In Depth Analysis and Survey of COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Global Cancer Stem Cell Market Report 2020 Key Players Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.,…

Rising number of corona virus cases has impacted numerous lives and led to numerous fatalities, and has affected the overall economic structure globally. The Cancer Stem Cell has analyzed and published the latest report on the global Cancer Stem Cell market. Change in the market has affected the global platform. Along with the Cancer Stem Cell market, numerous other markets are also facing similar situations. This has led to the downfall of numerous businesses, because of the widespread increase of the number of cases across the globe.href=mailto:nicolas.shaw@cognitivemarketresearch.com>nicolas.shaw@cognitivemarketresearch.com or call us on +1-312-376-8303.

Request Free Sample Copy of Cancer Stem Cell Market Research Report@ https://cognitivemarketresearch.com/medical-devicesconsumables/cancer-stem-cell-market-report

The major players in the Cancer Stem Cell market are Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., AbbVie Inc., Merck KGaA, Bionomics, Lonza, Stemline Therapeutics Inc., Miltenyi Biotec, PromoCell GmbH, MacroGenics Inc., OncoMed Pharmaceuticals Inc., Irvine Scientific, STEMCELL Technologies Inc., Sino Biological Inc., BIOTIME Inc. . Some of the players have adopted new strategies to sustain their position in the Cancer Stem Cell market. A detailed research study is done on the each of the segments, and is provided in Cancer Stem Cell market report. Based on the performance of the Cancer Stem Cell market in various regions, a detailed study of the Cancer Stem Cell market is also analyzed and covered in the study.

Report Scope:Some of the key types analyzed in this report are as follows: Cell Culturing, Cell Separation, Cell Analysis, Molecular Analysis, Others

Some of the key applications as follow: Stem Cell Based Cancer Therapy, Targeted CSCs

Following are the major key players: Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., AbbVie Inc., Merck KGaA, Bionomics, Lonza, Stemline Therapeutics Inc., Miltenyi Biotec, PromoCell GmbH, MacroGenics Inc., OncoMed Pharmaceuticals Inc., Irvine Scientific, STEMCELL Technologies Inc., Sino Biological Inc., BIOTIME Inc.

An in-depth analysis of the Cancer Stem Cell market is covered and included in the research study. The study covers an updated and a detailed analysis of the Cancer Stem Cell market. It also provides the statistical information of the Cancer Stem Cell market. The study of the report consists of the detailed definition of the market or the overview of the Cancer Stem Cell market. Furthermore, it also provides detailed information for the target audience dealing with or operating in this market is explained in the next section of the report.

Read Detailed Index of full Research Study @: https://cognitivemarketresearch.com/medical-devicesconsumables/cancer-stem-cell-market-report#download_report

The report also provides detailed information on the research methodologies, which are used for the analysis of the Cancer Stem Cell market. The methods are covered in detail in this section of the report. For the analysis of the market, several tools are used for the extraction of the market numbers. Among the several tools, primary and secondary research studies were also incorporated for the research study. These were further analyzed and validated by the market experts, to increase precision and make the data more reliable.

Moreover, the report also highlights and provides a detailed analysis of the drivers, restrains, opportunities, and challenges of the Cancer Stem Cell market. This section of Cancer Stem Cell market also covers the updated information, in accordance with the present situation of the market.

According to the estimation and the analysis of the market, the Cancer Stem Cell market is likely to have some major changes in the estimated forecasts period. Moreover, these changes can be attributed to the changes due to economic and trading conditions across the globe. Moreover, several market players operating in the Cancer Stem Cell market will have to strategically change their business strategies in order to survive in the market.

If Any Inquiry of Cancer Stem Cell Report @: https://cognitivemarketresearch.com/medical-devicesconsumables/cancer-stem-cell-market-report#download_report

Reasons for Buying this Cancer Stem Cell Report1. Cancer Stem Cell market advertise report helps with understanding the Basic product segments alongside likewise their potential future.2. This global Cancer Stem Cell report offers pin-point evaluation for changing competitive dynamics.3. The Cancer Stem Cell market supplies pin point analysis of changing competition dynamics and keeps you in front of competitors4. Original images and illustrated a SWOT evaluation of large segments supplied by the Cancer Stem Cell market.5. This report supplies a forward-looking perspective on different driving factors or controlling Cancer Stem Cell market gain.6. This report assists to make wise business choices using whole insights of the Cancer Stem Cell and also from creating a comprehensive evaluation of market sections.Note In order to provide more accurate market forecast, all our reports will be updated before delivery by considering the impact of COVID-19.

