Monthly Archives: September 2020

Ill confess: There was a time when I would have considered the question facing Republicans a no-brainer. Of course they should seize this opportunity to replace the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a conservative. Moving the courts especially the Supreme Court rightward has been a conservative lodestar for generations. It remains one of the last tenets of pre-Trump conservatism that still largely unites the right.

In fairness, the conservatives who take these matters seriously would say the issue isnt so much moving the courts rightward as it is restoring the courts to their proper role. They we believe the primary reason these fights have become so ugly is that the judiciary has taken upon itself legislative functions it does not have. (This is why even pro-choice conservatives, and even pro-choice liberals like Ginsburg, believe Roe v. Wade was deeply flawed.) When Supreme Court justices do the job of politicians, it shouldnt be a surprise that confirmation battles resemble political campaigns.

One of the benefits of this high-stakes moment is that many conservatives have shelved the old arguments about Senate precedents and hypocrisy and stated the matter clearly.

In reality, there are only two rules, both set forth in the Constitution, writes National Reviews Andrew McCarthy. A president, for as long as he or she is president, has the power to nominate a person to fill a Supreme Court seat; and that nominee can fill the seat only with the advice and consent of the Senate. Thats it. Everything else is posturing. Everything else is politics.

As is often the case, McCarthy is right.

But this argument is also why Im going wobbly. One of the reasons we are where we are is that then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid took this position when he invoked the nuclear option in 2013 i.e., lifted the filibuster for appellate judges. Mitch McConnell, the minority leader at the time, warned that doing so would invite a response in kind. In 2017, now-Majority Leader McConnell was true to his word. He lifted the filibuster on Supreme Court nominees.

In other words, what happens when both parties embrace the doctrine of do whatever you can get away with?

Even before Justice Ginsburgs demise, Democratic support was building not just for packing the Supreme Court by increasing the number of justices (which Ginsburg opposed), but also for Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rican statehood and the abolition of the legislative filibuster. Now, Democrats are all but vowing to go through with expanding the court in response to a rushed replacement for Ginsburg.

What will be the GOPs argument against such schemes?

What some now dismiss as politics and posturing are actually important considerations that honor the conservative distinction between can and should and fall under such antiquated notions as statesmanship, prudence, legitimacy, consistency and precedent. These concepts put maintaining the long-term health of our institutions above the demands of the moment.

Take Sen. Lindsey Graham, who promised in 2016 that if an opening were to come in the last year of President Trumps term, a nominee would not be considered until after the election. By going back on that promise in such spectacular fashion, Graham isnt merely debasing himself, hes also teaching people that nothing politicians say matters.

Moreover, merely on the level of realpolitik, abandoning all considerations other than what you can get away with amounts to preemptive disarmament for the wars to come. The pernicious logic of apocalyptic politics works on the assumption that the long term doesnt matter. But the long term always becomes now eventually.

This is why the Senate could have used more posturing and politics, not less. Republicans have the ability to fill Ginsburgs seat before the election or immediately after in a lame-duck session. Thats a huge bargaining chip, and given that the GOPs Senate majority is so slim, its a chip that could have been traded by even a handful of Republican senators.

A few Republicans could have agreed to postpone the process until after the election in exchange for a few Democrats agreeing never to vote for a court-packing scheme, giving voters some buy-in for whatever happens next. If no Democrats agreed, then their issue is really with the system, and Republicans would have been free to vote for Trumps pick, even in a lame-duck session. Im using the past tense, because on Tuesday morning, McConnell collected enough GOP votes to proceed with a fast-tracked process that will surely invite tit-for-tat reprisals down the road.

I had high hopes such a deal could work. I was naive. After all, such a bargain required politicians to trust other politicians to keep their word and stand up to the bases of their own parties for the long-term good of the country. I should have realized everyone is too out of practice with that sort of thing.

Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.

