vox--2020-04-27--Sunday’s virtual Sondheim concert was the most cathartic experience of quarantine so far

On Sunday night , stars of stage and screen gathered in their homes to put on a virtual concert in celebration of legendary Broadway composer Stephen Sondheim ’ s 90th birthday .
The concert , hosted by Raúl Esparza , was an intimate Zoom celebration .
The party was periodically plagued by technical glitches — it started more than an hour late , after a long period in which no sound was audible — but in the end , it didn ’ t matter .
The whole experience turned out to be perfect for this moment in time , whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theater devotee .
Sondheim is our great bard of loneliness and alienation , and his birthday concert , officially titled “ Take Me to the World , ” makes a strong argument that he ’ s the de facto poet laureate of this social distancing moment .
Sondheim ’ s birthday was actually March 22 , but Sunday night was a good time to celebrate nonetheless : April 26 also marked the 50th anniversary of the opening of Company , one of Sondheim ’ s most beloved shows .
Company was on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until the pandemic shut down the entire theater season ; you could find its planned stars , Katrina Lenk and Patti LuPone , in Sunday ’ s tribute instead .
The full concert is nearly two and a half hours long , but it ’ s well worth watching on YouTube : You get to see Jake Gyllenhaal belting his way through a love duet with Annaleigh Ashford , Melissa Errico doing a stripped-down and lovely take on “ Children and Art , ” and Jason Alexander telling the story of how Sondheim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We Roll Along purely to mess with the actor .
But if you don ’ t have a spare two and a half hours to spend today , we ’ ve assembled 12 highlights for you .
Pour yourself a glass of something , settle in , and prepare to feel some very cathartic feelings .
As it turns out , no one is alone .
“ Johanna ” is from Sondheim ’ s creepy , pulpy , pitch-black tragicomedy Sweeney Todd : The Demon Barber of Fleet Street .
The musical itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very horny , rape-y judge .
“ Johanna ” is a song about Todd ’ s estranged daughter , who ’ s now the ward of said judge , Judge Turpin .
Turpin keeps Johanna locked up , in a scenario that ’ s more like a kidnapper keeping his victim captive than a fairy-tale princess in a castle .
Lenk ’ s performance , particularly in her vocals and inflections ( she also plays the guitar ! )
, divorced the song from its original context , removing the horror and generally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lenk made me appreciate how Sondheim acutely wrote this song about longing and love , and how fine the line is between those feelings and the darkness of obsessive lust .
Sondheim was so aware of that threshold and tension throughout his work , but he best used it to create the surreal tragedy of Sweeney Todd and “ Johanna.
” —Alex Abad-Santos “ It Takes Two ” from Into the Woods — Beanie Feldstein and Ben Platt It ’ s become déclassé among Sondheim fans to express too much affection for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most mainstream and commercially successful of all his work .
But Into the Woods featured heavily in his 90th birthday concert , and the songs themselves made the case for why .
“ It Takes Two ” is ostensibly about a husband and wife team trying to collect four magical items in three days ’ time so they can feed a cow to heal a witch to get a baby , and — look , it ’ s complicated .
But the song is really about the wonderful surprise of falling in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thought you knew .
“ It Takes Two ” is so exuberant that you barely even have to sing it to sell it , but Feldstein and Platt sing the heck out of it and look like they ’ re having a blast .
It ’ s a great moment that reminds us of the reason for Into the Wood ’ s relative commercial success : It ’ s vibrant , singable fun .
For all we talk about Sondheim ’ s complexity , social themes , and cultural importance , there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ love behind everything he writes .
—Aja Romano “ Lesson # 8 ” from Sunday in the Park with George — Mandy Patinkin Sunday in the Park with George takes place across two generations .
The first act is about the 19th-century pointillism artist George Seurat , while the second act follows George ’ s great-grandson , also an artist and also named George .
“ Lesson # 8 ” is from the second act , and it comes after 20th-century George ’ s grandmother dies .
In the song , George is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ French-to-English lesson book — hence “ Lesson # 8 ” — and he ’ s thinking about how he misses his grandmother and how he ’ s having trouble making art .
And so I ’ ve always thought of it as a song about being artistically blocked and the depression that comes with it , about losing faith in one ’ s ability to see beauty in the world .
But I don ’ t think I ’ ll ever be able to hear this song now without thinking about Mandy Patinkin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , near tears as he sings a cappella , “ Where are the people out strolling on Sunday ?
” Patinkin made it a song about loneliness and isolation , which is to say he made it a song about this particular moment in time .
It ’ s an enormously warm and vulnerable performance , and right now , it ’ s incredibly cathartic to watch .
—Constance Grady One of the most effective moments of the evening was the hard cut to Lea Salonga — Broadway legend , owner of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and objectively the best Disney princess — singing “ Loving You ” from 1994 ’ s Passion .
Passion is perhaps Sondheim ’ s most challenging show within a long career of challenging shows .
In Passion , a manipulative woman falls in love with a young soldier and proceeds to slowly pry him away from his current , passionate love affair .
It ’ s a portrait of love as dark , ugly , possessive , jealous , bitter , and unapologetically intense , all accompanied by some of Sondheim ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Murphy originated the difficult onstage role of Sondheim ’ s obsessive antihero , but in this moment , Salonga owns the song .
Her tremulous warble and the dark edge she gives to wryly simplistic lines — like “ loving you is not a choice and not much reason to rejoice ” — embody both her mesmerizing talent as an actress and Sondheim ’ s genius at manifesting characters through their songs .
“ Loving You ” sounds like a simple love song , until you look more closely and realize the singer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their affection until they die .
By the time you get to the line , “ Loving you is not in my control , ” you realize that “ love ” in this framing is dangerous and sober .
Salonga sells it with quiet determination , and it ’ s enthralling .
—AR The title of Sondheim ’ s birthday show was “ Take Me to the World.
” Not only is the title itself apt for quarantine , but so is the show from which it came .
Few people outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the 1966 television musical Sondheim wrote starring his bestie Anthony Perkins as a poet who becomes trapped in a department store overnight and discovers a commune of people hiding from the world there .
If you want to know more about it , the full version and numerous clips are scattered across YouTube , featuring the many great songs this hour of TV gave us , including “ Take Me to the World.
” The Evening Primrose story and its theme of trapped refugees longing for the larger world made for an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Of the multiple Evening Primrose performances , Benanti ’ s haunting , melancholic performance of “ I Remember Sky ” — sung flawlessly while leaning against her bathtub , no less — made us yearn for the lost art of going outside .
—AR “ No More ” from Into the Woods — Chip Zien “ No More ” comes during Into the Woods ’ s darker , heavier second half , as the fairy-tale frolic of the first act is starting to fall apart .
It ’ s the cri de coeur @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s protagonist , as he realizes that life is full of terrible obstacles from which there is no escape — and if he tries to run away , he will lose the good things in his life as well as the bad .
Chip Zien , who originated the role of the Baker on Broadway in 1987 , knows how to go straight to the meat of the song just as well now as he did 33 years ago .
And in the final moments of his performance , he added a lovely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up the hat he wore to play the Baker on Broadway .
It ’ s a nod both to his own show and to Sondheim ’ s other iconic James Lapine collaboration : Look , he saved the hat .
—CG Assassins is perhaps Sondheim ’ s best and most upsetting musical — a devastating postmodern critique on the hollowness of the American dream , explored through the lives of the oft-marginalized men and women who have tried or succeeded at killing US presidents .
With its nonlinear narrative and mix of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ character delivers a drunken rant while dressed as Santa Claus before flying a plane into Nixon ’ s White House — Assassins offers such a sharp condemnation of American politics that it took three tries to bring the show to Broadway .
The first attempt , its original 1990 off-Broadway outing , was stymied by the advent of the Gulf War .
The second attempt was originally slated to open on Broadway in September 2001 .
It finally opened there at last in 2004 .
Assassins remains a very necessary show , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the show ’ s original opening number , shows us why .
Its narrator wryly breaks down the lure of the American Dream : “ You think , ‘ Why try ?
’ and you want to cry / Then that flag goes by , and you think , ‘ That ’ s why : ’ cause of that idea , that incredible idea.
’ ” In the hands of national treasure Brian Stokes Mitchell , it practically becomes a cautionary tale delivered by Uncle Sam himself — of the glamour , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ construct .
—AR “ Finishing the Hat ” from Sunday in the Park with George — Michael Cerveris “ Finishing the Hat ” is perhaps Sondheim ’ s most emblematic song , so the question wasn ’ t whether or not it would appear in this concert — it was who would get to sing it .
And somewhat surprisingly , it went not to Mandy Patinkin , who originated the role of George on Broadway in 1984 .
It went to Michael Cerveris instead .
Cerveris has played George before , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his best-known Sondheim collaborations are his work as John Wilkes Booth in Assassins on Broadway in 2004 and as Sweeney Todd in the 2005 Broadway revival .
In many ways , he ’ s an ideal Sondheim actor : His voice is so velvety and rich , you feel as though you could wrap yourself up in it .
But he ’ s also able to make his presence chilly and isolated in a way that ’ s perfect for Sondheim ’ s lonely , withholding heroes .
Here , gazing out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eye contact with the camera , Cerveris finds the aching loneliness that hides below George ’ s cold exterior .
He ’ s isolated even from us — but look , he made a hat , where there never was a hat .
—CG “ Someone in a Tree ” from Pacific Overtures — Ann Harada , Austin Ku , Kelvin Moon Loh , and Thom Sesma Sondheim once famously said that “ Someone in a Tree , ” from his 1976 flop Pacific Overtures , was the best song he ever wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argue with him .
The lush ensemble number , performed here by cast members of the 2017 Classic Stage Company production , takes the dry subject of the 1854 Treaty of Kanagawa between Commodore Perry and the Japanese shogunate and , instead of recapping it , turns the moment into a rich treatise on memory and historicity itself .
Through the disjointed perspectives and fading recollections of a few unrelated bystanders to the event , the song explores the fragmentation of memory , showing us that the power of an event is often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spirit of the moment rather than the actual things taking place .
“ Someone in a Tree ” is also a beautiful look at the experimental range of much of Sondheim ’ s work .
It ’ s a mini-version of Pacific Overtures itself : a very postmodern , meta-textual study of time and culture and the way that history gains meaning through incremental individual moments .
It was a theme Sondheim and his librettist for the show , John Weidman , would return to again for his much darker 1990 show Assassins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and controversial , each went on to become cult favorites and are now widely considered to be among Sondheim ’ s best musicals .
When he was writing the libretto for Hamilton , Lin-Manuel Miranda consulted Weidman specifically to gain insight into how to write such unreliable yet relatable narration into his own work .
“ Someone in a Tree ” is a short master class in how satisfying such an unsatisfying form can be .
—AR “ Send In the Clowns ” from A Little Night Music — Donna Murphy “ Send @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sondheim song because of its ability to somehow tell the entire story of someone ’ s life in just four minutes .
Sondheim wrote the song specifically for Glynis Johns , who portrayed Desiree in A Little Night Music on Broadway .
It ’ s about a woman reflecting on the regret and disappointments of her life and realizing the painful truth of it all : If she had done something differently back then ( in Desiree ’ s case , realizing she was truly in love with a man she previously rebuffed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much more contented present .
“ Send In the Clowns ” isn ’ t meant to be splashy or a showstopper .
It ’ s meant to be a quiet contemplation of a better life .
And while she ’ s not Glynis Johns , Donna Murphy gave it the touching , somber dignity it deserved .
—AAS “ Ladies Who Lunch ” from Company — Christine Baranski , Meryl Streep , and Audra McDonald Is there a more iconic quarantine mood than Christine Baranski , Meryl Streep , and Audra McDonald , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bottles of their alcohol of choice , slur-belting their way through “ Ladies Who Lunch ” ?
Of course there isn ’ t .
We stan these three icons , and we hope and pray this means Audra and her immaculate range will be joining Christine and Meryl in Mamma Mia 3 .
—CG “ No One Is Alone ” from Into the Woods — Bernadette Peters “ No One Is Alone ” is Bernadette Peters ’ s traditional concert closer , and it ’ s only fitting that it brings this virtual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Like her Sunday in the Park co-star Mandy Patinkin , Peters chose to go a cappella , sitting alone in her apartment and appearing to blink back tears now and then .
“ I thought this might just be the perfect song right now , ” Peters says earnestly as she finishes up , and she ’ s right .
Hard to see the light now .
Just don ’ t let it go .
—CG Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 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 volume that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a contribution to Vox today .

