and Europe seek to rebuild their economies. And while Europeans might be enjoying American-tourist-free zones, the decline of international travel has already hit countries like Italy and France quite hard. Travel restrictions could make that recovery even harder. And the US’s spiraling coronavirus outbreak will also hurt US tourism, as Europeans, and pretty much anyone else, will be unlikely to visit, presuming Trump lifts the current travel bans and they’re allowed to.
Trump has embraced travel bans since he took office, which he has justified as a way to defend the country and protect national security. Now, after its embarrassing coronavirus response, the US is on the receiving end, experiencing what it’s like for everyone else to try to keep Americans out.


vox--2020-06-26--This July, the Vox Book Club is reading Curtis Sittenfeld’s Rodham

As the Vox Book Club sails into July , we ’ re going to take a moment to wave a fond farewell to the frothy joys of The Princess Bride .
We just closed out a fantastic panel discussion on both book and movie with the Cut ’ s Sangeeta Singh-Kurtz and the Undefeated ’ s Soraya Nadia McDonald , which covered everything from why Prince Humperdinck is a lost Trump brother to our dream casting for an updated Princess Bride prestige limited cable series ( Dev Patel and Zendaya , call your agents ) .
If you missed it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recording and a transcript next week , and I highly recommend checking it out .
The Princess Bride dispensed with , we ’ ll turn ourselves full speed ahead into dealing , in the halo of Independence Day , with American politics .
Specifically , the American politics of recent and alternative history .
For the month of July , the Vox Book Club is going to be reading Curtis Sittenfeld ’ s Rodham , an alternate history that tells us what would have happened if Hillary Rodham had never married Bill Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a juicy , scandalous read , with plenty to say about the way American politics have evolved during the decades the Clinton family has been in public life .
( Plus , some oddly intimate sex scenes that in and of themselves are fodder for endless conversation . )
But because this is Vox and we have access to some of the most detail-oriented politics nerds on the planet , we ’ re going to have a little extra fun with Rodham .
We ’ re going to bring in some special @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s politics and put everything into context , both as a piece of alternate political history and as a work of political Real Person Fiction .
So we ’ ll also be changing up our standard book club format this month .
Instead of going through the book section by section , with one discussion post per section , we ’ re going to do two discussion posts this month , each with a special Vox guest star .
Both posts will assume that you ’ ve already read the full book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the book from different angles .
As always , I ’ ll provide discussion questions you can use to guide your Rodham conversation , either here at the site or within your own community .
And we ’ ll all meet up at the end of the month for a special virtual live event .
I can ’ t wait to see you there .
Sign up here to be notified about new book selections , discussions , and related live events .
Friday , July 10 : Discussion of political Real Person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ genre Friday , July 24 : Fact-checking Rodham ’ s alternate history and a conversation about Hillary Rodham Clinton , the woman , the myth , the politician Thursday , July 30 : Virtual live event , details TBD .
Sign up for the Vox Book Club newsletter for more info !
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

As the Vox Book Club sails into July, we’re going to take a moment to wave a fond farewell to the frothy joys of The Princess Bride. We just closed out a fantastic panel discussion on both book and movie with the Cut’s Sangeeta Singh-Kurtz and the Undefeated’s Soraya Nadia McDonald, which covered everything from why Prince Humperdinck is a lost Trump brother to our dream casting for an updated Princess Bride prestige limited TV series (Dev Patel and Zendaya, call your agents). If you missed it, I highly recommend checking out the recording and transcript!
The Princess Bride dispensed with, we’ll turn ourselves full speed ahead into dealing with American politics, in the halo of Independence Day. Specifically, the American politics of recent and alternative history.
For the month of July, the Vox Book Club is going to be reading Curtis Sittenfeld’s Rodham, an alternate history that tells us what would have happened if Hillary Rodham had never married Bill Clinton. On its own merits, Rodham is a juicy, scandalous read, with plenty to say about the way American politics have evolved during the decades the Clinton family has been in public life. (Plus, there are some oddly intimate sex scenes that in and of themselves are fodder for endless conversation.)
And because this is Vox and we have access to some of the most detail-oriented politics nerds on the planet, we’re going to bring in some Vox experts to help us fact-check Rodham’s politics and put the book into context, both as a piece of alternate political history and as a work of political Real Person Fiction.