Read more here:

Deal on court vacancy would make sense but will never happen | Jonah Goldberg - News-Herald.com

JASON CONNOLLYGetty Images

On September 23, a grand jury moved to indict only one officer involved in the killing of Breonna Taylor, who was asleep in her own home when police barged in to carry out a botched raid. Sgt. Brett Hankison was charged with "wanton endangerment" because some of the 10 shots he fired during the deadly encounter ended up in a neighboring apartment. He wasn't actually charged with anything directly related to Taylor's death and faces a maximum of five years in prison. No criminal charges were brought against officer Myles Cosgrove and Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly.

After a summer defined by loss and protests for Black Lives Matter, this indictment is understandably disappointing to so many. Sadly, it's not at all surprising. As defeating as this is, it's important to press on and continue to fight for Black Lives and demand justice for Taylor. We must. If you're thinking, "well, what now?" here are some actionable steps you can take:

As the Louisville chapter of Black Lives Matter noted, "There isnt a verdict in the world that will remove white supremacy from #louisvillethats up to us as a community." Allies especially white allies who benefit from systemic racism and their privilegecan help by donating and paying reparations so that Black families in Louisville can "have the resources they need to heal and survive in the midst of this ongoing nightmare."

This content is imported from Instagram. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Donate here, and continue to contribute to national organizations like the National Action Network, the NAACP, Equal Justice Initiative, Colin Kaepernicks Know Your Rights Camp, and Unicorn Riot.

You can also direct funds to the official GoFundMe that Taylor's family set up. Donations to that link will go toward advocating for police reform, various charities, women who want to start their own businesses, and scholarships for people who want to become emergency medical technicians and registered nurses.

Ahead of the grand jury decision, the city of Louisville imposed a curfew and declared a state of emergency, which could mean a bigger police presence at protests. It's so important to support the protestors who are brave enough to go out and take a stand in the coming days. As was the case when the Black Lives Matter protests gained steam earlier this summer, make sure you donate to national and local bail funds to ensure that those who are arrested for protesting and exercising their constitutional rights won't fall victim to the predatory bail system and legal fees.

Brett CarlsenGetty Images

Consider donating to The Louisville Community Bail Fund, The Bail Project National Revolving Bail Fund, LGBTQ Fund, Emergency Release Fund, and Trans Justice Funding Project.

Seriously, this isn't just a clich. No, voting won't automatically end police brutality or make systemic racism go away, but here's why it matters: When you vote for people who, for example, support your stance on police abolition or reform, they can help introduce legislation that has the ability to impact our communities. (The Minneapolis City Council recently submitted a proposal to disband the city's police department, for example.)

Plus, state positions like the Kentucky Attorney General are elected. Mind you, the current AG, Daniel Cameron, is up for re-election in 2024 and is the same guy who said the officers were "justified in their use of force" against Breonna Taylor and her boyfriend. And Cameron is on Donald Trump's short list to replace Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, so keep that in mind when it's time to vote.

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

This might sound like a broken record at this point, but it bears repeating: Take care of yourself first and foremost. It's been a centuries-long journey to get to where we are today, and there's still so much more that needs to be done to achieve true equality and justice for slain Black people like Taylor. But you can't be of service to anyone else if you're not looking after your mental, physical, or emotional health. (For mental health resources for Black women, check out this guide.) If you need time, rest. Then, come back stronger and ready to work.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

View post:

Here's How to Continue to Demand Justice for Breonna Taylor After the Grand Jury Indictment - Cosmopolitan.com

Daniel Woolf has been in his current role as Senior Policy Adviser for Infrastructure and Energy at the CBI since January 2018. Last year, in coordinating the CBIs response to the governments Infrastructure Finance Review, Woolf and his colleagues outlined the barriers to businesses investing in and financing UK infrastructure. At the time, those barriers included political uncertainty, the perception of politicised regulators, negative procurement practices, government handling of risk transfer, the lack of a championed infrastructure finance delivery model and fragmented governance structures.

While collating the CBIs response to the government consultation, Woolf produced recommendations to address these challenges, and this year he has spent a great deal of time producing a new CBI report on Infrastructure Finance titled, Investing in infrastructure, published in early September.