On Sunday night, stars of stage and screen gathered in their homes to put on a virtual concert in celebration of legendary Broadway composer Stephen Sondheim’s 90th birthday. The concert, hosted by Raúl Esparza, was an intimate Zoom celebration. The party was periodically plagued by technical glitches — it started more than an hour late, after a long period in which no sound was audible — but in the end, it didn’t matter. The whole experience turned out to be perfect for this moment in time, whether or not you’re a musical theater devotee. Sondheim is our great bard of loneliness and alienation, and his birthday concert, officially titled “Take Me to the World,” makes a strong argument that he’s the de facto poet laureate of this social distancing moment.
Sondheim’s birthday was actually March 22, but Sunday night was a good time to celebrate nonetheless: April 26 also marked the 50th anniversary of the opening of Company, one of Sondheim’s most beloved shows. Company was on the cusp of a gender-bent revival on Broadway until the pandemic shut down the entire theater season; you could find its planned stars, Katrina Lenk and Patti LuPone, in Sunday’s tribute instead.
The full concert is nearly two and a half hours long, but it’s well worth watching on YouTube: You get to see Jake Gyllenhaal belting his way through a love duet with Annaleigh Ashford, Melissa Errico doing a stripped-down and lovely take on “Children and Art,” and Jason Alexander telling the story of how Sondheim wrote one of the songs in Merrily We Roll Along purely to mess with the actor. But if you don’t have a spare two and a half hours to spend today, we’ve assembled 12 highlights for you.
Pour yourself a glass of something, settle in, and prepare to feel some very cathartic feelings. As it turns out, no one is alone.
“Johanna” from Sweeney Todd — Katrina Lenk
here’s the full vid of katrina lenk singing johanna pic.twitter.com/mY9HaKO2Gm — jw jpw talk to eabc other (@LITTLESONGBlRD) April 27, 2020
“Johanna” is from Sondheim’s creepy, pulpy, pitch-black tragicomedy Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. The musical itself features murder, cannibalism, and a very horny, rape-y judge. “Johanna” is a song about Todd’s estranged daughter, who’s now the ward of said judge, Judge Turpin. Turpin keeps Johanna locked up, in a scenario that’s more like a kidnapper keeping his victim captive than a fairy-tale princess in a castle.
Lenk’s performance, particularly in her vocals and inflections (she also plays the guitar!), divorced the song from its original context, removing the horror and generally unnerving tone. In doing so, Lenk made me appreciate how Sondheim acutely wrote this song about longing and love, and how fine the line is between those feelings and the darkness of obsessive lust. Sondheim was so aware of that threshold and tension throughout his work, but he best used it to create the surreal tragedy of Sweeney Todd and “Johanna.” —Alex Abad-Santos
“It Takes Two” from Into the Woods — Beanie Feldstein and Ben Platt
It’s become déclassé among Sondheim fans to express too much affection for the fairy-tale musical Into the Woods, arguably the most mainstream and commercially successful of all his work. But Into the Woods featured heavily in his 90th birthday concert, and the songs themselves made the case for why. “It Takes Two” is ostensibly about a husband and wife team trying to collect four magical items in three days’ time so they can feed a cow to heal a witch to get a baby, and — look, it’s complicated. But the song is really about the wonderful surprise of falling in love all over again with someone you thought you knew.
“It Takes Two” is so exuberant that you barely even have to sing it to sell it, but Feldstein and Platt sing the heck out of it and look like they’re having a blast. It’s a great moment that reminds us of the reason for Into the Wood’s relative commercial success: It’s vibrant, singable fun. For all we talk about Sondheim’s complexity, social themes, and cultural importance, there’s true joy, humor, and love behind everything he writes. —Aja Romano
Sunday in the Park with George takes place across two generations. The first act is about the 19th-century pointillism artist George Seurat, while the second act follows George’s great-grandson, also an artist and also named George. “Lesson #8” is from the second act, and it comes after 20th-century George’s grandmother dies.
In the song, George is going through his great-grandmother’s old French-to-English lesson book — hence “Lesson #8” — and he’s thinking about how he misses his grandmother and how he’s having trouble making art. And so I’ve always thought of it as a song about being artistically blocked and the depression that comes with it, about losing faith in one’s ability to see beauty in the world.
But I don’t think I’ll ever be able to hear this song now without thinking about Mandy Patinkin standing in his backyard with his dog, near tears as he sings a cappella, “Where are the people out strolling on Sunday?” Patinkin made it a song about loneliness and isolation, which is to say he made it a song about this particular moment in time. It’s an enormously warm and vulnerable performance, and right now, it’s incredibly cathartic to watch. —Constance Grady
One of the most effective moments of the evening was the hard cut to Lea Salonga — Broadway legend, owner of the world’s most perfect voice, and objectively the best Disney princess — singing “Loving You” from 1994’s Passion. Passion is perhaps Sondheim’s most challenging show within a long career of challenging shows. In Passion, a manipulative woman falls in love with a young soldier and proceeds to slowly pry him away from his current, passionate love affair. It’s a portrait of love as dark, ugly, possessive, jealous, bitter, and unapologetically intense, all accompanied by some of Sondheim’s most lush and soaring music.
Donna Murphy originated the difficult onstage role of Sondheim’s obsessive antihero, but in this moment, Salonga owns the song. Her tremulous warble and the dark edge she gives to wryly simplistic lines — like “loving you is not a choice and not much reason to rejoice” — embody both her mesmerizing talent as an actress and Sondheim’s genius at manifesting characters through their songs. “Loving You” sounds like a simple love song, until you look more closely and realize the singer is grimly vowing to stalk the object of their affection until they die. By the time you get to the line, “Loving you is not in my control,” you realize that “love” in this framing is dangerous and sober. Salonga sells it with quiet determination, and it’s enthralling. —AR
The title of Sondheim’s birthday show was “Take Me to the World.” Not only is the title itself apt for quarantine, but so is the show from which it came. Few people outside of Sondheim obsessives know about Evening Primrose, the 1966 television musical Sondheim wrote starring his bestie Anthony Perkins as a poet who becomes trapped in a department store overnight and discovers a commune of people hiding from the world there. If you want to know more about it, the full version and numerous clips are scattered across YouTube, featuring the many great songs this hour of TV gave us, including “Take Me to the World.”
The Evening Primrose story and its theme of trapped refugees longing for the larger world made for an unexpectedly sweet refrain throughout the evening. Of the multiple Evening Primrose performances, Benanti’s haunting, melancholic performance of “I Remember Sky”— sung flawlessly while leaning against her bathtub, no less — made us yearn for the lost art of going outside. —AR
“No More” comes during Into the Woods’s darker, heavier second half, as the fairy-tale frolic of the first act is starting to fall apart. It’s the cri de coeur of the Baker, the show’s protagonist, as he realizes that life is full of terrible obstacles from which there is no escape — and if he tries to run away, he will lose the good things in his life as well as the bad.
Chip Zien, who originated the role of the Baker on Broadway in 1987, knows how to go straight to the meat of the song just as well now as he did 33 years ago. And in the final moments of his performance, he added a lovely and tender grace note when he picked up the hat he wore to play the Baker on Broadway. It’s a nod both to his own show and to Sondheim’s other iconic James Lapine collaboration: Look, he saved the hat. —CG
“The Flag Song,” cut from Assassins — Brian Stokes Mitchell
Assassins is perhaps Sondheim’s best and most upsetting musical — a devastating postmodern critique on the hollowness of the American dream, explored through the lives of the oft-marginalized men and women who have tried or succeeded at killing US presidents. With its nonlinear narrative and mix of the blackly comedic with the too-close-for-comfort — one character delivers a drunken rant while dressed as Santa Claus before flying a plane into Nixon’s White House — Assassins offers such a sharp condemnation of American politics that it took three tries to bring the show to Broadway. The first attempt, its original 1990 off-Broadway outing, was stymied by the advent of the Gulf War. The second attempt was originally slated to open on Broadway in September 2001. It finally opened there at last in 2004.
Assassins remains a very necessary show, and the scathing “Flag Song,” the show’s original opening number, shows us why. Its narrator wryly breaks down the lure of the American Dream: “You think, ‘Why try?’ and you want to cry / Then that flag goes by, and you think, ‘That’s why: ’cause of that idea, that incredible idea.’” In the hands of national treasure Brian Stokes Mitchell, it practically becomes a cautionary tale delivered by Uncle Sam himself — of the glamour, and the danger, of America as a construct. —AR
“Finishing the Hat” is perhaps Sondheim’s most emblematic song, so the question wasn’t whether or not it would appear in this concert — it was who would get to sing it. And somewhat surprisingly, it went not to Mandy Patinkin, who originated the role of George on Broadway in 1984. It went to Michael Cerveris instead.
Cerveris has played George before, in an Illinois revival in 2004, but his best-known Sondheim collaborations are his work as John Wilkes Booth in Assassins on Broadway in 2004 and as Sweeney Todd in the 2005 Broadway revival. In many ways, he’s an ideal Sondheim actor: His voice is so velvety and rich, you feel as though you could wrap yourself up in it. But he’s also able to make his presence chilly and isolated in a way that’s perfect for Sondheim’s lonely, withholding heroes.
Here, gazing out of a window and staunchly refusing to make eye contact with the camera, Cerveris finds the aching loneliness that hides below George’s cold exterior. He’s isolated even from us — but look, he made a hat, where there never was a hat. —CG
“Someone in a Tree” from Pacific Overtures — Ann Harada, Austin Ku, Kelvin Moon Loh, and Thom Sesma
Sondheim once famously said that “Someone in a Tree,” from his 1976 flop Pacific Overtures, was the best song he ever wrote, and it’s hard to argue with him. The lush ensemble number, performed here by cast members of the 2017 Classic Stage Company production, takes the dry subject of the 1854 Treaty of Kanagawa between Commodore Perry and the Japanese shogunate and, instead of recapping it, turns the moment into a rich treatise on memory and historicity itself. Through the disjointed perspectives and fading recollections of a few unrelated bystanders to the event, the song explores the fragmentation of memory, showing us that the power of an event is often much more about the feeling and the spirit of the moment rather than the actual things taking place.
“Someone in a Tree” is also a beautiful look at the experimental range of much of Sondheim’s work. It’s a mini-version of Pacific Overtures itself: a very postmodern, meta-textual study of time and culture and the way that history gains meaning through incremental individual moments. It was a theme Sondheim and his librettist for the show, John Weidman, would return to again for his much darker 1990 show Assassins. And while both shows were challenging and controversial, each went on to become cult favorites and are now widely considered to be among Sondheim’s best musicals. When he was writing the libretto for Hamilton, Lin-Manuel Miranda consulted Weidman specifically to gain insight into how to write such unreliable yet relatable narration into his own work. “Someone in a Tree” is a short master class in how satisfying such an unsatisfying form can be. —AR
“Send In the Clowns” is my favorite Sondheim song because of its ability to somehow tell the entire story of someone’s life in just four minutes. Sondheim wrote the song specifically for Glynis Johns, who portrayed Desiree in A Little Night Music on Broadway. It’s about a woman reflecting on the regret and disappointments of her life and realizing the painful truth of it all: If she had done something differently back then (in Desiree’s case, realizing she was truly in love with a man she previously rebuffed), they would be in a much more contented present.
“Send In the Clowns” isn’t meant to be splashy or a showstopper. It’s meant to be a quiet contemplation of a better life. And while she’s not Glynis Johns, Donna Murphy gave it the touching, somber dignity it deserved. —AAS
“Ladies Who Lunch” from Company — Christine Baranski, Meryl Streep, and Audra McDonald
Is there a more iconic quarantine mood than Christine Baranski, Meryl Streep, and Audra McDonald, all wearing white bathrobes and clutching enormous bottles of their alcohol of choice, slur-belting their way through “Ladies Who Lunch”? Of course there isn’t. We stan these three icons, and we hope and pray this means Audra and her immaculate range will be joining Christine and Meryl in Mamma Mia 3. —CG
“No One Is Alone” is Bernadette Peters’s traditional concert closer, and it’s only fitting that it brings this virtual Sondheim concert to an end, too. Like her Sunday in the Park co-star Mandy Patinkin, Peters chose to go a cappella, sitting alone in her apartment and appearing to blink back tears now and then. “I thought this might just be the perfect song right now,” Peters says earnestly as she finishes up, and she’s right.
Hard to see the light now. Just don’t let it go. —CG