So we’ll also be changing up our standard book club format this month. Instead of going through the book section by section, with one discussion post per section, we’re going to do two discussion posts this month, each with a special Vox guest star. Both posts will assume that you’ve already read the full book, but they’ll each approach the book from a different angle. As always, I’ll provide discussion questions you can use to guide your Rodham conversation, either here at the site or within your own community. And we’ll all meet up at the end of the month for a special virtual live event. I can’t wait to see you there.
Sign up here to be notified about new book selections, discussions, and related live events.
Here’s the full Vox Book Club schedule for July 2020
Friday, July 10: Discussion of political Real Person Fiction and how Rodham fits into the genre
Friday, July 24: Fact-checking Rodham’s alternate history and a conversation about Hillary Rodham Clinton, the woman, the myth, the politician
Thursday, July 30: Virtual live event, details TBD. Sign up for the Vox Book Club newsletter for more info!


vox--2020-06-26--The fight for justice in the Breonna Taylor case, explained

It has been 104 days since Breonna Taylor was killed by police in her own home in Louisville , Kentucky .
Thousands of protesters have chanted her name across the country , demanding justice for the EMT , who would have turned 27 on June 5 .
As the country is reckoning with its history of racist police violence , advocates want to know why charges still haven ’ t been filed against the officers who shot her dead .
On March 13 , officers with a no-knock warrant entered Taylor ’ s apartment looking for two people suspected of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Taylor .
Three officers fired more than 20 rounds into the apartment , hitting Taylor at least eight times .
After months of investigation , the Louisville Police Department fired officer Brett Hankison , one of three officers who fired a gun that night , on June 23 .
But advocates still want to know why Hankison and the two other officers have not been arrested in Taylor ’ s shooting death .
Taylor ’ s death took place just three weeks after Ahmaud Arbery ’ s killing and about 10 weeks before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The suspects involved in Arbery ’ s case were arrested and charged two weeks after video of the incident went viral .
The four officers involved in the killing of George Floyd were fired four days after Floyd ’ s death , with the officer who knelt on Floyd ’ s neck charged with murder .
By contrast , not much has happened in Taylor ’ s case .
In the meantime , Taylor ’ s family , who are alleging excessive force and gross negligence in her death , filed a lawsuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involved in the shooting .
“ I want justice for her , ” Palmer , Taylor ’ s mother , told the 19th in May .
“ I want them to say her name .
There ’ s no reason Breonna should be dead at all.
” Police came looking for a drug suspect .
Breonna Taylor ended up dead instead .
On the night of March 13 , Louisville police had a warrant to enter Taylor ’ s apartment because they believed that a suspect in a narcotics investigation was storing drugs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home , according to USA Today .
However , according to the suit filed by Taylor ’ s family , the man police were searching for , Jamarcus Glover , did not live in her apartment complex and had already been detained by the time officers showed up .
Taylor had dated Glover two years ago , according to a family attorney , and did not maintain an active friendship with him .
Police said that the three officers knocked on the door to announce themselves .
But multiple neighbors say the officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the family ’ s lawsuit .
It was later uncovered that the police had been granted a no-knock warrant by a judge , which allowed them to enter Taylor ’ s apartment without announcing themselves .
They also weren ’ t wearing body cams .
When police arrived , Taylor ’ s boyfriend , Kenneth Walker , says he woke up and believed someone was trying to break into the apartment .
He fired a shot , hitting an officer in the leg .
Police then fired more than 20 rounds into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times and died at the scene , USA Today reported .
Walker was arrested and charged with attempted murder of a police officer .
Police found no drugs in the apartment , and both Taylor and Walker have no criminal history .
Officer Hankison , meanwhile , has a history of misconduct allegations .
He was already facing an ongoing federal lawsuit at the time of Taylor ’ s death by Kendrick Wilson , who accused Hankison of “ harassing suspects with unnecessary arrests and planting drugs on them , ” according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ targeted him and arrested him three times in a two-year period .
After Taylor ’ s death , claims of sexual assault surfaced , too , with at least two women coming forward in early June to allege that Hankison assaulted them .
In both allegations , which are similar to one another , Hankison offered the women rides home after they had been drinking at local bars .
In one case , Hankison allegedly followed the woman into her home and assaulted her while she was unconscious .
In the other case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the woman while she sat in his unmarked car , including rubbing her thighs and kissing her face .
On June 23 , he was fired .
