Category: texas

  • Former President Donald Trump speaks, flanked by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, during a visit to the border wall near Pharr, Texas, on June 30, 2021.

    Border communities pushed back against false narratives pushed by former President Donald Trump and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott during their tour Wednesday of parts of the U.S.-Mexico border where Governor Abbott has vowed to fulfill Trump’s campaign promise to complete a border wall.

    Trump and Abbott held a briefing with state and law enforcement officials at the Weslaco Department of Public Safety headquarters before heading to Pharr, Texas, just across the river from Reynosa, Mexico, where 19 people were killed during cartel-related shootings two weeks ago. Against a segment of unfinished wall, Trump and Abbott amplified GOP narratives of chaos at the border amid a complex increase in apprehensions due in part to Trump administration policies.

    According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, there were 180,034 apprehensions last month at the southern U.S. border, with 40 percent of those who were turned back having previously crossed. During the Trump administration, the highest recorded number of monthly apprehensions was nearly 150,000.

    But, as Truthout has previously reported, the increase in crossings is happening in part because 70,000 asylum seekers were already in line, stuck in Mexico after being forced to wait there under Trump’s restrictive Migrant Protection Protocols. The situation, immigrant rights advocates point out, is not quite a “surge,” but a regular seasonal influx of asylum-seeking children bolstered by a backlog of demand because of last year’s COVID-19 border closure.

    During Republicans’ border trip Wednesday, Abbott criticized Vice President Kamala Harris for visiting El Paso instead of the Rio Grande Valley, where apprehensions are more acute. President Joe Biden has assigned Harris to focus on poverty, violence and other root causes of migration in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. But while Biden has ended Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy, he has kept in place Title 42 of the public health code, allowing officials to use the pandemic as a reason to refuse asylum seekers entry.

    La Unión del Pueblo Entero (LUPE), which advocates for border communities, held a rally in San Juan, Texas, to push back against the GOP’s spin and pressure Democrats to lift remaining Trump administration restrictions hours before Trump and Abbott arrived. The rally featured progressive favorite Jessica Cisneros, who lost her primary bid against Rep. Henry Cuellar last year, and Texas Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa.

    “It’s unconscionable that the governor is wasting attention and resources to stir hate rather than focus on the urgent issues, such as fixing the state’s power grid,” said LUPE Executive Director Juanita Valdez-Cox. Democratic Party Chairman Hinojosa similarly characterized Abbott’s wall scheme as a political distraction from the statewide power grid failure in February that took more than 700 lives and more recent loss of more than 12,000 megawatts of power, saying Abbott is “busy promoting Trump’s pet project” and using border residents as “props for his political theater.”

    In March, Abbott announced that he would deploy more state police and National Guard troops to the border under Operation Lone Star. Two months later, he issued a disaster declaration in 34 Texas counties amid the ongoing influx of border apprehensions. Facing challenges from the right as he seeks a third term, including a potential challenge from former Texas GOP Chair Allen West, Abbott announced two weeks ago that Texas will continue Trump’s border wall project, starting with $250 million shifted from the state prison budget.

    This week, Abbott amended his disaster declaration to remove several border counties that refused to partner with the state, including the four largest counties in the Rio Grande Valley. The remaining declarations, however, allow Abbott to request the emergency transfer of legislative funds to begin construction of the border wall. Legal experts and some lawmakers, however, have questioned the legality of Abbott’s disaster declaration, arguing migration issues are reserved under the federal government’s jurisdiction.

    The governor has said he expects the state will receive “hundreds of miles” to build the border wall between state-owned lands on privately donated land. In addition to the $250 million from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, the state has also received at least $459,000 in private donations through a crowdfunding website.

    But with estimates ranging from $26 million to $46 million to build a mile of wall in some areas of South Texas, border activists are renewing their demands to “defund the wall,” saying the $250 million being shifted from the state prison budget should instead be used to address real crises on the border: addressing the health, education, ecological and economic disparities that Tejano people face every day.

    The No Border Wall Laredo Coalition, for instance, has long linked its demands for these kinds of investments to the larger movement for Black lives and to defund police, both in court and on the street, demonstrating the connection between the systemic, carceral racism of Trump’s, now Abbott’s, border wall (which activists call a “prison wall”) and the systemic racism of U.S. policing.

    Coalition activists say Abbott’s issuing of a disaster declaration over increased border apprehensions rings hollow to communities that, only a year ago, were under similar declarations after suffering the highest per capita rates of death amid the pandemic and more losses during the February blackout. Last year, Governor Abbott’s office dispersed critical aid from the federal CARES Act at a lower rate than the federal government, leaving some of the hardest-hit border cities, like Laredo, holding the bag. Those communities are still in need of deep investments to recover from COVID-19’s devastation, Coalition members say.

    Now, Texas Democrats are trying to keep Abbott from tapping into $15 billion in COVID relief funds for the wall, signing a letter this week urging Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen to block him from doing so. They are also asking the Treasury to make rules that would ensure the money can’t be used to replenish state funding for border barriers.

    Local activists with the No Border Wall Laredo Coalition painted a street mural in front of the George P. Kazen federal building on August 16, 2020.
    Local activists with the No Border Wall Laredo Coalition painted a street mural in front of the George P. Kazen Federal Building on August 16, 2020.

    “On the one hand, while [$250 million] is a drop in the bucket as far as the costs of this illogical infrastructure project, it is a shitload of money that could be put to good use for things that a state should be funding,” says Coalition member Tricia Cortez, who is also the executive director of the nonprofit Rio Grande International Study Center, which works to preserve and restore the Rio Grande Basin.

    Just a fraction of the money being reallocated to Abbott’s wall scheme, she says, could vastly improve living standards in underserved areas in the borderlands that face immense inequality, such as informal settlements like the colonias that lack basic necessities, often including potable water, septic or sewer systems, electricity, paved roads, or safe and sanitary housing.

    Cortez says Abbott’s dropping of major Rio Grande Valley counties from his disaster order shows his border wall scheme is more of a political stunt than a serious danger. “We view this as a sideshow, and we don’t feel as threatened by it in the sense of condemnation and construction here on our lands,” she tells Truthout. “I think that we don’t have that same level of apprehension with this, but at the same time, we’re also going to be working on different fronts.”

    Pressuring local leaders is one of those fronts. The Coalition worked with Laredo City Council members, who unanimously voted in favor of sending a letter to Abbott opposing his state-funded border wall, and recently passed a resolution affirming that position this week. Laredo is the seat of Webb County, which was among the counties that balked at being included in Abbott’s emergency declarations at the border.

    Mercurio Martinez III, a Laredo city council member whose family has owned land along the river for generations, told Truthout that he would like to see a portion of the $250 million go instead to expand and improve a 50-mile unpaved stretch of road to Eagle Pass.

    If Abbott attempts to seize land in Laredo through eminent domain to complete the border wall, “He’s going to have to fight us through the courts,” Martinez says — just like the Trump administration did. “From what I can see of him removing Webb County from the emergency declaratory, to me it’s very political, those counties along the river that voted for Biden and not for Trump got off the list.”

    Trump ultimately built 450 miles of wall during his presidency. While the Biden administration halted construction and returned $2 billion that Trump siphoned from the Pentagon budget, his administration has failed to dismiss hundreds of Trump-era eminent domain cases as officials continue to conduct a review of federal resources used to build the wall that was meant to be finished in March.

    Melissa Cigarroa, board president of the International Study Center, is one of the many Mexican American plaintiffs whose Trump-era land condemnation case is being left in legal limbo under the Biden administration. Every month, she says, her case gets delayed.

    Border area families like hers face impending decisions of whether to accept the federal government’s offers of compensation for their land or continue their costly legal fights in the hopes that the Biden administration could drop the cases and return the land to property owners.

    Cigarroa’s 175-acre ranch along the Rio Grande River is in Zapata County, which remains included under Abbott’s disaster declaration despite being part of an ongoing court challenge against Trump-era border wall land seizures and to the Department of Homeland Security’s waivers of at least 27 federal laws in order to expedite wall construction under the 2005 Real ID Act.

    Many of the counties that are choosing to partner with the state, like Zapata, Cigarroa says, are doing so because they hope to receive additional funding streams that would support border enforcement and security measures.

    Melissa Cigarroa on her ranch in Zapata County, Texas, on August 16, 2020.

    “This is such a boneheaded approach to fake dealing with a fake crisis. It’s just a manufactured political ploy by a very weak governor who feels like he’s intimidated from other right-wing candidates,” Cigarroa says. “The cities that have the greatest focus on migration issues are the ones who are opting out of Abbott’s plan. What does that tell you? That it addresses nothing.”

    With so little money for what is needed to finish Trump’s wall, Cigarroa likewise doesn’t see Abbott’s state funding scheme as much of a threat as the federal government apparatus under Trump, and in some ways continuing under Biden, is in terms of land seizures.

    “Basically, [Abbott’s] proposing funneling dollars to private ranchers to help them fix their fences, and then he’s going to count that as a win,” she tells Truthout. “Private ranchers have the roads degrade every time there’s a huge storm — they’re ranch roads, they’re dirt roads — so road maintenance and fence maintenance is a thing that ranchers do all the time.”

    Private funding schemes have not panned out in the past. In 2018, the founders of We Build the Wall, Brain Kolfage and former White House strategist Steve Bannon, crowdfunded more than $25 million to build a three-mile section of border wall in the Rio Grande Valley. They were later indicted on wire fraud and money-laundering conspiracy charges for using hundreds of thousands of dollars from the fund for personal expenses. Amid increased erosion, the campaign’s border barrier segment is now at risk of falling into the river.

    “It’s really offensive because the state invests so little in us, and where they want to infuse a shitload of state money, it’s going to be instead on something so destructive and ineffective, all for one guy’s political ambitions,” the International Study Center’s Cortez says.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott on Tuesday signed one of his party’s top legislative priorities into law: a bill aimed at stopping teachers from talking about racism and any current events that may be contentious.

    The legislation, supported by virtually every GOP state legislator, states that social studies teachers in public K-12 schools “may not be compelled” to talk about current events or public policy or social issues considered controversial. If they do talk about such things, they are required to present the issue “without giving deference to any one perspective.”

    The law specifies all the things that social studies teachers aren’t allowed to talk about.

    They can’t make it part of a course to talk about the concept that “one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex.”

    The post Governor Signs Law To Stop Teachers From Talking About Racism appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  •  

    USA Hands Off Honduras: NYC Protest, 2018

    Protest in Union Square, New York (cc photo: Jim Naureckas)

    This week on CounterSpin: “Biden Administration Ousts Trump’s Border Patrol Chief,” announced the June 24 New York Times, explaining in the subhed that Rodney Scott “had become known for his support of President Donald J. Trump’s signature border wall, and had resisted a Biden initiative to stop using the phrase ‘illegal alien.”’ Ergo, we are to understand, his “forcing out” by the White House—suggesting a meaningful departure from the immigration policies of the previous administration. The message is undermined by the subsequent acknowledgement from the paper’s anonymous Homeland Security source that Scott “could remain in the department, reassigned to a new post.”

    The notion of real change is undermined more severely by a close look at Biden’s actual immigration policy, particularly with regard to Central America, which includes familiar promises to promote “the rule of law, security and economic development” in the region, and to fight corruption. Familiar because they’ve been used for decades as cover for policies that pour money into regional governments that agree to use it to protect the profits of foreign investors, by violence if necessary (and it’s always necessary), and even when it means communal and environmental devastation, which are also par for the course.

    So what’s new? We’ll talk about Central America policy and Honduras in particular with Laura Carlsen, director of the Americas Program at the Center for International Policy.

          CounterSpin210625Carlsen.mp3
    West Texas oil rig

    (cc photo: Paul Lowry)

    Also on the show: Texas state Rep. Jim Murphy may wish he’d never called attention to Chapter 313—the state program that offers companies major tax breaks to locate in the state. The alarming price tag attached to Murphy’s proposal to expand the program led some to examine Chapter 313 carefully for the first time. The Houston Chronicle produced a groundbreaking investigative series on the program and its costs. A somewhat motley coalition of opposition was formed. And now—after being easily renewed three times since 2001—the program is set to expire. We’ll hear why that’s good news for Texas schools, taxpayers and the planet from Greg LeRoy, executive director of the group Good Jobs First.

          CounterSpin210625LeRoy.mp3

    The post Laura Carlsen on Biden’s Central America Policy, Greg LeRoy on Texas Corporate Subsidies appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on CounterSpin.

  • Wind turbines operate on a wind farm in Marshalltown, Iowa. As of 2020, wind energy powers 57 percent of Iowa's net electricity generation -- a bigger share than any other state.

    As we work to combat the climate crisis, it’s clear that electricity providers must shift toward using more renewable energy to generate power. Clearly, more regulations are needed. But depending on where you are in the country, the word “regulation” is met with heavy resistance. So, why not try a reframe?

    Some clever folks did just that. They came up with the label “Renewable Portfolio Standard,” also called “Renewable Energy Standards,” a policy approach that has spread rapidly with real impact.

    The Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is a public mandate, typically initiated by a state legislature with the purpose of increasing energy from renewable sources — wind, solar, and other alternatives to fossil fuel and nuclear power. Another purpose has been to drive renewable innovation by signaling a predictable, growing market. The law sets renewable energy production targets for utilities — either in the amount of energy they produce or as a share of their energy output — along with consequences for not meeting them, usually a fine.

    Way back in 1983, Iowa became the first state to try this type of renewable energy mandate. The state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard mandated that Iowa’s two main utility companies own or secure by contract a total of 105 megawatts (MW) of renewables, or enough to power several hundred homes. Not a terribly impressive requirement … but a start. From this baby step came a big leap. By 2019, Iowa was the second largest wind power producer, after Texas. And by 2020, wind energy from more than 5,100 turbines powered 57 percent of Iowa’s net electricity generation — a bigger share than any other state.

    As of early 2021 the state was generating around 11,500 megawatts of renewable-based energy, nearly 110 times the energy potential of Iowa’s original 105 megawatt renewables target.

    Iowa’s success has played a pivotal role in moving others to use the Renewable Portfolio Standard. Now, 30 states, plus Washington, D.C., and three territories have adopted the policy or a similar approach to mandate a shift in electricity generation.

    In 2004, as the most oil-dependent state in the nation, Hawaii changed its renewable portfolio “goal” to an enforceable standard. In a 2015 update to the standard, Hawaii became the first state to set a target of using 100 percent renewable energy by 2045. Gov. David Ige explained: “Hawaii spends roughly $5 billion a year on foreign oil to meet its energy needs. Making the transition to renewable, indigenous resources for power generation will allow us to keep more of that money at home, thereby improving our economy, environment, and energy security.”

    In 2018, California took the same step, setting a 100 percent renewable energy production goal by 2045. Understanding the urgency of this act, then-Gov. Jerry Brown declared to the press, “It will not be easy. It will not be immediate. But it must be done.”

    The results are impressive: Clearly, lack of federal leadership did not stop significant state action.

    If you thought Iowa’s use of renewable portfolio standards was unexpected, consider that even in Texas — where we know ideas like “big government” and “regulations” sound unpopular — lawmakers were willing to pass a renewable energy requirement when it was framed as a “Renewable Portfolio Standard.”

    In 2002, after much give-and-take, the Texas legislature enacted Senate Bill 7, amending the state’s utility code and allowing for competition in the state’s retail electricity market. The Lone Star State put in place a Renewable Portfolio Standard. It required that by 2009 electricity providers collectively supply consumers with 2,000 megawatts of renewable power, enough to power about a third of a million homes.

    When it became clear that this goal would be met three years early in Texas, the state legislature more than doubled the requirement to just over 5,000 megawatts by 2015. As before, wind development blew past forecasts. This achievement was possible because Texas had approved construction of transmission lines to route electricity from remote wind farms to large urban markets. As of May 2021, the state’s installed wind capacity had reached nearly 40,000 megawatts — more than six times the goal mandated just four years earlier. Now leading the nation in wind energy, Texas currently generates 20 percent of U.S. wind-powered electricity.

    Meanwhile, in less than a decade, Virginia has become a renewable energy powerhouse. It’s on track to produce more than half of its electricity from renewables by 2035, and all of it a decade later.

    In March, the 2020 Virginia Clean Economy Act went into effect. It’s got real teeth: mandated benchmarks over 15 years for solar and wind investment and a Renewable Portfolio Standard requiring the state’s utilities to provide fully renewable electricity by 2045.

    If the entire U.S. were to adopt similar policies to these state-wide initiatives and enact a national goal of a 50 percent renewable energy standard by 2035, potentially we could cut CO2 emissions in the nation’s power sector by over 45 percent and reduce national natural gas generation by 38 percent over the next 15 years. These reductions—although falling slightly short of national efforts by President Biden to halve our current CO2 emissions within the next decade — would put us on track to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

    Almost half the growth of U.S. renewable energy from 2000 to 2019 can be linked to state Renewable Portfolio Standards — with more expected over the next decade. But that’s about the only blanket statement one can make about them. This reminds us of Justice Brandeis’s observation nearly 90 years ago, perhaps no more important today: “It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments …”

    States have implemented differing approaches. Standards range from Washington, D.C.’s call for 100 percent renewable energy by 2032 to Iowa’s modest, but long-surpassed, 1983 renewables goal. Many states mandate that renewables comprise a minimum share of retail electric sales — generally between 10 and 45 percent, though 14 states require 50 percent or greater. Rather than mandating that a particular share of energy be renewable, two national leaders, Iowa and Texas, require specific amounts of renewable energy capacity.

    In creating investment certainty, states’ “standards” mandates have been astonishingly successful in driving the growth of renewable energy and advancing renewable energy technology, all the while driving down our reliance and generation of fossil fuel source production, which has been steadily declining in the past several years. In fact, the U.S. now generates more than double the total renewable energy that was called for in the 29 states’ standards put together.