*If you have any special requirements, please let us know and we will offer you the report as you want Click Here>Download Customized Sample Report of Cancer Stem Cell Market Report 2020 (COVID-19 Impact Analysis Updated Edition May 2020)

About Us: Cognitive Market Research is one of the finest and most efficient Market Research and Consulting firm. The company strives to provide research studies which include syndicate research, customized research, round the clock assistance service, monthly subscription services, and consulting services to our clients. We focus on making sure that based on our reports, our clients are enabled to make most vital business decisions in easiest and yet effective way. Hence, we are committed to delivering them outcomes from market intelligence studies which are based on relevant and fact-based research across the global market.

Contact Us: +1-312-376-8303Email: nicolas.shaw@cognitivemarketresearch.comWeb: https://www.cognitivemarketresearch.com

**********Download the Entire Report*************************************************https://cognitivemarketresearch.com/medical-devicesconsumables/cancer-stem-cell-market-report

Excerpt from:

In Depth Analysis and Survey of COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Global Cancer Stem Cell Market Report 2020 Key Players Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.,...

Idyllwild Arts Academy: A safe and creative hub in the mountains – Study International News

Ask Idyllwild Arts Academy (IAA) high school students what they will miss most after graduation, and you will get many answers.

Some long to reconnect with a close-knit creative community. Another already misses the fun collaborating with IAA professors and peers on music, theatre, film and art projects.

Others yearn for the safety of a countryside campus, where the sight of hawks swooping above the San Jacinto mountains becomes part of a daily routine.

So, when the Academy announced that lessons resume on Aug. 31, 2020 with distance learning and that the campus reopens on Oct.1, 2020 if it is safe to do so IAA students and faculty were thrilled!

Idyllwild Arts Foundation President Pamela Jordan said, The Idyllwild Arts community is resilient and our resolve is strong, so we will come through the COVID-19 crisis.

Academic classes will be entirely online when students first return to campus. This will reduce the number of teachers on campus and assist a smooth transition for students as they adjust to in-person instruction.

Source: Idyllwild Arts Academy

Once the campus fully reopens, students will study, practise, and perform in safe spaces. The number of students in classrooms will be limited and full advantage will be taken of the outdoors.

In the dorms, each student will share a bathroom with only one other student. Faculty and student health will be monitored daily. The Academy has even assembled a medical advisory board to supplement the recommendations of national experts with granular local knowledge.

Continued online instruction will also allow for independent growth and connection with students who may not be able to arrive until January 2021.

Thats not all for the best arts high school in the United States, as ranked byNiche.com. In 2020, the Academy is offering a new Online Gap Year for all arts majors.

This add-on year is perfect for high school graduates who are unsure of what to do next and need time to reassess their study plans amid the current COVID-19 climate.

This year, IAAs Film and Digital Media Department and their star-studded line-up of film industry professionals will bring creative learning to the comfort of your home through its new virtual Gap Year programme.

Source: Idyllwild Arts Academy

The IAA Film and Digital Media Department offers postgraduates and gap year students the opportunity to focus their studies on one of three specific areas: Directing, Writing, or Post-Production.

Each of these areas breaks down into eight-week focus sessions for a culmination of a year-long certificate of completion.

For the upcoming Film Online Gap Year programme, the Academy enlisted high-profile film industry professionals to guide you through their online post-production, directing and writing masterclasses.

To share her experiences as a writer, director, producer and what growing up in the industry was like, Tiny Apples founder Julie Pacino will take IAAs online stage. Julie has written and directed several short films that have screened in cities across the world including Cannes, Hollywood, Sao Paulo, and New York.

Film producer Lynn Hendee will be sharing her vast industry experience with IAA students too. Hendee is a member of the Producers Guild of America, founding Co-Chair of the PGAs Womens Impact Network (WIN) and an alumna of the 2017 Sundance Institute/Women in Film Intensive Workshop.

Her multiple successful film credits include Enders Game, The Tempest, In My Country, and many more.