vox--2020-04-27--New York is the first state to cancel a presidential primary over coronavirus concerns

New York state has canceled its June 23 Democratic presidential primary , becoming the first state to do so over concerns about the coronavirus .
The decision came after a Monday vote by commissioners on the New York State Board of Elections .
The decision will not impact primaries for congressional , state-level , and local races , which will be held the same day and largely conducted through absentee ballot .
With more than 288,045 confirmed coronavirus cases and 22,000 deaths , New York is the state hardest hit by the virus in the US .
Already , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 28 to late June .
Many other states have postponed their contests , but New York is the first to cancel its primary outright .
Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) firmly opposed canceling the primary .
Even though Sanders recently suspended his bid for the Democratic nomination and endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden , he stood the chance to amass delegates from the primary — which could give him more leverage over the party ’ s platform and rules at the Democratic National Convention .
New York has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were up for grabs .
The cancellation could hamper Sanders ’ s influence at the convention and add to existing distrust of the Democratic Party and its institutions from some of his supporters .
Sanders ’ campaign and groups supporting him put out statements Monday afternoon blasting the decision .
“ Today ’ s decision by the State of New York Board of Elections is an outrage , a blow to American democracy , and must be overturned by the DNC , ” said Sanders ’ campaign senior advisor Jeff Weaver .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the proper response must be to make the election safe — such as going to all vote by mail — rather than eliminating people ’ s right to vote completely.
” The New York Board of Elections officials ultimately decided that with Biden already the presumptive Democratic nominee , the public health risks of holding an election outweighed the benefits of it continuing , according to the New York Times .
“ What the Sanders campaign wanted is essentially a beauty contest that , given the situation with the public health emergency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indeed , frivolous , ” the board ’ s Democratic co-chair , Douglas Kellner , told the Times .
The Times reported the presidential primary was the only race on the ballot for about 20 counties in the state , meaning they now will have no election at all — and poll workers and voters in those counties can stay home .
States are pushing back their elections and expanding absentee ballots No other state besides New York has yet canceled a primary election outright , but many are having to rethink how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pandemic .
Wisconsin has been the only state so far to proceed with an in-person election during the height of the outbreak in the US , causing an outcry from voters and voting rights advocates alike .
Several dozen cases of Covid-19 , the disease caused by the novel coronavirus , have been linked to the state ’ s April 7 election , according to public health officials .
New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order on April 24 requiring the state board of elections to mail every New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballot , along with paid postage .
In addition to New York , 15 other states and Puerto Rico have pushed back the dates of their elections or switched to a vote-by-mail system with an extended deadline to get ballots in : Alaska , Connecticut , Delaware , Georgia , Hawaii , Indiana , Kentucky , Louisiana , Maryland , New Jersey , Ohio , Pennsylvania , Rhode Island , West Virginia , and Wyoming .
Getting states more federal money to expand vote-by-mail ahead of November is one of the agenda items @ @ @ @ @ @ @ negotiations for a coronavirus relief package .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has suggested she ’ d like to see about $ 4 billion dedicated to vote-by-mail efforts .
Update : This post was updated with a statement from the Sanders campaign .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