    While this statistic is extremely impressive, we must also note that individual states can’t fight this national effort alone. These regional efforts constitute only a fraction, albeit a powerful one, of the necessary measures our nation must take in order to foster renewable energy systems that aren’t reliant on detrimental fossil fuels.

    Let us all support the efforts of organizations and leaders rewriting our nation’s energy story. The youth-led Sunrise Movement as well as 350.org are leading the charge for renewable energy, fossil fuel emitter accountability, and just, equitable and sustainable energy grids — all the while upgrading the most crucial element of American infrastructure, democracy itself. They, among others, deserve praise and support for advancing the Green New Deal and President Biden’s Plan for a Clean Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice. Renewable Portfolio Standards are just one tool in what must become a broad, transformative strategy for how we power our society — a strategy that, I’m thrilled to say, is already significantly underway.

    Note: If you want to discover where your state stands on renewable energy mandates, here is a handy interactive site from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The author would like to thank Nina Larbi, Olivia Smith and Rachel Madison for their assistance on earlier drafts.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • A patient is transported to the emergency department by paramedics

    El Paso, Texas — Alfredo “Freddy” Valles was an accomplished trumpeter and a beloved music teacher for nearly four decades at one of the city’s poorest middle schools.

    He was known for buying his students shoes and bow ties for their band concerts, his effortlessly positive demeanor and a suave personal style — “he looked like he stepped out of a different era, the 1950s,” said his niece Ruby Montana.

    While Valles was singular in life, his death at age 60 in February was part of a devastating statistic: He was one of thousands of deaths in Texas border counties — where coronavirus mortality rates far outpaced state and national averages.

    In the state’s border communities, including El Paso, not only did people die of covid-19 at significantly higher rates than elsewhere, but people under age 65 were also more likely to die, according to a KHNEl Paso Matters analysis of covid death data through January. More than 7,700 people died of covid in the border area during that period.

    In Texas, covid death rates for border residents younger than 65 were nearly three times the national average for that age group and more than twice the state average. And those ages 18-49 were nearly four times more likely to die than those in the same age range across the U.S.

    “This was like a perfect storm,” said Heide Castañeda, an anthropology professor at the University of South Florida who studies the health of border residents. She said a higher-than-normal prevalence of underlying health issues combined with high uninsurance rates and flagging access to care likely made the pandemic even more lethal for those living along the border than elsewhere.

    That pattern was not as stark in neighboring New Mexico. Border counties there recorded covid death rates 41% lower than those in Texas, although the New Mexico areas were well above the national average as of January, the KHN-El Paso Matters analysis found. Texas border counties tallied 282 deaths per 100,000, compared with 166 per 100,000 in New Mexico.

    That stark divide could be seen even when looking at neighboring El Paso County, Texas, and Doña Ana County, New Mexico. The death rate for residents under 65 was 70% higher in El Paso County.

    Health experts said Texas’ refusal to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, a shortage of health care options and the state’s lax strategy toward the pandemic also contributed to a higher death rate at the border. Texas GOP leaders have opposed Medicaid expansion for a litany of economic and political reasons, though largely because they object to expanding the role or size of government.

    “Having no Medicaid expansion and an area that is already underserved by primary care and preventive care set the stage for a serious situation,” Castañeda said. “A lot of this is caused by state politics.”

    Texas was one of the first states to reopen following the nationwide coronavirus shutdown in March and April last year. Last June — even as cases were rising — Gov. Greg Abbott allowed all businesses, including restaurants, to operate at up to 50% capacity, with limited exceptions. And he refused to put any capacity restrictions on churches and other religious facilities or let local governments impose mask requirements.

    In November, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed an injunction to stop a lockdown order implemented by the El Paso county judge, the top administrative officer, at a time when El Paso hospitals were so overwhelmed with covid patients that 10 mobile morgues had to be set up at an area hospital to accommodate the dead.

    Unlike Texas, New Mexico expanded Medicaid under the ACA and, as a result, has a much lower uninsured rate than Texas for people under age 65 — 12% compared with Texas’ 21%, according to Census figures. And New Mexico had aggressive rules for face masks and public gatherings. Still, that didn’t spare New Mexico from the crisis. Outbreaks in and around the Navajo reservation hit hard. Overall, its state death rate exceeded the state rate for Texas, but along the border New Mexico’s rates were lower in all age groups.

    For some border families, the immense toll of the pandemic meant multiple deaths among loved ones. Ruby Montana lost not only her uncle to covid in recent months, but also her cousin Julieta “Julie” Apodaca, a former elementary school teacher and speech therapist.

    Montana said Valles’ death surprised the family. He had been teaching remotely at Guillen Middle School in El Paso’s Segundo Barrio neighborhood, an area known as “the other Ellis Island” because of its adjacency to the border and its history as an enclave for Mexican immigrant families.

    When Valles first got sick with covid in December, Montana and the family were not worried, not only because he had no preexisting health conditions, but also because they knew his lungs were strong from practicing his trumpet daily over the course of decades.

    In early January, he went to an urgent care center after his condition deteriorated. He had pneumonia and was told to go straight to the emergency room.

    “When I took him to the [hospital], I dropped him off and went to go park,” said his wife, Elvira. But when she returned, she was not allowed inside. “I never saw him again,” she said.

    Valles, a father of three, had been teaching one of his three grandchildren, 5-year-old Aliq Valles, to play the trumpet.

    They “were joined at the hip,” Montana said. “That part has been really hard to deal with too. [Aliq] should have a whole lifetime with his grandpa.”

    Hispanic adults are more than twice as likely to die of covid as white adults, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In Texas, Hispanic residents died of covid at a rate four times as high as that of non-Hispanic white people, according to a December analysis by The Dallas Morning News.

    Ninety percent of residents under 65 in Texas border counties are Hispanic, compared with 37% in the rest of the state. Latinos have high rates of chronic conditions like diabetes and obesity, which increases their risks of covid complications, health experts say.

    Because they were more likely to die of covid at earlier ages, Latinos are losing the most years of potential life among all racial and ethnic groups, said Coda Rayo-Garza, an advocate for policies to aid Hispanic populations and a professor of political science at the University of Texas-San Antonio.

    Expanding Medicaid, she said, would have aided the border communities in their fight against covid, as they have some of the highest rates of residents without health coverage in the state.

    “There has been a disinvestment in border areas long before that led to this outcome that you’re finding,” she said. “The legislature did not end up passing Medicaid expansion, which would have largely benefited border towns.”

    The higher death rates among border communities are “unfortunately not surprising,” said Democratic U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar, who represents El Paso.

    “It’s exactly what we warned about,” Escobar said. “People in Texas died at disproportionate rates because of a dereliction on behalf of the governor. He chose not to govern … and the results are deadly.”

    Abbott spokesperson Renae Eze said the governor mourns every life lost to covid.

    “Throughout the entire pandemic, the state of Texas has worked diligently with local officials to quickly provide the resources needed to combat covid and keep Texans safe,” she said.

    Ernesto Castañeda, a sociology professor at American University in Washington, D.C., who is not related to Heide Castañeda, said structural racism is integrally linked to poor health outcomes in border communities. Generations of institutional discrimination — through policing, educational and job opportunities, and health care — worsens the severity of crisis events for people of color, he explained.

    “We knew it was going to be bad in El Paso,” Ernesto Castañeda said. “El Paso has relatively low socioeconomic status, relatively low education levels, high levels of diabetes and overweight [population].”

    In some Texas counties along the border more than a third of workers are uninsured, according to an analysis by Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families.

    “The border is a very troubled area in terms of high uninsured rates, and we see all of those are folks put at increased risk by the pandemic,” said Joan Alker, director of the center.

    In addition, because of a shortage of health workers along much of the border, the pandemic surge was all the deadlier, said Dr. Ogechika Alozie, an El Paso specialist in infectious diseases.

    “When you layer on top not having enough medical personnel with a sicker-on-average population, this is really what you find happens, unfortunately,” he said.

    The federal government has designated the entire Texas border region as both a health professional shortage area and a medically underserved area.

    Jagdish Khubchandani, a professor of public health at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, about 40 miles northwest of El Paso, said the two cities were like night and day in their response to the crisis.

    “Restrictions were far more rigid in New Mexico,” he said. “It almost felt like two different countries.”

    Manny Sanchez, a commissioner in Doña Ana County, credits the lower death rates in New Mexico to state and local officials’ united message to residents about covid and the need to wear masks and maintain physical distance. “I would like to think we made a difference in saving lives,” Sanchez said.

    But, because containing a virus requires community buy-in, even El Paso residents who understood the risks were susceptible to covid. Julie Apodaca, who had recently retired, had been especially careful, in part because her asthma and diabetes put her at increased risk. As the primary caregiver for her elderly mother, she was likely exposed to the virus through one of the nurse caretakers who came to her mother’s home and later tested positive, said her sister Ana Apodaca.

    Julie Apodaca had registered for a covid vaccine in December as soon as it was available but had not been able to get an appointment for a shot by the time she fell ill.

    Montana found out that Apodaca had been hospitalized the day after her uncle died. One month later, and after 16 days on a ventilator, she too died on March 13.

    She was 56.

    This story was done in partnership with El Paso Matters, a member-supported, nonpartisan media organization that focuses on in-depth and investigative reporting about El Paso, Texas, Ciudad Juárez across the border in Mexico, and neighboring communities.

    Methodology

    To analyze covid deaths rates along the border with Mexico, KHN and El Paso Matters requested covid-related death counts by age group and county from Texas, New Mexico, California and Arizona. California and Arizona were unable to fulfill the requests. The Texas Department of State Health Services and the New Mexico Department of Health provided death counts as of Jan. 31, 2021.

    Texas’ data included totals by age group for border counties as a group and for the state with no suppression of data. New Mexico provided data for individual counties, and small numbers were suppressed, totaling 1.6% of all deaths in the state. (Data on deaths is commonly suppressed when it involves very small numbers to protect individual identities.)

    National death counts by age group were calculated using provisional death data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and included deaths as of Jan. 31, 2021.

    Rates were calculated per 100,000 people using the 2019 American Community Survey.

    The ethnic breakdown in Texas’ border counties comes from the Census Bureau’s 2019 population estimates.

    KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

    USE OUR CONTENT

    This story can be republished for free (details).

    Subscribe to KHN’s free Morning Briefing.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • I get it.

    As a native Texan, I feel your pain.

    I, too, was weaned on comic book versions of the Alamo and the Texian War for Independence, and I understand your anger and frustration. We have been betrayed.

    The question, now, is what are we going to do about it?

    Should we slap AK47s over our shoulders and strap pistols across our beer bellies and stage our own Alamo about what never really happened at the Alamo at the state capitol? Do we need to stand tall with the Texas chapter of the Daughters of the Confederacy and protest these shameless revisions to all the lies we hold dear? Or is it time to face the Mariachi music?

    Call me crazy, but I’m a proponent of the latter.

    The genie is out of the proverbial Tequila bottle.

    It’s time to reckon with an ugly truth. Texas independence was mostly about slavery (and gringo knavery) and not much at all about bravery. In fact, the biggest things in this state chockfull of big things, are the whoppers we’ve told about our history for almost two centuries.

    But, hey, on the lighter side . . . you have to admit . . . Ozzy Osbourne is looking smarter all the time. And Phil Collins—maybe he should sue . . . sue . . . Sussudio all those so-called Alamo relic peddlers.

    I bet he feels like a real pendejo.

    But fret not, fellow Texans. There was actually a real Alamo. Dozens of native Texans—not of the mostly white immigrant variety that fought in the fake Alamo, of course—bravely volunteered and voluntarily fought and died to preserve the freedom of a people and stop Spanish-speaking Fascists. It just didn’t happen here. It happened in Spain one hundred years after Texas independence.

    In 1936, conservative nationalist Fascists attempted to topple the left-leaning government of Spain. Liberals, progressives, communists and anarchists came from all over the world to the defense of the Spanish Republic, but the Fascists were backed and supplied by Adolph Hitler and Benito Mussolini. Oh, and also a Lone Star oil and gas outfit known as Texaco. Texaco refused to sell oil to the freedom fighters, but allowed the conservative fascists in Spain to put the oil they imported for their insurrection on a tab until war was over.

    In hindsight, the Spanish Civil War was a dress rehearsal for World War II. And, while FDR and the United States remained neutral, thousands of Americans came to the aid of the Spanish Republicans, including dozens from Texas.

    Needless to say, the good guys lost, and the leader of the Fascist insurrection, Francisco Franco, ruled Spain as a dictator until his death in 1975.

    But, get this.

    Conroe, Texas native Philip Detro rose to the rank of Commander of the Lincoln-Washington Battalion and hung out with Ernest Hemingway before succumbing to complications resulting from a sniper’s bullet.

    Fort Worth, Texas native Theodore Gibbs—a black man who ran away from his home in Cowtown at the age of thirteen after witnessing the rape of his mother by her white employer—joined the freedom fighters in Spain and drove an ambulance until he was killed by an artillery shell.

    Laredo, Texas native Virgilio Gonzalez Davila served with the Washington Battalion and then transferred to the 46th Division Campesinos, a “shock force” who fought in every major conflict of the war.

    Texarkana, Texas native Conlon Samuel Nancarrow emigrated to Mexico after serving with the Peoples’ Army of the Spanish Republic, and went on to become one of the most original, influential musical composers of the 20th century.

    And Oliver Law, a black native of Matagorda, Texas, became the first African American to command an integrated military force in American history. He was killed in action while leading Abraham Lincoln Battalion in the first days of the Battle of Brunete.

    Dozens of red-blooded native Texans fought in Spain, serving alongside or hobnobbing with the likes of Langston Hughes, George Orwell, Paul Robeson, Federico Garcia Lorca, Pablo Neruda, Andre Malruax, etc., etc.

    Sure, they were a bunch of liberals who thought for themselves—and fought for someone besides themselves—but they were still Texans. And they went to fight in a real Alamo, for freedom and human rights—not the preservation and expansion of a disgraceful travesty.

    That’s something, right?

    The post A Real Alamo first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The Declaration for American Democracy coalition hosts a rally calling on the Senate to pass the For the People Act outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on June 9, 2021.

    How far will the GOP go to steal the 2022 election?

    The corrupt Republican Party, a wholly-owned division of corporate and billionaire America, has dropped all pretense of having any governing ideas that will help or improve America.

    Instead, they’ve gone all-outrage, all-the-time and believe that getting white people all cranked up about America’s racial history will provide a veneer of “issues” while they work hard in the background to rig and then steal elections.

    This is not new for the GOP.

    Back in the 1960s they were hysterical about young people smoking pot and “open homosexuality.” And they were doing everything they could to block people of color from voting through programs like William Rehnquist’s Operation Eagle Eye that involved standing outside polling places and “challenging” people of color, thus forcing them to go home and get ID before they could vote…on the accurate assumption that most wouldn’t return. (This was before ID laws; you only needed ID to register to vote, and the biometric of your signature was how you verified identity on voting day.)

    In the 1970s they were freaking out about Black people protesting police violence: every single “riot” through the late 60s and early 70s was triggered by an incident of police violence against unarmed Black people. Nixon fed his “Southern Strategy” in 1972 with poisonous rhetoric about “burning cities.”

    Throughout the Reagan 1980s Republicans worked hard to destroy labor unions, cut taxes on the rich while raising taxes on working-class people, and freaked out even more about Black people (see George HW Bush’s infamous 1988 “Willie Horton” ads). And abortion; with Reagan’s 1980 election, the GOP went from pro-choice to pro-forced-pregnancy.

    The 90s saw the GOP hysterical — positively hysterical — that President Clinton might have had sex with a consenting adult in the White House and lied about it. They were also working as hard as they could to ship factory jobs overseas (with, stupidly, help from Clinton) because de-industrializing America would destroy our labor unions, who generally supported Democrats. And, of course, they were getting “tough on crime” with stop-and-frisk and “three strikes” to make life miserable for Black people…who then could no longer vote because they’d been busted for a crime.

    In 2001, Osama bin Laden gave the GOP a huge gift with 9/11, and the Bush administration and Congress reacted exactly as bin Laden had publicly predicted: wasting trillions of dollars, starting unnecessary wars, and dialing back on the civil liberties that have historically been at the core of American values. And, of course, when President Obama was elected in 2008 they went nuts again about Black people.

    The second decade of the 21st-century saw the GOP fully embrace open and naked fascism with the 2016 election of Donald Trump, who then doubled down on his party’s racism with attacks on Muslim Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and, of course, Black people, both in America and in what he called “shithole countries.”

    But where they’re going now to suppress the vote of non-white people is so over the top that even Barry Goldwater or Richard Nixon didn’t dare try it.

    In Arizona they’re in open violation of federal law, “inspecting” actual ballots and voting machines and even hauling some of them off to a “cabin in the woods in Montana” for “more careful examination.” You can safely expect that any day now they’ll tell us that Trump “actually won” Arizona, and then the race will be on to “inspect“ ballots in other swing states.

    Down in Florida Republicans have been putting up “ghost” candidates and it appears they successfully used them to win two or three legislative state elections. This scam involves finding some random person who has the same last name as the Democratic candidate and getting that person on the ballot to confuse voters and split the vote against the actual Democrat.

    Meanwhile, 14 states have now passed laws (with another 30+ pending) to make it harder for young people, older people, Black/non-white people and low-income folks to register, to keep their names on the voter rolls, and to vote. In many of those states they’ve gone so far as to give openly partisan Republican officials the power to decide which votes will be counted and which votes will be discarded based on their own personal “suspicion.”

    Their newest strategy for the 2022 election is to freak out and piss off white people by falsely claiming that progressives, Democrats and Black people want to “teach white kids that they’re racist” and “should be ashamed of being white.” Republicans call this “Critical Race Theory” although it’s not; this “definition” of CRT is entirely manufactured by the GOP, and their faux outrage is pure politics.

    The GOP has been running scam after scam for 70 years now; Dwight Eisenhower was the last legitimately elected Republican president, as I document here. They’re going to try to pull it off again in 2024, but the prize in 2022 is the House and Senate — and state legislatures and governorships.