The Louisville Metro Police Department posted Hankison ’ s termination letter on Twitter , which stated Hankison “ displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life when you wantonly and blindly fired ten ( 10 ) rounds into the apartment of Breonna Taylor… ” The letter also stated Hankison violated the department ’ s protocol on use of deadly force when he shot through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covered .
This prevented him from determining whether there was an immediate threat or innocent people present ; some of the bullets even traveled to a neighbor ’ s apartment where three people were endangered , according to the letter .
Hankison has ten days to appeal his termination .
The other two officers who fired rounds that night , John Mattingly and Myles Cosgrove , remain on the force and have been placed on administrative reassignment .
The case remains under independent investigation with Kentucky ’ s Attorney General Daniel Cameron , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ additional details or a timeline for the investigation .
Protests are ongoing , and calls for justice in the investigation continue In May , Benjamin Crump , the Taylor family ’ s attorney , argued that the killings of Black women have tended to receive less media attention than the deaths of Black men .
“ They ’ re killing our sisters just like they ’ re killing our brothers , but for whatever reason , we have not given our sisters the same attention that we have given to Trayvon Martin , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Crutcher , Alton Sterling , Philando Castile , Eric Garner , Laquan McDonald , ” he told the 19th .
“ Breonna ’ s name should be known by everybody in America who said those other names , because she was in her own home , doing absolutely nothing wrong.
” Protests where the crowds chant , “ Say Her Name , Breonna Taylor , ” have attempted to reverse the lack of attention .
In 2015 , activists around the country demonstrated and used the hashtag # SayHerName to draw attention to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including Gabriella Nevarez , Michelle Cusseaux , and Alexia Christian , as Jenée Desmond-Harris reported for Vox at the time .
The death of Sandra Bland in jail after she was arrested during a traffic stop also drew national attention to the impact of police brutality and racism on Black women ’ s lives .
Around the country , activists organized marches and signed petitions on Taylor ’ s June 5th birthday , saying she should ’ ve been alive to see the day .
In Louisville , protesters have gathered in Breonna @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brutality in a number of demonstrations .
After curfew on the evening of May 31 , which was imposed because of the protests , law enforcement shot and killed David McAtee , 53 , a local restaurant owner .
Following his death , Louisville Police Chief Steve Conrad was fired , though it is still unclear exactly who shot McAtee , Vox ’ s Anna North reported .
While there have been other changes in the police department since Taylor ’ s death — on June 11 the Louisville Metro Council voted unanimously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and celebrities are asking why the three officers involved in Taylor ’ s killing haven ’ t been arrested .
On June 14 , Beyoncé wrote an open letter to Kentucky ’ s attorney general , demanding that criminal charges be brought against the three officers to “ show the value of a Black woman ’ s life.
” She also asked that the office bring greater transparency to the investigation .
At a June 18 press conference , Cameron — the first Black attorney general in Kentucky and a former legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the investigation is ongoing , without giving any specific details .
“ To all those involved in this case , you have my commitment that our office is undertaking a thorough and fair investigation , ” he said .
“ This is also a commitment that I ’ m making to the Louisville community which has suffered tremendously in the days since March 13.
” Cameron was also the first Republican attorney general elected in the state , according to the New York Times , on a platform that backed Trump and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ efforts like building a border wall .
He has criticized some of protesters ’ demands , including the call to defund the police .
“ Radical rhetoric and calls to ‘ defund the police ’ threaten public safety and only serve to divide us further , rather than bringing us together , ” he said in a press release on June 24 .
Why there haven ’ t been arrests in the case so far Criminal law expert Ronald Wright told Vox in May that in officer-involved shooting cases like Taylor ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ takes to bring forth charges should not necessarily be the issue .
Rather , people should question and examine what the prosecutor does during their investigation .
“ I don ’ t really fault prosecutors for taking their time , gathering the facts , being thorough .
The timing doesn ’ t really bother me as much as the amount of effort If what you ’ re doing is you ’ re not doing anything and you ’ re stalling , and you don ’ t really intend to press the case as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in your district , then that ’ s a problem , ” Wright told Vox .
Since these cases are especially difficult to win at trial , Wright pointed out , prosecutors must take the time to build a really strong case .
“ The delay could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on whether they are putting in the effort into building a great case , ” he said .
In the high-profile Baltimore police custody death of Freddie Gray , State ’ s Attorney Marilyn Mosby arrested the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s death and charged them with offenses including second-degree depraved heart murder and manslaughter .