New York state has canceled its June 23 Democratic presidential primary, becoming the first state to do so over concerns about the coronavirus.
The decision came after a Monday vote by commissioners on the New York State Board of Elections. The decision will not impact primaries for congressional, state-level, and local races, which will be held the same day and largely conducted through absentee ballot.
With more than 288,045 confirmed coronavirus cases and 22,000 deaths, New York is the state hardest hit by the virus in the US. Already, the state had postponed its primary from April 28 to late June. Many other states have postponed their contests, but New York is the first to cancel its primary outright.
Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) firmly opposed canceling the primary. Even though Sanders recently suspended his bid for the Democratic nomination and endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden, he stood the chance to amass delegates from the primary — which could give him more leverage over the party’s platform and rules at the Democratic National Convention. New York has a large cache of delegates; 274 delegates were up for grabs.
The cancellation could hamper Sanders’s influence at the convention and add to existing distrust of the Democratic Party and its institutions from some of his supporters. Sanders’ campaign and groups supporting him put out statements Monday afternoon blasting the decision.
“Today’s decision by the State of New York Board of Elections is an outrage, a blow to American democracy, and must be overturned by the DNC,” said Sanders’ campaign senior advisor Jeff Weaver. “Give that the primary is months away, the proper response must be to make the election safe — such as going to all vote by mail — rather than eliminating people’s right to vote completely.”
The New York Board of Elections officials ultimately decided that with Biden already the presumptive Democratic nominee, the public health risks of holding an election outweighed the benefits of it continuing, according to the New York Times.
“What the Sanders campaign wanted is essentially a beauty contest that, given the situation with the public health emergency, seems to be unnecessary and, indeed, frivolous,” the board’s Democratic co-chair, Douglas Kellner, told the Times.
The Times reported the presidential primary was the only race on the ballot for about 20 counties in the state, meaning they now will have no election at all — and poll workers and voters in those counties can stay home.
States are pushing back their elections and expanding absentee ballots
No other state besides New York has yet canceled a primary election outright, but many are having to rethink how they hold elections in the midst of a pandemic.
Wisconsin has been the only state so far to proceed with an in-person election during the height of the outbreak in the US, causing an outcry from voters and voting rights advocates alike. Several dozen cases of Covid-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, have been linked to the state’s April 7 election, according to public health officials.
Related New York and Kentucky just made it easier to vote by mail
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order on April 24 requiring the state board of elections to mail every New York resident an application for an absentee ballot, along with paid postage.
In addition to New York, 15 other states and Puerto Rico have pushed back the dates of their elections or switched to a vote-by-mail system with an extended deadline to get ballots in: Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
Getting states more federal money to expand vote-by-mail ahead of November is one of the agenda items for Democrats in the next round of negotiations for a coronavirus relief package. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has suggested she’d like to see about $4 billion dedicated to vote-by-mail efforts.
Update: This post was updated with a statement from the Sanders campaign.


vox--2020-04-27--A Republican effort to sabotage Obamacare was just rejected by the Supreme Court

On Monday , the Supreme Court voted 8-1 to reject a Republican effort to sabotage parts of the Affordable Care Act .
The upshot of this decision is that health insurers will receive payments owed to them under Obamacare ’ s “ risk corridor ” program .
Justice Sonia Sotomayor ’ s majority opinion in Maine Community Health Options v. United States , relies on “ a principle as old as the Nation itself , ” according to the opinion .
That principle : “ The Government should honor its obligations.
” The vote in Maine Community was not close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of Sotomayor ’ s opinion , leaving Justice Samuel Alito in a lonely dissent .
That ’ s a bit of a surprising outcome given what was at stake in the case , which involved a $ 12 billion Republican scheme to sabotage Obamacare .
And yet , after years of litigation seeking to destroy the Affordable Care Act , and after many more years of partisan rancor bitterly dividing the two major political parties on whether Obamacare should continue to exist , only Justice Alito was willing to endorse this particular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary legislative accomplishment .
The other eight justices all agreed that the risk corridors program should be preserved .
Insurance operates on a fairly basic model .
People who fear some kind of unfortunate event agree to pay premiums to the insurer .
If that event happens , the insurer pays at least some of the customer ’ s costs .
This model necessarily involves risk for insurance companies .
If they set premiums too high , they won ’ t be able to attract customers .
But if they set premiums too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obligated to pay for costs that vastly exceed the amount of money they ’ ve brought in .
For this reason , insurers are often reluctant to enter new markets because they might not know enough about that market to set the right premiums .
But the whole point of the Affordable Care Act was to provide insurance to populations that historically have struggled to obtain health coverage .
As Chief Justice John Roberts noted during oral arguments in Maine Community , the law seeks to benefit people “ who were otherwise uninsurable.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ enticement , insurers would be particularly reluctant to enter the Obamacare markets because they were being asked to take on a considerable amount of risk .
Risk corridors are one enticement that the Affordable Care Act provides to bring these reluctant insurers into the Obamacare exchanges .
Under this program , insurers that set their premiums too high paid a percentage of their excess profits to the government .
And insurers who set their premiums too low are reimbursed a percentage of their losses .
That way , insurers enjoy some cushion against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ low .
The risk corridors were a temporary program , which expired after 2016 .
But many insurers that were entitled to payments under the risk corridor program never received those payments — to the tune of about $ 12 billion — largely due to a Republican effort to undermine the program .
Beginning in 2013 , Sen. Marco Rubio ( R-FL ) began pushing for legislation to end the risk corridor payments .
Eventually , Congress enacted a provision in its appropriations bills for 2014 , 2015 , and 2016 — known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to prevent the federal government from making most of the payments it owes under the risk corridors program .
The core issue in Maine Community is whether this rider actually cut off these payments .
If Congress wants to repeal one of the government ’ s financial obligations , it must do so clearly To understand why the rider did not successfully cut off the risk corridor payments and why the Supreme Court sided with the insurers in Maine Community , it ’ s useful to dig into the text of the Affordable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the riders .
The Affordable Care Act ’ s language governing the risk corridors is written in mandatory terms .
It states that the government “ shall pay ” a fraction of the costs of insurers that qualify for relief under the risk corridor program .
“ Shall ” is a strong word .
It suggests that the government must do the thing that Congress has instructed it to do .
Moreover , as Sotomayor writes , Obamacare creates something very akin to a contract between insurers and the federal government .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal duty of the United States that could mature into a legal liability through the insurers ’ actions—namely , their participating in the healthcare exchanges.
” That is , insurers were told that they would be entitled to benefit from the risk corridor program if they agreed to sell plans on the Obamacare exchanges .
If the government were to back out of this arrangement after an insurer upheld its part of the bargain , it would not honor its legal obligation .
But what of the rider ?
That provision , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much of the federal government ’ s spending appropriations for 2014-2016 , provides that “ none of the funds made available by this Act ” from certain health care-related appropriations “ may be used for payments under section 1342 ( b ) ( 1 ) of Public Law 111–148 ( relating to risk corridors ) .
” The key words here are “ by this Act.
” Though the rider prohibits money appropriated under these specific spending bills from being used to fund risk corridors , it does not prevent the government from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of funds .
And , as it turns out , there is another source of funds that the government can use to make the risk corridor payments — the “ Judgment Fund , ” which “ pays court judgments and compromise settlements of lawsuits against the government.
” Much of Sotomayor ’ s opinion focuses on prior precedents establishing that courts should be very reluctant to read one federal law as implicitly eliminating an obligation laid out by another law .
“ Repeals by implication are not favored , ” Sotomayor writes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When confronted with two laws that seem to pull in different directions , courts should “ ‘ regard each as effective ’ —unless Congress ’ intention to repeal is ‘ clear and manifest.
’ ” Thus , because it is possible to read the rider narrowly , to still preserve the government ’ s original obligations under the risk corridor program , that rider should be read narrowly .
The risk corridor program survives .
Are the Obamacare wars finally coming to a close ?
If this case involved any other law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s opinion is a straightforward application of longstanding precedent , and a fairly uncontroversial one at that .
Nearly every member of the Court , after all , agreed with her .
But the Maine Community case is significant because it involved the Affordable Care Act .
The history of Obamacare has , to a large extent , been the story of Republican lawyers coming up with ways to challenge the law in court that are widely dismissed as ridiculous — right up until those lawyers start to prevail before sympathetic federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , however , that most of the Supreme Court is fully capable of separating their personal political views from what the law requires in an Obamacare-related case .
The big test of whether the judicial Obamacare wars are coming to a close , however , will come when the Supreme Court hears California v. Texas next fall .
That case asks the courts to repeal Obamacare under a legal theory that is rejected even by many leading conservative scholars and other opponents of the Affordable Care Act .
If the justices approach the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approach they took in the Maine Community case , this latest attack on Obamacare will also be rejected by a lopsided vote .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