    In several states, like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, even though the majority of people statewide vote for Democrats, Republicans still control both the state Houses’ and Senates’ as well as a majority of those states’ congressional delegations to DC because of “surgically precise” mostly race-based GOP gerrymandering.

    And lording over the entire enterprise is a network of right-wing billionaires that has more employees, more offices and a larger budget than the GOP itself. The media almost never mentions them and they operate largely invisibly, but they are the dark-matter mass that deforms the orbit of American politics.

    The right-wing billionaires don’t much care about race, but gleefully have their think tanks and media outlets like Fox use lies about CRT and other racial issues (“Replacement Theory”) to get people out to vote for Republicans who will then give the billionaires more tax cuts and deregulation.

    Which brings us back to the question that opens this rant. “How far will the GOP go to steal the 2022 election?”

    All you have to do is look at what they did on January 6, and how seriously they’re now paddling to pin the blame on antifa or the FBI or anybody other than themselves, to know the answer. But it also goes even beyond what the FBI calls open “terrorism.”

    Now the Texas GOP is trying to recruit an army of 10,000 “poll watchers” to show up at polling places in minority and student neighborhoods during the 2022 election; prison tats, baseball bats and bullhorns are optional but no doubt welcome. What’s happening in Texas is being replicated in other states across the nation.

    Election workers and volunteers all across the country, but particularly in swing states, are getting death threats and quitting in droves, to be replaced by GOP and Qanon operatives. One in six election workers has received a threat and one in three is thinking of leaving their job. This is all at the same time 14 GOP states have increased the power of these election workers to turn away voters or simply refuse to count their votes.

    And now the NY Times is reporting that in Georgia and other states, GOP officials are actually firing and removing Black elections officials in largely-Black areas and replacing them with white Republicans. Georgia Republicans are “disappearing” Black election workers.

    Meanwhile, Republican politicians and billionaire-owned right-wing media are doubling down on their lie that Critical Race Theory is “a way to make white people feel bad.” This is just the 2021 version of the “political correctness” (PC) Limbaugh and the right used to complain about in the 1990s when it became unacceptable to use the N-word and other racial slurs in white circles. They’re openly bragging these lies about CRT will mobilize white voters to show up for the GOP.

    Legal or not, moral or not, consistent with American values or not, honestly or blatantly dishonest, they’ll do whatever it takes to seize and hold power.

    The For The People Act will clean up a lot of this, but not the GOP’s resetting how election systems work in the states so GOP officials can simply throw out votes from precincts or areas they simply “believe” (but cannot demonstrate or prove) have “fraud” (also known as “Black voters”). That’s going to require additional federal legislation.

    The next few weeks are critical and we all must contact our members of Congress and raise hell. The Congressional switchboard is 202-224-3121. Americans who care about the fate and future of our republic damn well better get active now.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • A natural gas drilling rig in Fort Worth, Texas.

    This article was published in partnership with The Texas Observer and Mother Jones.

    When Wanda Vincent looks out the windows of her day care center in Arlington, Texas, past the playground, she sees a row of enormous beige storage tanks. They’re connected to two wells that produce natural gas for Total, one the world’s largest fossil fuel companies. No government agency – city, state or federal – monitors the air here or inspects regularly for emissions. So Vincent has no way of knowing whether dangerous gases are leaking out of all that equipment, potentially harming the children and staff who spend their days so close to those wells.

    She feels surrounded. Within two miles of her day care, 35 wells produce gas at six different sites, most of them operated by TEP Barnett USA, a subsidiary of the French energy giant Total, the dominant gas producer in Arlington. The diverse Dallas suburb of 400,000 has the fortune and misfortune of sitting atop one of the country’s largest onshore natural gas fields, the Barnett Shale.

    “No one is held accountable to determine whether it’s safe or not, and yet they allow them to be there,” Vincent said. “There’s not any documentation showing we’ve done testing and you’re safe.”

    Last year, as the Black and Latinx neighborhood around her day care was grappling with high COVID-19 numbers, Vincent learned from a local activist that Total wanted to drill three more wells behind her playground. Neither the company nor the city had informed her, and she took that personally. “I’m African American, and it makes me feel like they don’t value our lives.”

    Twenty years of fracking in the United States has delivered not only energy independence, but also an expanding export industry in oil, natural gas and liquified natural gas. America’s drilling boom, led by Texas, has also brought heavy industry into many rural and urban communities. Millions of people now live in the shadow of oil and gas wells, unwitting participants in a massive experiment with their health. That drilling poses substantial risks to the climate as well, because methane, the main component of natural gas, is a potent greenhouse gas.

    It’s hard to find a place in America where as many people live close to dense drilling as here in Tarrant County. Arlington itself is home to 52 gas well sites and thousands of wellheads. These wells are often near residential neighborhoods, commercial strips and doctor’s offices. More than 30,000 Arlington children go to public school within half a mile of wells, according to an analysis by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting, and up to 7,600 infants and young children attend private day cares within that radius. Eighty-five percent of the public school students are children of color, and more than two-thirds live in poverty. Altogether, more than half of Arlington’s public schools and day care facilities are within a half-mile of active gas production. Eight day care centers are within 600 feet, the standard setback in Arlington. 

    In recent years, scores of scientific studies have linked proximity to drilling to increased health risks, including childhood asthma, childhood leukemia and birth defects. The exposures can come from the fumes of diesel trucks, generators or drilling rigs. They can also come from chemicals used in fracking, as companies extract oil and gas from the shale by injecting mixtures of water, sand and chemicals. The exposures can continue over the estimated 25-year lifespan of the wells, as gases leak from wells, tanks, pipes and valves.

    Researchers at Oregon State University found a 59% increase in the odds of at least one asthma hospitalization among children who lived in Texas ZIP codes with fracking. Researchers from the University of Colorado observed that children with congenital heart defects are more likely to be born to mothers living near wells, and children with leukemia are about four times more likely to be living in areas with high levels of oil and gas development. Children and developing fetuses are especially vulnerable to the toxic air pollution, fine particles and other emissions from oil and gas extraction, according to public health experts. Tarrant County has suffered high rates of childhood asthma, birth defects and other potential effects of drilling, but no government agency has ordered the kind of thorough public health assessment that could connect the dots.

    A large industrial complex stands behind a fenced-in playground.
    A natural gas drilling site is adjacent to a playground for Cornerstone Academy in Arlington, Texas. Credit: Liveable Arlington

    The state of Colorado commissioned scientific studies, then last year overhauled its oil and gas oversight to prioritize public health. Now, most wells there cannot be closer than 2,000 feet from buildings. And the state is required to “ensure environmental justice for disproportionately impacted communities” by giving them a say in the permitting process.

    Texas went the opposite direction. After the city of Denton tried to outlaw fracking within its boundaries in 2014, the state Legislature overwhelmingly adopted a law that prohibits local governments from banning drilling or passing any restriction that isn’t “commercially reasonable.” Since then, Texas localities that want to say no to gas companies have faced the prospect of expensive court battles.

    Still, over the last year, Arlington has started to push back.

    A City Council showdown

    Last June, when the Arlington City Council convened to discuss Total’s bid to drill and frack three additional wells behind Vincent’s day care, Mother’s Heart, the nation was deep into a reckoning over racism. In the days leading up to the June 9 meeting, Arlington residents had been taking to the streets in Black Lives Matter protests. Earlier that day, the council had passed two resolutions committing to racial equity. 

    Mayor Jeff Williams opened the evening meeting with a moment of silence for George Floyd and a prayer: “Help us to answer the call to help each of our citizens. And especially now, our Black brothers and sisters. Here in our community and throughout our country, Lord, they are hurting as we are hurting,” Williams said, head bowed. “Help to guide us in the direction that we need to go to ensure that each of our citizens is not only treated equally, but treated well.”

    Vincent was among the first to speak against the permit.

    “Our clients are about 80% African American and about 20% Latino,” she said. “Can you guarantee me 100% that you’re not putting any of us in harm’s way now or in the future?”

    “Can you guarantee me 100% that you’re not putting any of us in harm’s way now or in the future?”

    arlington day care owner wanda vincent

    Council Member Marvin Sutton pressed Total on whether the company would monitor the air near Mother’s Heart to see whether young children were being exposed to toxic fumes.

    “No, we don’t do the air monitoring,” said Kevin Strawser, Total’s senior manager for government relations and public affairs. “We rely on the TCEQ for that.” (The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, spokesperson Gary Rasp told Reveal, does not monitor air emissions at individual drilling sites.)

    Strawser said Total controls air pollution in many ways – by drilling with electric instead of diesel rigs and checking monthly for leaks. “There’s no one better in the business,” he said. “I appreciate the residents around the site and particularly the school that’s just to the north of us. And I feel like we’ve cohabitated there for the last 10 years without any issues.”

    Ranjana Bhandari, executive director of Liveable Arlington, a volunteer organization that opposes urban drilling, explained how she went door to door before the pandemic, alerting Vincent and others about Total’s plan to drill more wells. “We discovered that nobody was aware of this,” she said. “We did the job that Total should have done.”

    But Council Member Helen Moise, a longtime supporter of the oil and gas industry, warned that Arlington’s hands were tied. “As a council, we are aware that fracking is not a desirable activity any longer in a city,” she said. But Arlington was happy to take millions of dollars from gas companies in the past and is now “living with the consequences.”

    “As a council, we are aware that fracking is not a desirable activity any longer in a city.”

    arlington Council Member Helen Moise

    Fracking began here on the Barnett Shale. And communities on the shale did enjoy an influx of cash in the early years of the fracking boom some 15 years ago. In Arlington, oil royalties funded a $100 million Tomorrow Foundation, which awards several million dollars a year to programs that do such things as provide medical care to infants or install energy-saving streetlights.

    But the economic windfall forecast in industry-funded reports never materialized. Most of the royalties and profits went to companies or absentee owners of mineral rights. “And the potential costs, those mostly stay with and in the local community,” according to Matthew Fry, an associate professor of geography and environment at the University of North Texas, who has researched the impact of drilling in the Barnett Shale.

    The industry does provide thousands of local jobs, but they now make up less than 1% of employment in the county – and today, gas production generates less than 1% of county tax revenue, according to industry and government data, a third of its peak.

    Perhaps the political calculus was beginning to shift. That night, the council did something it had rarely done before. It voted 6 to 3 to reject Total’s plans to drill behind Mother’s Heart.

    Wellheads spread ‘like toxic spores’

    Decades ago, updates to the federal Clean Air Act required companies to install modern pollution control devices whenever they build or modify large facilities such as refineries, incinerators and power plants. It slashed pollution from power plants and other big polluters, as well as cars and trucks, vastly improving air quality in many metropolitan areas. But the law has a blind spot when it comes to oil and gas sites. It considers each well site as a separate source of pollution, even in cases like Arlington, where one company, Total, operates 33, each with multiple wells.

    “This surgical loophole that no other industry in America has enjoyed prevents sprawling well sites from being considered together,” said John Walke, a former official with the Environmental Protection Agency who is now a lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “It has incentivized the spreading of wellheads like toxic spores across many communities.”

    The Obama administration was the first to regulate air pollution released by drilling and fracking; the EPA under his leadership regulated volatile organic compounds in 2012 and methane, a potent greenhouse gas, in 2016. After drilling, companies were required to capture the gas immediately or burn it in a flare rather than release it into the air. Companies were also required to hunt for leaks twice a year and fix them. But the Obama rules regulated only new wells, grandfathering in hundreds of thousands of others, including most of the wells in the Barnett Shale. And those regulations had barely gone into effect when they were gutted by the next president, Donald Trump.

    An image from an infrared imaging spectrometer shows a plume of methane in a rainbow of colors that indicate its concentration.
    NASA detected this methane leak in a California oil field in summer 2020. The oil company subsequently confirmed and repaired the leak. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

    These regulatory gaps have left much of the oversight of drilling and fracking in states’ hands. Some states, such as New York, Vermont and Maryland, have banned it. Colorado and Wyoming imposed strict rules. Others, like Texas, have given substantial leeway to industry. 

    “Texas does the minimum of what it has to do to meet federal standards,” said Cyrus Reed, interim director of the Sierra Club’s Texas chapter. “We’ve always argued they should be much more stringent where you have oil and gas mixing with people in close proximity.”

    Two agencies in Texas regulate oil and gas production: the Texas Railroad Commission, which permits oil and gas drilling and inspects for groundwater contamination every five years, and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, or TCEQ, which regulates air pollution. It’s responsible for ensuring that the state meets federal air pollution standards for smog, ozone and soot but leaves routine inspection of wells to gas companies like Total. The agency, which conducts inspections only in response to complaints or red flags in gas companies’ self-reports, monitors a tiny fraction of Tarrant County’s 4,001 wells. The TCEQ conducted 93 inspections here in fiscal year 2019 and 134 in fiscal year 2020, according to Gary Rasp, the TCEQ spokesperson.

    The TCEQ can set individualized emission limits as part of the permitting process. But the agency offers leniency to many companies, allowing most well sites in Tarrant County, including some of Total’s, to obtain a permit by rule. That status allows companies to avoid not only individualized emission limits, but also public hearings. 

    Some communities on the Barnett Shale have stepped in to fill the regulatory gaps. Kenneth Tramm’s company, Modern Geosciences, has been contracted by five municipalities to inspect well sites for leaks. In one case in Grand Prairie, a gas company reported no leaks at its well site over the course of five years. Yet in a 2015 audit, Tramm’s company found 22 leaks in 15 minutes. “A lot of people are using instruments that honestly couldn’t see numbers that would matter,” Tramm said. “Yet they derive a comfort from the performance of an inspection.” 

    Portrait of Ranjana Bhandari
    Ranjana Bhandari is the founder of the anti-drilling group Liveable Arlington. Credit: Zerb Mellish for Reveal

    The inadequate inspections come at a cost. He recalls visiting a site in Denton in 2018 where he said his instruments detected “a catastrophic failure.” “Something on one of their tanks is actually blowing out,” he said. “So it’s immediate lockdown.”

    In Arlington, lax regulations mean no government entity has ever conducted an environmental impact or health assessment of either individual wells or the cumulative effects of the oil and gas enterprise that sprawls across the city. Nor, as Ranjana Bhandari, the anti-drilling activist, points out, has there ever been an effort to evaluate whether the drilling disproportionately affects communities of color. “I’m quite certain that there is no requirement” to assess wells’ environmental impact, Richard Gertson, the city’s assistant director of planning, told Reveal. “We’re not ignorant of the fact that any operation, much less gas drilling, is going to have impacts. We just have to balance it appropriately against our obligation not only to the citizens, but also to operators for commercially reasonable extraction.”

    Researchers from the University of Texas at Austin recently studied emissions from the Barnett Shale and found that the amount of methane pollution being released per unit of gas is growing even as production declines. Some emissions come from large equipment failures, according to David Allen, a co-author of the study and a former chair of the EPA’s science advisory board, but much comes from thousands of smaller leaks across the nation’s fourth-largest metro area. Equipment parts, he said, are “going to continue to break and then get repaired and break and get repaired.” 

    ‘We were on our own’

    Bhandari, an economist and former college instructor, had her first brush with gas drilling in 2007. That’s when Chesapeake Energy Corp. sent landmen door to door in her affluent neighborhood in West Arlington, a hilly area of elegant homes on large, elaborately landscaped lots. Chesapeake, later acquired by Total, wanted the mineral rights to the gas below their homes. Bhandari, who didn’t want drilling anywhere near her son, then 5, refused to sign. Some neighbors had a different strategy, she said – they wanted the royalties without the drill rigs. Ultimately, the company agreed to move the well site about a mile away and drill horizontally from there. 

    The experience taught Bhandari that property owners can influence where drilling happens – in a way that renters can’t. “When I drive out of my neighborhood, within about three minutes, I see three drill sites, and they are right next door to much poorer homes,” she said. 

    In the years that followed, the Sierra Club, the environmental advocacy group, promoted natural gas as a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change. So did then-President Barack Obama. Their argument at the time was that power plants using natural gas pump out far less carbon dioxide than coal-fired plants. But they didn’t factor in the vast amounts of methane – an even more potent greenhouse gas – that leak from wells and other equipment.

    In the midst of the ensuing fracking boom, new drill sites kept getting approved in Arlington. Bhandari expected national environmental groups to swoop in and raise a ruckus. But “nobody came, nobody did anything,” Bhandari recalls. “We were on our own.”

    The few neighborhoods that managed to keep out drilling, Bhandari noticed, were affluent like hers.

    One of those rare places was an upscale, predominantly White neighborhood called Rush Creek. During a packed 2012 City Council meeting, scores of people spoke against drilling there, including then-Mayor Robert Cluck. He urged the gas company to drill horizontally from somewhere else to access the gas. 

    “I think there are other ways to get to this area rather than putting it in a place that’s surrounded by homes and is a beautiful place,” Cluck said. “This is a premium housing area. Why in the world would you not come from some other place?”

    After the council voted to spare Rush Creek, it approved drilling in a predominantly Latinx area near Cowboys Stadium, where the median household income is $23,000, less than half the city median.

    “That night was pretty revealing,” recalled Bhandari, who watched the meeting remotely. “I was pretty horrified.”

    From Bhandari’s perspective, there was now so much drilling in Arlington that it had changed the character of her city. She said she’d get headaches from the fumes as she drove around town. In 2013, the City Council was considering a request to drill near two day cares. For the first time, she got up to speak. Despite voices of opposition, the council voted to approve a new drill zone at a well pad called Rocking Horse. Although Bhandari didn’t realize it at the time, that decision – to permit not a single drill site, but an entire zone – would frustrate drilling opponents years into the future.

    The following year, Bhandari and a half-dozen other mothers and grandmothers banded together to launch Liveable Arlington. “Something just snapped, and I said we were going to form a group,” she recalled. “I didn’t want to be an activist. I still don’t think of myself as one. When you live in places like this, you have to do this for your children.”