Source: Idyllwild Arts Academy

For an Editing in LA masterclass, Emmy Award-winning picture editor John Gilbert will guide IAA students through the dos and donts. Gilbert has over thirty years experience editing both television and feature films, such as Atlas Shrugged II: The Strike and Teen Wolf episodes.

Learn the advanced intricacies of cinematography with Dan Kneece who has worked with the best in business. He was taught Steadicam by inventor Garrett Brown. This led to a 28-year career as a Steadicam operator and anongoing professional relationship with director David Lynch on projects such as Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart, Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive.

For Quentin Tarantino,Danwas A Camera/Steadicam Operator on Jackie Brown and Steadicam operator on the Death Proof segment of Grindhouse.

Dannow uses his knowledge, extensive film making experience and incredible eye to excel in his work as a director ofphotography.

The IAA Film Online Gap Year also features film legend Ralph Singletons film scheduling and budgeting masterclass, Witt Lacys DirectorsGuild of America Assistant Director, production assistant boot camp, Billy Cowarts acting class, seasoned casting director Mikie Heilbruns masterclass and much more.

Source: Idyllwild Arts Academy

As mentioned above,the Academy is now offering a new Online Gap Year for all arts majors.In the Film Online Gap Year, for example, youll level-up your creative experience through a virtual Writing Programme, a Directing Programme and a Post-Production Programme.

These three programmes will broaden your knowledge of the film sector and help you discover which creative route youd like to take further into university or a career.

The Writing Programme expands your storytelling skills through Screenwriting, Playwriting, and Multi-Genre workshops. Whereas the Directing Programme provides students with an overview of visual storytelling and character development.

For the Post-Production programme, youll acquire technical skills and aesthetic sensibilities in editing and sound production. This Post-Production programme also offers professional Avid User Certifications in Media Composer and Pro-Tools with testing after a 16-week or 32-week intensive.

Ready for a year filled with creativity, inspiration and expert guidance from the comfort of your home? Contact Idyllwild Arts Academy today.

An unforgettable IAA gap year awaits.

Follow IAA on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Vimeo and Instagram

Idyllwild Arts Academy: creativity and safety

Why auditions are important for developing artists

Go here to see the original:

Idyllwild Arts Academy: A safe and creative hub in the mountains - Study International News

No flight required: 10 island escapes you can drive to – USA Today 10Best

Photo courtesy of iStock / helivideo

Note from 10Best: Be sure to familiarize yourself with the local restrictions on travel in each location, and check with any businesses for the latest updates on openings/closures and visitor requirements before you go.

You don't need to hop a plane to the Caribbean to enjoy a relaxing island escape full of great beaches and far-flung adventures. We've put together 10 of the best island escapes in America that you can reach by car.

Photo courtesy of iStock / f11photo

A laid-back island escape just a short drive from the heart of downtown San Diego, Coronado Island boasts a long stretch of award-winning beach that sparkles in the sun thanks to a mineral in the sand called mica.

The small beach town is the perfect place to rent a bike and explore the beautiful gardens. And if you're spending the night, the historic Hotel del Coronado is a must-stay.

Photo courtesy of iStock / GabrielPevide

The Florida Keysare a necklace of tropical islands connected by the Overseas Highway, running from Key Largo, just south of Miami, to the end of the road at Key West.In 2009, the famed highway was designated an All-American Road, the highest recognition under the National Scenic Byways program.

The drive offers a myriad of island escapes with a beautiful blend of emerald-green harbors, turquoise seas, swaying palms and wildlife-rich mangroves.

Photo courtesy of iStock / Mak_photo

Virginia's Chincoteague Island is best knownfor two things: sumptuously salty oysters and its unique population of wild ponies. The island is part of a 14,000-acre national wildlife refuge, which means it remains blissfully underdeveloped.

Tours offer the chance to see the wild ponies in their natural habitat,or visit during late July to watch the local "saltwater cowboys" move the herd on their annual pony swim.

Photo courtesy of iStock / Douglas Rissing

The sleepy beach town on Tybee Island may be one of the best-kept secrets in all of the American Southeast. This under-the-radar barrier island sits along the pristine Georgia coast just 30 minutes from the historic colonial center of Savannah.