All three officers in the case were acquitted .
“ It may have been that it would have been better to go a little slower and get more evidence for charges after some delay , ” Wright told Vox .
However , others point to the speed at which arrests came in the Arbery and Floyd cases — and the fact that years-long delays in Eric Garner ’ s case still didn ’ t lead to justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo placed him in a banned chokehold .
One day before the five-year anniversary of Garner ’ s death in July 2019 , federal prosecutors announced they would not bring charges against Pantaleo .
The NYPD fired Pantaleo in August 2019 , more than five years after Garner ’ s death .
The influence of police unions , which have come under criticism from activists and protesters during the unrest , may also contribute to delays .
As Vox ’ s Dylan Matthews reported , police unions have become engrossed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kill unarmed Black people : In May , the Louisville police union demanded an apology from Louisville council member Jessica Green after she called Taylor ’ s boyfriend a hero after he was charged with shooting officer Mattingly the night Taylor was killed .
“ Calling someone that shot an on-duty police officer , in the performance of official duties , a hero is a slap in the face , ” said Ryan Nichols , president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 614 .
Green said she would not apologize .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refused to discuss any potential roadblocks , stating that “ an investigation of this magnitude , when done correctly , requires time and patience.
” He added , “ To those across the country we have heard from with cards , emails , and letters , and calls – who are asking us to complete the investigation as soon as possible – we hear you and we are working around the clock to follow the law to the truth.
” On June 25 , a crowd of more than 500 demonstrators , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , gathered on the steps of the Kentucky State Capitol in Louisville for a # JusticeForBreonnaTaylor rally , according to the Louisville Courier-Post .
Activist Tamika Mallory emphasized the need to keep calling for justice and accountability in Taylor ’ s case .
“ I ’ m sure we all understand that Breonna Taylor is everywhere , ” she said .
“ The issue of Black women being killed and our voices being too low is a problem.
” Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Editor’s note: On September 23, a Jefferson County grand jury announced that it would indict former Louisville police officer Brett Hankison on three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment in the shooting death of Breonna Taylor. The two other officers who fired shots that night — Jonathan Mattingly and Myles Cosgrove — were not indicted. The piece below was last updated on July 13.
It has been more than 100 days since Breonna Taylor was killed by police in her own home in Louisville, Kentucky. Thousands of protesters have chanted her name across the country, demanding justice for the EMT, who would have turned 27 on June 5.
As the country is reckoning with its history of racist police violence, many advocates want to know why charges still haven’t been filed against the officers who shot her dead. Meanwhile, those who want to abolish the carceral state are rethinking what justice in the Taylor case should actually look like.
Most advocates agree that another Black woman is dead because of a lack of police accountability — and something needs to change.
On March 13, three officers with a no-knock warrant entered Taylor’s apartment looking for two people suspected of selling drugs, neither of whom was Taylor. The officers fired more than 20 rounds into the apartment, hitting Taylor at least eight times.
After months of investigation, the Louisville Police Department (LMPD) fired officer Brett Hankison on June 23; the other two officers remain on administrative assignment. A special Kentucky prosecutor is leading an investigation into both the shooting and the department’s handling of the shooting to determine whether to charge the three officers who fired their weapons; the FBI is leading its own investigation. On June 29, the Louisville Metro Council also announced a resolution to investigate the actions of Mayor Greg Fischer and his administration surrounding Taylor’s death. The council hopes to create greater transparency around who made what decisions in the Taylor case, according to a news release.
Taylor’s death took place amid a slate of high-profile killings of unarmed Black people — it was just three weeks after Ahmaud Arbery was killed by white vigilantes while jogging and about 10 weeks before the fatal arrest of George Floyd. The suspects involved in Arbery’s case were arrested and charged two weeks after video of the incident went viral. The four officers involved in the killing of George Floyd were fired four days after Floyd’s death, with the officer who knelt on Floyd’s neck charged with murder.
By contrast, not much has happened in Taylor’s case.
In the meantime, Taylor’s family, alleging excessive force and gross negligence in her death, filed a lawsuit on April 27 against the officers involved in the shooting. In a court filing submitted on July 5, the family alleges that Taylor received no emergency medical aid as she lay dying. The document also claims that the raid on Taylor’s apartment was part of the mayor’s scheme to clear out a block in the neighborhood for redevelopment.