On Monday, the Supreme Court voted 8-1 to reject a Republican effort to sabotage parts of the Affordable Care Act. The upshot of this decision is that health insurers will receive payments owed to them under Obamacare’s “risk corridor” program.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s majority opinion in Maine Community Health Options v. United States, relies on “a principle as old as the Nation itself,” according to the opinion. That principle: “The Government should honor its obligations.”
The vote in Maine Community was not close. Eight justices joined all or nearly all of Sotomayor’s opinion, leaving Justice Samuel Alito in a lonely dissent. That’s a bit of a surprising outcome given what was at stake in the case, which involved a $12 billion Republican scheme to sabotage Obamacare.
And yet, after years of litigation seeking to destroy the Affordable Care Act, and after many more years of partisan rancor bitterly dividing the two major political parties on whether Obamacare should continue to exist, only Justice Alito was willing to endorse this particular effort to undercut President Obama’s primary legislative accomplishment.
The other eight justices all agreed that the risk corridors program should be preserved.
Risk corridors, briefly explained
Insurance operates on a fairly basic model. People who fear some kind of unfortunate event agree to pay premiums to the insurer. If that event happens, the insurer pays at least some of the customer’s costs.
This model necessarily involves risk for insurance companies. If they set premiums too high, they won’t be able to attract customers. But if they set premiums too low, an insurer can potentially be obligated to pay for costs that vastly exceed the amount of money they’ve brought in. For this reason, insurers are often reluctant to enter new markets because they might not know enough about that market to set the right premiums.
But the whole point of the Affordable Care Act was to provide insurance to populations that historically have struggled to obtain health coverage. As Chief Justice John Roberts noted during oral arguments in Maine Community, the law seeks to benefit people “who were otherwise uninsurable.” So, absent some sort of enticement, insurers would be particularly reluctant to enter the Obamacare markets because they were being asked to take on a considerable amount of risk.
Risk corridors are one enticement that the Affordable Care Act provides to bring these reluctant insurers into the Obamacare exchanges. Under this program, insurers that set their premiums too high paid a percentage of their excess profits to the government. And insurers who set their premiums too low are reimbursed a percentage of their losses. That way, insurers enjoy some cushion against catastrophic loss if they set premiums too low.
The risk corridors were a temporary program, which expired after 2016. But many insurers that were entitled to payments under the risk corridor program never received those payments — to the tune of about $12 billion — largely due to a Republican effort to undermine the program.
Beginning in 2013, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) began pushing for legislation to end the risk corridor payments. Eventually, Congress enacted a provision in its appropriations bills for 2014, 2015, and 2016 — known as a “rider” — seeking to prevent the federal government from making most of the payments it owes under the risk corridors program. The core issue in Maine Community is whether this rider actually cut off these payments.
If Congress wants to repeal one of the government’s financial obligations, it must do so clearly
To understand why the rider did not successfully cut off the risk corridor payments and why the Supreme Court sided with the insurers in Maine Community, it’s useful to dig into the text of the Affordable Care Act itself, and the text of the riders.
The Affordable Care Act’s language governing the risk corridors is written in mandatory terms. It states that the government “shall pay” a fraction of the costs of insurers that qualify for relief under the risk corridor program. “Shall” is a strong word. It suggests that the government must do the thing that Congress has instructed it to do.
Moreover, as Sotomayor writes, Obamacare creates something very akin to a contract between insurers and the federal government. The Affordable Care Act “imposed a legal duty of the United States that could mature into a legal liability through the insurers’ actions—namely, their participating in the healthcare exchanges.”
That is, insurers were told that they would be entitled to benefit from the risk corridor program if they agreed to sell plans on the Obamacare exchanges. If the government were to back out of this arrangement after an insurer upheld its part of the bargain, it would not honor its legal obligation.
But what of the rider? That provision, which was attached to appropriations bills laying out much of the federal government’s spending appropriations for 2014-2016, provides that “none of the funds made available by this Act” from certain health care-related appropriations “may be used for payments under section 1342(b)(1) of Public Law 111–148 (relating to risk corridors).”
The key words here are “by this Act.” Though the rider prohibits money appropriated under these specific spending bills from being used to fund risk corridors, it does not prevent the government from making these payments from a different source of funds. And, as it turns out, there is another source of funds that the government can use to make the risk corridor payments — the “Judgment Fund,” which “pays court judgments and compromise settlements of lawsuits against the government.”
Much of Sotomayor’s opinion focuses on prior precedents establishing that courts should be very reluctant to read one federal law as implicitly eliminating an obligation laid out by another law. “Repeals by implication are not favored,” Sotomayor writes, quoting from a 1974 Supreme Court decision. When confronted with two laws that seem to pull in different directions, courts should “‘regard each as effective’—unless Congress’ intention to repeal is ‘clear and manifest.’”
Thus, because it is possible to read the rider narrowly, to still preserve the government’s original obligations under the risk corridor program, that rider should be read narrowly. The risk corridor program survives.
Are the Obamacare wars finally coming to a close?
If this case involved any other law, it would be unremarkable. Sotomayor’s opinion is a straightforward application of longstanding precedent, and a fairly uncontroversial one at that. Nearly every member of the Court, after all, agreed with her.
But the Maine Community case is significant because it involved the Affordable Care Act. The history of Obamacare has, to a large extent, been the story of Republican lawyers coming up with ways to challenge the law in court that are widely dismissed as ridiculous — right up until those lawyers start to prevail before sympathetic federal judges. The Maine Community opinion suggests, however, that most of the Supreme Court is fully capable of separating their personal political views from what the law requires in an Obamacare-related case.
The big test of whether the judicial Obamacare wars are coming to a close, however, will come when the Supreme Court hears California v. Texas next fall. That case asks the courts to repeal Obamacare under a legal theory that is rejected even by many leading conservative scholars and other opponents of the Affordable Care Act.
If the justices approach the California case with the same wholly legal approach they took in the Maine Community case, this latest attack on Obamacare will also be rejected by a lopsided vote.


vox--2020-04-27--The 2020 election calendar

The 2020 election calendar

Following Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ s decision to suspend his campaign for president , the Democratic primary is all but over .
Former Vice President Joe Biden is the presumptive Democratic nominee and challenger to President Donald Trump .
Though voters will now begin to turn toward the general election , a slate of presidential primary elections — which Trump and Biden are expected to sweep easily — are still scheduled to run through early July .
State and local primaries will take place as late as September .
After that , the Democratic and Republican conventions are scheduled for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convention was rescheduled from July ) .
Lastly , Election Day itself will fall on November 3 .
At least one presidential contest — the New York Democratic primary — has been cancelled outright due to the coronavirus pandemic , and the Puerto Rico Democratic primary has been postponed indefinitely .
For all of the events that haven ’ t been cancelled , though , there ’ s this calendar .
Read on for all of the most important events of the 2020 election cycle and bookmark this page to refer back to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your Google Calendar by clicking the plus sign on the bottom right of this page , or subscribe through a calendar app of your choice .
This page and the calendar subscriptions will be updated as dates change .
• Hawaii primary ( D ; vote-by-mail only ; results will be available “ late May , ” according to interim Hawaii Democratic Party Chair Kate Stanley ) • New York primaries ( state and congressional races only ; Democratic presidential primary cancelled ) Read all of our coverage from the June debates here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the July debates here .
Read all of our coverage of the September debate here .
• Second town hall on climate change on MSNBC Read all of our coverage from the October debate here .
Read all of our coverage from the November debate here .
Read all of our coverage from the December debate here .
Read all of our coverage from the Iowa caucuses here .
Read all of our coverage from the New Hampshire primaries here .
Read all of our coverage from the South Carolina primary here .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday here .
Read all of our coverage from the March 10 primaries here .
Read all of our coverage from the March 17 primaries here .
• Wisconsin primaries ( D , R ; April 7 is the election date and mail-in vote postmark deadline following court rulings , as of 8 pm ET on April 6 ) • Alaska primary ( D ; vote-by-mail only ; results will be available no later than 11:59 pm on April 11 )

Share All sharing options for: The 2020 election calendar
Vox answers your biggest questions about the 2020 US presidential election .
This story is part of a group of stories called
The 2020 presidential election is ramping into high gear.
Joe Biden announced his running mate, California Sen. Kamala Harris, and Democrats and Republicans held their first virtual conventions this summer. Biden and President Donald Trump accepted their parties’ official nominations for president, and the fall campaign season is upon us.
The presidential debates began September 29 and run through October, including the vice presidential debate on October 7. The second presidential debate, scheduled for October 15, was canceled after Trump tested positive for Covid-19, then refused to agree to debate virtually. One more debate is scheduled for October 22.
Election Day itself, of course, will fall on Tuesday, November 3.
Read on for the important events of the 2020 election cycle and bookmark this page to refer back to. You can also add it to your Google Calendar by clicking the plus sign on the bottom right of this page, or subscribe through a calendar app of your choice. This page and the calendar subscriptions will be updated as dates and information change.
And check out our guides on how to vote early and by mail.
September 2020
September 29
Presidential debate in Cleveland, Ohio, at the Case Western Reserve/Cleveland Clinic joint campus
October 2020
October 7
Vice presidential debate in Salt Lake City at the University of Utah
October 22
Presidential debate in Nashville, Tennessee, at Belmont University
November 2020
November 3
Election Day
Past 2020 election coverage
June 2019
June 26-27
Read all of our coverage from the June debates here.
July 2019
July 30-31
Read all of our coverage from the July debates here.
September 2019
September 4
September 12
Read all of our coverage of the September debate here.
September 19-20
October 2019
October 15
Read all of our coverage from the October debate here.
November 2019
November 20
Read all of our coverage from the November debate here.
December 2019
December 19
Read all of our coverage from the December debate here.
January 2020
January 14
February 2020
February 3
Iowa caucuses
Read all of our coverage from the Iowa caucuses here.
February 7
February 11
New Hampshire primaries
Read all of our coverage from the New Hampshire primaries here.
February 19
February 22
Nevada caucuses
February 25
February 29
South Carolina primary
Read all of our coverage from the South Carolina primary here.
March 2020
March 3 (Super Tuesday)
Alabama primaries (D, R)
American Samoa caucuses (D)
Arkansas primaries (D, R)
California primaries (D, R)
Colorado primaries (D, R)
Maine primaries (D, R)
Massachusetts primaries (D, R)
Minnesota primaries (D, R)
North Carolina primaries (D, R)
Oklahoma primaries (D, R)
Tennessee primaries (D, R)
Texas primaries (D, R)
Utah primaries (D, R)
Vermont primaries (D, R)
Virginia primary (D)
Democrats Abroad primary (through March 10)
Read all of our coverage from Super Tuesday here.
March 10
Idaho primaries (D, R)
Michigan primaries (D, R)
Mississippi primaries (D, R)
Missouri primaries (D, R)
North Dakota caucuses (D)
Washington primaries (D, R)
Read all of our coverage from the March 10 primaries here.
March 12
Virgin Islands caucuses
March 14
Guam caucuses (R)
Northern Marianas convention (D)
March 15
March 17
Arizona primary (D)
Florida primaries (D, R)
Illinois primaries (D, R)
Northern Marianas convention (R)
Read all of our coverage from the March 17 primaries here.
March 24
American Samoa caucuses (R)
April 2020
April 7
Wisconsin primaries (D, R; April 7 is the election date and mail-in vote postmark deadline following court rulings, as of 8 pm ET on April 6)
April 10
Alaska primary (D; vote-by-mail only; results will be available no later than 11:59 pm on April 11)
April 17
Wyoming caucuses (D; vote-by-mail only)
April 28
Ohio primaries (D, R; vote-by-mail only)
May 2020
May 2
Kansas primary (D)
Guam caucuses (D)
May 7-9
Wyoming state convention (R)
May 12
Nebraska primaries (D, R)
May 19
Oregon primaries (D, R)
June 2020
June 2
Delaware primaries (D, R)
District of Columbia primaries (D, R)
Indiana primaries (D, R)
Maryland primaries (D, R)
Montana primaries (D, R)
New Mexico primaries (D, R)
Pennsylvania primaries (D, R)
Rhode Island primaries (D, R)
South Dakota primaries (D, R)
June 6
Virgin Islands caucuses (D)
June 7
Puerto Rico primary (R)
June 9
Georgia primaries (D, R)
West Virginia primaries (D, R)
June 23
Kentucky primaries (D, R)
New York primaries (D, R)
July 2020
July 7
New Jersey primaries (D, R)
July 11
Louisiana primaries (D, R)
August 2020
August 11
Connecticut primaries (D, R)
August 17-20
Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Read our coverage of the Democratic convention here.
August 24-27
Republican National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina
Read our coverage of the Republican convention here.


