June 30, 2015

Justice Department faults Ferguson protest response

Source: St Louis Post-Dispatch

FERGUSON • Police trying to control the Ferguson protests and riots responded with an uncoordinated effort that sometimes violated free-speech rights, antagonized crowds with military-style tactics and shielded officers from accountability, the Justice Department says in a document obtained Monday by the Post-Dispatch.

“Vague and arbitrary” orders to keep protesters moving “violated citizens’ right to assembly and free speech, as determined by a U.S. federal court injunction,” according to a summary of a longer report scheduled for delivery this week to police brass in Ferguson, St. Louis County, St. Louis and Missouri Highway Patrol.

They already have the summary, still subject to revision, that was obtained by the newspaper.

It suggests that last year’s unrest was aggravated by long-standing community animosity toward Ferguson police, and by a failure of commanders to provide more details to the public after an officer killed Michael Brown.

Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/justice-department-faults-ferguson-protest-response/article_32d55f9f-0bf4-51e4-93d6-71b873cb8038.html

June 30, 2015

Hey, Liberals: SCOTUS Ain’t Your Friend - By Michael Tomasky

After the ACA and marriage rulings, liberals might be feeling hey, the court’s not so bad. But it is. And rulings can always be reversed.

It would be understandable if liberals were feeling kind of relaxed, kind of “Supreme Court, what’s so bad?” over the weekend. John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy delivered for our team on Obamacare, and then Kennedy came through again on same-sex marriage. If this is a conservative court, is getting a liberal one—which will be one of the trump-card arguments for voting for Hillary Clinton next fall—really a matter of such pressing urgency?

Well, yes. As we saw yesterday with the court’s death-penalty and EPA rulings, it’s still a long way from being a liberal court. But there’s more to it than that. People should remember that if a Republican is elected president next year and has the chance to replace Kennedy and/or Ruth Bader Ginsburg with another Samuel Alito, the Obamacare and same-sex marriage standings could easily be reversed. And don’t think there aren’t conservatives out there thinking about it, because there most certainly are, and they literally want to roll back the judicial clock to 1905.

An interesting and important debate opened up over the weekend in conservative legal circles that you should take some time to educate yourself about. Many conservatives, of course, are furious with Roberts and Kennedy and are wondering, with conservatives like this, who needs liberals?

The ins and outs of the debate were deftly summarized yesterday by Ian Millhiser of Think Progress. I’m not going to take you as deep into the jurisprudential weeds as Millhiser does, but here’s the basic story. Since the 1980s, “judicial restraint” has been the guiding principle of conservative jurisprudence—the idea that judges shouldn’t make law from the bench but should rule more narrowly and modestly, deferring to the other branches. Roberts was invoking judicial restraint during his confirmation hearings with that famous line about judges just calling “balls and strikes.”

more
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/30/hey-liberals-scotus-ain-t-your-friend.html

June 30, 2015

Conservatives Love Scott Walker’s Anti-Gay Transition

Betsy Woodruff

Scott Walker’s call for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling has saved his reputation with the conservative right.

Scott Walker has his groove back with social conservatives and he has the Supreme Court to thank.

After the court ruled that the Constitution guarantees same-sex couples the right to marry, Walker released a statement calling for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage. And social conservatives loved it, and it came at a moment when he needed all the love he could get.

Back in May, the Wisconsin governor traveled to Washington to meet with a bevy of leaders from the party’s more conservative wing.

And in that meeting, there were lots of Walker skeptics.

Penny Nance—the president of the influential conservative group Concerned Women for America—emailed to The Daily Beast after that meeting to say she still wasn’t convinced Walker was a strong enough opponent of same-sex marriage.

“I think people are still trying to discern,” his position, she wrote. His list of confusing comments about the issue over the years made it a little tricky for some on the right to ascertain his position.

more
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/30/scott-walker-came-out-as-anti-gay-and-conservatives-loved-it.html

June 30, 2015

NPR article about events in our life thirty years ago -- DonViejo

This article is about events in our life thirty years ago. The article is a transcript of the interview broadcast this morning. On this NPR site, there is a > in a box, just to the left of the headline. You can listen to the story by clicking on it. -- DonViejo

Regrets Linger 30 Years After Gay Couple Had Their Foster Children Taken Away

By BARBARA HOWARD

BOSTON - Many view Massachusetts as the catalyst that led to Friday’s Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states.

But the state’s trajectory on gay rights issues has not always been upward.

Thirty years ago, an attempt by two gay Boston men to become foster parents ignited a media and political firestorm — leaving regret that still smolders today.

‘Daddy Don’ And ‘Daddy Dave’

Don Babets and David Jean, like others in the gay community, had become urban pioneers, buying a house on Fort Hill in Boston’s Roxbury neighborhood. Babets, who worked for the city, had grown up the oldest of five. Jean, who worked for a nonprofit and was music director at his church, grew up as one of six. So it was only natural, after being together for seven years, that they thought about kids of their own. They applied to be foster parents.