“I want justice for her,” Tamika Palmer, Taylor’s mother, told the 19th in May. “I want them to say her name. There’s no reason Breonna should be dead at all.”
Police came looking for a drug suspect. Breonna Taylor ended up dead instead.
On the night of March 13, Louisville police had a warrant to enter Taylor’s apartment because they believed that a suspect in a narcotics investigation was storing drugs or money or receiving packages at her home, according to USA Today.
However, according to the suit filed by Taylor’s family, the man police were searching for, Jamarcus Glover, did not live in her apartment complex and had already been detained by the time officers showed up. Taylor had dated Glover two years ago, according to a family attorney, and did not maintain an active friendship with him.
Police said that the three officers knocked on the door to announce themselves. But multiple neighbors say the officers neither knocked nor identified themselves, according to the family’s lawsuit. It was later uncovered that the police had been granted a no-knock warrant by a judge, which allowed them to enter Taylor’s apartment without announcing themselves. They also weren’t wearing body cams.
When police arrived, Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, 27, says he woke up and believed someone was trying to break into the apartment. There was banging on the door, he says, but police never announced themselves. He reached for his licensed handgun after he and Taylor asked who it was and got no response, NBC reported. He fired one shot, hitting an officer in the leg.
Police then fired more than 20 rounds into the apartment. Taylor died at the scene. Walker was arrested and charged with attempted murder of a police officer and aggravated assault.
Police found no drugs in the apartment, and both Taylor and Walker have no criminal history.
On May 22, Kentucky prosecutors announced that they had dismissed all charges against Walker, who said he fired a shot in self-defense when he believed he and Taylor were under attack.
On June 11, police released an incident report for the night Taylor was killed, but it was largely blank. Though Taylor was fatally shot, the four-page report listed her injuries as “none.” The report also stated there was no forced entry, though witnesses say the police used a battering ram to enter the apartment, according to CBS News.
The Taylor family’s 31-page July 5 court filing adds two new (and since contested) allegations to the narrative: that Taylor received no medical aid as she lay dying and that the nighttime raid was part of Mayor Fischer’s plan to redevelop a city block in western Louisville.
Taylor’s family said there is no evidence that suggests that Taylor was given medical attention in the six minutes between when she was shot and when she died. However, the coroner who performed Taylor’s autopsy said that her injuries from the shooting were so extreme that she would’ve died in “less than a minute” and that the recorded time of death on the report is “an estimate.”
The family’s filing also alleges that police went after Glover because of political pressure from the mayor’s office due to a redevelopment project valued at more than $30 million, according to the New York Times. Glover was reportedly using a row of abandoned houses to sell drugs in the area that needed to be cleared for development.
“People needed to be removed and homes needed to be vacated so that a high-dollar, legacy-creating real estate development could move forward,” attorneys for the family wrote in the court filing. The city has called the allegations “outrageous.”
Meanwhile, it came to light that the officer who shot Taylor, Hankison, had a history of misconduct allegations. He was already facing an ongoing federal lawsuit at the time of Taylor’s death in which Kendrick Wilson accused Hankison of “harassing suspects with unnecessary arrests and planting drugs on them,” according to USA Today. Wilson alleges that Hankison targeted him and arrested him three times in a two-year period.
After Taylor’s death, claims of sexual assault surfaced, too, with at least two women coming forward in early June to allege that Hankison assaulted them. In both allegations, which are similar to one another, Hankison offered the women rides home after they had been drinking at local bars. In one case, Hankison allegedly followed the woman into her home and assaulted her while she was unconscious. In the other case, Hankison reportedly made sexual advances toward the woman while she sat in his unmarked car, including rubbing her thighs and kissing her face.
On June 23, he was fired. LMPD posted Hankison’s termination letter on Twitter, which stated Hankison “displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life when you wantonly and blindly fired ten (10) rounds into the apartment of Breonna Taylor…” The letter also stated Hankison violated the department’s protocol on use of deadly force when he shot through a patio door and window that was covered. This prevented him from determining whether there was an immediate threat or innocent people present; some of the bullets even traveled to a neighbor’s apartment where three people were endangered, according to the letter. Hankison has appealed his termination.
The other two officers who fired rounds that night, John Mattingly and Myles Cosgrove, remain on the force and have been placed on administrative reassignment. The case is still under independent investigation with Kentucky’s Attorney General, Daniel Cameron, who has said he will not provide additional details or a timeline for the investigation.
