JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
The Candidacies of Robert Kennedy Jr and Cornell West
Brief #103 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by William Borque
Kennedy’s views are largely conspiratorial, with many arguing that he is running for President simply to attempt relevance.
Examining Competitive US House Races in the West
Brief #102 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by Ian Milden
The small size of the Republican majority leaves Democrats with a path to re-take the House majority.
The Nightmare Started at 7 in the Morning
Brief #95 – Foreign Policy Brief
by Yelena Korshunov
The siblings were among the more than 150 kidnapped in Gaza in recent days. Ilan and Mirit Regev, the parents of Itai and Mia, recreate the moments of horror…
The Medium is the Manipulation, Part 2: Detecting the AI in Campaign Advertising
Brief #99 – Technology Policy Brief
by Steve Piazza
Campaign ads are not in and of themselves policy, but their message reflects a candidate’s or party’s policy of sorts, namely on how far it is willing to go to get what it wants.
The Hamas October 7th Terrorist Incursion Into Israel: A Survivor’s Account
Brief #94 – Foreign Policy Brief
by Ester Avisror
Young women and men faced the raw alarm of death, as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorists arrived in vans and motorcycles, firing bullets which consumed over 250 people in unending horror.
DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM SUGGESTIONS PART 3: IMMIGRATION
OF ED
U.S. Resist News
US immigration policy is in disarray. The number of immigrants crossing our border…
Democrats Vie to for a Vacant Senate Seat
Brief #101 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by William Borque
The question that many Californians are asking is if Butler will enter the race.
The Week That Was: Global News In Review
Brief #93 – Foreign Policy Brief
by Ibrahim Castro
The militant group Hamas launched a surprise assault inside Israeli territory this past weekend that has so far killed over 900 people and became the deadliest attack in Israel’s history.
A Clash of Titans: FTC Chair Lina Kahn Takes on Amazon
Brief #98 – Technology Policy Brief
by Mindy Spatt
As a law student Lina Kahn authored a widely respected critique of Amazon’s market power. Now that she’s chair of the Federal Trade Commission will she be able to do something about it?
X Marks the Spot as Elon Musk Makes More Enemies
X Marks the Spot as Elon Musk Makes More Enemies
Technology Policy Brief #94 | By: Mindy Spatt | August 3, 2023
Photo taken from: rappler.com
__________________________________
Elon Musk’s neighbors in San Francisco are up in arms about X, and he takes on a formidable litigator with a lawsuit against the Center for Countering Digital Hate.
Analysis
Elon Musk’s rebranding of Twitter as X landed with a thud here in San Francisco, where he marked the event by installing an enormous glowing X on his mid-Market Street headquarters. Complaints poured in to the San Francisco Department of Building Inspections saying that the sign was unsafe and a nuisance, with flashing lights that interfered with neighbors’ sleep. It was quickly removed. Despite that, the Building Department announced that Musk would still have to pay fees for the installation and removal of the sign, both of which were unpermitted.
The move was perhaps part of a pissing match with Facebook, renamed with the shorter, punchier Meta, and its owner Mark Zuckerberg, who launched a new social media site Threads in a direct challenge to Twitter. Threads racked up over 100 million followers in its first week, and most industry analysts see it as a genuine threat to Twitter’s dominance.
Musk is also feeling challenged by a nonprofit advocacy organization that seeks to hold social media companies like X accountable for their impacts “by highlighting their failures, educating the public, and advocating action from other platforms and governments to protect our communities.”
On Monday July 30 X filed suit against the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) in federal court. X is accusing the CCDH of using data that it didn’t legally possess to “falsely claim it had statistical support showing the platform is overwhelmed with harmful content.”
Since Musk took over Twitter in late 2022, the CCDH has been studying and publishing research on what they say is a rise in hate speech, disinformation and incitement to harm on Twitter, a view that is certainly shared by other critics of the platform.
In a June 2023 report the Center said Twitter routinely failed to act on hate speech by deleting tweets or users’ accounts, citing these examples:
“The black culture has done more damage [than] the Klan ever did”
“The Jewish Mafia wants to replace us all with brown people”
“Trannies are pedophiles”
“Diversity is a codeword for White Genocide”
“Hitler was right”, accompanied by a montage of the former dictator
Black people belong “locked in cages at the zoo”
LGBTQ+ rights activists need “IRON IN THEIR DIET. Preferably from a #AFiringSquad”
In a letter threatening suit on June 20, X cited this report in accusing
the CCDH of “making inflammatory, outrageous, and false or misleading assertions about Twitter and its operations…” Although the suit alleges misappropriation of data, the letter seems to complain of its’ absence, claiming that CCDH labeled its analysis of the content as research, “despite failing to conduct (or even attempt) anything resembling the rigorous design process, analytical procedures or peer review that a reasonable person would expect to accompany research product …”
In a response, the Center’s lawyers termed the letter “ridiculous,” and noted that rather than trying to correct the problem the company was instead relying on intimidation and threats to silence critics. They demanded that X Corp “take immediate steps to preserve all documents and other information (including any and all text messages to or from Mr. Musk…) concerning disinformation and hate speech on Twitter….”