    Later that year, the people of nearby Denton passed their fateful ballot initiative to ban fracking, spurring the state Legislature to rise to the defense of the gas industry. House Bill 40 – one of a wave of state preemption laws sweeping the country – passed the Texas House overwhelmingly, 125-20. Rep. Chris Turner, a Democrat who represents Arlington, was one of the few to oppose it. In March, he introduced legislation to give local communities more say. But with Republicans in control of the Legislature, his bill hasn’t gotten a floor vote.

    That’s left opposition in the hands of volunteers like Bhandari.

    Liveable Arlington’s first big win was in 2017, when a gas company applied to drill a wastewater injection well near Lake Arlington, the source of drinking water for half a million people. Bhandari’s group organized a petition opposing the permit, and the company withdrew its application.

    Before Mother’s Heart, the only time the Arlington City Council had rejected Total’s drilling plans was in 2018, when the company sought a permit near another day care, Cornerstone Academy. But after Total promised to relocate Cornerstone’s playground, the council reversed itself and approved the wells.

    Given that experience, Bhandari said she was on edge last summer, “waiting to find out what mischief they’re planning. I’ll be damned if I’m going to let Total win something here easily.”

    Weak rules and no will to enforce

    At first blush, the Mother’s Heart vote seemed like a turning point. But in the ensuing months, Total continued to press for the right to drill next to preschools. And previous City Council votes, combined with that 2015 state law, would make it hard for the city to say no.

    Total did not immediately challenge the Mother’s Heart vote. It simply pivoted to securing a permit to drill seven new wells at Rocking Horse, the well pad that inspired Bhandari’s first anti-fracking speech. Rocking Horse is in Council Member Marvin Sutton’s district, where the majority of residents are African American or Latinx. It’s also right next to two day cares licensed to care for about 250 kids. 

    Arlington City Council Member Marvin Sutton at the Rocking Horse drill site in November 2020. Credit: Lauren Rangel

    Directly to the east of the well pad lies block after block of modest, single-family homes built in the 1980s. The day cares are just to the northeast. But Total didn’t have to face those parents or residents in a public hearing. Nor did Sutton and his council colleagues get to vote. In that 2013 vote – the one where Bhandari first spoke out and long before Sutton was elected – the City Council had granted Total a “drill zone” at Rocking Horse, giving the company the indefinite right to secure new drilling permits without a vote or public meeting.

    Gas companies had pressed for the city to create these zones. “There is no need to burden council with additional permit approvals,” one gas company, Vantage, argued at the time. 

    “It’s completely emblematic of all the things that are wrong with urban drilling in Arlington,” Bhandari said. “You see it happening recklessly close to homes, schools and medical offices. You see no neighborhood input. You see really, really weak rules and no will or desire on the part of local government or the state to see that those rules are actually implemented.”

    Reveal asked Richard Gertson, the Arlington planning official, about his office’s decision to approve the permits at Rocking Horse right after the council blocked drilling near Mother’s Heart.

    “I understand those who may say, ‘Well, they’re exactly the same aren’t they?’ It’s drilling and you’ve got day cares and all these other uses, but it’s a different situation as far as we’re concerned,” he said. “Once the council establishes that drill zone, as they did in 2013, then any future permit applications, if they are inside that drill zone, they may be approved administratively.”

    In November, 10 days after Total had begun drilling under its new permits at Rocking Horse, Liveable Arlington captured video of black smoke billowing from the machinery. Bhandari suspected the company may have been using a diesel rig.

    Bhandari sent the video to a city inspector, who confirmed her suspicions. The city let Total finish the well that was underway but required the company to halt additional work until it brought in an electric rig, Gertson said.

    “Those little children have no voice in this,” Bhandari said. “They are completely at the mercy of this nexus of politicians and an industry that just operates like it’s above the law.” She said Total’s use of the diesel rig exemplifies the company’s complete disregard for the rules – until it gets caught.

    In Texas, there is rarely anyone looking. Last year, when Total asked the state environmental agency for a permit by rule to drill and frack those seven new wells at Rocking Horse, the agency laid out its lack of oversight in a letter: “Be advised no review has been done by TCEQ to verify that the site meets the requirements of the permit by rule.”

    Gertson, too, was explicit that his office expects gas operators to police themselves. “That’s not our procedure to try to babysit a site or to monitor a site during drilling,” he said.

    Total declined to respond to questions, but Kevin Strawser, the senior manager, issued a brief statement. “We operate our sites in a safe and environmentally responsible way that is compliant with the requirements of our business,” he said, adding that the company works “diligently to ensure the safety and quality of life for our neighbors near our sites.”

    ‘We’ve opened the door’

    Marvin Sutton spent his career as an air traffic controller at the Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, where keeping people safe was his mission. After the diesel rig incident, he headed over to the Rocking Horse well site to assess the risks. The Childcare Network is just 359 feet away from the drilling, and its outdoor play area is even closer. 

    “We know that distance between airplanes increases our margin of safety,” Sutton said. “The goal is to add a margin of safety and protect the kids.”

    His decision to run for City Council was driven by a desire to improve public safety in his hometown. He ran six times before winning a seat in 2019.

    Air pollution worries him, but so does the risk of accidents, like when a gas pipeline 2015 well blowout sent 42,800 gallons of fracking fluid onto Arlington streets.

    Exasperated that a City Council decision eight years ago prevented him from protecting the day cares near Rocking Horse today, Sutton proposed to change the rules. He sought to measure the 600-foot setback between wells and day cares not from the facility, but from the property line. That was enough to run afoul of Total. 

    In February email exchanges obtained by Reveal, Total told city staff that it wanted the city to exclude its existing well sites from the proposed restrictions, mentioning one well pad in particular, called Galletta. Failing to do so, wrote Julie Jones, Total’s manager for regulation and real estate, “could prohibit further development of wells at that location.” Total went on to claim that failing to issue the exemption would violate state law – and cited HB 40 by name. Galletta is 280 feet from a shopping center that’s home to Little Texans of Arlington Daycare.

    At a City Council meeting in February, city staff presented satellite images showing two Total well sites, including Galletta, operating outside of drill zones and adjacent to day cares. The well sites are so close to day cares, they said, that changing the setback from buildings to property lines could indeed prevent Total from drilling new wells there. The staff report indicated meetings with the gas industry, but not with the day cares. And it noted that the gas industry saw the measure as a slippery slope; next, the city would want to increase setbacks for other protected uses, such as schools or doctor’s offices.

    Council Member Andrew Piel, an industry supporter, cited Total’s email saying, “I didn’t want to expose the city to litigation.” 

    The email exchanges show an extensive back and forth between Arlington’s staff and Total’s. “I know staff is and will continue to look for possible solutions to avoid a potential legal conflict,” wrote Galen Gatten, the city’s land use attorney.

    The council compromised, deciding that the 600-foot setback will now also apply to playgrounds, but not property lines. The ordinance change, adopted unanimously in April, also grandfathered in existing drill zones, which would allow more drilling at Rocking Horse.

    Sutton saw the ordinance change as “testing the waters,” a step toward reasserting local control. So was his recent mayoral bid, in which he came in third in a crowded field, running on a platform that emphasized drilling safety. “We’ve opened the door,” he said, “and we’re going to continue to open that door, to get what we really need to protect our citizens and to protect our kids.”

    Even as the nation grapples with climate change and recognizes the need to wean itself off fossil fuels, the residents of Arlington – and millions of others who live close to wells – can expect to keep living with drilling for decades. Their fate now turns on the demands of a growing new export industry that’s ramping up to ship methane across the globe in the form of liquified natural gas.

    President Joe Biden has declared his commitment to slashing greenhouse gas pollution by at least 50% by the end of the decade. But he has also said he will not ban fracking – and he has yet to lay out how he will square those two commitments. As for liquefied natural gas, Biden’s energy secretary, Jennifer Granholm, told Congress in January that these exports “have an important role to play in reducing international consumption of fuels that have greater contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.”  

    Total is based in France, which banned fracking in 2017. Yet thanks in part to drilling in U.S. shale communities like Arlington, the company is a player in liquefied natural gas on a global scale. Total has just rebranded as TotalEnergies, building on its pledge to be a net-zero greenhouse gas polluter by 2050. But its plan to be “a world-class player in the energy transition” still depends heavily on drilling and fracking. “Total has made natural gas, the least polluting of all fossil fuels, a cornerstone of its strategy in order to meet the growing global demand for energy while helping to mitigate climate change,” the company said in an April report.  

    The EPA, stuck figuring out how to manage fracking’s environmental fallout, begins listening sessions today to seek public comment as it prepares to draft new rules to control the inevitable methane leaks. Many people who are trying to carve out lives inside the drill zone – from Texas to California, Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania and beyond – have signed up to speak, as has Bhandari. She wants answers about why the U.S. government lets Total drill in the backyard of American day cares when it cannot frack anywhere in its home country. 

    “We have this ingrained sense that this couldn’t happen in America, so we are willfully looking at it and choosing not to recognize it for what it is,” Bhandari said. “This is ecocide.” 

    Reveal data reporter Mohamed Al Elew contributed to this story. It was edited by Esther Kaplan, Soo Oh and Taki Telonidis. It was copy edited by Nikki Frick. Lead photo by Zerb Mellish.

    Elizabeth Shogren can be reached at eshogren@revealnews.org. Follow her on Twitter: @ShogrenE.

    Life in the drill zone is a story from Reveal. Reveal is a registered trademark of The Center for Investigative Reporting and is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization.

    This post was originally published on Reveal.

  • The Innocence Project joined a diverse group group of immigrants’ rights organizations, criminal justice reform advocates, and others to demand that the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio immediately cease and desist from their practice of forced dental radiography and attendant “age estimation” imposed on children, many of whom are seeking asylum. These procedures are typically requested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to wrongly and erroneously reclassify children as adults, which often leads to children being placed in detention with adults and possibly deported. The procedures are not initiated or intended for any diagnostic, treatment, or other health-related purpose (or other benefit) for the children. 

    Many of these children have documentary evidence that makes them readily identifiable as legal minors under the age of 18, in the form of a passport, valid birth certificates, or baptismal certificates, in addition to representations by their family members and themselves as to their ages. Despite such proof, immigration officials often dispute a child’s age and seek procedures to reclassify the child as an adult, which leads to the loss of heightened legal protections the law gives to children. Indeed, the Innocence Project has collaborated with immigrants’ rights’ organizations in 16 individual cases in which an asylum-seeking individual was deemed to be an adult. In 15 of these cases, our clients were, in fact, children who were wrongfully jailed in adult detention centers.  

    These “age estimation” practices not only have been found scientifically untenable by judicial tribunals in the U.S. and in Europe, but also grossly violate children’s common law and constitutional rights, and the basic right to bodily integrity. Dental age estimation procedures, depending on the circumstances in which they are authorized or performed on these children, also contravene medical and dental ethical obligations. In short, there is no justification for using these questionable techniques on young asylum seekers, the majority of whom come from developing countries and are particularly vulnerable.

    The post Innocence Project Joins Immigrant Rights Groups in Demanding That the University of Texas Stop Unlawful Use of ‘Dental Age Estimation’ appeared first on Innocence Project.

    This post was originally published on Innocence Project.

  • If we want to quickly combat climate change, we need to deal with “the other” greenhouse gas: methane. Methane leaks are heating up the planet and harming people who live where gas drilling takes place. 

    Reporter Elizabeth Shogren introduces us to a NASA scientist who’s devoting his career to hunting down big methane leaks. Riley Duren and his team have figured out how to spot methane pollution from airplane flyovers, and in an experiment, his data was used to make polluters plug their leaks. Scientists have answers to the methane problem. The question is whether governments will step up to fund a comprehensive methane monitoring system. 

    Next, Shogren zooms in on Arlington, Texas, a community that bet heavily on drilling for methane, the main ingredient in natural gas. There are wells all over Arlington, next to homes and shopping centers, even day cares and schools. Arlington’s children have unwittingly been part of an experiment to see what happens when gas wells and people mix.

    We end the show with a story from Reveal’s Brett Simpson about a serious source of methane that is often overlooked. Cows and other livestock produce 14% of the world’s methane emissions, in many places belching more of the gas than oil and gas wells. We meet a scientist who’s figured out how to reduce methane emissions from cows by 80%.

    This post was originally published on Reveal.

  • The Texas deputy who tased a 16-year-old asylum-seeker at a government-funded shelter was placed on administrative leave, the Bexar County Sheriff’s Office said on Wednesday. 

    The announcement came a day after Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting published bodycam footage of the incident as part of an investigation into federally sponsored shelters turning over migrant children to law enforcement. 

    In the footage, which Reveal obtained through a public records request, Deputy Patrick Divers can be seen arriving at the Southwest Key Casa Blanca shelter in San Antonio. Staff there had called 911 after the boy, who had fled Honduras at age 15, refused to go to class and had broken some bed frames and storage bins.

    Divers didn’t request evidence of the child’s alleged wrongdoing at the time, according to the footage. The deputy didn’t attempt to have his orders translated into Spanish by the bilingual shelter staff, nor did he tell the boy that he was under arrest. He ordered the teen in English to stand up and turn around. The child showed no signs of fighting back or resisting arrest. Divers then repeatedly pulsed the weapon on the child’s torso and thighs, shocking him for 35 seconds, the footage shows. 

    Divers, a 27-year veteran of the department, couldn’t be reached for comment for the investigation. 

    The sheriff’s office has continued to deny Reveal access to a number of documents that would help the public better understand what happened. For months, Reveal has sought a copy of a use-of-force report that Divers and his partner, Harold Schneider, would have ostensibly had to file after the tasing. We have also requested the department’s use-of-force policy to understand whether the deputies’ actions were allowed. (We found that the department had already submitted an unredacted version of its use-of-force policies as part of an unrelated lawsuit and published the chapter in full online.)

    What’s more, as we prepared to publish this investigation, a Sheriff’s Office sergeant requested that we destroy the video, arguing he never should have released it to the public because it involves a juvenile. 

    On Wednesday, officials went a step further in their attempts to keep the information from Reveal. 

    The Bexar County District Attorney’s Office issued a letter to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, seeking a ruling against releasing additional records. In its letter, the district attorney contends that “release would interfere with law enforcement and prosecution” because it would give criminals sensitive information on how law enforcement operates.

    The district attorney also noted that the sheriff had requested that Reveal destroy the video footage. Reveal will not destroy the video. There is a strong public interest in its airing. The child’s grandmother told Reveal that she wants the video to be published so the public knows what can happen in shelters for migrant children in the United States.

    Additionally, U.S. Rep. Joaquin Castro, a Democrat who represents San Antonio, called for a federal inquiry into what happened.

    “I am urging a full investigation by the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services of this incident, and also the Department’s policy with respect to the use of local police and a review of refugee shelter’s employee training and trauma-informed care practices,” he wrote in a statement. 

    Reveal’s investigation has found that over the last six years, shelters have discharged at least 84 migrant children, ages 11 to 17, to local law enforcement. Additional records for 19 of the children indicate many children were arrested over allegations of fighting and property damage. Only one was arrested for a felony and prosecutors didn’t pursue charges in the case. 

    Southwest Key’s Casa Blanca shelter is funded by the Office of Refugee Resettlement, which is part of the Department of Health and Human Services. A Southwest Key spokesperson declined to comment on Divers’s leave, saying that it is a law enforcement matter. The federal refugee agency did not respond to requests for comment about Divers’s placement on administrative leave. 

    Aura Bogado can be reached at abogado@revealnews.org, and Laura C. Morel can be reached at lmorel@revealnews.org. Follow them on Twitter: @aurabogado and @lauracmorel.

    Texas deputy who tased migrant child placed on administrative leave is a story from Reveal. Reveal is a registered trademark of The Center for Investigative Reporting and is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization.

    This post was originally published on Reveal.

  • Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General, speaks during a panel discussion during the Conservative Political Action Conference on February 27, 2021 in Orlando, Florida.

    Conservative Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said on Friday that, had his office not blocked Harris County from sending out mail-in ballot applications to all of its registered voters, Donald Trump would have lost the state.

    Paxton told former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in a podcast that blocking the applications was instrumental to Trump’s win, because otherwise the state “would’ve been one of those battleground states that they were counting votes in Harris County for three days and Donald Trump would’ve lost the election.”

    “If we’d lost Harris County—Trump won by 620,000 votes in Texas,” Paxton said. “Harris County mail-in ballots that they wanted to send out were 2.5 million, those were all illegal and we were able to stop every one of them,” he continued, falsely conflating ballot applications with ballots.

    Harris County officials announced last August that they planned to send mail-in ballot applications to all 2.4 million of its registered voters. The county houses Houston and is the third most populous county in the U.S.

    A lawsuit brought by Paxton on behalf of the Republicans to block the plan succeeded, however, and the county was barred by the courts from sending the unsolicited applications. The effort to widen voting access, Paxton’s office argued, would confuse voters. (Several states sent out not ballot applications but actual mail-in ballots automatically to voters last year without causing widespread fraud or confusion.)

    Meanwhile, Texas and its largely Republican state officials had changed many voting rules several times before the 2020 election. Paxton led the charge in the state against no-excuse absentee voting and enacted a policy that was “a recipe for disaster,” as Slate wrote, when Texas disallowed people from filing for an absentee ballot if they were not considered at high-risk for complications from COVID-19 — just months before the election.

    It’s unclear if Trump would have actually won the state if Harris County had been allowed to follow through on its plan to make voting more accessible. While President Joe Biden won the county by a 13-point margin or nearly 220,000 votes, with record-breaking voter turnout, Trump carried the state with over 600,000 votes.

    Regardless of whether the results would have been any different for Biden had Harris County been able to send out mail-in ballot applications, Paxton’s statement about the election results seven months after the fact is revealing of how conservatives view elections and voting rights. Rather than ensuring that elections are conducted fairly, they openly support blocking access to the ballot by any means necessary, especially among voters in more Democratic leaning and nonwhite areas. Paxton, after all, is the same person who sued to disenfranchise millions of voters in battleground states following Biden’s victory in the 2020 elections.