“I had no agenda when I went in to do this. I just wanted to be a parent,” Jean said. “I wasn’t trying to prove anything. I wasn’t trying to stir up the pot.”

Babets and Jean were not the first gay foster parents; there had quietly been others — there was no policy prohibiting it at the time, the only guideline was the “best interest of the child” — but, by all accounts, Babets and Jean were the first foster parents who were openly gay.

The screening to become a foster parent was rigorous. Babets remembers a lengthy application and home visits with social workers. Character references came from Babets’ priest and Jean’s pastor.

more + pictures
http://www.wbur.org/2015/06/30/gay-boston-men-foster-parents

June 29, 2015

Conservatives Are Gearing Up For Fight Of Their Lives After Gay Marriage Ruling

NEW YORK (AP) — Now that same-sex marriage is legal nationwide, religious conservatives are focusing on preserving their right to object. Their concerns are for the thousands of faith-based charities, colleges and hospitals that want to hire, fire, serve and set policy according to their religious beliefs, notably that gay relationships are morally wrong.

The Republican Party's 2016 presidential candidates are already campaigning on the issue. And Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is urging President Barack Obama and the nation's governors "to join me in reassuring millions of Americans that the government will not force them to participate in activities that violate their deeply held religious beliefs."

The religious liberty fight isn't about what happens inside the sanctuary. First Amendment protections for worship and clergy are clear. Potential conflicts could arise, however, over religious organizations with some business in the public arena. That category ranges from small religious associations that rent reception halls to the public, to the nation's massive network of faith-based social service agencies that receive millions of dollars in government grants. Some groups, such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, also want protections for individual business owners who consider it immoral to provide benefits for the same-sex spouse of an employee or cater gay weddings.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy raised the issue in the majority opinion Friday granting gays the right to marry. He said First Amendment protections are in place for religious objectors, who "may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned."

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/bobby-jindal-religious-freedom-gay-marriage-supreme-court

June 29, 2015

Texas Clerk Issuing Gay Marriage Licenses In Spite of Her Faith

Over the weekend, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton suggested that local clerks with religious objections could opt-out of granting marriage licenses to gay couples in light of the Supreme Court's decision legalizing same-sex marriage. But at least one Texas clerk who opposes gay marriage on religious grounds doesn't see a need for the exemption.

“Personally, same-sex marriage is a contradiction to my faith and belief that marriage is between one man and one woman,” Denton County Clerk Juli Luke said in a statement Sunday, according to the the Denton Record-Chronicle. “However, first and foremost, I took an oath on my family Bible to uphold the law, and as an elected public official, my personal belief cannot prevent me from issuing the licenses as required.”

Her clerk's office oversaw its first gay marriage Monday morning, the Denton Record-Chronicle. The couple, Sara Bollinger and Whitney Hennen, received their license a little after 8 a.m.

"It feels pretty incredible. Growing up this didn’t seem like something that was ever going to happen,” Bollinger said.

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/texas-clerk-marriage-religious-objections

June 29, 2015

On Environmental Issues, Hillary Clinton is a No-Brainer Over Rivals

On Environmental Issues, Hillary Clinton is a No-Brainer Over Rivals

In a better world, presidential candidates would debate how to solve the climate change crisis. Instead, climate change and other environmental issues are another area where Republicans and Democrats disagree. In fact, most leading Republicans won’t even admit climate change is happening.

Conversely, Hillary Clinton’s record during her eight years in the Senate should be encouraging to environmentalists. The League of Conservation Voters issues a report card every year on members of Congress. During then-Sen. Clinton’s time in office, she amassed a lifetime score of 82 out of 100.

As a means of comparison, current Republican Senators Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio have lifetime scores of 11, 11, 9, and 9, respectively. There is no comparison.
While in the senate, Clinton voted to:

Keep drillers out of public lands, including Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Support clean, safe, renewable energy.

Protect families by ensuring water and air are clean.

Seek alternatives to coal.

Provide assistance for low income families for help with energy bills.


Read more: http://bluenationreview.com/environmental-issues-hillary-clinton-brainer-rivals/#ixzz3eUDvZLVLrivals/#ixzz3eUDKINRV

Where Does Hillary Clinton Stand on the Environment?

Her silence on Keystone XL has irked environmentalists, but Clinton is the only presidential candidate to fully accept human-caused climate change.

By Anastasia Pantsios / EcoWatch April 14, 2015

There’s a cliche among those who are discouraged by the political climate that “there’s no difference between the candidates.” Now that Hillary Clinton has made her official, anticipated-for-years announcement that she will be running for president in 2016, making her the prohibitive favorite to win the Democratic nomination, it’s time to look at where she stands on environmental issues versus where the Republican field of millions—OK, dozens—stands.

The GOP field has two official candidates so far—senators Rand Paul of Kentucky and Ted Cruz of Texas. Florida Sen. Mario Rubio is expected to announce today. Numerous other hopefuls, including New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, are making moves, such as visits to key primary states like New Hampshire, that show they’d like to be in the race as well.