The suit could be an arrogant overstep by Musk. For one thing, it is bringing more attention to the CCDH’s message. For another, the Center is represented by Roberta Kaplan, whose recent work on behalf of E. Jean Carroll resulted in a $5 million verdict against Donald Trump. Her many other accomplishments include defeating the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and a $26 million verdict against the white supremacists and neo-Nazis who conspired to commit racially-motivated violence in Charlottesville in 2017. She may prove a far more formidable adversary than Zuckerberg.
Engagement Resources
Toxic Twitter: How Twitter Makes Millions from Anti-LGBTQ+ Rhetoric by the Center for Countering Digital Hate, March 28, 2023CCDH, https://counterhate.com/research/toxic-twitter-anti-lgbtq/
Path for Democrats to Regain the House Runs Through New York
Path for Democrats to Regain the House Runs Through New York
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #88 | By: Ian Milden | August 3, 2023
Photo taken from: time.com
__________________________________
Democrats lost their majority in the House of Representatives in the 2022 mid-term elections. However, the small size of the Republican majority leaves Democrats with a path to re-take the House majority. This Brief will take an early look at some of the races in New York state, which has enough competitive races to affect the control of the House majority.
Analysis
Republicans shocked many pundits by only winning a four seat majority in the House of Representatives during the midterm elections. While Democrats performed well nationally in 2022, New York Democrats did not have a great performance statewide in 2022.
Incumbent Governor Kathy Hochul (D-NY) won her race by less than six percentage points. The closer than expected margin may have hurt Democrats chances to hold win in a few close races. Republicans won in New York’s 22nd District and 17th district by less than 3,000 votes. These districts will likely be targets for Democrats again this year. Mike Lawler flipped the 17th District by defeating former DCCC chairman Sean Patrick Maloney and Brandon Williams won the open seat vacated by John Katko (R-NY). The 22nd district is in upstate New York while the 17th district is in southern New York.
Next to the 22nd district in New York is the 19th district. The 19th district is a swing district in the Hudson Valley. Marc Molinaro (R-NY) won the open seat in 2022, which was open due to redistricting. Antonio Delgado (D-NY) won a version of this seat in 2018 and was re-elected in 2020, but he vacated the seat to become the lieutenant governor of New York. Pat Ryan (D-NY) won a special election in 2022 under the old district lines, but the redistricting process moved him to the 18th district where he now represents in Congress. Congressman Ryan remains in a competitive district and House Republicans have indicated that they will try to win his seat this fall.
There are also some competitive seats based in Long Island that Democrats will target. The third district has already gotten a ton of attention from both parties due to the scandals and subsequent indictment of newly-elected incumbent George Santos. The seat was recently held by Tom Suozzi (D-NY) who vacated the seat in 2022 to run for Governor, so it is a seat where Democrats have a recent history of winning. Santos may not be a participant in the General Election since New York Republicans are looking for ways to push him out of Congress, and Santos’ various legal problems could also complicate his ability to remain in Congress. Santos’ first quarter FEC report shows his campaign lost money due to refund requests, which suggests his reelection campaign is politically unviable. Federal prosecutors have moved rather quickly with his criminal case, so he is likely to face trial or strike a plea deal before the midterm elections.
In addition to George Santos’ seat, Democrats should also target the neighboring fourth district, where Anthony D’Esposito (R-NY) won a seat that was vacated by Kathleen Rice (D-NY). This area of Long Island has a history of voting for Democrats in recent decades at the Congressional and Presidential level. Democrats could also target the first and second districts, which are also based on Long Island, but these districts lean more towards Republicans and Democrats have not had success there recently.
One additional variable that could help Democrats gain seats is a mid-decade redistricting. This is a possibility due to a technicality in the law, and the process for drawing maps for the 2022 elections. The Independent Redistricting Commission did not take a second attempt to draw new maps, which resulted in a court-appointed special master drawing the maps after a court ruling. Democrats are arguing that the maps should be redrawn because the process determined by the law was not followed.
While New York State provides the exact number of competitive districts held by Republicans that Democrats need to win in order to gain control of the House majority, it would be a surprise if Democrats successfully flipped all five of these districts. In addition, Democrats will likely need to win additional seats outside of New York in order to get the majority since there are likely to be losses elsewhere. These Congressional Districts will be ones to keep an eye on as Democrats recruit candidates and start raising money for the 2024 general election.