vox--2020-04-27--Chart: The coronavirus pandemic, state by state

The coronavirus outbreak first erupted in the United States in Washington state , and while New York has become the American epicenter of the pandemic , there are Covid-19 cases in all 50 states .
The pathogen is spreading across the country , along with positive tests and death counts .
Getting control over the outbreak depends on each state ’ s ability to engineer an effective response , to slow the virus down and eventually contain it .
What plans for physical distancing are put in the place — and how well are they followed ?
Can the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patients ?
“ Each region has its own socio-cultural reasons that contribute to the rate of spread and its own approach to dealing with that rate of spread , ” says Carl Bergstrom , a professor of biology at the University of Washington who has been modeling infectious disease outbreaks for 20 years .
For now , the coronavirus appears more concentrated in urban centers , primarily New York City and its surrounding suburbs .
That ’ s where the virus first landed and it could flourish in those places because they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a stealthy virus that takes several days for its symptoms to show up .
Metro centers all over the US — Detroit , New Orleans , Miami , and many more — continue to see increases in coronavirus cases .
At the same time , the US is still almost certainly undertesting in other parts of the country .
To give one example , Connecticut has done more than twice as many tests per capita as Texas and Georgia .
Yet all three states have roughly the same number of positive test @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far fewer people per capita .
Such a high positive test rate suggests that the real number of cases may be much larger than the official count .
As of April 27 , New York has the most confirmed cases ( about 288,000 ) and it has also conducted the second most tests per million people ( about 41,000 ) , having only been recently surpassed by Rhode Island .
Here ’ s how states , territories , and Washington , DC , compare based on the number of confirmed cases and deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to data from the Covid Tracking Project .
Using the latest available Census Bureau numbers , we also calculated the number of tests per million people in a population , to give a better sense of a state ’ s efforts in tracking the disease .
State health systems have different capacities to handle the surge of Covid-19 cases .
Some started the crisis with higher uninsured rates , particularly in the South , because they have refused to expand Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act .
Now millions of workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis sets in , suddenly uninsured during a public health emergency .
Some states have younger and healthier populations ; others are older .
Certain states have more hospital beds per capita than their neighbors , and funding for public health differs considerably among states .
“ One thing that always strikes me about the American system is effectively there are , like , 51 American systems , ” Ellen Nolte , professor of health services and systems research at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , told Vox last year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unprecedented challenge for states New York , Washington , and California were forced early on to take measures to curtail the Covid-19 outbreak , and some states quickly followed their lead .
Others were reluctant to impose strict distancing guidelines , worried about the imposition on daily life and especially businesses .
As of April 20 , at least 42 states had statewide stay-at-home directives .
New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo moved to expand hospital capacity in his state ; he also waived out-of-pocket costs for health insurance , and the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to volunteer their services to avert a hospital staffing shortfall .
New York set up “ containment zones ” to contain local hot spots , where all the area schools were closed , and religious gatherings and other large gatherings were halted .
The state has also radically reorganized its hospitals into effectively one statewide system , in the hopes of better managing staff , supplies , and patients .
However , New York , like many other states , initially hesitated to put out “ stay at home ” guidance , before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington Gov .
Jay Inslee quickly ordered the state ’ s schools to close until the last week of April after the Everett nursing home outbreak .
He also appeared uneasy about issuing a statewide “ stay at home ” order , though he ’ s since done so .
California Gov .
Gavin Newsom was the first governor to issue such an order ( after several major metropolitan areas in his state had taken that step ) , and he helped convince some of the big tech companies in his state to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Other governors adopted more lax attitudes toward the crisis , at least initially .
Oklahoma Gov .
Kevin Stitt tweeted out ( and then deleted ) a picture of him and his family eating at a restaurant even though other states were starting to shut down nonessential businesses .
Florida Gov .
Ron DeSantis at first shrugged off calls to issue a stay-at-home order after pictures of college-age beachgoers in his state stirred up fears they would become vectors for spreading a virus that is generally milder for young people .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and finally issued a statewide stay-at-home order .
However , some beaches in the state have already started reopen as of April 20 .
Hospitals are relying on states to increase the health system ’ s capacity of hospital beds , ICUs , and ventilators , as well as the personnel to staff them .
States , in turn , will need support from the federal government , as their tax revenue takes a hit in the economic downturn .
The stimulus bill passed by Congress provides money to hospitals as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much more is needed .
The relationship between the states and the White House has been a fickle one in the crisis .
President Donald Trump has insinuated states should treat his administration kindly in order to win more federal support .
Governors have contradicted Trump over his speculation in mid-March that Americans could return to normal life soon ; he has somewhat backed off such claims .
And many states say that they are still not getting enough supplies from the federal government to make up for expected shortfalls .
States are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capacity , too , so they can actually trace the outbreak .
New York so far is testing people at the highest rate of any state , while there are other states with a growing number of cases ( like Texas and Georgia ) where the testing rates still remain low .
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 .