It makes the ideal spot for every sort of beach activity, from beach-combing for shells along the secluded northern beaches to kite surfing and kayaking with dolphins from the wind-swept south end.

Photo courtesy of iStock / Robert Mintzes

Florida's Marco Island sits along the Gulf Coast between Naples and the mangroves of the Ten Thousand Islands as they stretch into the Everglades. Here you can find perfect white-sand beaches along with some of the best beachfront dining in the state.

Photo courtesy of iStock / SEASTOCK

Drive onto a Washington State ferry in Anancortes, and you'll soon land on Orcas Island, a rugged, rainforest-clad jewel in the San Juan Islands.Take a whale-watching tour to spot killer whales spy hopping in the emerald sea or hike through lush forests to visit Cascade Falls in Moran State Park.

A drive to the top of Mount Constitution offers exceptional views of the islands and snow-capped peaks in the distance.

Photo courtesy of iStock / NikonShutterman

Off the coast of North Carolina, the barrier islands of the Outer Banks are connected by a coastal highway, offering easy access to many great beaches and attractions, from Cape Hatteras National Seashore to the site of the Wright brothers' first airplane flight at Kitty Hawk.

Not to mention, you'll find miles of off-road beach and opportunities for great fishing, surfing, scuba diving and many other watersports.

Photo courtesy of iStock / S_Hoss

Mount Desert Island, Maine's largest island, is a popular escape for those looking to truly get away from it all. Those looking to hobnob can stay in Bar Harbor to see theestates of Millionaire's Row and hike Cadillac Mountain. But nature fans should head straight to Acadia National Park, where you can explore remote beaches and glacier-cut canyons.

Photo courtesy of iStock / Vladone

The Thousand Islands in Upstate New York are the eponymous home of Thousand Island dressing, which you can sample at its birthplace in Clayton, and they also sit along the The Great Lakes Seaway Trail, an iconic and picturesque drivepast Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River.

The region is chock full of activities, such as world-class fishing and birdwatching. And don't miss the chance to explore a unique pair of island castles, Boldt Castle and Singer Castle.

Photo courtesy of iStock / SkyF

Nicknamed "Key West of the Midwest" for its eclectic characters and lively nightlife, Put-in-Bay is a town on South Bass Island in the Ohio section of Lake Erie. A car ferry makes it easy to drive onto the island, and once there you can rent a bike, golf cart or scooter to get around the friendly town.

Adventurers can take a kayaking trip on the lake or visitCrystal Cave to see the world's largest geode.

Visit link:

No flight required: 10 island escapes you can drive to - USA Today 10Best

Grand Island School district expects technical devices will be in high demand as more students learn remotely – WIVB.com – News 4

GRAND ISLAND, N.Y. (WIVB) A local school district is noticing that devices, such as Chromebooks are in high demand, as people continue working from home and students prepare for distance learning.

Grand Island Central School District Superintendent Brian Graham says each student in the district grades 2nd through 12th will have access to a device to learn remotely. He says the district planned accordingly for that, but says any extra Chromebooks they ordered might not be in on time.

Those devices are in high demand so they may be delayed for the start of school, Graham said.

Since the district is leaning towards a hybrid model of learning, Graham says students will need access to devices such as Chromebooks.

Through those devices, our children will be working with our teachers through google classroom, he said.

He says since March, the school district has been planning to make sure each student has what they need to learn from home.

This summer were purchasing Chromebooks and making sure that every child has access, Graham said. Theres a big demand right now for those devices, luckily were only looking at a small number perhaps 200 to 400, because we were already prepared.

Local tech expert Ron Odde says hes not surprised Chromebooks are a hot item.

I can understand why they would go with Chromebooks because that is certainly the least expensive option, Odde said.

Odde owns Your PC Medic in Buffalo. Each week, close to two dozen people, many who work from home, reach out needing computer or technical help. With many school districts in the area pushing for a hybrid model of learning, Odde says that could mean parents who arent used to the technology will have to become more computer savvy by next month.

Regardless of what technology is being used there are definitely going to be some people that will need some assistance in learning how to use

the technology, learning how to access the various resources that the school system might be asking them to access online, he said. So certainly that is anticipated.

His advice for parents..