Engagement Resources
DCCC Website, Official Campaign Arm of House Democrats, https://dccc.org/
The Week That Was: Global News In Review
The Week That Was: Global News In Review
Foreign Policy Brief #86 | By: Ibrahim Castro | August 3, 2023
Photo taken from: fox4news.com
__________________________________
Coup in Niger
Last week Niger’s democratically elected President Mohamed Bazoum was overthrown by the country’s military leaders. The leaders of the coup have warned against any armed intervention in the country. This comes as West African leaders are set to gather for an emergency summit to discuss how to restore constitutional order to Niger. As the largest country in West Africa, it’s an important country for the region. Politically, it was seen as an example of relative democratic stability, as its neighbors in the region, Mali and Burkina Faso, have already succumbed to military coups. Strategically for the West, it hosts French and US military bases as a key partner in the fight against armed insurgents in the Sahel region. Economically, Niger is one of the poorest countries in the world, receiving close to $2 billion a year in official development assistance, but it is rich in raw materials like uranium, producing 7% of all global supplies. The US has called for president Bazoum’s immediate release. Meanwhile the African Union, the West African regional bloc Ecowas, the EU and the UN have all spoken out against the coup.
Floating border wall
Last week the United States Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the state of Texas, calling for the removal of a floating border barrier that has raised territorial and humanitarian concerns. Mexico filed a complaint with the US government earlier this month, accusing the structure of violating border treaties signed in 1944 and 1970. The razor-wired floating border is one of the latest examples of extremist efforts by the Texas Republican governor to repel asylum seekers. The barrier is a part of Operation Lone Star, a Texas initiative launched in 2021 under Governor Abbott. It includes bussing and flying migrants and asylum seekers to predominantly Democratic cities, and deploying troops from the state National Guard and the Texas Department of Public Safety to guard the border. The number of irregular crossings from Mexico into the US has been on the decline since the ending of Title 42, a controversial COVID-era policy that allowed border officials to turn away asylum seekers without processing their claims. The floating border and other Texas policies for dealing with migrants have sparked human rights concerns, and asylum groups denounce the militarisation of the border and heavy-handed policies.
Russia writes off $23 billion debt for Africa
Russian President Vladimir Putin said last week, at the second ever Russia- Africa summit that his country has written off $23 billion of Debt for African countries. Russia also offered assistance to Africa in countering threats such as terrorism, piracy, and transnational crimes, saying it would continue to train personnel from African countries. Putin assured African leaders that Russian businesses have a lot to offer partners from Africa. Russia is now pushing harder to move closer to African nations as it looks for friends, allies, and markets to help support it against Western states opposed to its aggression in Ukraine. Moscow was a crucial player in Africa in the Soviet era, but its influence has waned heavily over the past few decades. Putin is trying to rekindle that influence and win over the countries in the global south to back him in an ever increasing polarized world.
Russian Bombing Can’t Break the Spirit of the Citizens of Odessa
Russian Bombing Can’t Break the Spirit of the Citizens of Odessa
Foreign Policy Brief #85 | By: Yelena Korshunov | August 1, 2023
Photo taken from: Collage by author Yelena Korshunov, Transfiguration Cathedral in Odessa, Ukraine, before and after Russia’s shelling.
__________________________________
On the night of July 18th Raisa woke up from a terrible roar and heart-rending children’s screams. It seemed like their house was exploding and this is the end. This family was lucky enough to stay alive that night; just the deep crater from the explosion in front of their building and glass shards from broken windows became that night’s gift of “Russian peace”.
It was a quiet night when a massive shelling of Odessa began. The Russian side justified it as “retaliation strikes” for the explosion on the Crimean bridge. Night after night, Russian missiles not only damaged the infrastructure of the local port, but also destroyed many historical buildings and the Transfiguration Cathedral that was rebuilt in the last century after already being destroyed by the Soviet authority in 1936. Many people died and were injured, including children.
The Russian army launched its attacks immediately after their withdrawal from a UN-brokered grain agreement with Ukraine, which implied guarantees for the safe export of grain from the port of Odessa. On Sunday, July 16, the last vessel with Ukrainian grain left the port, and two days later Russia carried out a large-scale mortal shelling. The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation stated that the targets of the “precision weapons” were some facilities where “terrorists” prepared acts against the Russian Federation, fuel storage facilities, and a ship repair plant that produces boats which “terrorists” would use for their acts. In fact, the beautiful small port temple, a hotel, a restaurant, and private houses were the target of Russia’s missiles. Next night heavy shelling ruined the grain and oil terminals and other port infrastructure. According to the Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine, 60 tons of grain were destroyed, which, as President Volodymyr Zelensky later clarified, the country was going to send to China. The shelling also left 3,000 people without electricity that night.