Protests are ongoing, and calls for justice in the investigation continue
In May, Benjamin Crump, the Taylor family’s attorney, argued that the killings of Black women have tended to receive less media attention than the deaths of Black men.
“They’re killing our sisters just like they’re killing our brothers, but for whatever reason, we have not given our sisters the same attention that we have given to Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Stephon Clark, Terence Crutcher, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, Eric Garner, Laquan McDonald,” he told the 19th. “Breonna’s name should be known by everybody in America who said those other names, because she was in her own home, doing absolutely nothing wrong.”
Protests where the crowds chant, “Say her name, Breonna Taylor,” have attempted to reverse the lack of attention. In 2015, activists around the country demonstrated and used the hashtag #SayHerName to draw attention to women who had lost their lives, including Gabriella Nevarez, Michelle Cusseaux, and Alexia Christian, as Jenée Desmond-Harris reported for Vox at the time. The death of Sandra Bland in jail after she was arrested during a traffic stop also drew national attention to the impact of police brutality and racism on Black women’s lives.
Around the country, activists organized marches and signed petitions on Taylor’s June 5 birthday, saying she should’ve been alive to see the day. In Louisville, protesters have gathered in Breonna Taylor’s name to protest police brutality in a number of demonstrations since May. After a protest-imposed curfew on May 31, law enforcement shot and killed David McAtee, 53, a local restaurant owner. Following his death, Louisville Police Chief Steve Conrad was fired, though it is still unclear exactly who shot McAtee, Vox’s Anna North reported.
While there have been other changes in the police department since Taylor’s death — on June 11 the Louisville Metro Council voted unanimously to ban no-knock warrants — advocates, activists, and celebrities are asking why the three officers involved in Taylor’s killing haven’t been arrested. On June 14, Beyoncé wrote an open letter to Kentucky’s attorney general, demanding that criminal charges be brought against the three officers to “show the value of a Black woman’s life.” She also asked that the office bring greater transparency to the investigation.
At a June 18 press conference, Cameron — the first Black attorney general in Kentucky and a former legal counsel for Sen. Mitch McConnell — emphasized that the investigation is ongoing, without giving any specific details.
“To all those involved in this case, you have my commitment that our office is undertaking a thorough and fair investigation,” he said. “This is also a commitment that I’m making to the Louisville community, which has suffered tremendously in the days since March 13.”
Cameron was also the first Republican attorney general elected in the state, according to the New York Times, on a platform that backed Trump and some of the president’s signature efforts, like building a border wall. He has criticized some of protesters’ demands, including the call to defund the police.
“Radical rhetoric and calls to ‘defund the police’ threaten public safety and only serve to divide us further, rather than bringing us together,” he said in a press release on June 24.
Wake Forest Law professor Ronald Wright, who specializes in the work of criminal prosecutors, told Vox that Cameron’s comments regarding defunding the police are worth watching because they are relevant to how Cameron handles the case. “If he starts to sound like an advocate for law enforcement, voicing broad support for police officers and defending them in general terms, that would make me wonder if he can evaluate charges fairly in this case,” Wright said. “It is tough to convince the public that you will hold the police accountable for their wrongdoing if you never find anything to criticize in their work.”
Why there haven’t been arrests in the case so far
Wright told Vox in May that in officer-involved shooting cases like Taylor’s, the length of time the prosecutor takes to bring forth charges should not necessarily be the issue. Rather, people should question and examine what the prosecutor does during their investigation.
“I don’t really fault prosecutors for taking their time, gathering the facts, being thorough. The timing doesn’t really bother me as much as the amount of effort. If what you’re doing is you’re not doing anything and you’re stalling, and you don’t really intend to press the case as hard as you would press any shooting in your district, then that’s a problem,” Wright told Vox.
Since these cases are especially difficult to win at trial, Wright pointed out, prosecutors must take the time to build a really strong case. “The delay could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on whether they are putting in the effort into building a great case,” he said.
In the high-profile Baltimore police custody death of Freddie Gray, State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby arrested the three officers involved just days after Gray’s death and charged them with offenses including second-degree “depraved heart” murder and manslaughter. All three officers in the case were acquitted. “It may have been that it would have been better to go a little slower and get more evidence for charges after some delay,” Wright told Vox.