The only other clear likely candidate in the Democratic field is immediate past Gov. of Maryland Martin O’Malley, who is campaigning vigorously but has not announced his candidacy.

You’re going to hear grumbling from some environmentalists about Hillary’s lack of perfection. One particular sticking point is her failure to say where she stands on approving the Keystone XL pipeline. She told an audience in Winnipeg in January, “You won’t get me to talk about Keystone because I have steadily made clear that I’m not going to express an opinion. It is in our process and that’s where it belongs.”

more
http://www.alternet.org/environment/where-does-hillary-clinton-stand-environment

Is Bernie Sanders the Best Candidate on Climate Change?

He was recently ranked as the Senate's top leader on global warming.

—By Ben Adler | Thu May 14, 2015 6:15 AM EDT

This article originally appeared in Grist and is republished here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The Democratic presidential primary race got its second major candidate recently, and its first true climate hawk: Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, self-described democratic socialist. Sanders has one of the strongest climate change records in the Senate. In fact, according to rankings released by Climate Hawks Vote, a new super PAC, Sanders was the No. 1 climate leader in the Senate for the 113th Congress that ended in January.

Climate Hawks Vote measures leadership, not just voting records, tabulating actions like bills introduced, speeches given, and so forth. In the 112th Congress, Sanders ranked third behind Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.). In the last Congress, he edged out Whitehouse by one point.

"Sanders is very much among the top leaders," says R.L. Miller, founder of Climate Hawks Vote. "He has a record of really strong advocacy for solar in particular." Miller notes that distributed solar, which enables everyone with a solar panel to create their own energy instead of relying on a monopolistic utility company, fits especially well with Sanders' democratic socialist philosophy. It's bad for corporations and good for regular folks who get to own the means of production.

Here are some of the highlights from Sanders' climate and clean energy record:

more
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/05/bernie-sanders-greenest-presidential-candidate

June 29, 2015

The Stunning, Scorching Accusation in Justice Sotomayor’s Death Penalty Dissent

On Monday, the Supreme Court upheld the use of midazolam in lethal injections, despite the fact that the drug may have been responsible for several botched, extremely painful executions in 2014. The vote was 5–4, with the usual lineup of conservatives against liberals. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a scorching, devastating dissent that carefully disproved both the facts and logic of Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion. Sotomayor noted that Alito’s decision rested on the fact that the prisoners had not demonstrated that the state could obtain other, more humane drugs to kill them—so it can go ahead and execute them with the potentially torturous midazolam. In a stunning passage, she then lobs this accusation at the majority:

Petitioners contend that Oklahoma’s current protocol is a barbarous method of punishment—the chemical equivalent of being burned alive. But under the Court’s new rule, it would not matter whether the State intended to use midazolam, or instead to have petitioners drawn and quartered, slowly tortured to death, or actually burned at the stake: because petitioners failed to prove the availability of sodium thiopental or pentobarbital, the State could execute them using whatever means it designated.

Alito's only response to this charge? “That is simply not true.”

###

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/06/29/glossip_v_gross_sotomayor_s_scorching_death_penalty_accusation.html?

June 29, 2015

In a Brave, Powerful Dissent, Justice Breyer Calls for the Abolition of the Death Penalty

Justice Stephen Breyer took a brave, powerful stand against the machinery of death on Monday, writing that, to his mind, “the death penalty, in and of itself, now likely constitutes a legally prohibited ‘cruel and unusual punishmen[t].’ ” Breyer notes that his “20 years of experience on the court,” during which he has been forced to decide whether myriad inmates may live or die, led him to this conclusion.

In a courageous 41-page dissent from a pro-death penalty ruling joined only by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Breyer explains that the startlingly high number of exonerated death row inmates suggests that capital punishment is unreliable and error-prone—in the words of the Eighth Amendment, “cruel.” (In a stunning retort to Justice Antonin Scalia, Breyer discusses the exoneration of Henry Lee McCollum—“Scalia's favorite murderer.”) The death penalty, Breyer writes, is also unconstitutionally arbitrary, dispensed randomly, rarely, and unpredictably. This infrequency renders the punishment unconstitutionally “unusual,” as well.

Breyer also notes a number of troubling factors in death penalty sentencing. Race may play a role, he writes (correctly), as do judicial elections—judges may condemn convicts to die so that voters will perceive them as tough on crime. Breyer then declares:

The imposition and implementation of the death penalty seems capricious, random, indeed, arbitrary. From a defendant’s perspective, to receive that sentence, and certainly to find it implemented, is the equivalent of being struck by lightning. How then can we reconcile the death penalty with the demands of a Constitution that first and foremost insists upon a rule of law?

more
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/06/29/breyer_and_the_death_penalty_the_justice_calls_for_its_abolition.html?

June 29, 2015

Things People Ask Gay Dads (But Probably Shouldn’t)