On the night of July 23, Russia resumed strikes. This attack was the most destructive yet since the beginning of the war. Russian missiles hit the port infrastructure again and destroyed six residential apartment buildings. The historical center of Odessa was also damaged. Among Russia’s targets were 29 architectural monuments under the protection of UNESCO. These buildings survived the violent destructive revolution of 1917 and World War II, but they apparently bothered the Kremlin too much. The Chinese consulate in Odessa also suffered from that attack. On July 29th a UNESCO mission arrived in Odessa to assess damage.
In the days after the night horror Odessa residents have been leaving their homes and shelters to help the municipal services with the elimination of the shelling’s ramifications. People go out to sort out the rubble, clean streets, and remove debris from the areas of the tragedy.
After massive attacks on the center of Odessa, the mayor of the city, Gennady Trukhanov, addressed the citizens of Russia in Russian language: ”If you knew how Odessa hates you. Not only hates, but also despises. You are fighting with little children and with churches. Your rockets fly even to cemeteries. During this war, you were called differently: rashists, orcs, scum, nits. But it’s still sweet. You are just creatures without family and tribe, morality and values. And with no future. You don’t know us Odessans very well. You will not break us, but only anger us even more. The strength of our defenders, multiplied by the anger and pain of ordinary people, will be your death sentence.”
Carbon Taxes: Balancing Climate Change Mitigation with Sustainable Economic Growth
Navigating the Information Jungle: Social Media, Disinformation, and Political Polarization
Environmental Policy Brief #157 | By: Inijah Quadri | July 31, 2023
Photo taken from: internationaltaxreview.com
__________________________________
Addressing climate change is a pressing concern that demands comprehensive policy responses. Among various climate policies, carbon tax implementation has emerged as a pivotal tool for promoting a transition towards a greener economy. A carbon tax imposes a fee on the carbon content of fossil fuels, thus financially incentivizing businesses and individuals to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
While the carbon tax is perceived as a practical strategy for curbing emissions, it is a contentious policy area in the United States, where concerns about economic competitiveness, equity, and efficacy of the tax are prevalent. Potential repercussions on low-income households and certain industries are a particular source of debate. However, evidence from other nations and a few localized examples within the U.S. illustrate the viability of a carbon tax as a tool for climate action while maintaining economic growth.
Analysis
Studies suggest that carbon taxes can effectively reduce GHG emissions. Countries like British Columbia and Sweden have experienced significant emission reductions following carbon tax implementation, without inhibiting economic growth.
a. British Columbia, Canada: The province implemented a revenue-neutral carbon tax in 2008. Years later, per capita fossil fuel consumption decreased by over 15% in British Columbia relative to the rest of Canada, with minimal impact on overall economic performance.
b. Sweden: Implemented in 1991, Sweden’s carbon tax is one of the highest in the world. Despite this, Sweden’s economy has grown year upon year since the tax’s inception, challenging the belief that environmental regulations necessarily harm economic growth.
Closer to home, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) – a cooperative effort among the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states that implements a regional cap-and-trade program (a market cousin of a carbon tax) – has seen success in reducing emissions while generating economic benefits. However, for broader application across the U.S., concerns over economic and social implications require careful design of a national tax policy.
Another key U.S. initiative in carbon pricing is California’s Cap-and-Trade Program. This program sets a statewide limit on GHG emissions while permitting entities to buy and sell emission allowances. The program has contributed to California’s progress in reducing emissions and has generated billions in revenue for climate and clean energy programs.
Addressing equity issues is vital. Potential regressive impacts of a carbon tax can be offset through tax rebates or by directing revenue to fund social programs. The idea of a revenue-neutral approach, like that in British Columbia, where tax revenues are returned to citizens through other tax reductions, may be appealing.
Tackling climate change necessitates a comprehensive suite of policy measures, with a carbon tax potentially playing a significant role in the U.S. context. The implementation of such a tax demands ongoing refinement, transparency, and a focus on fairness to ensure that the tax burden is appropriately shared.
Engagement Resources
- Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition (https://www.carbonpricingleadership.org/): The CPLC supports and encourages successful carbon pricing implementation worldwide.
- Environmental Defense Fund (https://www.edf.org/): The EDF focuses on key environmental issues, including climate change and carbon pricing.
- Citizens’ Climate Lobby (https://citizensclimatelobby.org/): A grassroots organization advocating for national climate change policies, including carbon pricing.
- World Resources Institute (https://www.wri.org/): A global research organization turning ideas into action to preserve our natural resources.
- Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (https://www.c2es.org/): This center promotes robust policy and action to address energy and climate change challenges.
- Resources for the Future (https://www.rff.org/): An independent, nonprofit research institution in Washington, DC, focusing on environmental, energy, and natural resource issues.
Navigating the Information Jungle: Social Media, Disinformation, and Political Polarization
Navigating the Information Jungle: Social Media, Disinformation, and Political Polarization
Technology Policy Brief #93 | By: Inijah Quadri | July 31, 2023
Photo taken from: www.aa.com.tr
__________________________________
Social media has emerged as a pivotal platform for communication, entertainment, and information dissemination in the 21st century. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube command billions of users, profoundly influencing global culture, policy debates, and political discourse. While the rise of social media has undoubtedly democratized access to information, it has also become a fertile ground for disinformation and political polarization.
Disinformation—the deliberate creation and sharing of false information with the intent to deceive or mislead—is not just misinformation or rumors. It is an orchestrated campaign designed to propagate lies, distortions, and half-truths, ultimately impacting public opinion, aggravating political division, and undermining democratic processes.
Significant evidence points to the role of social media in propagating disinformation, with repercussions visible in landmark political events, such as the 2016 US Presidential Election and the Brexit referendum. A 2019 report from Oxford University’s Computational Propaganda Research Project disclosed organized social media manipulation in 70 countries, a substantial increase from 48 the previous year and 28 the year before that. The gravity of these findings suggests that unchecked disinformation can destabilize societies and impede democratic processes.
Analysis
Political polarization—intense divergence of political attitudes to ideological extremes—isn’t a novelty. However, social media has catalyzed and amplified its effects by creating echo chambers and filter bubbles, where algorithms curate content that aligns with a user’s existing beliefs and interests.
These algorithms are essentially complex computational procedures designed to present users with content that they would likely find engaging. By analyzing data like previous likes, shares, and time spent on different types of posts, they make educated guesses on what a user might want to see next. This, however, can often lead to the amplification of misinformation as controversial and sensational content tends to generate high engagement. This selective exposure to information bolsters cognitive biases, with a 2022 study demonstrating how these echo chambers can foster extremism by reinforcing and amplifying partisan views.
Disinformation thrives in these digitally-fueled environments. Its seeds are sown deep and spread rapidly within the echo chambers, often remaining unchecked or contested. The 2020 US Presidential Election stands as a stark testament to this, as false narratives about election fraud circulated widely on social media platforms despite the claims being thoroughly debunked by fact-checkers. The aftermath—an unprecedented attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021—laid bare the dangerous repercussions of this disinformation.
Addressing the role of social media in fanning the flames of disinformation and political polarization is a challenging task. Policymakers are navigating a tightrope between the need for information integrity and the preservation of freedom of speech. However, steps can be taken. Greater transparency from tech companies about their algorithms, stronger and more proactive fact-checking measures, education focused on media literacy, and potential regulation of social media platforms are strategies currently under consideration.
But the key is fostering a multidimensional approach that involves all stakeholders—governments, tech companies, civil society, and users—to ensure that the digital public square can support a vibrant, yet responsible, exchange of ideas. More specifically, stakeholders need to converge on the adoption of standards and guidance to address the spread of disinformation effectively.
As an example, the recent legislation proposed by Elizabeth Warren and Lindsey Graham can serve as a pivotal reference. This law attempts to introduce stricter rules for social media platforms in curbing the spread of misinformation, thereby holding them more accountable. As such, stakeholders must critically examine, discuss, and build upon such legislative efforts to achieve a more comprehensive and resilient approach against disinformation.
Engagement Resources
- Center for Humane Technology (https://www.humanetech.com/): Advocating for the redesign of technology to better align with human interests, focusing on the harmful effects of social media and disinformation.
- The Poynter Institute (https://www.poynter.org/): An international leader in journalism, promoting the responsible production and sharing of news, with significant resources on fact-checking and combating disinformation.
- Digital Forensic Research Lab (https://www.digitalsherlocks.org/): An entity dedicated to the study and exposure of disinformation and misinformation on social media, providing digital tools to discern truth in the digital age.
- The Media Manipulation Casebook (https://mediamanipulation.org/): A digital research platform combining theory, methods, and practice for mapping media manipulation and disinformation campaigns.
- First Draft (https://firstdraftnews.org/): A nonprofit that provides resources and training for journalists in the digital age, including a focus on verification and fact-checking to combat misinformation and disinformation.
- Stanford Internet Observatory (https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/io): The observatory conducts research on abuse in current information technologies, with a focus on social media and the integrity of information.