This year has been challenging for the industry, Woolf says: It has been a very turbulent time and the infrastructure sector has been hit really hard by COVID-19. Members have told us about quite a few projects that have been delayed, with the construction sector in particular faced with real difficulties including whether to stay open and how to continue to operate safely. Members tell us that while around 90 per cent of sites have reopened, they are in many cases still making a loss due to adaptations they have had to make to ways of working.

He adds: Our members are consistently positive about the relationship with the public sector, with Highways England, for example, continuing with meaningful upgrade work. The notice to proceed that was recently issued on HS2 has also started to inject some much-needed cashflow into the supply chain.

Woolf says that prior to COVID-19, it was clearly important to the government to encourage private investment into UK infrastructure, which led to the Treasury and Infrastructure and Projects Authoritys consultation process about attracting private money into the sector. But we are still waiting for the publication of the governments response to that consultation, and that should be the priority now. It is our view that the pandemic has served as a really important moment in highlighting how important the private sector is to the governments aim of delivering the infrastructure that the country needs.

In March 2020, the government made its historic pledge of 640 billion to build UK infrastructure, which was a huge commitment. Since then, the government has had to spend billions to keep the economy afloat, says Woolf, so those commitments have clearly become more challenging as a result. I am increasingly of the view that the private sectors role is more important than ever.

The CBI does not see any evidence of a drop-off in the private sectors appetite to invest into infrastructure, so the government must now focus on facilitating that investment. It is our view that to increase private investment into UK infrastructure the government should focus on an attractive investment environment starting with creating a stable and enabling regulatory regime, says Woolf.

That means retaining the key regulatory principles that have facilitated the swathes of investment into the regulated utilities over the past 30 years, including evidence-based decision-making and keeping at arms length from short-term political considerations. It also means making decisions subject to a proportionate but robust appeals regime.

Other barriers that continue to put off private investment include an overly complex and fragmented governance regime, and the lack of clarity on finance delivery models. Woolf says, At the end of 2018, following the abolition of PFI and PF2 contracts, there was an expectation from our members that a new delivery model would be championed or proposed, and that didnt happen. That essentially signalled to the private sector to banks and investors that the UK government, at that time, was not really serious about attracting private finance into infrastructure.

He says CBI members are now keen for a clear departure from the notion that you can have a one-size-fits-all model: We would rather see the government outline, as part of the publication of the national infrastructure and construction pipeline, a series of models that they would permit for different sectors and different projects, he says.

The CBI also feels that the government should now consider setting up an infrastructure bank, similar in function to the British Business Bank, to plug the gap in funding lost by the conclusion of the UKs involvement with the European Infrastructure Bank. Plans for such a bank are rumoured to be in place.

We think a British infrastructure bank could play a similar role to the Canadian Infrastructure Bank, says Woolf, which allows the Canadian government to explore projects that would otherwise be difficult to bring to market. In Canada there is sufficient liquidity to finance many of their planned infrastructure projects, so there was a fear that the bank would crowd out private finance. But, our members have told us that it assists the market as a vehicle to present innovative and unsolicited proposals, to help manage risks that the private sector cannot accept, and to provide competitive financing when a project is too large for the market.

Such a model could serve to bridge the gap between the public and private sector on complex projects that require innovative solutions, he argues.

In the UK, the appetite from the private sector to invest in infrastructure has only grown with the advent of COVID-19, while the governments need for private capital to deliver its objectives is also clear. Woolf hopes Whitehalls response to last years consultation will soon start to unlock the standstill.

Read the original post:

In the second interview of the series, Daniel Woolf of CBI shares his recommendations on addressing the challenges of investing in infrastructure -...

by Xing Hey

Many years ago, I sat dejected as a judge sentenced me to life in prison for crimes committed as a 15 year old. At the time, I felt as if the world was falling away and I was hanging on without a parachute or a place for a soft landing. The arms of somebody that would catch and hold me couldnt be found. I never felt so alone as I did in that moment. Aside from three random strangers, the packed courtroom on that day was there to encourage the punishment of a criminalized teenage me. When the punishment was officially announced, the satisfaction of the audience in that room was eerie. I still feel the chills from that day years ago today.