    Regardless of whether Paxton’s lawsuit against the mail-in ballot applications handed Trump his victory in Texas, it was certainly one more tool in the GOP’s voter-suppression toolbox for the state. Analyses have shown that Texas is the hardest state to vote in, with restrictions like strict voter ID laws, limits on ballot drop-off locations, and mail-in ballot eligibility requirements. Moreover, Republican-led gerrymandering has worked to further suppress Democratic voters in the state.

    Recently, Texas Democrats walked off the legislative floor in an attempt to block yet another voter suppression bill that their Republican colleagues tried to ram through the legislature. In the wake of widespread outrage over provisions in the bill that will affect the voting rights of millions — such as limits on voting on Sunday mornings, which critics point out is a clear attempt to restrict the Black vote — Republicans have made the absurd claim that it was just a typo.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • It’s ironic that Republicans in Texas are so committed to abolishing abortion.

    Abortion is their primary modus operandi.

    Abortion is basically their chief reason for being.

    Every election season, Republicans try to abort voting rights, especially for Texans of a different complexion. And as much weeping and gnashing of teeth Republicans do about late-term abortion, they would gleefully abort the results of the last presidential election. An inordinate number of Texas Republicans tried on January 6. They can’t help themselves.

    While the United States of America was established by the descendants of immigrants, the Republic of Texas was largely founded by actual immigrants. The only two native Texans who signed the Texas Declaration of Independence were Jose Francisco Ruiz and Jose Antonio Navarro; so, besides the original founders without Spanish surnames, Republicans are fierce opponents of immigration and naturalization. Republicans would abort immigration altogether if they could, but, in recent years they’ve had to settle for separating immigrant children from their parents and placing them in cages along our border. It’s sad, but at least the victims are brown.

    Texas Republicans aren’t real keen on persons of color in general—immigrant or no—unless they’re carrying a football. Which brings to mind another white conservative conundrum. It’s difficult for Texas Republicans to think highly of themselves and their forebears if the facts about Texas independence and the countless atrocities committed against persons of color are widely propagated. Truth-telling, therefore, must be aborted. It’s a constant priority. But—to their tremendous benefit—the only thing more powerful than white fragility in Texas these days is conservative white political agility.

    When Texas Republicans aren’t obsessing over ways to disenfranchise persons of color, they go after women. Texas Republicans have a perpetual, Viagra-charged hard-on for aborting women’s reproductive rights, and also fight against fair pay for Texas women. It’s no wonder there are less and less Republican babies around.

    And there’s the real rub.

    White women have the most abortions. If women of color were the largest demographic utilizing birth control or terminating their pregnancies, Texas Republicans would make birth control and abortion kits available at the drive-thru of every Whataburger in the state.

    I’m not trying to be funny.

    There’s no reason to mince words. Their record is clear.

    Texas Republicans initially aborted the insurance exchange clause of Obamacare here in the Lone Star State to poison the proverbial well. It denied millions of folks affordable health care and, ultimately, killed Texans just to score political points. More recently, Texas Republicans aborted the right to protest Big Oil and regularly abort clean air and clean water measures, poisoning millions of Texans, destroying animal habitats and restricting access to precious natural resources. And Texas Republicans are currently working to abort reasonable gun control efforts, abort real reforms of the Texas power grid (which killed Texans during the ice storm this last February) and abort the homeless (instead of mitigating the conditions that create them).

    Oh, and they get away with all this because Republicans aborted the FCC Fairness Doctrine back in 1987, ushering in a media environment where a propaganda machine like Fox News could brainwash conservative voters, convincing them to self-abort theretofore long-standing notions of honesty, conscience and human decency.

    In a word, Texas Republicans are more of a miscarriage than an abortion—of justice, of intellect, of forethought and of reasonable governance. But abortion is the means by which they simultaneously make Texas a laughingstock and a menace.

    The post The Party of “Abortion” in Texas first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Lake Highlands High School valedictorian Paxton Smith decries Texas' assault on reproductive rights in Dallas, Texas, on May 30, 2021.

    A Texas high school valedictorian’s graduation speech garnered attention from Democratic lawmakers and rights advocates Wednesday after going viral on social media — not for the typical optimism contained in such addresses, but for the student’s decision to go off-script and speak out against her state’s assault on reproductive rights.

    At Lake Highlands High School’s graduation on Sunday in Dallas, Paxton Smith scrapped her valedictory address — which had been approved by school officials — and told her audience it felt wrong to her “to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in this state.”

    “Starting in September, there will be a ban on abortions that take place after six weeks of pregnancy, regardless of whether the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest,” Smith said, referring to Senate Bill 8, which Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law last month.

    In addition to banning abortion care after six weeks of pregnancy, at which point many women don’t yet know they’re pregnant, the law allows any citizen to sue anyone who “aids or abets” a patient who has an abortion — including clinic employees, friends or family members who drive the patient to their appointment, or providers.

    “I have dreams, hopes, and ambitions,” said Smith. “Every girl here does. We have spent our whole lives working towards our futures, and without our consent or input, our control over our futures has been stripped away from us. I am terrified that if my contraceptives fail me, that if I’m raped, then my hopes and efforts and dreams for myself will no longer be relevant. I hope you can feel how gut-wrenching it is, how dehumanizing it is, to have the autonomy over your own body taken from you.”

    Smith’s speech begins at the 4:38 mark below:

    Smith won praise from lawmakers including Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) and state Rep. Julie Johnson, both of whom applauded the graduate’s “brave” decision to speak candidly about abortion care in a congressional district that has historically been solidly Republican before voters elected Democratic Rep. Colin Allred in 2018.

    “It gives members of the Texas Women’s Health Caucus hope to know that young women like Paxton Smith are out there to carry the torch,” said Johnson.

    Others on social media echoed the lawmakers’ admiration, calling Smith “a force” and thanking her for articulating “the connection between a woman’s achievements, opportunities, and control over her body.”

    “I refuse to give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights,” Smith said in her speech. “A war on the rights of your sisters, a war on the rights of your mothers, a war on the rights of your daughters. We cannot stay silent.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • This Pride Month, we celebrate LGBTQ rights and equality. But there is still much work to be done to combat prejudice and discrimination against LGBTQ communities in the United States, including within the legal system and among law enforcement.

    Last year, nationwide protests against police brutality and racial bias prompted calls for investigations into the deaths of two Black transgender people — Tony McDade, who was shot and killed by police in Florida in May 2020, and Layleen Polanco, who died in isolation in 2019 at Rikers Island where she was being held on a $500 bail she could not afford to pay.

    Trans people are almost four times more likely to experience police violence than cisgender people — people whose gender identity corresponds with their birth sex — according to the Anti-Violence Project. McDade’s death highlighted this tragic fact, while Polanco’s death in the custody of the legal system drew attention to the discriminatory treatment that members of the LGBTQ community experience while detained.

    But these are just two examples of the many ways in which the legal system is failing the LGBTQ community. 

    “I think people are surprised to learn that wrongful conviction happens as a result of homophobia and prejudice against the LGBTQ community, especially in this time where things have been changing and improving more generally,” Anna Vasquez told the Innocence Project.

    In 1995, Vasquez and three of her friends were wrongly accused of sexually abusing two young girls in San Antonio, Texas, after one of the women, Elizabeth Ramirez, rejected the advances of the children’s father Javier Limon. All four of the women identify as lesbians, a fact that colored the investigation into the accusations and case against them.

    Police often profile and criminalize LGBTQ people, according to the American Bar Association, and this has lead to arrests based on biased beliefs, influenced investigations, and contributed to the harassment and sexual assault of LGBTQ people by law enforcement officers.

    “We were looked at horribly, horribly,” Vasquez said. “Because of people’s opinions and all that was going on back then that we were made out to be these horrible monsters.”

    At the time of their arrest, several false allegations of child abuse in daycare centers believed to be part of satanic rituals had led to more than a decade of the “Satanic Panic.” In multiple cases, law enforcement and prosecutors relied on scientifically invalid expert testimony which attributed hymen tears to sexual abuse or testimony based on coercive or suggestive interrogations.

    “We were looked at horribly, horribly.”

    “That was the way it all started — the “daycare panic” and the “Satanic Panic” — and the gay community was already looked upon as preying on children. So, unfortunately, that’s how it all just got out of control because I was a gay woman and my alleged victims were little girls,” Vasquez said.

    But it wasn’t just the unfounded national fear of satanic ritual abuse that influenced the investigation into their case, Vasquez said. Both she and Kristie Mayhugh, one of the other women accused, are not feminine-presenting, which she believes contributed to the discrimination they experienced.

    “That right there put a bad taste in people’s mouth,” she said. “And it was really Javier who led this accusation against us because he didn’t like that Liz was gay and had rejected him — it was a shot to his ego — but you would think law enforcement or expert witnesses would try to find the truth, but they also had these opinions and biases. And so it just fueled the fire.”

    During their hearings, Vasquez said the prosecutor emphasized the fact that she and her friends were gay.

    “They just kept hammering on it …. ‘These are four gay women, this is what gay people do, this is how they live their lives’,” she recalled. People who identify as LGBTQ are incarcerated at three times the rate of the general U.S. population, according to one study. And this disproportionate rate of incarceration is influenced by many of the same types of discrimination that have led to the over-incarceration of people of color.

    “You would think law enforcement or expert witnesses would try to find the truth…”

    Because of the widespread bias and discrimination the gay community was already experiencing at the time, Vasquez said they received little support from the wider LGBTQ community.

    “The gay community was already portrayed as being child predators and they didn’t want to be connected with a case like this,” even though it was a wrongful conviction, she said.

    Vasquez and her friends were wrongfully convicted in 1998 and spent 15 years in prison before being released on bail in 2013 after one of the alleged victims recanted her statement saying that her father had pressured her to lie. The women came to be known as the “San Antonio Four” and were exonerated with the help of the Innocence Project of Texas in 2016. The documentary “Southwest of Salem” tells their story. 

    Today, Vasquez is the director of outreach and education at the Innocence Project of Texas, where she shares her story of wrongful conviction to help educate the community, providing the kind of information she wishes she’d had before her wrongful conviction.

    “I just wish I was educated about this … I wish I had some kind of knowledge of wrongful convictions when this all happened to me, or even a basic knowledge of my rights,” Vasquez said. “I think a lot of people take for granted or expect law enforcement to protect you and to find out the truth in an investigation. And, unfortunately, we cooperated … and I did everything that I was raised to do by complying with law enforcement, but it just went horribly wrong.”

    Embed from Getty Images

    Part of Vasquez’s job now is working to educate law enforcement and legal practitioners about biases and wrongful conviction.

    “We have to tackle all the biases, their [misinformed] opinions, and prejudices in how they were raised,” she said.

    Vasquez said that when it comes to dismantling discrimination against Black people, other people of color, and the LGBTQ community she hopes to see movements come together to advocate for systemic change. In particular, she hopes the LGBTQ community will come together to support one another.

    While incarcerated, Vasquez was shocked to witness the unchecked abuse of a trans woman. 

    “People would throw rocks at her and the guards would encourage it and call her a ‘freak,’ and I just didn’t understand that as a gay woman, because there were many other gay women in prison. Yet they treated this person like she was something else even though she was part of their own LGBTQ community,” she said.

    To really bring about change, Vasquez said she hopes to see people working together as a community.

    “Whether you’re lesbian or gay or transgender, instead of approaching it like lesbians have bigger problems or gay people have worse problems or trans people have bigger problems, we need to push forward together because equality is what we want,” she said.

    “That’s all anybody wants and that’s what everyone is fighting for and we must continue that.”

    The post ‘We were made out to be these horrible monsters’: How Homophobia Led to the Wrongful Conviction of Four Texas Women appeared first on Innocence Project.

    This post was originally published on Innocence Project.

  • Trump supporters rally in Tampa, Florida, at a Make America Great Again rally on July 31, 2018. Trump has recently been telling people he will be reinstated as president in August 2021.

    A vicious military coup d’état took place on February 1 of this year in the nation of Myanmar. Parliament was preparing to convene after a November election that saw Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy win 83 percent of the available seats. The military refused to accept the results of the election — and started killing. More than 600 people have been murdered in the violence, and thousands have been injured. “Many of those killed have been young protesters,” reports The New York Times, “their lives ended with a single gunshot to the head.”

    Michael Flynn, Donald Trump’s disgraced former national security adviser, attended a QAnon-heavy event in Dallas, Texas, over the weekend. The main topic of the event, called “For God & Country Patriot Roundup,” was the ongoing gibberish belief that Trump won the election.

    One attendee asked Flynn, “I want to know why what happened in Myanmar can’t happen here?” The audience cheered the question loudly. When they quieted, Flynn replied, “No reason. I mean, it should happen here. No reason.” When confronted with his own words, Flynn scrambled to claim that he didn’t actually say what he actually said into a recording camera, calling it “a boldface fabrication based on twisted reporting.” The camera did not lie, however: A former military general and high-ranking official in a Republican administration appeared to endorse the military overthrow of the United States government before a rapturously cheering Republican crowd.

    Flynn is no wild-eyed outrider. A vast majority of the Republican Party has become loudly and vigorously anti-democratic in the aftermath of the Trump administration and the election that ended it. Trump himself has been going around telling people he expects to be reinstated as president by August, while giving no explanation for how this might come about. As there is no democratic mechanism for reinstalling a defeated president, he can only be speaking of one thing: another coup d’état, but here, and at the highest level.

    State-level Republican officeholders are not waiting for August, but are laboring to affect their own slow-rolling coup in the upcoming elections. In more than a dozen states, brutally repressive anti-voter laws are being put in place in an attempt to make it impossible for non-Republican voters to cast a ballot. Seemingly convinced after 2020 that it is no longer possible for Republicans to actually win national elections, and stoutly incapable of making changes needed to alter that fate because Trump still commands the party, Republicans in these states have chosen to attack the underpinnings of democracy itself.

    Nowhere has this been more evident than in Texas, where the Republican-controlled legislature this weekend attempted to pass the most draconian anti-voter laws in the nation. The bill, known as SB 7, is a terrifying raft of undiluted anti-democratic racism that has no business becoming law:

    The legislation would make it a felony for an election official to offer a voter an unsolicited absentee ballot application. It would further restrict which people qualify to vote absentee, even though Texas already has irrationally restrictive standards. It would eliminate safeguards meant to prevent election officials from mistakenly tossing absentee ballots based on dubious signature-matching issues. It would crimp Sunday voting in a way that would make it difficult for Black churches to run “Souls to the Polls” events. It would crack down on anyone transporting more than two non-relatives to a polling place. It would ban drive-through voting, temporary voting sites and 24-hour early voting. It would make it dangerously easy for state judges to overturn election results. And it would empower partisan poll watchers, encouraging them to hassle election officials and voters.

    It is well worth noting that had SB 7 passed, it would have become law the same week as a new Texas law that is on the verge of going into effect which allows people to carry concealed weapons without a permit. This means these “poll watchers” could all be packing heat as they try to intimidate and harass Democratic voters. If you think that’s a coincidence, I invite you to think again, hard.

    The GOP effort was temporarily stymied by Democrats, who walked out of the chamber en masse on Sunday night, preventing a final vote. The walkout represented a significant setback for Gov. Greg Abbott, who loudly supports the measures in the bill, but not a permanent one. Abbott has announced his intention to call a special session at some point in the future, where Republicans can again bring SB 7 to a vote. In retribution, Abbott has threatened to cut the funding for the legislature itself. “No pay for those who abandon their responsibilities,” he tweeted on Monday.

    “This is a battle over which party gets to rule,” Paul Waldman writes for The Washington Post. “But more importantly, it’s about whether we have a democracy at all, whether all citizens are allowed to vote and the system respects their decisions. That hasn’t always been true in the past. And if some people get their way, it won’t be true in the future.”

    As with so much else, this crisis bends all the way back to the filibuster. The U.S. House has resoundingly passed HB 1, which offers a wide range of voter protections that would all but obviate the anti-democratic shenanigans going on in Texas and elsewhere. Because of the filibuster, HB 1 is essentially doomed in the Senate. Until a law like HB 1 is on the books, very little can be done to thwart these staggering power grabs at the state level. If the issue is not confronted soon, there will be mayhem of the highest order come November 2022 and 2024.

    “Congratulations to Democrats in Texas for protecting democracy and the right to vote,” tweeted Bernie Sanders . “We must pass S. 1, the For The People Act. The future of American democracy is at stake.” S. 1 is the still-untouched Senate version of HB. 1.

    At a bare minimum, these actions and the mindset behind them must serve as a klaxon warning to President Biden and congressional Democrats: The Republicans are not coming to the table with clean hands. They do not want bipartisanship, and they do not want to cut deals. They will break this nation over their knees if they believe they will be deprived of the power they think they deserve as their (largely white) birthright. That Rubicon was crossed on January 6, and in case no one noticed, they haven’t stopped since.

    “If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism,” wrote George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum in 2018. “They will reject democracy.”

    When right-wingers like Frum display that level of prognostication, it’s time to slap the panic button good and hard. End the filibuster, pass HB 1 and understand: A lot of people make a habit out of downplaying the power of the vote, but if the vote has such little power, why are Republicans trying so hard to destroy it?

    Don’t let them.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Julian Castro speaks during the "Texans Rally For Our Voting Rights" event at the Texas Capitol Building on May 8, 2021 in Austin, Texas.

    Texas Democrats blocked final passage of a Republican-authored voter suppression bill late Sunday by abruptly walking off the state House floor, denying the chamber’s GOP majority the quorum necessary to proceed to a vote.

    The last-ditch move by Democratic lawmakers came hours after Texas Republicans rammed the bill through the state Senate in the dead of night following a marathon session on Saturday, maneuvering around rules that typically bar lawmakers from voting on legislation that has not been public for at least 24 hours.