Many advocates, however, point to the speed at which arrests came in the Arbery and Floyd cases — and the fact that years-long delays in Eric Garner’s case still didn’t lead to justice. Garner died in July 2014 after NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo placed him in a banned chokehold. One day before the five-year anniversary of Garner’s death in July 2019, federal prosecutors announced they would not bring charges against Pantaleo. The NYPD fired Pantaleo in August 2019, more than five years after Garner’s death.
And in the three cases above there were videos of the incidents. Wright said that even with footage, cases against police officers are difficult to prosecute. Videos do represent extra proof — a form of evidence Taylor’s case lacks.
The influence of police unions, which have come under criticism from activists and protesters during the unrest, may also contribute to delays. As Vox’s Dylan Matthews reported, police unions have become engrossed in preventing the discipline of officers who kill unarmed Black people:
In local cases, this attitude has translated to a defense of officers who kill or wound innocent civilians. The Louisville Metro Police Department [had first] been limited to just announcing its “intention” to fire Brett Hankison, a detective who shot his gun 10 times during the raid that killed Breonna Taylor, rather than actually firing him outright. This limitation is largely because of the city’s contract with the police union, which gives Hankison multiple opportunities to appeal. He is first allowed a “pretermination hearing” with counsel, and then, once terminated, an appeal to the police merit board, of which Hankison himself is a member.
In May, the Louisville police union also demanded an apology from Louisville council member Jessica Green, who called Taylor’s boyfriend a hero after he was charged with shooting Mattingly the night Taylor was killed. “Calling someone that shot an on-duty police officer, in the performance of official duties, a hero is a slap in the face,” said Ryan Nichols, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 614. Green said she would not apologize.
But Wright said that Hankison’s firing does offer a clue to how a criminal case could swing. That the LMPD found that he showed “extreme indifference to the value of human life” when he “wantonly and blindly” fired 10 rounds into the apartment means there’s a chance for a conviction if a jury were to find the same conclusion. “If a jury in a criminal trial were to reach the same conclusions after hearing the facts, they could properly convict him of a lesser version of homicide,” Wright told Vox.
At the recent press conference, Cameron refused to discuss any potential roadblocks, stating that “an investigation of this magnitude, when done correctly, requires time and patience.” He added, “To those across the country we have heard from with cards, emails, and letters, and calls, who are asking us to complete the investigation as soon as possible — we hear you and we are working around the clock to follow the law to the truth.”
Defunding the Louisville police and its ties to justice for Taylor
Amid a growing call to “defund” or “abolish the police,” there are others advocating for justice who view the calls to arrest officers as taking away from the larger goal of dismantling the system.
According to anti-criminalization organizer Mariame Kaba, director of the anti youth incarceration grassroots organization Project NIA, celebrating charges for officers signals our dependence on a criminal justice system that was created to uphold white supremacy. “To transform a death-making system, our expectations have to be much higher,” she wrote last month in the New York Times. “Celebrating charges is like celebrating bread crumbs. ... I understand why people do it, but I think according great significance to charges misses the point and it also freezes people in place. It has the effect of demobilizing collective action.”
Kaba explained that justice is not just closing down police departments but making them obsolete. “The surest way of reducing police violence is to reduce the power of the police, by cutting budgets and the number of officers,” she wrote.
But on June 25, the Louisville Metro Council approved a budget that wouldn’t even begin to defund LMPD. The new spending plan will merely “require police to put the money toward recruiting a more diverse force, additional training and exploring co-responder models that could send behavioral health professionals on calls with officers,” according to the Louisville Courier-Journal. Funding will also be directed to a civilian review board that will oversee LMPD, following the 24-1 vote. Black Lives Matter demanded that more money be shifted to community services.
Today Metro Council votes on the 20-21 Budget. 49% is allocated to @lmpd and corrections. Demand better for our communities! When we say #defundpolice there is a clear vision of what is possible. give money directly to community https://t.co/WXPhjFxHYU #DefendBlackLife pic.twitter.com/RlWwVb2b4W — BLM Louisville (@BLMLouisville) June 25, 2020
On the same day the budget was approved, a crowd of more than 500 demonstrators, including activists, community members, and celebrities, gathered on the steps of the Kentucky State Capitol in Frankfort for a #JusticeForBreonnaTaylor rally, according to the Louisville Courier-Journal. Activist Tamika Mallory emphasized the need to keep calling for justice and accountability in Taylor’s case. “I’m sure we all understand that Breonna Taylor is everywhere,” she said. “The issue of Black women being killed and our voices being too low is a problem.”