The coronavirus outbreak first erupted in the United States in Washington state, and while New York has become the American epicenter of the pandemic, there are Covid-19 cases in all 50 states.
The pathogen is spreading across the country, along with positive tests and death counts. Getting control over the outbreak depends on each state’s ability to engineer an effective response to slow the virus down and eventually contain it. What plans for physical distancing are put in the place — and how well are they followed? Can the state health system survive an influx of infected patients?
“Each region has its own socio-cultural reasons that contribute to the rate of spread and its own approach to dealing with that rate of spread,” says Carl Bergstrom, a professor of biology at the University of Washington who has been modeling infectious disease outbreaks for 20 years.
At first, the coronavirus was most concentrated in urban centers, primarily New York City and its surrounding suburbs. It could flourish in those places because they are densely packed with people, exposing them to a stealthy virus that takes several days for symptoms to show up. Metro centers all over the US — Detroit, New Orleans, Miami, and many more — have continued to see increases in coronavirus cases.
At the same time, the US is still almost certainly undertesting in other parts of the country. To give one example, Connecticut has done about twice as many tests per capita as Texas. Yet both states have roughly the same number of positive test results, despite the latter testing far fewer people per capita. Such a high positive test rate suggests that the real number of cases may be much larger than the official count.
As of May 11, New York has the most confirmed cases (about 335,000) and it has also conducted the second most tests per million people (about 60,000), having been recently surpassed by Rhode Island.
Here’s how states, territories, and Washington, DC, compare based on the number of confirmed cases and deaths, and the number of people tested, according to data from the COVID Tracking Project. Using the latest available Census Bureau numbers, we also calculated the number of tests per million people in a population, to give a better sense of a state’s efforts in tracking the disease.
(Note: We have updated the chart to display “tests conducted” instead of “people tested” because some states are reporting a raw count of the number of tests performed, which may include multiple tests for the same person.)
State health systems have different capacities to handle the surge of Covid-19 cases. Some started the crisis with higher uninsured rates, particularly in the South, because they have refused to expand Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act. Now, millions of workers are newly unemployed as the coronavirus economic crisis sets in, suddenly uninsured during a public health emergency. Some states have younger and healthier populations; others are older. Certain states have more hospital beds per capita than their neighbors, and funding for public health differs considerably among states.
“One thing that always strikes me about the American system is effectively there are, like, 51 American systems,” Ellen Nolte, professor of health services and systems research at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, told Vox last year.
The coronavirus pandemic has presented an unprecedented challenge for states
New York, Washington, and California were forced early on to take measures to curtail the Covid-19 outbreak, and some states quickly followed their lead. Others were reluctant to impose strict distancing guidelines, worried about the imposition on daily life and especially businesses.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo moved to expand hospital capacity in his state; he also waived out-of-pocket costs for health insurance, and the state put out a call for retired doctors to volunteer their services to avert a hospital staffing shortfall. New York set up “containment zones” to contain local hot spots, where all the area schools were closed, and religious gatherings and other large gatherings were halted. The state has also radically reorganized its hospitals into effectively one statewide system, in the hopes of better managing staff, supplies, and patients. However, New York, like many other states, initially hesitated to put out “stay at home” guidance, before instituting that policy on March 22.
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee quickly ordered the state’s schools to close until the last week of April after the Everett nursing home outbreak. He also appeared uneasy about issuing a statewide “stay at home” order, though he’s since done so. California Gov. Gavin Newsom was the first governor to issue such an order (after several major metropolitan areas in his state had taken that step), and he helped convince some of the big tech companies in his state to donate much-needed protective masks for medical staff.
Other governors adopted more lax attitudes toward the crisis, at least initially. Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt tweeted out (and then deleted) a picture of him and his family eating at a restaurant even though other states were starting to shut down nonessential businesses. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at first shrugged off calls to issue a stay-at-home order after pictures of college-age beachgoers in his state stirred up fears they would become vectors for spreading a virus that is generally milder for young people. On April 1, he changed his mind and finally issued a statewide stay-at-home order.
By late April, more than 40 states had issued stay-at-home orders, but some have now begun to relax those social distancing measures. Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee have initiated a phased reopening plan, as Vox’s Katelyn Burns reported. Florida is doing the same. Other states, such as Washington, are expected to be more cautious as they unwind restrictions that public health experts credit with stemming the spread of Covid-19.
Hospitals are relying on states to increase the health system’s capacity of hospital beds, ICUs, and ventilators, as well as the personnel to staff them. States, in turn, will need support from the federal government, as their tax revenue takes a hit in the economic downturn. The stimulus bill passed by Congress provides money to hospitals as well as funding for states, although experts say much more is needed.
The relationship between the states and the White House has been a fickle one in the crisis. President Donald Trump has insinuated states should treat his administration kindly in order to win more federal support. Governors have contradicted Trump over his speculation in mid-March that Americans could return to normal life soon; he has somewhat backed off such claims. And many states say that they are still not getting enough supplies from the federal government to make up for expected shortfalls.
States are depending on federal aid to increase testing capacity, too, so they can actually trace the outbreak. New York so far is testing people at the highest rate of any state, while there are other states with a growing number of cases (like Texas and Georgia) where the testing rates still remain low.


vox--2020-04-27--Trump keeps using “sarcasm” to explain away his embarrassing statements

President Donald Trump ’ s new thing appears to be using implausible claims of “ sarcasm ” to explain away his embarrassing public statements .
On Sunday , for the second time in three days , Trump said something ridiculous , was widely mocked for it , and then tried to walk it back by saying his original comment was meant sarcastically .
Notably , the most recent incident came amid a full-day Twitter meltdown that stood out even by Trump ’ s standards .
That meltdown happened on a day in which more than 1,000 Americans died from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Melania Trump ’ s birthday .
But after attending a virtual Catholic Mass , President Donald Trump spent his Sunday raging on Twitter .
Perhaps his most unhinged tweet of the day came in a thread in which he demanded that reporters who had received “ Noble Prizes ” for their work on the Russia investigation have them taken away .
Not only was Trump confusing Nobel Prizes with the Pulitzer Prize — an award given to journalists and writers — but he managed to pull off two errors in a single word @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this thread by basically trying to crowdsource frivolous lawsuits against media outlets that reported stories about the Russia investigation he didn ’ t like .
Here ’ s a screencap : Trump is shameless about many things , but these tweets apparently crossed a line even for him .
He ended up deleting them about three hours later — but in doing so he posted another insisting people just weren ’ t picking up on his “ sarcasm.
” “ Does anybody get the meaning of what a so-called Noble ( not Nobel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pertains to Reporters and Journalists ?
Noble is defined as , ‘ having or showing fine personal qualities or high moral principles and ideals .
Does sarcasm ever work ?
” he wrote .
In this case , it definitely didn ’ t .
And if Trump really meant to be sarcastic , then he had no reason to delete the tweets .
This disaster happened just 48 hours after another gaffe resulted in Trump using a “ sarcasm ” self-defense .
On Friday , as Trump was widely mocked for comments he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the possibility that disinfectant injections could be a miracle cure for the coronavirus , he claimed he was just being “ sarcastic ” when he made them — even though video of the briefing showed beyond a shadow of doubt he was lying .
Not only is Trump so undisciplined that he ’ ll publicly riff on the possible therapeutic qualities of bleach or post woefully ignorant tweets about “ Noble Prizes ” to his 79 million followers without having someone first take a look at them , but he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And he also clearly wants to talk about anything but the ongoing public health crisis taking place across the country .
Trump posted more than 40 tweets or retweets just in the 12 hours between noon Sunday and midnight .
The word “ coronavirus ” was mentioned in one of them .
Trump ’ s Sunday of tweets began with a post in which he insisted , ridiculously , that “ [ t ] he people that know me and know the history of our Country say that I am the hardest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality , despite having very little on his schedule these days , Trump reportedly can ’ t be bothered to attend the White House coronavirus task force meetings and hence shows up for the briefings unprepared . )
Trump followed that up with another thread in which he falsely claimed he hasn ’ t “ left the White House in many months , ” even though just last month he went on a weekend-long vacation at Mar-a-Lago that included a golf outing with the Washington Nationals .
He ’ s also traveled to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus cases were reported on January 20 .
That thread concluded with Trump lamenting that “ I will often be in the Oval Office late into the night & read & see that I am angrily eating a hamburger & Diet Coke in my bedroom .
People with me are always stunned .
Anything to demean !
” ( Trump originally misspelled “ hamburger ” as “ hamberger ” before deleting and reposting . )
After posting a string of tweets attacking Fox News for not covering him in a fawning enough manner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where he amplified lies about the Russia investigation and a post characterizing his impeachment as a “ failed coup attempt.
” The president retweeted Candace Owens describing Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-NY ) as “ a racist , radical communist ” and shared a deep fake video of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden .
Trump then began his Monday with more overheated attacks on the media .
And attacks on blue states led by governors who have been critical of the federal coronavirus response .
With White House officials reportedly hoping to curtail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disinfectant injections fiasco , the president may be relying even more on Twitter to get his message out .
The one he ’ s conveying now is of a president too preoccupied with his personal grievances to spend much time thinking about the pandemic , let alone responding to it .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