    S.B. 7 (pdf), which Republican lawmakers crafted and expanded in secret, would impose new voter ID requirements for mail-in ballots, make it easier for judges to overturn election results, limit the use of ballot drop boxes, and restrict early voting hours on Sundays — a provision that civil rights groups said would disproportionately impact Black voters.

    After walking out of the House chamber shortly before the midnight deadline for passage of the bill, Texas Democrats gathered at Mt. Zion Baptist Church late Sunday in what the Texas Tribune described as a “nod at a last-minute addition to the expansive bill that set a new restriction on early voting hours on Sundays, limiting voting from 1 pm to 9 pm.”

    “Over the last two days, Democrats had derided the addition — dropped in during behind-closed-door negotiations — raising concerns that change would hamper ‘souls to the polls’ efforts meant to turn out voters, particularly Black voters, after church services,” the Tribune reported.

    Under Texas law, two-thirds of the 150 House members must be present for the chamber to take a vote — a requirement that went unfulfilled due to the Democrats’ walkout, which came after the minority party’s earlier delay tactics appeared likely to fail.

    “We’ve used all the tools in our toolbox to fight this bill,” state Rep. Nicole Collier (D-95), chair of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus, said in a speech outside Mt. Zion late Sunday. “And tonight we pulled out that last one.”

    Sarah Labowitz, policy and advocacy director at the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement that thanks to Democrats’ walkout, “one of the ugliest anti-voter bills in the country died today in the 2021 Texas Legislature.” But Labowitz emphasized that the fight is far from over and vowed to “remain vigilant against any attempt to bring back this racist bill in a special session.”

    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, promised to do just that in a tweet late Sunday after S.B. 7 — one of the governor’s top priorities and part of a wave of GOP-led voter suppression measures nationwide — failed to pass before the legislative session expired at midnight.

    S.B. 7 “will be added to the special session agenda,” Abbott wrote.

    State Rep. Chris Turner (D-101), chair of the House Democratic Caucus, acknowledged that Democrats looking to kill S.B. 7 for good face an uphill battle given the GOP’s dominance of the Texas legislature and control of the governor’s mansion.

    “We’re outnumbered. There’s no doubt about it. Republicans are in the majority,” said Turner. “Democrats are going to continue to use every tool in our toolbox to slow them down, to fight them, to stop them. What that looks like weeks or months down the road, I can’t predict at this point, but we’re going to fight with everything we’ve got.”

    “We did our part to stop S.B. 7,” added state Rep. Erin Zwiener (D-45). “Now we need Congress to do their part by passing H.R. 1 and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Governor of Texas Greg Abbott looks on prior to Game One of the 2020 MLB World Series at Globe Life Field between the Los Angeles Dodgers and the Tampa Bay Rays on October 20, 2020, in Arlington, Texas.

    After reaching a deal less than a day earlier, overnight Sunday Texas state senators debated then passed along party lines a GOP voter suppression bill that was condemned by rights advocates and political figures across the United States — including President Joe Biden — and has sparked calls for Congress to urgently combat Republican attacks on democracy.

    “Today, Texas legislators put forth a bill that joins Georgia and Florida in advancing a state law that attacks the sacred right to vote,” Biden said Saturday. “It’s part of an assault on democracy that we’ve seen far too often this year — and often disproportionately targeting Black and Brown Americans. It’s wrong and un-American. In the 21st century, we should be making it easier, not harder, for every eligible voter to vote.”

    Sarah Labowitz, policy and advocacy director of the ACLU of Texas, also slammed the state GOP’s Senate Bill 7 in a statement Saturday, declaring that “S.B. 7 is a ruthless piece of legislation.”

    “It targets voters of color and voters with disabilities, in a state that’s already the most difficult place to vote in the country. The defining message of the 2021 Texas Legislature is clear: Political leaders chose to punish their constituents instead of fixing the electrical grid or providing pandemic or blackout relief,” said Labowitz, referencing power issues that impacted the state earlier this year.

    “The bill, which was hashed out in a closed-door panel of lawmakers over the past week, was rushed to the State Senate floor late Saturday. In a legislative power play orchestrated by Republican lawmakers and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the Senate moved to suspend rules that required a bill to be public for 24 hours before a final vote,” the New York Times reported. “The Texas House did not move to suspend the rules, and is likely to vote on the bill on Sunday.”

    The Republican-controlled Texas Legislature is set to adjourn on Monday. The Washington Post noted that GOP Gov. Greg Abbott “threatened lawmakers with a special session if they did not pass a voting bill this week” and is expected to sign S.B. 7. Abbott is a potential 2024 presidential candidate and a major supporter of former President Trump — who, despite his definitive loss, claimed repeatedly that the 2020 election was “stolen” from him, which a majority of recently polled Republicans still believe.

    Critics have called S.B. 7 a clear effort to limit electoral participation in the largely Democratic Harris County because it would outlaw drive-thru and 24-hour voting, which nearly 140,000 county voters used in the 2020 election. Other provisions include barring election officials from sending absentee ballots to all voters, implementing new identification requirements for Texans who request mail ballots, allowing partisan poll watchers additional access, and imposing harsher punishments on election officials who violate state rules.

    According to the Post, “In a last-minute addition, language was inserted in the bill making it easier to overturn an election, no longer requiring evidence that fraud actually altered an outcome of a race — but rather only that enough ballots were illegally cast that could have made a difference.”

    “S.B. 7 remains a racist voter suppression bill that belongs in the Jim Crow era,” Common Cause Texas executive director Anthony Gutierrez said Saturday after a conference committee of state House and Senate members released the final version.

    “The choice to push this legislation forward in the dark, despite overwhelming opposition from the people of Texas, is about the politicians in power doing everything they can to manipulate the outcome of future elections to keep themselves in power,” he continued.

    MOVE Texas communications director Charlie Bonner echoed that critique Saturday in comments to The Texas Tribune.

    “It is fitting that the final push to get anti-voter Senate Bill 7 to the governor’s desk would take place behind closed doors, hidden from public scrutiny,” said Bonner. “This bill does nothing to improve the security of our elections — it only makes our democracy weaker by limiting access for young, disabled, Black, and Brown Texans.”

    Gutierrez asserted that “the intent of this bill is now and has always been to make it harder for certain Texans to vote or simply discourage others from even trying to take part in our democracy. Nowhere is that made more clear than in this version that cruelly removes an amendment that would have simply made it easier for high schools to register students. There is literally no reason to do that other than the politicians in power being afraid of too many young people voting.”

    “New voting procedures implemented by innovative county officials like drive-thru voting and after-hours voting were a resounding success and deserve to be celebrated,” he added. “Instead, supporters of S.B. 7 decided to end those practices simply because they enabled more people to make their voices heard in our elections.”

    The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund on Saturday sent a letter to Texas legislators urging them to vote down the final version of S.B. 7, writing that the bill “includes out-of-bound amendments and was surrounded by procedural irregularities,” and “may evince the Legislature’s intent to discriminate against Black voters, in violation of the U.S. Constitution and federal law.”

    The developments in Texas fueled fresh calls for the U.S. Senate to pass the For the People Act, a sweeping House-approved election reform package that voting rights advocates say would thwart many of the hundreds of state bills that Republicans across the country have introduced — and, in some cases, enacted — this year.

    I call again on Congress to pass the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act,” said Biden. “And I continue to call on all Americans, of every party and persuasion, to stand up for our democracy and protect the right to vote and the integrity of our elections.”

    Former Democratic Congressman Beto O’Rourke — who battled Biden in the 2020 presidential primary and is reportedly considering a run to serve as the Lone Star State’s governor — tweeted Saturday that “Texas lawmakers would dismantle our democracy in order to keep themselves in power. We’re doing all we can to stop this bill from becoming law. But we can’t do it alone. We need help. The U.S. Senate must pass the For the People Act.”

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Friday committed to forcing a vote on the For the People Act next month. In a letter to the Democratic caucus, he said the bill is “essential to defending our democracy, reducing the influence of dark money and powerful special interests, and stopping the wave of Republican voter suppression happening in the states across the country in service of President Trump’s Big Lie.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The State Capitol Building in downtown Austin, Texas.

    Republican-led legislatures in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Texas, and other states are passing laws that make it harder to vote. Many of these bills, which have been drafted with help from an offshoot of the conservative Heritage Foundation, will have a disproportionate impact on voters of color and are being challenged in court.

    While judges could strike down some provisions for violating a state constitution or discriminating against voters with disabilities, the appellate courts that will make the final decision include mostly Republican appointees.

    The GOP is defending the legislation as a response to voter fraud, though there is no evidence of widespread fraud. Jessica Anderson of Heritage Action, which helped with the drafting, said the bills would help “right the wrongs of November.” Heritage has long advocated voting restrictions, such as voter ID laws; as founder Paul Weyrich said in 1980, “Our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.” The group has pledged to spend millions defending the new laws in court.

    Voter suppression laws have faced difficulty passing the scrutiny of courts in recent years. For example, North Carolina’s 2013 voting law, which included a strict voter ID mandate, cuts to early voting, and the end of Election Day registration, was struck down by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia in 2016. The court found that legislators had targeted Black voters “with almost surgical precision.”

    North Carolina went on to pass another voter ID law that was also blocked by a federal judge in late 2019. The 4th Circuit overturned that decision, but in February 2020 the state Court of Appeals blocked the law after finding it likely violated the state constitution by disenfranchising Black voters. The case went to trial last month. The North Carolina Supreme Court, which has the final say on state law, has a 4-3 Democratic majority, but Republicans could take control after next year’s election.

    In Texas, Florida, and Georgia, the state supreme courts are composed entirely of Republican justices. Most of them are affiliated with the conservative Federalist Society, which helped both former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis choose appointees.

    Trump appointed more than a quarter of active federal judges, and last year his appointees shot down efforts to ease voting rules during the pandemic. The U.S. Supreme Court, which now has a 6-3 majority of Republican appointees including three put there by Trump, is unlikely to rule that the new Southern voter suppression laws discriminate against voters of color. In the run-up to last year’s election, the high court ruled against voters several times, including a ruling in favor of Alabama officials who were seeking to bar local election boards from offering curbside voting during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    These judges are unlikely to rule that the new voter suppression bills are racially discriminatory, but some courts could strike them down for violating the state constitution or the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

    Citing the ADA in Georgia

    Georgia’s new voting law incorporated several recommendations from Heritage, including strict limits on ballot drop boxes and mail-in ballot request forms, as well as bans on counties raising money from nonprofits for election administration. It also allows state officials to overturn decisions by local elections officials.

    Civil rights groups immediately filed lawsuits challenging the new rules. A federal lawsuit from several voting rights groups argues the law will have a greater impact on voters of color, who face much longer wait times.

    Any ruling to strike down the law would be reviewed by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears cases from Florida, Georgia, and Alabama. Republicans have radically reshaped the court in recent years, and Trump’s appointees included lawyers who had defended voter suppression. For example, Judge Andrew Brasher in his previous role as Alabama’s solicitor general had filed a brief defending a Florida law that had been struck down as an unconstitutional “poll tax.” The court agreed and restored the restrictive Florida law.

    Though federal courts probably won’t strike down the new Georgia voter suppression bill as racially discriminatory, the lawsuits argue that some provisions — including the ban on giving food and water to voters waiting in line — violate the ADA. The 11th Circuit previously issued groundbreaking rulings that broadly interpreted the ADA. But last year, in addition to upholding Alabama’s restrictions on curbside voting, the court ruled that a grocery store’s website wasn’t subject to the ADA.

    The law could eventually face challenges in state court as well, because the Georgia Constitution includes strict limits on the legislature’s power. The state Supreme Court has had a conservative majority since the legislature packed the court in 2016. Six of the seven justices are Republican appointees.

    Multiple Challenges in Florida

    Gov. DeSantis signed a bill on May 3 that also bans giving food and water to waiting voters and sharply limits drop boxes for mail-in ballots. After last year’s election, DeSantis praised election administration in his state and held it up as a model. But the bill he signed makes big changes and was opposed by local election administrators.

    The new law makes it nearly impossible for voter registration groups to help voters return their ballots, and it requires those groups to recite a misleading “warning” to people they help register to vote. Now election boards must post an employee to constantly monitor drop boxes, which can be open only during early voting hours.

    Civil rights groups immediately filed multiple challenges against the law in federal court. They argued, among other things, that it violates the ADA by making voting inaccessible to many voters with limited mobility, who are more likely to use drop boxes that are “placed outdoors and are easily accessible.” One lawsuit argues the penalties for giving voters food and water “exposes family members, caregivers, and volunteers to potential criminal liability.”

    Another federal lawsuit says the bill “purports to solve problems that do not exist” and “caters to a dangerous lie about the 2020 election that threatens our most basic democratic values.” It argues the bill was intended to keep senior citizens, young people, and voters of color from casting their ballots.

    Like Georgia’s, Florida’s new voter suppression law would likely be reviewed by the conservative 11th Circuit. And any state case would be headed for the Florida Supreme Court, which is one of the most conservative courts in the country. All of the justices are Republican appointees.

    A Pledge to Sue in Texas

    The Texas House passed a bill on May 7 that bans election officials from sending out unsolicited mail-in ballot request forms, empowers partisan poll watchers, and creates criminal penalties for election officials who violate limits on helping voters. A similar measure had already passed the Senate and the bill is now being finalized in conference.

    Republicans removed some of the bill’s more onerous restrictions last week, as well as controversial “purity of the ballot box” language that was added to the state constitution when white supremacist politicians established Jim Crow.

    Democrats said they would sue over the law in federal court, but the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears cases from Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, is arguably the most conservative appellate court in the country. Trump’s appointees included Judge Kyle Duncan, who signed a brief defending the 2013 North Carolina voter suppression bill.

    The 5th Circuit struck down a Texas voter ID law as violating the Voting Rights Act in 2016. But the court upheld a subsequent voter ID bill two years later. The court has also issued several rulings to throw out ADA lawsuits in recent years.

    If the new law is challenged under the state constitution, the case would be tried in the state capital of Austin. Most of the judges there are Democrats, but the legislature is considering a bill that would take the decision out of the hands of Austin’s appellate judges. The bill would create a new appellate court, elected in statewide partisan races, to review rulings in cases challenging state laws.

    In 2020, the all-GOP Texas Supreme Court sided with state officials seeking to block a county official from sending mail-in ballot request forms to all registered voters.

    Arkansas Sued in State Court

    Unlike in the other states, Arkansas’ legislature didn’t pass a single bill with multiple restrictions on voting rights. But it did pass a series of bills that included many of the same Heritage Foundation suggestions. Legislators also toughened Arkansas’ voter ID law and gave county commissioners authority over polling places. Holly Dixon of the state ACLU said this legislative session saw “the most dangerous assault on the right to vote since the Jim Crow era.”

    The state League of Women Voters and Arkansas United, an immigrant advocacy group, challenged the bills in state court. The groups argue that the new voting restrictions violate the rights to equal protection, a “free and equal election,” and free speech guaranteed by the Arkansas Constitution.

    Lawmakers defended the bills as a response to fraud. But the lawsuit argues that “if there is a threat to the integrity of Arkansas’s elections, it is the state’s consistently low voter turnout, particularly among Black voters.”

    The Arkansas Supreme Court struck down a voter ID law in 2014, construing it as a new “qualification” for voters, beyond those laid out in the state constitution. In 2018, though, the court upheld a similar law.

    Voters elected a conservative justice to the state Supreme Court last year, after a GOP group in Washington, D.C., spent big in the nonpartisan race. The new justice created a narrow conservative majority. Recent conservative high court candidates have been closely tied to the Republican Party.

    A bill introduced in the Arkansas legislature in February would have shifted the state to partisan judicial races, a move that only one state — North Carolina — has made in the past century. However, that bill stalled in committee.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • (Dallas, Texas – May 25, 2021) A Dallas County District Court has recommended Mallory Nicholson’s 1982 conviction for burglary and sexual assault be vacated based on newly discovered evidence of his innocence that had been withheld by the State at his original trial.  

    Mr. Nicholson spent 21 years in prison for crimes he did not commit and has had to register as a sex offender since his parole release in 2003. District Court Judge Chika Anyiam signed the order after determining that the State had withheld key evidence that pointed to an alternative suspect and demonstrated inconsistencies in the victims’ identification of Mr. Nicholson. Under the United States Supreme Court case Brady v. Maryland, the State must disclose such favorable evidence to the defense and must vacate convictions, like Mr. Nicholson’s, that involve Brady violations. Mr. Nicholson was arrested for burglary and the sexual assault of two children in June 1982. No physical evidence connected him to the crime and he has steadfastly maintained his innocence. At trial, he presented strong evidence and alibi witnesses to support the fact that he had been with family, attending his wife’s funeral, 45 minutes away from Dallas at the time of the crimes. 

    In addition to the Brady violations, the case was also marred by eyewitness misidentification and racial bias. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will now decide whether to adopt Judge Anyiam’s recommendation.

    In 2019, at the Innocence Project’s request, Cynthia Garza, chief of the Dallas County District Attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit (CIU), and Holly Dozier agreed to review Mr. Nicholson’s case. Their review uncovered this exculpatory evidence, and the CIU agreed that Mr. Nicholson was entitled to a new trial. 

    “We are thankful for the Dallas County District Attorney’s CIU’s cooperation in reviewing Mr. Nicholson’s conviction, uncovering this Brady evidence, and recognizing the misconduct of the trial prosecutors in this case,” said Innocence Project Staff Attorney Adnan Sultan, who represents Mr. Nicholson. “This conviction and his subsequent 21 years in prison destroyed Mr. Nicholson’s life and for the last 18 years, he has to endure the humiliation of having to publicly register as a sex offender, all for a crime he did not commit.” 

    Mr. Nicholson is also represented by Gary Udashen of Udashen Anton. 

    Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot added, “Mr. Nicholson did not receive a fair trial that he was entitled to by the U.S. and Texas constitutions. It is our job as prosecutors to turn all evidence of innocence over to the defense counsel. And it remains our job to correct our past wrongs.”