Just be patient, Odde said. Dont assume that something catastrophic happening just because its not working at the moment.

uBreakiFix is another business in Western New York that tells News 4 theyve been busy lately as well. The owner says each of its seven locations between Buffalo and Rochester have been booked up with people needing computer repairs or technical support.

Sarah Minkewicz is a reporter who has been part of the News 4 team since 2019. See more of her work here.

Read more:

Grand Island School district expects technical devices will be in high demand as more students learn remotely - WIVB.com - News 4

Community Health Action of Staten Island distributes boxes of fresh free food from Fresh Direct – SILive.com

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- Community Health Action of Staten Island (CHASI) is distributing boxes of fresh free food from Fresh Direct for Staten Islanders, especially in light of thousands of Islanders whose food has gone bad because of power outages, post-Tropical Storm Isaias.

We distributed over 400 boxes (Friday) and have about 50 left for distribution today, said Laura Del Prete, of CHASI. We will be getting more next week to do another distribution.

You can pick up a pre-packed box of non perishable items at 56 Bay Street. Please be sure to sign for your box, while supplies last.

The program, started at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, has recently been extended through the end of September. From March to June of this year, pantry staff served over 24,000 households.

So many people have lost the contents of their fridge due to the storm and we are here to help, added Del Prete. Box contents vary, but include canned goods, cereal, pasta or rice, and other non-perishable grocery items.

The best days to pick up are Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., but food may be available at other times by calling 718-808-1450.

CHASI FOOD PANTRY

Individuals or families seeking food can visit the CHASI community food pantry at 2134 Richmond Terrace, Port Richmond. The pantry is open Tuesdays 10-2, Wednesdays 12-4, Fridays 2-6, and Saturdays 10-2.

The CHASI mobile food pantry visits locations in 16 neighborhoods across the Island, said Emilie Tippins, CHASI Vice President Communications & Development. The past four months have dramatically increased the need for pantry services.

Respecting social distancing protocol, the CHASI pantry service has moved outdoors. Benefits navigators work with clients in need to help with health insurance benefits and SNAP benefits.

Connections are still available to other CHASI services during the pandemic, many with home delivery or virtual options, including overdose prevention, recovery support groups (many by phone), at-home HIV testing, and domestic violence support.

PARTNERSHIP WITH FRESH DIRECT, BP JAMES ODDO, AND OTHERS

In addition to the partnership with Fresh Direct via Borough President James Oddos office, CHASI has received COVID-related supplies and food from the Food Bank for New York, City Harvest, North Shore and South Shore Rotary Clubs and Rotary District 7230.

ALSO: Boy Scouts of America, Richmond County Savings Foundation, SIEDC, BCB Bank, NYC Department of Education, Notre Dame Club of Staten Island, Rabs Country Lanes, NYC Department of Sanitation, College of Staten Island, Snug Harbor Heritage Farm, Blessing Bag Brigade of NJ, Mariners Harbor Farm, other local organizations, local elected officials, and several generous individual donors.

Original post:

Community Health Action of Staten Island distributes boxes of fresh free food from Fresh Direct - SILive.com

The Devaluation of Free Speech in the Land of the Free – Jewish Journal

With a presidential election looming during these fast times when fevers and emotions run high, there is one urgent national crisis that may not be remedied by voting or a vaccine. And it bears directly on the foundational principles of what once united these states of America.

Whether we realize it or not, we are being forced to rethink our origins and reorder our priorities mostly by holding our tongue or liking the same tweet.

Conformity has become a newly dominant ethos, demanding that we reassess American history and regard our founding not as a revolutionary miracle but as original sin.

Yet, in doing so, we are becoming a smaller, meaner and more vengeful America intolerant and all too eager to punish those who dare to express disfavored opinions. Shades of these restrictions on speech can be found across political spectrums, but what is now being called the cancel culture resides mostly with the progressive left.

These cancellations are not to be taken lightly. They are terminal, and like all Terminators, they keep coming back.

Sound ominous? Well, just consider some recent events (there are many more, by the way) and ask whether free speech and critical thought are alive and well in America.

Last month evolutionary psychologist and Harvard professor Steven Pinker was the subject of an open letter signed by hundreds of linguists seeking to have him removed as a distinguished fellow from the Linguistic Society of America. His scholarly credentials were impeccable but some of his tweets and bits of other writing were deemed deplorable. Mostly he was accused of racial insensitivity for relying on data that suggested that overt racism in America was in decline.