On a grey overcast Thursday in a Seattle Courthouse on August 6, 2020, King County Superior Court Judge ODonnell, sentenced James and Jerome Taafulisia to 40 years in prison for crimes they committed when they were 16 and 17. As I had once been a teenager given such a sentence, as an adult I felt helpless and heartbroken upon hearing the punishment handed down to James and Jerome. The feelings when being told you are going to spend the rest of your life in prison as a teenager are indescribable, but those feelings came rushing back as I heard the judge attempt to justify sending James and Jerome to languish in prison for a lifetime. I sympathized with how they were feeling after being told that they were no longer fit to be a part of society.

Although James and Jerome have put on a tough facade to survive the trauma of abuse and neglect throughout childhood, on that day I witnessed emotions from them for the first time. James burst into tears, while Jerome burst into an original song declaring his unconditional love for his brothers. Despite the indisputable tragedy of the lives of these two young people, Judge ODonnell sentenced them to prison for a lifetime for mistakes and choices they made as traumatized youth.

Everyone in the courtroom grieved for James and Jerome that day. Everyone, it seemed, except the judge, prosecutors, and maybe even the lawyers defending them. For these agents of the system it appeared to be business as usual which, in this current moment in history, is the biggest tragedy. They simply smiled and shook hands, as if the totality of the situation was a normal function of the system. At the end of the day, they got to go home to children and families, while the systems victims, including families and friends of Jeannine Zapata, James Tran, as well as James, Jerome, Joseph (the youngest brother accused in this incident) and others, will continue to grieve the lives lost and live with the harms which the system ultimately caused. Every single individual impacted by the tragedy on January 26, 2016 in the homeless encampment known as the Jungle, will live with scars or resolution of some sort, but will never actually be healed by the remedy prescribed by the state.

Sadly this is the typical narrative in the history of law and justice in the United States of America where children, BIPOC community members, and houseless folx disproportionately make up the population of those oppressed, criminalized, and neglected by the state. For James, Jerome, and Joseph, the Washington State system of Child Protective Services (CPS), had been their legal guardian since they were toddlers. With no accountability, this state institution failed to provide them with the safety and protection that all children deserve. Yet the remedy imposed by the state for children they helped traumatize and forced into homelessness, was to punish them in the form of incarceration.

So it shouldnt surprise us when harm occurs in our communities, when our children are hurting and crying, their pain is customarily met with indignation rather than empathic understanding. The cries of our children sound different to those tasked with upholding the system. Just like us, our children are dangerous to them, deserving of criminalization and punishment. No matter what personal testimony or scientific evidence is put in front of them about the effects of childhood trauma and compromised brain development, our childrens behaviors and actions are criminalized and punished. Instead of treatment and restorative remedies, they increase the structure and capacity of the criminal legal system to punish us by investing in more policing, more prosecutors, more jails, and more prisons.

Accordingly, those responsible for creating and maintaining the legal system have always found a way, reformed a way, to lock us up and throw away the key. Time and again, throughout the history of this criminal justice system, they have found a way to kill us, while convincing us that they will reform the systems that are killing us. However, whether in prison or on the streets, we keep dying. We just keep on dying and they keep on convincing us we will be okay. They often dupe us with progressive narratives and strategies then push forward proposals and legislation that supposedly will fix the problem of our deaths by this system.

A reformist agenda is when a judge in the traditional criminal system of justice can attempt to convince us that sentencing James and Jerome to only 40 years was doing them a favor, stating that the time they will spend in the state system of corrections will give them a better opportunity to change themselves; ironically an opportunity to change themselves in a system that has never been kind to them, an opportunity they have never been given while free in society.