    The Background: Witness Misidentification 

    On June 12, 1982, two boys, 7- and 9-year-old cousins, were approached by a young man who offered them $5 to help him enter an apartment window. Once inside, the man stole several items and sexually assaulted both children. The boys told their aunt, who called the police, and they were taken to Parkland Hospital for sexual assault examinations.

    Both boys initially told police and the examining doctor that they had been assaulted by a 14-year-old Black boy. They also provided the attacker’s nickname to police who later learned he lived near the crime scene.  

    Two days after the assault, police drove one of the victims to the crime scene. On the way, the boy saw 35-year-old Mallory Nicholson standing in front of an apartment building with friends and claimed he was the person who had committed the crime. 

    The following day, police showed the other victim a photo lineup, which included Mr. Nicholson. While the victim did not identify Mr. Nicholson at the time, his mother later called detectives and claimed her son had recognized the person who had committed the crime but had been afraid to point him out. Police put Mr. Nicholson in a live lineup the next day, and both victims identified him. Even though Mr. Nicholson had been at his wife’s funeral on the day of the crime, police arrested him and charged him with burglary and sexual assault.  Eyewitness misidentification has contributed to approximately 63% of the 232 wrongful convictions that the Innocence Project has helped overturn. 

    At trial, the boys claimed for the first time that the attacker had told them he had been in a hurry because he had had to attend his wife’s funeral. The State argued that this was a distinct fact, unique to Mr. Nicholson, which proved guilt.

    Throughout the trial, the defense maintained that the boys had misidentified Mr. Nicholson as the person who committed the crime. The defense also presented numerous alibi witnesses who confirmed he’d been at his wife’s funeral with friends and family in the hours that followed. Despite the strength of this evidence, Mr. Nicholson was convicted and sentenced to 55 years for the assaults and eight years for burglary.

    Brady Evidence

    In this case, the favorable evidence which the State failed to disclose to Mr. Nicholson’s defense counsel included:

    • Five police reports documenting conversations the victims had had with police in which they identified their attacker as someone other than Mr. Nicholson by name. The reports were written by a police officer who was never called by the State as a witness despite his role in the investigation.
    • The sexual assault report written by the doctor who had examined the victims, which documented their description of the attacker as a 14-year-old Black male. 
    • Handwritten interview notes from prosecuting attorneys listing physical characteristics of the attacker which were inconsistent with Mr. Nicholson’s appearance at the time of the crime in critical ways.  
    • Grand jury testimony from one of the victims in which he failed to say anything about the attacker being in a hurry because he had to attend his wife’s funeral. This was a critical omission, which defense attorneys could have used to discredit the victim at trial. 
    • Handwritten interview notes from the prosecuting attorneys which stated multiple times that the mother and grandmother of one of the victims knew Mr. Nicholson’s wife, and had been aware of her death and funeral date. Had the defense been privy to this information, they could have challenged the State’s argument that the victims’ statements about the attacker needing to attend his wife’s funeral had been “the most telling factor” of Mr. Nicholson’s guilt. 

    Racial Bias 

    Mr. Nicholson was tried before an all-white jury who rejected his five alibi witnesses, all of whom were Black. All-white juries have historically convicted Black defendants at a higher rate than white defendants and have been shown to disregard the testimony of truthful Black defense witnesses in favor of weak circumstantial evidence.

    Additionally, the prosecutor had relied heavily on negative racial stereotypes at trial, focusing on Mr. Nicholson’s recent unemployment and implying that his alibi witnesses were not reliable because they had hung out and drunk every night. 

    Officers were apparently satisfied by the simplest similarity between Mr. Nicholson and the original description of the attacker — the only commonality being that both were “Black males” — and therefore made no efforts to follow up on the alternative suspect. Such tunnel vision is a known function of implicit racial bias. The resulting wrongful conviction of Mr. Nicholson robbed him of nearly four decades of his life.

     

    The post Texas Court Recommends Vacating Mallory Nicholson’s 1982 Wrongful Conviction appeared first on Innocence Project.


    This content originally appeared on Innocence Project and was authored by jlucivero.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • With an hour left to vote, people wait in line at Manor ISD Administration building on November 3, 2020, in Manor, Texas.

    A voter suppression bill currently being considered by the Texas legislature would decrease the number of polling locations in districts that are traditionally Democratic and nonwhite while increasing the locations in Republican and predominantly white districts.

    The state experienced high turnout for the 2020 election, especially in more heavily populated areas like Houston. Now, Republicans are targeting those very places in an elections bill, SB 7, applying a formula to redistribute polling locations in the state’s five most populous counties that the Texas Tribune has found would disproportionately affect voters in Democratic communities.

    In Harris county, which houses Houston, all but two of the area’s 15 Democratic districts would see a decrease in polling locations thanks to the new formula. District 141, which is also home to the largest portion of nonwhite people of voting age of any other district in the county — white people make up only 10.6 percent of the population of voting age there — would be hit the hardest, losing 11 polling places.

    All of the districts in Harris county that would be losing polling places are represented by Democrats. Meanwhile, every district represented by a Republican would either not see a change or would gain polling locations. All of those districts have white voting age populations of 45 percent or more, according to census data.

    The Texas Tribune analysis also finds similar trends in other counties. In Tarrant County’s district 90, which is represented by a Democrat and where 77 percent of the population is either Latino or Black, voters would lose half of the polling locations they had in 2020.

    SB 7 would also implement a number of other voting restrictions, such as limiting the distribution of absentee ballots, allowing for more voter roll purges, and limiting early voting with provisions like banning drive-through voting. The bill, if signed into law, would make Texas one of the hardest states in the country for citizens to exercise their right to vote.

    State lawmakers are currently ironing out the final details of the bill, after which it will have to clear a vote again in the Senate and the House. The GOP controls both chambers of the legislature and the governor, Greg Abbott, is a Republican.

    Though the election bill will affect millions of voters in the state, Republicans have shrouded the process of writing and amending the bill in secrecy. The committee currently making amendments to the bill is doing so behind closed doors, much to the dismay of many voting rights advocates.

    Republican Rep. Briscoe Cain also previously tried to rush the voting restriction bill out of committee without listing it on the committee’s agenda, giving journalists no notice of the bill’s movement and the public no chance to comment on it.

    Cain has said that the bill isn’t about voter suppression in his opinion. “I believe it is voter enhancement,” he said this month of the bill that would make it harder for people of color to vote. The bill, which Cain has sponsored, also has language plucked straight out of Jim Crow, including phrases that suggest it is necessary to “preserve the purity of the ballot box.”

    Republicans have been quite open with their goals in this year’s wave of voter suppression laws: they are trying to engineer situations so that Republicans can’t lose elections again. In March, an Arizona lawmaker said that the GOP is passing such laws because “everybody shouldn’t be voting.”

    The GOP has been passing voter suppression laws at record pace, introducing hundreds over the course of just a few months. Democrats — both at the state and federal level — have been trying to stem the tide, but Republicans are forging ahead, especially in states where they control the governorship and the legislature.

    Before the Texas House passed a version of SB 7 earlier this month, Democrats fought the legislation through the night, introducing 130 amendments to the bill. And, at the federal level, Democrats are trying to pass the For the People Act, which would drastically expand voting access — but the Senate filibuster stands in its way.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Texas Gov. Greg Abbott holds up the signed "heartbeat ban" on abortion at a signing ceremony on May 19, 2021.

    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill on Wednesday that would ban abortion before many women even know they’re pregnant, and allow nearly any private citizen to sue abortion providers — or anyone who helps a woman terminate her pregnancy.

    The “heartbeat ban” would prohibit abortions after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, and includes exemptions for medical emergencies but not cases of rape or incest. Abortion rights advocates vowed to challenge the law in court, arguing that it would ban abortions as early as two weeks after a missed menstrual cycle, an impossibly early date that effectively amounts to full abortion prohibition, said Dyana Limon-Mercado, the executive director of Planned Parenthood Texas Votes.

    “When you factor in the time it takes to confirm a pregnancy, consider your options and make a decision, schedule an appointment and comply with all the restrictions politicians have already put in place for patients and providers, a six-week ban essentially bans abortion outright,” she told the Texas Tribune.

    Other states have passed “heartbeat” bills, but they have been blocked by courts for infringing on abortion rights upheld by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade. The Supreme Court this week said it would review Mississippi’s abortion ban, which bans the procedure after 15 weeks, after it was blocked by lower courts. But the Texas bill has a novel enforcement mechanism that its Republican supporters believe could help it withstand legal challenges.

    Instead of the government enforcing the ban, the bill will allow any private citizen who is not a government official to sue abortion providers, or anyone who helped someone get an abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected — including family members, rape crisis counselors, and medical professionals — even if they are not connected to the patient or the provider.

    “This law is so broadly written it could target not just abortion clinics and staff but anyone that volunteers or donates to an abortion fund or activist organization like ours,” Aimee Arrambide, executive director of reproductive rights advocacy group Avow Texas, told The Guardian. “Domestic violence and rape crisis counselors who offer guidance, family members who lend money to abortion patients, a friend who gives a ride to an appointment, or even someone that provides an address to a clinic could also face lawsuits.”

    People who sue would be entitled to a $10,000 award and attorney’s fees if they win.

    “Every citizen is now a private attorney general,” Josh Blackman, a constitutional law professor at South Texas College of Law, told the Tribune. “You can have random people who are against abortion start suing tomorrow.”

    The law would take effect in September.

    The law does not allow rapists to sue but advocates say that the language in the bill would not apply to those who are not convicted, much less reported. More than 90 percent of rapes in Texas are not reported to the police, according to a 2020 report prepared for the Texas legislature.

    “This bill empowers rapists and abusers, and lawyers and trolls who want to abuse and clog up our courts,” said state Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin, said in a floor speech. “And this forced pregnancy act will drive women back into the [pre-Roe] shadows out of fear of harassment through lawsuits that anyone in this country can file.”

    The law also allows people who sue to file lawsuits in their home districts and prevent the case from being moved to a different court. Legal experts told the Tribune that this could make it more costly and difficult for abortion providers to fight lawsuits because the court may be hundreds of miles away and abortion activists can shop for districts they think will be more sympathetic.

    The bill’s supporters argue that since there is no state official responsible for enforcing the law, there is no one for abortion providers to sue to challenge the law.

    “It’s a very unique law and it’s a very clever law,” Blackman told the Tribune. “Planned Parenthood can’t go to court and sue Attorney General [Ken] Paxton like they usually would because he has no role in enforcing the statute. They have to basically sit and wait to be sued.”

    But abortion rights advocates said they plan to fight the law in court regardless.

    Elisabeth Smith, an attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, told the outlet that reproductive health groups are “not going to let this six-week ban go unchallenged.”

    Amy Hagstrom Miller, who heads the abortion provider Whole Woman’s Health, expressed concerns that the bill would allow anti-abortion activists to harass providers, noting that her clinics have already been hit with false reports alleging water heater permit violations, social distancing violations, and violations of other regulations.

    “False reports disrupt health care services and this culture of threats and accusations is designed to intimidate providers,” she told the Tribune, adding that about 90 percent of women who come to her clinics are more than six weeks into their pregnancy.

    Abbott justified the ban on religious grounds and vowed that the bill would ensure that the “life of every unborn child who has a heartbeat will be saved from the ravages of abortion.”

    “Our creator endowed us with the right to life and yet millions of children lose their right to life every year because of abortion,” he said.

    Texas Right to Life called the signing a “landmark victory” but said even more comprehensive bills are still pending in the legislature.

    Abortion in the state was already banned after 20 weeks and medically-induced abortions are banned after 10 weeks. State law also requires providers to perform an ultrasound at least 24 hours before an abortion and provide information on medical risks and alternatives.

    South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Idaho have all passed heartbeat bans this year and Arkansas and Oklahoma approved near-total abortion bans, though none have yet gone into effect and many have been blocked.

    State Sen. Bryan Hughes, who sponsored the legislation, said the enforcement mechanism differentiates Texas’ bill from other states.

    “Based on what we read in court opinions from other abortion cases, and other federal cases, we believe this bill — because of the private civil enforcement, primarily, and a few other things — is drafted differently than those other heartbeat bills that are pending, that are awaiting court ruling today,” he told CNN.

    More than 350 Texas attorneys condemned the bill in a letter to lawmakers, arguing that the enforcement mechanism undermines the state’s constitution and the “rules and tenets of our civil legal system.”

    “The bill is a blatantly unconstitutional attempt by Texas Republican leadership to misuse civil courts to restrict women’s access to healthcare, and to allow anti-choice activists to target and penalize healthcare providers,” Texas attorney Christian Menefee told The Guardian. “This bill is morally reprehensible and legally nonsense.”

    Drucilla Tigner of the ACLU of Texas called the law “the most extreme abortion ban in the country.”

    “Not only does this ban violate more than half a century of Supreme Court case law, it paves the way for anti-choice extremists to use our court system to go after anyone who performs abortions or considers supporting a person that has one,” Tigner said in a statement. “But make no mistake, abortion is both legal in Texas and supported by the majority of Texans. The governor’s swipe of a pen can’t change the Constitution.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • When Dennis Allen learned that the former Dallas County prosecutor Richard “Rick” Jackson had been disbarred, he felt “fabulous.”

    But, Mr. Allen clarified, his joy stemmed not from Mr. Jackson’s punishment, “but from this huge step in the right direction towards justice. I just felt happy and overjoyed that finally we’re making real progress towards justice for everyone,” he said.

    In 2000, Mr. Jackson, then a Dallas County assistant district attorney, withheld evidence from two innocent men on trial for murder: Mr. Allen and Stanley Mozee. Both men were sentenced to life in prison and spent 15 years incarcerated for a crime they didn’t commit, while evidence that could have proven their innocence sat in Mr. Jackson’s files the entire time.

    “To be honest, I believed in our system. I did not know there were individuals who were engaging in misconduct, who would do this until it actually happened to me,” Mr. Allen said. “I believed that the system was in place for everybody and that it would give everyone the opportunity at real justice. I really believed that the system would work.”

    Stanley Orson Mozee, represented by the Innocence Project and attorney Nina Morrison (background), takes his first steps on the outside after Judge Mark Stoltz overturned his conviction for murder because of prosecutorial misconduct at the Frank Crowley Courts Building on Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2014. (Image: Lara Solt)

    Mr. Allen and Mr. Mozee were freed in 2014 after Mr. Jackson’s misconduct was discovered. Mr. Jackson had already retired from practicing law the year before, after being fired by the Denton County district attorney’s office, the Dallas Morning News reported

    The Innocence Project and the Innocence Project of Texas, who represented both Mr. Allen and Mr. Mozee for over a decade, filed a grievance against Mr. Jackson with the Texas State Bar in 2018. Both men were exonerated soon after, in May 2019.

    The state bar agreed that Mr. Jackson had engaged in “professional misconduct” and filed formal disciplinary charges against him. In response, Mr. Jackson surrendered his law license to avoid disciplinary action — effectively meaning he has been disbarred and will no longer be able to practice law in the state of Texas. The Texas Supreme Court wrote in its order revoking Mr. Jackson’s law license last month that “Richard E. Jackson’s resignation is in the best interest of the public, the profession, and Richard E. Jackson.”

    Mr. Jackson is one of only four prosecutors who has been disbarred for misconduct — the most serious disciplinary action that can be taken against a prosecutor — as opposed to being suspended or “reprimanded” by the state bar. Mr. Mozee said he hopes that Mr. Jackson will now reflect on his actions after losing his license.

    “I’m not a person who holds grudges and I don’t have hard feelings toward anybody or towards the judicial system, but it’s exciting to me to know he’s been held accountable,” he said.

    “I also want people to know that even though someone heard my humble cry and was able to reach out and help me prove my innocence and this has happened, there are still so many more people in there that are fighting serious cases in which they’re actually innocent.”

    Prosecutorial misconduct played a role in approximately 31% of exoneration cases to date, but just 4% of prosecutors whose misconduct contributed to a wrongful conviction have ever faced any kind of personal or professional discipline, according to the National Registry of Exonerations. Only one prosecutor, another former Texas district attorney, has ever been jailed for their misconduct.

    “It’s impossible to overstate just how horrific the consequences were of Mr. Jackson’s actions,” said Innocence Project Senior Litigation Counsel Nina Morrison, who represented Mr. Allen and Mr. Mozee. “They were sentenced to life in prison and could well have served that entire time and died in prison had Mr. Jackson himself not preserved the evidence of their innocence in his own files.”

    Because prosecutors can claim “absolute immunity” from civil liability under current law, Mr. Jackson and most other prosecutors who have committed misconduct at trial cannot be sued for money damages, even in the most egregious cases of misconduct.

    “There’s a growing awareness among the public about the enormous power and discretion of prosecutors, and like police officers when they are caught flagrantly and openly abusing that power with devastating consequences, the public is increasingly demanding accountability,” Ms. Morrison said.

    Mr. Allen said he also hopes the news will help make people who could potentially be swept up in the system aware of the prevalence of prosecutorial misconduct in wrongful convictions cases.

    “I think about people like me who didn’t know that this can happen or don’t have a reason to think about this kind of stuff — when they see this it’s going to shed light on what’s really happening in our system and why change is needed,” he said.

    The post This Prosecutor’s Misconduct Sent Two Innocent People to Jail. Now He’s Been Disbarred. appeared first on Innocence Project.

    This post was originally published on Innocence Project.

  • National Rifle Association (NRA) President Wayne LaPierre speaks during the NRA Leadership Forum in Atlanta, Georgia, on April 28, 2017.

    A federal bankruptcy judge has dismissed the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) bankruptcy claims, filed in Texas despite the organization being based in New York, for being a blatant attempt to avoid litigation over its mishandling of donor funds for the past several decades.

    The ruling is considered a huge blow to the gun rights organization, as it allows a lawsuit filed against the group in its home state to move forward unimpeded.