A political culture that is hostile to open and respectful dialogue, and that requires ideological conformity and moral certainty, is decidedly illiberal.

David Shor, a data analyst, was fired at the end of May for a tweet that cited an academic study showing that voters were negatively influenced by violent protests, to the benefit of Republican candidates. Clearly, supporters of violent protests wish to keep their options open.

Also last month, professors at The New School in New York, UCLA and Stanford were investigated, and condemned by a student senate resolution in the latter case, for using the N-word while quoting from the works of James Baldwin, Martin Luther King Jr. and the lyrics from the hip-hop group, N.W.A, respectively. How else to discuss the writings of African Americans without examining the chosen words of African Americans was not explained.

A Portland, Ore., burrito shop shut down in 2017 because its owner was accused of stealing and committing culinary white supremacy by having learned new recipes on a trip to Mexico. The audacity of a taco prepared by a non-Mexican. Who knew there were enough Italians in Portland to toss all those pizza pies.

And by now everyone knows the fallout from The New York Times decision in June to publish an op-ed from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who argued that the military should be brought in to quell the violence that arose from some of the Black Lives Matter protests. It was a position that a slight majority of Americans shared an ABC/Ipsos poll released June 7 revealed 52% approved even if misguidedly, but it apparently was a position that the Times did not think was fit to print.

Staffers erupted and the publisher disavowed the essay, calling its publication a mistake. James Bennet, the pages main editor, resigned under pressure. A few weeks later, editor and opinion writer Bari Weiss resigned, too, with a stinging letter that accused the papers leadership of capitulating to a progressive mob that undermined the objectivity of its journalistic mission. (In her July 31 appearance on Real Time With Bill Maher, she likened the cancel culture to social murder.)

Of course, cancellation is not limited to chiseled stone. It usually involves real lives and real people. And it can be ruinous. A slip of the tongue, a casual remark, an errant tweet now has the potential to end a career.

On the same day, columnist Andrew Sullivan resigned from New York magazine, citing similar problems with colleagues who no longer welcomed his opinions. Harpers Magazine followed with a published letter signed by 153 writers and cultural figures lamenting the illiberal and public-shaming zeitgeist of these times. With these battle lines fully drawn and career wreckage everywhere, Politico took a survey and found that 46% of Americans believe that the cancel culture has gone too far.

Maybe so, but the so-called progressive left is ramping up for more purges. Not since Stalin has purging been this much in vogue.

Historical statues have become popular targets. Confederate officers and Founding Fathers, to the delight of some, are earmarked for the same rubble. America, after all, is irredeemably flawed, they say. These historical markers are emblems of shame, and roving wrecking crews are performing a righteous task.

Of course, cancellation is not limited to chiseled stone. It usually involves real lives and real people. And it can be ruinous. A slip of the tongue, a casual remark, an errant tweet, an unintended slight, a joke resurrected from an era when social boundaries were broader and a joke was regarded as a joke, a source in a syllabus or a single paragraph within an article now has the potential to end a career. Punishments never seem to fit these thought crimes. Whats more, these cancellations allow for no forgiveness.

Speech now suddenly comes with consequences. Politically incorrect speech is not to be freely spoken. Here, it is the community at large that determines what is to be censored. And some speech is flatly denied a public hearing. Punitive mobs gather, usually in cyberspace, for the sole purpose of creating the critical mass that will lead to cancellation. The hecklers veto has multiplied, resting on the hair-trigger fingertips of those with Twitter accounts.

The presidency of Donald Trump hasnt helped matters, given a leadership style that depends so much on jingoistic slogans and us versus them mind games.

Despite our national love affair with the First Amendment, free expression is being regulated not by the government, but by the intolerant left, which has decamped from college and is now setting the terms for public debate.

Yes, conservatives are capable of the same double standards, but the phenomenon of the cancelation culture stems from a decidedly leftist university worldview, and its spread throughout society should concern all Americans who value free speech.

Theres a new sheriff in town in the form of the thought police. Those insufficiently woke, unmindful of white privilege, oblivious to power differentials and colonial legacies, are likely to be called out and cancelled. And cancellation is not a mere figure of speech. It means what it says: Go away! Its not a disagreement; it is the blotting out of conversation altogether.