Why The Religious Liberty Argument Threatens Civil Rights And Anti – Discrimination Statutes
Why The Religious Liberty Argument Threatens Civil Rights And Anti – Discrimination Statutes
Civil Rights Policy Brief #210 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | July 28, 2023
Photo taken from: americanprogress.org
__________________________________
On June 30, 2023 the Supreme Court handed down its decision in the case 303 Creative, LLC v. Elenis. That case began when the owner of a graphic design business in Colorado considered expanding her business to include wedding website design. She had concerns, because of her religious beliefs and opposition to same – sex marriages, that she would be compelled to create a wedding website for a same – sex couple. The Supreme Court decided in a 6 – 3 decision based on free speech grounds that “The First Amendment prohibits Colorado from forcing a website designer to create expressive designs speaking messages with which the designer disagrees.”
In the aftermath of the decision, a number of notable incidents occurred indicating that the decision was being interpreted in an extreme manner. In July in Traverse City Michigan Christine Geiger, the owner of Studio 8 Hair Lab announced on Facebook “If a human identifies as anything other than man/woman, please seek services at a local pet groomer. You are not welcome at this salon. Period.” In subsequent interviews with the owner, she clarified that she was opposed to the TQ+ of the LGBQT+ acronym and claimed she had a right refuse service to those persons. The T stands for transgender persons and Q stands for those who identify as queer. The + is an all – encompassing symbol for those who identify as intersex, asexual, pansexual, two – spirit or omnisexual.
In Texas, McLennan County Justice of the Peace Dianne Hensley filed a lawsuit in 2019 after being warned by the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct for her refusal to perform same – sex marriages in the state. Her rationale is that she is being unfairly punished for her religious beliefs and opposition to same – sex marriages. Her case was subsequently dismissed after reaching a lower appeals court tribunal. But with the recent Supreme Court decision in 303 Creative, LLC v. Elenis, the Texas Supreme Court agreed to hear the case to consider whether her lawsuit should be revived. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Analysis
These two incidents and a number of other lower court cases illustrate the danger and hatred that LGBQT+ people face in the ongoing discrimination because of religious liberty debate. The 303 decision carved out a free speech exception but it was clear that the motivation behind the case was in using a person’s religious beliefs as justification to refuse to serve other persons in the marketplace because of their opposition to the lifestyle choice of the other persons.
But the danger and harm that appears to be emerging may not be just against the LGBQT+ community. The rationale of the 303 decision and the justification often put forth by those who are claiming that their religious liberty is being infringed is that they are being forced to do something against their religious beliefs. In the 303 case the reasoning was that the graphic designer was being forced to say words or express views in her own designs that went against her religious beliefs. In other cases, the rationale is that by providing a service or selling a product to a couple living their lifestyle choice means that the religious people endorse or support same sex marriage.
But now, legal scholars are wondering if this refusal to serve another person could be extended to matters outside LGBQT+ issues. In Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent in the 303 case, she listed numerous examples where a person might decide to refuse someone service because of their religious beliefs. She listed a photographer refusing to take professional head shots of a woman because he might not believe women should work outside the home. Or that a vendor could refuse service of any item or service to an interracial couple because of religious beliefs against people of different races mixing or even marrying. Anti – miscegenation laws were once justified on religious grounds with reasoning as ignorant as “because the Bible was against races mixing.” And during the 1960’s, a reliance on religious beliefs and religion was once used as the reason to refuse to support passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If the 303 case and its rationale becomes more accepted and widespread than it is likely that certain civil rights and anti – discrimination statutes can be nullified and given minimal effect if a person can simply claim religious liberty for any law they do not want to follow. This is a very dangerous road to be going down but that seems to be the effect that the 303 decision is having. Over one hundred and forty years ago in the 1879 Supreme Court case Reynolds v. United States the Court recognized this problem and Chief Justice Morrison Waite wrote
“Can a man excuse his [illegal] practices…because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances….”
It is unfortunate that today’s Supreme Court has failed to follow this legal principle, opting instead to give a preferred position to religious beliefs over the rule of law. No person should be deprived of their civil rights by a hairdresser or even a judge simply because of the religious beliefs of those people. Maybe one day the Supreme Court will revisit these discrimination in the name of religious liberty cases and re-adopt the legal principle from the Reynolds case, lest the LGBQT+ community and other vulnerable communities be deprived of the protections of civil rights and anti – discrimination statutes and their basic civil rights. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- National Constitution Center – analysis of the 303 decision and discussion about free speech, expressive conduct and discrimination.
- The First Amendment Encyclopedia – a history and explanation of the Supreme Court’s 1879 Reynolds v. United States decision.
This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact rodwood@email.com.