    The NRA filed for bankruptcy earlier this year, choosing to do so as part of what it called a “new strategic plan.” In a statement made at the time, the NRA said their plan “involves utilizing the protection of the bankruptcy court” and “dumping New York” to avoid what it described as a “corrupt political and regulatory environment.”

    The bankruptcy filing came about just months after New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a lawsuit against the NRA, stating that leaders of the organization had for decades misused millions of dollars in donations from its members and supporters in order to pay for their own personal expenditures.

    Judge Harlin Hale, chief of the federal bankruptcy court in Dallas, Texas, was not coy about his reasons for dismissing the bankruptcy filings made by the far right, pro-gun organization.

    “The NRA is using this bankruptcy case to address a regulatory enforcement problem, not a financial one,” he said in his ruling.

    Hale, who is the 2019 recipient of the Judge William L. Norton, Jr. Judicial Excellence Award, also opined on the organization’s president, Wayne LaPierre, making the decision to file for bankruptcy without discussing it with the NRA’s board of directors as “nothing less than shocking.”

    New York AG James responded to the ruling shortly after it was made in a tweet:

    “The @NRA does not get to dictate if and where it will answer for its actions, and our case will continue in New York court. No one is above the law,” James wrote.

    The NRA has not shied away from acknowledging why it made its bankruptcy filings out of state. Indeed, in testimony made earlier this year regarding the bankruptcy claims, LaPierre admitted that it was done to avoid the lawsuit filed by James.

    Also revealed in LaPierre’s testimony was the fact that he often took trips on a friend’s yacht, between the years of 2013 and 2018, ostensibly to stay safe from threats he said he had received after mass shooting events.

    Yet, while these “security retreats,” as LaPierre called them, were presented as necessary for him to avoid imminent danger, the trips did not take place in close proximity to the mass shooting events. His “retreat,” for example, from threats associated with the December 14, 2012, mass shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School (which resulted in the deaths of 20 small children and six adults), did not occur until the summer of 2013.

    The New York attorney general filed the lawsuit against the NRA late last summer, stating that leaders of the organization had for decades misused millions of dollars in donations from its members and supporters in order to pay for their own personal expenditures. There was “a culture of self-dealing, mismanagement, and negligent oversight at the NRA that was illegal, oppressive, and fraudulent,” a statement issued last August by James’s office read.

    The suit calls for the removal of LaPierre from his position at the organization, punitive actions against other NRA officials who also benefited from misuse of donors’ dollars, and the dissolution of the NRA altogether. The extraordinary step of seeking to end the organization was necessary “[b]ecause the corruption was so broad,” James said, adding that LaPierre and others had “basically destroyed all of the assets of the operation.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The Biden administration claims to care about the climate crisis but it is currently allowing a dredging project to proceed in the Matagorda shipping channel to open the way for crude oil exports in Texas. Not only will this drive a surge in oil extraction, but it will also increase mercury pollution by digging in a Superfund site left by the aluminum company, Alcoa. The project will decimate the struggling local fishing industry. To stop this project, veteran activist and shrimper, Diane Wilson has been on a hunger strike since April 7. Clearing the FOG speaks with Diane about her current hunger strike and her long fight to protect the waters in her area.

    The post Hunger Strike Exposes Biden’s Drive To Increase US Oil Exports appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • A roundup of the coverage on struggles for human rights and freedoms, from Colombia to China

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Voters approach the door at a polling location on October 13, 2020, in Austin, Texas.

    Texas House Republicans passed a voter suppression bill early Friday morning despite a tough fight put up by Democrats, who offered over 130 amendments from late Thursday into the night.

    Democrats were able to water down the bill, SB 7, and cut into some of the most punitive proposals, but the final vision retained restrictive proposals like limiting ballot drop boxes and prohibiting counties from sending unsolicited absentee ballots.

    The House voted at 3 am to advance the bill, which contained 20 of the provisions proposed by Democrats, who had slim chances of outright stopping the bill. Texas’ House is controlled by Republicans by a wide margin; the bill passed 81-64.

    The bill will head to committee to reconcile the differences with the version passed by the Texas Senate and clear another vote in both chambers before it goes to Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk. Abbott, a Republican, is expected to sign the bill.

    Previous versions of SB 7 had many restrictions that raised alarms for racial justice and disability advocates, including a ban on drive-through voting, restrictions on early voting hours, and limits on polling places in areas with larger populations of Black and Latinx residents.

    It also contained language plucked straight out of Jim Crow which was eventually removed from the bill. The original text written by Republicans stated that the bill’s purpose was to “preserve the purity of the ballot box,” which Democratic Rep. Rafael Anchía pointed out was explicitly racist.

    “You may have missed it then — and this would’ve been very obvious I think to anyone who looked at that language — that provision was drafted specifically to disenfranchise Black people, Black voters in fact, following the Civil War,” Anchia said, per the Texas Tribune. “Did you know that this purity of the ballot box justification was used during the Jim Crow era to prevent Black people from voting?”

    Unfortunately, reconciliation in committee could end up removing the Democrats’ amendments, and much of the restrictions could be put back in place in the final bill. Former federal Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas), through Twitter, encouraged Texans to call their representatives and urge them to vote down the ultimate version of the bill.

    He also encouraged residents to call their federal senator and voice their support for Democrats’ For the People Act, which could help undo some of the harmful voter suppression legislation that Republicans have been putting forth in states across the country.

    “This bill would not only stop voter suppression efforts in Texas, but would do so in Georgia, Arizona, Kansas, etc,” tweeted O’Rourke. “This is the most important thing we can do for voting rights in America.”

    Florida was the latest state to pass Republican-led restrictions on elections, joining Georgia in imposing racist voter suppression laws. On Thursday, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Florida) signed a bill acutely limiting ballot drop boxes, banning handing out food and water in voting lines, and empowering partisan poll watchers to challenge ballots.

    DeSantis locked out all media except for Fox News when he signed the bill that would affect the millions of voters in his state. Democrats balked at the decision.

    “The bill signing of a voter suppression bill by our Governor is a ‘Fox Exclusive’ — when did public policy become an exclusive to any media company, let alone a hyper conservative one?!” wrote Florida Democratic State Rep. Anna Eskamani on Twitter. “This is how fascism works y’all — and if you’re proud about the bill let people see you sign it!”

    Several groups have filed lawsuits over the Florida bill. The League of Women Voters of Florida and Black Voters Matters Fund have alleged that the bill is unconstitutional. The NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund and Common Cause soon followed with a lawsuit against the Florida secretary of state, saying that the bill causes undue restrictions on voting. And the League of United Latin American Citizens is suing the state and asking the U.S. Justice Department to investigate the Republicans who sponsored the bill.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Legendary environmenal activist Diane Wilson has been called “an unreasonable woman.”

    As a shrimper, Diane learned firsthand about tremendous pollution damaging the waters near her hometown of Port Lavaca and fought to defend the Bay from Formosa and Alcoa, major chemical companies. In 2019, Diane was plaintiff to a court case brought against Formosa on account of the shocking amount of plastic pollution – called nurdles – that Diane found littered around the Bay. That case resulted in a $50 million settlement against the company that is being used for environmental projects.

    Now, as of May 5th, Diane is on Day 29 of a hunger strike protesting the dredging of the Matagorda Ship Channel, a channel first dredged in the 1960s to provide a means for ships to travel between the Gulf of Mexico and the industry along Lavaca Bay.

    The post Diane Wilson In Hunger Strike To Protect Matagorda Bay appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Demonstrators gather in Plano, Texas, to protest the in-custody homicide of Marvin Scott III on May 2, 2021.

    In their first one-on-one interview since viewing horrific footage of their son’s in-custody homicide at the hands of eight Collin County, Texas, jailers on March 14, the parents of Marvin Scott III told Truthout that their son experienced a “whole day of torture” instead of receiving the help he needed during a mental health crisis.

    The five-hour video, which lacked audio, was so horrible, LaSandra Scott tells Truthout, that, “They might as well have just shot him so it could be over quick,” emphasizing the hours of suffering her son went through. “These people need to go to jail, and they need to go to jail now, as we speak.”

    Marvin Scott III
    Marvin Scott III

    Police in Allen, Texas, arrested the 26-year-old Marvin Scott III, who was Black, on a marijuana possession charge March 14 after finding him sitting next to a single joint at the Allen Premium Outlets mall. From there, his family and their attorney say, police took him to the Allen city jail. When they began noticing strange behavior, they transferred him to Allen Presbyterian Hospital.

    Marvin III had been diagnosed with schizophrenia two years prior. After more than a year without an episode, his parents believe his initial interaction with officers triggered a relapse.

    A doctor who evaluated Marvin III at Allen Presbyterian determined he was fit for custody, his parents and attorney say, and he was taken to Collin County Jail. He would not make it out alive.

    The family says six jailers participated in torturing him, attempting to strap him to a restraint bed, pepper-spraying him and covering his face with a spit hood as he rapidly deteriorated and eventually died.

    The Collin County medical examiner officially ruled Marvin III’s death a homicide last week, more than a month after he was killed. Marvin III’s cause of death, according to Collin County Medical Examiner Dr. William Rohr, was “fatal acute stress response in an individual with previously diagnosed schizophrenia during restraint struggle with law enforcement.” A final autopsy report is still pending release. He had been in custody for at least 10 hours, the family’s attorney, Lee Merritt, says.

    “After viewing the video, and then we were released to go home, and then you reflect on what you just saw and take it all in, oh my God. It was worse than anything you can imagine,” Marvin III’s father, Marvin Scott Jr., told Truthout. Instead of getting him the mental health support he needed, Marvin Jr. says, the jailers instead “‘helped’ him to an agonizing death.”

    Marvin III, his parents say, was never violent or threatening, even during mental episodes in which he experienced delusions or hallucinations. “He’d just get really anxious and start talking about things that weren’t true,” LaSandra says. “When we would see that coming on, we would get him help.”

    Collin County Sheriff Jim Skinner fired seven jailers and another resigned after the in-custody homicide. One of the jailers has since been reinstated, however, through the state’s Civil Service Commission process, a decision the sheriff has said he disagreed with.

    Last week, The Dallas Morning News obtained and published the names of eight jailers, despite efforts by the Collin County Sheriff’s Office to keep the names secret. In its appeal to the state attorney general to deny the paper’s public records request, the office argued that releasing the names could interfere with an active criminal investigation by the Texas Rangers. Sheriffs also told The News the office could not comment on the possibility of arrests due to the Ranger investigation. The Collin County district attorney’s office likewise told The News it does not comment on pending cases.

    The paper then turned to the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement, seeking the names of the jailers who were fired or resigned on April 1. The Commission requires law enforcement agencies to file reports when officers or jailers are terminated or resign. The Commission provided the following eight names: Blaise Mikulewicz, Austin Wong, Justin Patrick, Rafael Paradez, James Schoelen, Alec Difatta, Andres Cardenas and Christopher Windsor.

    LaSandra and Marvin Jr. expressed dismay at the reinstatement of one of the jailers, whose identity remains unknown, telling Truthout he shouldn’t have been able to appeal his termination through the state’s Civil Service Commission while an active criminal investigation is still playing out. “Is that even possible, or is there some type of loophole?” LaSandra says. “There’s no way these individuals need to be walking around talking about, ‘I want my job back.’ We’re in disagreement of that, because if you see something, do something,” she said, referring to the two jailers who weren’t actively engaged with Marvin but still present.

    The family’s attorney, Merritt, is working to obtain video footage of the events leading up to Marvin III’s in-custody homicide, including any video showing his initial interaction with Allen police at Premium Outlets mall. This could include security footage from the mall’s North Face store and body-worn and dash camera footage from Allen police. He’s also working to obtain video showing what happened during Marvin III’s time at the Allen jail, the Allen Presbyterian Hospital and during transport. The family plans to file a federal civil rights claim once they have the videos and after the conclusion of law enforcement agencies’ criminal investigations.

    “Allegedly he was restrained [at the Allen city jail] in a chair for 11 minutes, so we need to see what happened to our son and how he was treated there before going to the hospital,” LaSandra says.

    It’s also imperative to understand Marvin III’s initial interaction with Allen police at the mall. The fact that he was arrested for such a small amount of marijuana, especially as surrounding counties like Dallas are no longer arresting people for personal possession of small amounts, is crushing, the family says. “It was very petty for the officers to apprehend him without giving him a warning because knowing that in other counties, that wasn’t an issue,” LaSandra says.

    Merritt tells Truthout he’s encouraging the Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis to release the video to the public and that, based on the footage, there’s enough probable cause for an arrest. Still, he says, prosecutors are concerned “about tampering the jury pool through release of the video, and there’s concern that they have not received a complete file from the Texas Rangers.”

    While some attorneys have argued that a death caused by acute stress response may not amount to criminal liability because of Marvin III’s preexisting mental illness, Merritt says the causality is clear: The jailers caused the stress which caused Marvin III’s death. He compared the rationale to defense attorneys who argued George Floyd died of car exhaust instead of Derek Chauvin’s knee. Further, he says, there was clearly reckless indifference and negligence on the part of the jailers, who violated procedures and training on detecting and responding to people who are having mental episodes.

    “Cases like this very often result in a natural causes [of death] finding when there’s a preexisting condition or an enlarged heart. We saw that go back and forth a lot in the George Floyd case, so having an initial finding of homicide is important,” Merritt says. “My federal experience has taught me, repeatedly, that the medical examiner’s statements were very strong in favor of criminal accountability.”

    In any case, prosecutors will have to present medical experts to a grand jury that will decide whether the jailers’ actions were unlawful. Arrests in jail-related, in-custody deaths are rarely made before a grand jury reviews evidence, and a grand jury trial is likely still weeks away.

    “As we reach day 50 since Marvin died, we’re starting to lose faith in the local prosecutors” due to “their failure to act,” Merritt says. Normally, he says he would anticipate the Department of Justice stepping in, as has happened in other, more high-profile cases. However, one of the jailers, Blaise Mikulewicz, worked for the FBI for 23 years prior to joining the Collin County Sheriff’s Office, so Merritt says he’s cautious about turning to the federal level for recourse.

    Marvin Jr. says that while he feels good about how Collin County DA Willis has handled the case so far, he feels the Texas Rangers investigation, in contrast, has been more tightly controlled and less transparent. The parents say they haven’t heard an update from the Rangers since they initially spoke in the immediate aftermath of the homicide. They also say they never received a call from law enforcement about their son in the days following his murder.

    LaSandra tells Truthout that after the Collin County Medical Examiner’s Office confirmed the death of her son on a Sunday afternoon in March, she was directed to call the Texas Rangers to find out what happened. She didn’t hear back from the Rangers, she says, until about 8 pm that evening to set up a meeting for the following Tuesday. “So we went not knowing for all of those days, which is totally disrespectful and not the process on how you do things. We should have heard from law enforcement initially, and they could have taken things from there. It was so insensitive.”

    The Texas Rangers investigation, Marvin Jr. says, has been very secretive. “Everything is being investigated, and it’s just kept hush-hush. They don’t say nothing. You can’t talk about this, you can’t talk about that, because it’s pending investigation, and I understand that,” Marvin Jr. says. “I don’t want to mess nothing up. But I’m a father who lost a son, and I need everybody to know about this, so this don’t happen to nobody else.”

    Despite the grisly details surrounding the in-custody homicide, the case hasn’t gained as much national traction as other law enforcement-perpetrated killings making headlines in the aftermath of the Chauvin verdict last month. That may be partly because video of the homicide has yet to be released, and partly because in-custody deaths in county jails are sometimes harder to shine a spotlight on. That’s something the Scott family wants to change.

    “Even though it’s just as horrific as all the other cases, it’s a little bit different because it was behind closed doors. There’s no bodycam. There’s a camera, but there’s no bodycam,” Marvin Jr. told Truthout, noting that body-worn camera footage is often released to the public more quickly. “I think it’s that difference that’s keeping his story kind of quiet. I think [law enforcement likes] that. They don’t want all the attention on this case. But we need the attention on the case. People need to hear about it. I do want it to go national.”

    Attorney Merritt believes that Marvin’s III case isn’t trending the way other cases are because of the stigmatization of incarcerated people and those already in custody. “If Marvin was killed at the Outlet mall, I believe that case would garner more attention. But when someone dies in an in-custody death, most people have a knee-jerk, conditioned response that that’s a ‘bad’ person who did a ‘bad’ thing, and it’s kind of their own fault if they’re in jail.”

    Until more video evidence and information is released, the family says they will continue protesting alongside local supporters every Tuesday and Thursday outside the Collin County Jail and marching on the weekends elsewhere in the area, including the Premium Outlets mall. “As long as we can continue [protesting], they can’t sweep it under the rug,” Marvin Jr. says.

    Protesting, they say, also helps them endure the other traumas and hardships they’ve carried since Marvin III’s murder in mid-March. LaSandra, a home health nurse, says she hasn’t been able to work under the weight of her grief. “We barely working. We barely can make it,” she says. “It’s disrupted me because it’s so traumatic. I can’t even think…. I can’t possibly take care of anybody at this point. It’s depressing. The most horrible feeling one could ever have, surrounding these awful circumstances. It’s hard to get the proper rest. It’s hard to think about what you need to do.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Texas shrimper, fisherwoman and internationally known environmentalist Diane Wilson is on Day 22 of her hunger strike to gain national solidarity and publicity for pressure on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to rescind its permit for big oil to dredge a channel in mercury laden Matagorda Bay, Texas.  The dredged channel would allow massive oil tankers into the bay to take on crude oil that will be exported from the U.S.

    “I am risking my life to stop the reckless destruction of my community. Oil and gas export terminals like the project I am fighting pollute our air, water, and climate — only to pad the pockets of fossil fuel CEOs,” said Diane Wilson. “The Biden Administration needs to stop the dredging and stop oil and gas exports.”

    The post US Army Corps Of Engineers Permit Big Oil To Dredge Mercury-Contaminated Matagorda Bay appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.