Reform of the criminal legal system has been shown not to work for us. Progressive promises to close down the youth jail within 5 years, Miranda Rights ordinances with young people, auto-decline legislation, zero youth detention, and Miller v. Alabama only matter on the surface if the system is going to continue to criminalize the traumas of our children. The truth is, if they cant put our children in youth jails, they will find a way to put them in adult prisons. They will always find a way. Reform is a strategy that will make us forget and be convinced. Reform results in a policy where King County Superior Court Judge Sean ODonnell, King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg, and King County Deputy Prosecutor Maria Barbosa, after the overwhelming evidence of childhood trauma presented, could make an argument that a 40-year prison sentence for James and Jerome is justice in light of the sentence they could have given. In good conscience, they actually believed that such a sentence would be in James, Jeromes, and societys best interest.

Unfortunately, though today we grieve the lives lost to the brutality of the police and the criminal justice system, tomorrow we will forget. While James and Jerome are sitting at Green Hill School pondering how to survive a 40-year prison sentence and all the additional traumas that come with it, we will go on with our lives. Months or years from now, we will forget about James and Jerome, as we have forgotten about the multitudes of young BIPOC men and women from our communities sentenced to die in prison. As we forget, more tragedies of state-sanctioned violence by the system will continue to happen to the young people of our communities.

As with James, Jerome, myself and many others, this system is working exactly the way it was built to work. My story, James and Jeromes story, is not unique when it comes to law and justice in America. There is no justice in this system for us. Our cries dont matter to them. Never have. The oppression of BIPOC bodies continues to maintain white Americas status quo.

Therefore, if we truly care about BIPOC bodies broken by the system, we must imagine a world where the systems that cause harm to individuals with those identities do not exist. We have to educate ourselves and our surroundings about the history of Black, Brown, and Indigenous liberation, and understand how an abolitionist imagination is key in that liberation. If Black lives truly mattered to us, then a world of abolition, where a carceral system of policing and prisons is not our default solution to social problems, should matter as well.

Imagine instead of criminalization and punishment, the likes of James, Jerome and I would have been provided the support and resources we needed to thrive as young people. Instead of further marginalization, imagine when I was suspended from school, dropped out of the 7th grade, or was a runaway, I was provided preventative support and resources I needed. Instead of further criminalization, imagine when James, Jerome and Joseph, were homeless teengaers doing what was neccesary to survive on the streets, they were given the preventative support and resources they needed. How might things have been different if we had caring and nurturing adults to intervene at some point, if community-based youth organizations had the resources to reach out to us? Part of an abolitionists imagination is the belief that we have the ability and brilliance to take care of each other, that we can keep us safe, without the complicity of the state. However, if we cannot begin to have such an imagination, how can we possibly protect our children from the harms the state can do to them?

Our accountability to the likes of James and Jerome is to not forget about them. Our accountability is in our willingness to hold such a reformist system accountable by not being easily convinced of the progressive promises and policies that end up killing us and our children.

We are in September now. Summer is over. After months of protest and civil unrest, we are still here: Jacob Blake, Dijon Kizzee, and thirteen-year-olds being charged as adults by a so-called progressive King County Prosecutors Office, not to mention countless other unnamed BIPOC community members dying from the injustices of this system. There is no time better than now that we come together and imagine a new way to restore humanity into our youth and wholeness to our communities. Abolition must be an initiative and policy now. The more we wait, the more we will continue to grieve the lives of our community members lost to this system.

Connect with James and Jerome:

James Taafulisia 848290Green Hill School375 SW 11 StreetChehalis, WA 98532

Jerome Taafulisia 851094Green Hill School375 SW 11 StreetChehalis, WA 98532

Connect with our abolition work:

http://www.Facebook.com/FreeThemAllWA/

http://www.Facebook.com/covid19mutualaid/

Xing Hey is a community organizer, youth advocate, educator, student, abolitionist and a member of APICAG (Asian Pacific Islander Cultural Awareness Group). Hes called Tacoma/Seattle home his entire life.

Featured image is attributed to Dennis Sylvester and belongs to the Public Domain under a CCO 1.0 Public Domain Dedication.

Like Loading...

Read more:

OPINION: The Limits of ReformNo Justice for James and Jerome Taafulisia - southseattleemerald.com