FDA Legalizes Nonprescription Birth Control, but Legal Challenges Await
FDA Legalizes Nonprescription Birth Control, but Legal Challenges Await
Health & Gender Policy Brief #81 | By: Geoffrey Small | July 28, 2023
Photo taken from: pink.pharmaintelligence.informa.com
__________________________________
On July 13th, the FDA approved nonprescription birth control pills for use in the United States. Opill, generically referred to as norgestrel, is a progestin-only oral contraceptive that will be available for purchase at drug stores, grocery stores, convenience stores, and online. Patrizia Cavazzoni, M.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, stated that the approval “marks the first time a nonprescription daily oral contraceptive will be an available option for millions of people in the United States.” HRA Pharma, recently acquired by Perrigo Company plc, applied for norgestrel to be switched to non-prescription after it met FDA requirements with studies that showed the drug can be “used by consumers safely and effectively, relying only on the nonprescription drug labeling without any assistance from a health care professional.” The approval is a significant victory for reproductive rights, as recent Supreme Court rulings have stripped U.S. citizens of universal access to abortions. However, experts are wary of the legal challenges that may follow the FDA approval. Exploring recent Supreme Court decisions may help the public understand the future of nonprescription birth control.
Policy Analysis
According to the FDA, “Almost half of the 6.1 million pregnancies in the U.S. each year are unintended. Unintended pregnancies have been linked to negative maternal and perinatal outcomes, including reduced likelihood of receiving early prenatal care and increased risk of preterm delivery, with associated adverse neonatal, developmental and child health outcomes.” Despite this data, reproductive rights have been under siege since the recent infamous Supreme Court ruling that dismantled Roe v. Wade and left the legality of abortion procedures to be determined by the states.
Many experts also point to the recent challenges of mifepristone, an abortion pill, that could set a precedent for nonprescription birth control. On April 21st, the Supreme Court blocked a lower court decision to ban the FDA-approved drug while lawsuits are challenging the agency’s recent sanctioning of ordering abortion medication online. The ruling doesn’t mean the decision is final. The justices left the decision to ban mifepristone in the hands of the 5th U.S. Court of Appeals. Justice Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Texas U.S. District Judge appointed by the Trump Administration, issued a national ban on April 7th arguing that the approval of the drug 23 years ago was not properly executed. However, Judge Thomas O. Rice in Washington issued a contrary ruling to expand the use of mifepristone minutes after Kacsmaryk’s ruling. Also, The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals partially limited Kacsmaryk’s decision, as the statute of limitations to challenge the approval passed long ago. Legal experts speculate that the mifepristone decision will almost certainly end back up in the Supreme Court during the next term, because the 5th Circuit still needs to inevitably rule on the lawsuits challenging the drug.
Lawsuits, backed by anti-reproductive rights groups, for the recent FDA-approval of nonprescription birth control are all but certain to make their way through the federal courts. The mifepristone legal battle is not over and may help determine legal precedents for over-the-counter drugs, like Opill. Organizations like the ACLU are challenging abortion abolitionist legal efforts in the United States. Donating to their organization can help protect reproductive rights from these challenges.
Engagement Resources
- https://www.aclu.org
The Ukraine Crisis Situation Update #25
The Ukraine Crisis Situation Update #25
Foreign Policy Brief #84 | By: Ibrahim Castro | July 27, 2023
Photo taken from: https://www.ft.com/
__________________________________
Drone strikes
Russian authorities have accused Ukraine of launching a drone attack on Moscow early Monday that saw one of the aircraft fall near the Russian Defense Ministry’s headquarters. This is another attack in what has become a series of drone attacks and bombings in the Russian capital since the beginning of the war. Russia later launched its sixth air attack on Ukraine’s capital this month, but all incoming drones were shot down and reports indicated no damage or casualties. The recent attack on Kyiv, came the day after Russia warned of “tough retaliatory measures” for the attempted drone strike in Moscow. Russian airstrikes also severely damaged dozens of Ukrainian architectural landmarks, including a historic Orthodox cathedral in the southern city of Odessa, sparking outrage and prompting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to vow retaliation.
Russia-Belarus-Poland
With the war in Ukraine came the strengthening of ties among some allies and increase in distrust among rival states. Russian President Vladimir Putin recently warned Poland that any attack on Belarus will be considered an attack on Russia, in a direct threat to the NATO ally. Putin made such threats in response to Warsaw’s decision this week to station military units to the east of the country, closer to the Belarusian border. Poland stationed troops closer to its border in response to thousands of Wagner mercenary troops holding military exercises with Belarusian troops near the Polish border. Putin though, claimed, “that Poland appeared to have interests in retaking eastern territories it lost to former Soviet Union leader Joseph Stalin, including “a good chunk of Ukraine … to take back the historic lands… it’s well known that they dream of Belarusian lands as well.” Adding that Moscow would treat any aggression against Belarus with all means at its disposal.