President Donald Trump’s new thing appears to be using implausible claims of “sarcasm” to explain away his embarrassing public statements.
On Sunday, for the second time in three days, Trump said something ridiculous, was widely mocked for it, and then tried to walk it back by saying his original comment was meant sarcastically. Notably, the most recent incident came amid a full-day Twitter meltdown that stood out even by Trump’s standards.
That meltdown happened on a day in which more than 1,000 Americans died from the coronavirus. It was also first lady Melania Trump’s birthday. But after attending a virtual Catholic Mass, President Donald Trump spent his Sunday raging on Twitter.
Perhaps his most unhinged tweet of the day came in a thread in which he demanded that reporters who had received “Noble Prizes” for their work on the Russia investigation have them taken away. Not only was Trump confusing Nobel Prizes with the Pulitzer Prize — an award given to journalists and writers — but he managed to pull off two errors in a single word by misspelling “Nobel.”
Trump concluded this thread by basically trying to crowdsource frivolous lawsuits against media outlets that reported stories about the Russia investigation he didn’t like. Here’s a screencap:
The president is now mixing up Pulitzer prizes with Nobel prizes pic.twitter.com/LP26W3hSFs — Allan Smith (@akarl_smith) April 26, 2020
Trump is shameless about many things, but these tweets apparently crossed a line even for him. He ended up deleting them about three hours later — but in doing so he posted another insisting people just weren’t picking up on his “sarcasm.”
“Does anybody get the meaning of what a so-called Noble (not Nobel) Prize is, especially as it pertains to Reporters and Journalists? Noble is defined as, ‘having or showing fine personal qualities or high moral principles and ideals. Does sarcasm ever work?” he wrote.
In this case, it definitely didn’t. And if Trump really meant to be sarcastic, then he had no reason to delete the tweets.
Does anybody get the meaning of what a so-called Noble (not Nobel) Prize is, especially as it pertains to Reporters and Journalists? Noble is defined as, “having or showing fine personal qualities or high moral principles and ideals.” Does sarcasm ever work? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 26, 2020
This disaster happened just 48 hours after another gaffe resulted in Trump using a “sarcasm” self-defense.
On Friday, as Trump was widely mocked for comments he made during a briefing the day before about the possibility that disinfectant injections could be a miracle cure for the coronavirus, he claimed he was just being “sarcastic” when he made them — even though video of the briefing showed beyond a shadow of doubt he was lying.
Here's a mashup of Trump claiming today he was just asking "a very sarcastic question to the reporters in the room" when he mused about disinfectant injections as a possible coronavirus miracle cure, followed by the original clip showing beyond a doubt that he was not doing that. pic.twitter.com/wby4ucd59Q — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 24, 2020
Not only is Trump so undisciplined that he’ll publicly riff on the possible therapeutic qualities of bleach or post woefully ignorant tweets about “Noble Prizes” to his 79 million followers without having someone first take a look at them, but he’s incapable of just admitting he messed up. And he also clearly wants to talk about anything but the ongoing public health crisis taking place across the country.
Trump’s tweets paint a picture of an extremely undisciplined man
Trump posted more than 40 tweets or retweets just in the 12 hours between noon Sunday and midnight. The word “coronavirus” was mentioned in one of them.
Trump’s Sunday of tweets began with a post in which he insisted, ridiculously, that “[t]he people that know me and know the history of our Country say that I am the hardest working President in history.” (In reality, despite having very little on his schedule these days, Trump reportedly can’t be bothered to attend the White House coronavirus task force meetings and hence shows up for the briefings unprepared.)
The people that know me and know the history of our Country say that I am the hardest working President in history. I don’t know about that, but I am a hard worker and have probably gotten more done in the first 3 1/2 years than any President in history. The Fake News hates it! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 26, 2020
Trump followed that up with another thread in which he falsely claimed he hasn’t “left the White House in many months,” even though just last month he went on a weekend-long vacation at Mar-a-Lago that included a golf outing with the Washington Nationals. He’s also traveled to eight political rallies since the first US coronavirus cases were reported on January 20.
That thread concluded with Trump lamenting that “I will often be in the Oval Office late into the night & read & see that I am angrily eating a hamburger & Diet Coke in my bedroom. People with me are always stunned. Anything to demean!” (Trump originally misspelled “hamburger” as “hamberger” before deleting and reposting.)
....schedule and eating habits, written by a third rate reporter who knows nothing about me. I will often be in the Oval Office late into the night & read & see that I am angrily eating a hamburger & Diet Coke in my bedroom. People with me are always stunned. Anything to demean! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 26, 2020
After posting a string of tweets attacking Fox News for not covering him in a fawning enough manner, Trump went on a retweet binge where he amplified lies about the Russia investigation and a post characterizing his impeachment as a “failed coup attempt.” The president retweeted Candace Owens describing Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) as “a racist, radical communist” and shared a deep fake video of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.
Trump then began his Monday with more overheated attacks on the media.
FAKE NEWS, THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 27, 2020
And attacks on blue states led by governors who have been critical of the federal coronavirus response.
Why should the people and taxpayers of America be bailing out poorly run states (like Illinois, as example) and cities, in all cases Democrat run and managed, when most of the other states are not looking for bailout help? I am open to discussing anything, but just asking? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 27, 2020
With White House officials reportedly hoping to curtail Trump’s public appearances after the disinfectant injections fiasco, the president may be relying even more on Twitter to get his message out. The one he’s conveying now is of a president too preoccupied with his personal grievances to spend much time thinking about the pandemic, let alone responding to it.


vox--2020-04-27--A historic Second Amendment showdown in the Supreme Court ends with a whimper

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York was a Supreme Court case that , at one point , seemed likely to significantly expand the Second Amendment and hand a massive victory to gun groups .
But on Monday morning , the Supreme Court handed down its opinion , and New York State Rifle ended in a whimper .
The Court , by a 6-3 vote , determined that the case , at least as it stands now , is moot — meaning that there is no longer a live dispute between the two parties .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ down to a lower court to determine whether there are any dormant issues in this lawsuit that could be revived .
Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissenting opinion , which was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch and largely joined by Justice Clarence Thomas .
As a practical matter , the Court ’ s decision means that it will avoid — for now — the question of whether to extend the Second Amendment .
The case , at least as it arrived at the Supreme Court , involved a very narrow issue .
New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to gun owners .
A “ carry ” license permits them to carry a handgun for “ target practice , hunting , or self-defense.
” The less permissive “ premises ” license , meanwhile , permits a gun owner to “ have and possess in his dwelling ” a handgun .
Under a now-repealed rule , premise license holders were only allowed to bring the gun out of their home for limited purposes , including to practice shooting at seven gun ranges .
The plaintiffs in New York State Rifle brought a narrow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal appeals court explained in an opinion upholding the city ’ s repealed rule , some of the plaintiffs “ seek to transport their handguns to shooting ranges and competitions outside New York City.
” One plaintiff also owns two homes , and he wants to be able to transport the same gun between those two homes .
After the Supreme Court agreed to hear this case , New York State enacted a law permitting people with premises licenses to do the very things these plaintiffs said they wished to do : bring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outside the city and transport a gun between two homes .
As a general rule , there must be a live dispute between two parties for a federal lawsuit to continue .
So if the plaintiffs seek the right to do X , and the defendant is now legally required to allow the plaintiffs to do X , the case is considered “ moot ” and it must be dismissed .
The Supreme Court ’ s opinion in New York State Rifle , however , does not go quite so far as to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Our ordinary practice in disposing of a case that has become moot on appeal is to vacate the judgment with directions to dismiss , ” the Court explains .
“ However , in instances where the mootness is attributable to a change in the legal framework governing the case , and where the plaintiff may have some residual claim under the new framework that was understandably not asserted previously , our practice is to vacate the judgment and remand for further proceedings in which the parties may , if necessary , amend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fully.
” The upshot is that the case will go back down to the lower court , which will examine some residual issues that the Supreme Court did not resolve , such as whether the plaintiffs “ may not be allowed to stop for coffee , gas , food , or restroom breaks on the way to their second homes or shooting ranges outside of the city.
” But , as a practical matter , the impact of the Court ’ s New York State Rifle decision is that it likely delays , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court ’ s ability to hand down any major pronouncements regarding the Second Amendment .
The Supreme Court has not had much to say about the Second Amendment since District of Columbia v. Heller ( 2008 ) , its first decision holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual ’ s right to bear arms .
Though Justice Anthony Kennedy joined the Supreme Court ’ s 5-4 majority in Heller , he also insisted upon “ some important changes ” to that opinion , which placed some significant limits on gun rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Supreme Court , and his replacement , Justice Brett Kavanaugh , has signaled that he would read the Second Amendment much more expansively than Kennedy .
It is likely , in other words , that gun rights groups can still look forward to a major victory .
It just won ’ t happen today .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York was a Supreme Court case that, at one point, seemed likely to significantly expand the Second Amendment and hand a massive victory to gun groups.
But on Monday morning, the Supreme Court handed down its opinion, and New York State Rifle ended in a whimper. The Court, by a 6-3 vote, determined that the case, at least as it stands now, is moot — meaning that there is no longer a live dispute between the two parties. And the justices sent the case back down to a lower court to determine whether there are any dormant issues in this lawsuit that could be revived.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch and largely joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.
As a practical matter, the Court’s decision means that it will avoid — for now — the question of whether to extend the Second Amendment.
The case, at least as it arrived at the Supreme Court, involved a very narrow issue.
New York City offers two kinds of licenses to gun owners. A “carry” license permits them to carry a handgun for “target practice, hunting, or self-defense.” The less permissive “premises” license, meanwhile, permits a gun owner to “have and possess in his dwelling” a handgun. Under a now-repealed rule, premise license holders were only allowed to bring the gun out of their home for limited purposes, including to practice shooting at seven gun ranges.
The plaintiffs in New York State Rifle brought a narrow challenge to this framework. As a federal appeals court explained in an opinion upholding the city’s repealed rule, some of the plaintiffs “seek to transport their handguns to shooting ranges and competitions outside New York City.” One plaintiff also owns two homes, and he wants to be able to transport the same gun between those two homes.
After the Supreme Court agreed to hear this case, New York State enacted a law permitting people with premises licenses to do the very things these plaintiffs said they wished to do: bring their guns to shooting ranges and competitions outside the city and transport a gun between two homes.
As a general rule, there must be a live dispute between two parties for a federal lawsuit to continue. So if the plaintiffs seek the right to do X, and the defendant is now legally required to allow the plaintiffs to do X, the case is considered “moot” and it must be dismissed.
The Supreme Court’s opinion in New York State Rifle, however, does not go quite so far as to dismiss the case in its entirety. “Our ordinary practice in disposing of a case that has become moot on appeal is to vacate the judgment with directions to dismiss,” the Court explains. “However, in instances where the mootness is attributable to a change in the legal framework governing the case, and where the plaintiff may have some residual claim under the new framework that was understandably not asserted previously, our practice is to vacate the judgment and remand for further proceedings in which the parties may, if necessary, amend their pleadings or develop the record more fully.”
The upshot is that the case will go back down to the lower court, which will examine some residual issues that the Supreme Court did not resolve, such as whether the plaintiffs “may not be allowed to stop for coffee, gas, food, or restroom breaks on the way to their second homes or shooting ranges outside of the city.” But, as a practical matter, the impact of the Court’s New York State Rifle decision is that it likely delays, until at least next year, the Supreme Court’s ability to hand down any major pronouncements regarding the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court has not had much to say about the Second Amendment since District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), its first decision holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to bear arms. Though Justice Anthony Kennedy joined the Supreme Court’s 5-4 majority in Heller, he also insisted upon “some important changes” to that opinion, which placed some significant limits on gun rights.
But Kennedy is no longer on the Supreme Court, and his replacement, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, has signaled that he would read the Second Amendment much more expansively than Kennedy.
It is likely, in other words, that gun rights groups can still look forward to a major victory. It just won’t happen today.