Russia-Ukraine grain deal
Russia announced last week that it was suspending its participation in a deal that allowed the export of Ukrainian grain to the rest of the world, once again raising fears over global food supplies and upending a rare diplomatic breakthrough since Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. Wheat prices have risen more than 14% since last week, and corn prices are up more than 10%. Russia has for some time complained that it is being prevented from adequately exporting its own goods under sanction, while Ukraine is able to ship grain out of the country, and Russian foreign minister Peskov cited that objection as the reason for pulling out of the deal. The UN Chief, Antonio Guterres, on Monday, urged Russia to resume the internationally brokered deal so that grain could be shipped from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports, saying that otherwise, the world’s most vulnerable among the hungry will suffer the worst consequences.
Engagement Resources
Is Doug Burgum Breaking Campaign Finance Laws to Try to Get on the Debate Stage?
Is Doug Burgum Breaking Campaign Finance Laws to Try to Get on the Debate Stage?
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #87 | By: Ian Milden | July 25, 2023
Photo taken from: www.newsnationnow.com
__________________________________
North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum (R-ND) recently launched a Presidential Campaign, which he is largely funding through his personal fortune. The RNC’s requirements to get on the debate stage require candidates to demonstrate a degree of grassroots support though donors and polling. Burgum is employing tactics that might not be legal in order to reach the donor threshold. This Brief will discuss those tactics, why they might be illegal, and what the government should do about it.
Analysis
In nearly every election cycle, longshot candidates launch campaigns for President. The campaign for the 2024 Republican Presidential nomination is no different. With the increasing number of candidates, the national parties have installed requirements in recent cycles in order for candidates to participate in debates. While the debates themselves are not always impactful, the difference between making the debate stage and being left off is still considered a critical measure of viability for longshot candidates.
In order for a candidate to receive an invitation to participate in next month’s debate, they must have 40,000 unique donors from at least 20 states. They must also reach 1% in three national or state polls that meet the RNC’s specifications, which are not in line with modern polling criteria. Candidates will also be required to pledge to support to the eventual nominee.
While longshots have to be creative in order to meet these criteria, Governor Doug Burgum’s strategy might be illegal. Burgum, a former CEO of Great Plains Software, is using his personal fortune to send $20 gift cards to the first 50,000 donors to his campaign. While candidates have given away merchandise in exchange for donations (such as shirts, yard signs, and other memorabilia), nobody has ever given away something with a clear monetary value.
Burgum’s strategy might be illegal because it effectively makes Burgum a straw donor. A straw donor is someone who gives money to a campaign through another person as a way of circumventing campaign contribution limits. This is illegal and the Justice Department has prosecuted people for straw donor schemes. It is not completely clear if this is illegal as there are a few differences from the traditional straw donor schemes that the Justice Department typically prosecutes.
The first difference is that the candidate who is effectively acting as the straw donor. Candidates are not limited in the amount of money that they can give their own campaign. Typical straw donor schemes are usually attempts to circumvent campaign contribution limits (both on dollar amounts and foreign nationals), and there is no limit on candidates giving themselves money. The second difference is that most straw donor schemes are secret attempts at circumventing campaign finance laws. Burgum is doing this transparently and not asking people for contributions that would exceed existing campaign finance limits.
Is Burgum’s Strategy Illegal?
To be honest, I don’t know. I don’t know if those differences matter enough in the eyes of the law. The Federal Elections Commission (FEC) is the agency that would usually determine whether Burgum’s strategy is legal or not. As I have written in a previous brief, the FEC is not a very functional regulator. This allows campaigns to try lots of different strategies and see if they work. If they happen to violate existing campaign finance rules, the FEC might fine the campaign in a few years for an amount that is not substantial for a billionaire like Burgum. This is not effective enforcement of campaign finance law.
There is a simple solution that might work better for the public. The Justice Department has a unit that prosecutes people for federal campaign finance offenses. Since the FEC is dysfunctional, it would be in the best interests of the public if the Justice Department could determine whether new strategies like the one Burgum is using with gift cards for donations are legal or not. If the Justice Department thinks that the strategy is illegal, it can inform Burgum’s campaign and tell it to stop rather than having to invest resources in an investigation and potential prosecution. If the strategy is legal, the Justice Department can put out a statement saying so. The Justice Department has taken this approach on other legal areas such as helping businesses comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. While this approach would further harm the authority of the FEC, the FEC can only have its authority restored by a complete overhaul, which requires Congress to act on. The Justice Department should only take on this responsibility temporarily for time-sensitive matters until Congress overhauls the FEC.
Engagement Resources
- For more about the Federal Election Commission and how it works contact https://www.fec.gov