And it portends the death of liberalism itself.

Remember liberalism? Its origins are found in the writings of John Locke and his fellow enlightened philosophers. These were the writers who James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and other delegates to the Constitutional Convention were reading when they undertook the task of drafting our founding documents the blueprints to our democracy. It led to a compelling list of freedoms: speech, assembly, press, the right to and from religion, and limited self-government that protected private property and enforced the rule of law.

All of this consensus around rights came under the imprimatur of liberalism. And early Americans were proud to call themselves liberals. A good many of todays Americans are no longer so sure.

To be liberal means to keep an open mind when venturing out into the public square, freely sampling the ideas of the day. Ideas have a tendency to conflict. Thats OK. Making judgments about ideas is all part of the democratic experience.

Only with a liberal openness to ideas can government make better decisions and the electorate become more informed. Healthy disagreement was the secret sauce of the social contract. Americans stood ready to entertain differences of opinion without reaching for pitchforks and muskets.

What we see today in the progressive orthodoxy of the new left is not liberalism, however. The liberal tradition was never so quick to judge and even quicker to indict. Publicly shaming is not the same as debating. And it is not the product of the liberal mind. A political culture that is hostile to open and respectful dialogue, and that requires ideological conformity and moral certainty, is decidedly illiberal.

Politico took a survey and found that 46% of Americans believe that the cancel culture has gone too far.

But thats the junction where the woke-world places itself. Groupthink is all too commonplace. Accusations of racism are far too easily and frequently made. Conversations are forced to end before they even start.

Those who exist in the rarefied precincts of university life already know that American Exceptionalism has been in a freefall for many years now. Whats different today is that the circle of co-conspirators has widened, and moved off campus. Wokeness has declared war on whiteness, with progressives schooling the general public in what is for them an entirely new canon, whether they like it or not.

It is a lesson that centers on America as an unabashed imperialist, colonial power. Racist from birth. Enslaver. Exploiter. Defiler. Despoiler. Appropriator of cultures not their own. Instigator of global conflicts. Magnifier of economic inequalities.

There can be no Greatest Generation in a nation without any positive attributes. Thats the vision of America that many progressives have. To suggest otherwise is to evidence racist intent. In todays cancel culture, the talking point of intersectional oppression is ignored at ones peril.

Think I am kidding? Cancellation is the politics of pink slips. Accusations are more than sufficient. Exoneration is unobtainable. Speech is stifled in mid-sentence and careers are ruined.

The social contract is being renegotiated as we speak.

In case there is any wonder whether the Atlantic Ocean provides a measure of insulation from this cancellation craze, British lecturer Stephen Lamonby was fired last month after he casually mentioned to another academic that he believed Jewish people are the cleverest in the world. Lamonby assumed he was allowed to use a positive stereotype. The university, however, dismissed him for gross misconduct.

Most universities, and The New York Times, could stand to go back to school for a refresher course on basic civics.

Instead, we are instructed that certain words or ideas must be banished, otherwise people of color will be at risk, their lives endangered. But in what sense? Clearly, not in the way that Medgar Evers was murdered, or the four girls killed in the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing in Birmingham, Ala., both in 1963. Arent those very different examples of endangerment surely when compared to a tweet citing data on the decline of racism?

Who knew that liberals were crazy, too? Yes, conservatives scoff at evolution with creationist theme parks that adopt the historical timeline of The Flintstones, where intelligent design enables Neanderthals to ride on the backs of dinosaurs. But is what we are seeing from progressives in squelching any comment that may conflict with the orthodoxy of the moment any better?

Moral revulsion and old-school social distancing is one thing; canceling a life is quite another. Thousands of Twitter users lie in wait, twitching at the thought of rendering someone jobless.

Twitter confers outsized influence on its users, none of whom are smart simply because they own a smartphone. Similarly, faculty infighting, where the stakes on wokeness run high, makes Mean Girls seem positively unctuous by comparison.

Photo illustration by Avishek Das/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

The presidency of Donald Trump hasnt helped matters, given a leadership style that depends so much on jingoistic slogans and us versus them mind games. There is a daily choreography to taking sides that has polarized the populace and inspired protests that, with another administration, might have remained under wraps.

At the same time, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is bound to receive carte blanche privileges in a Joe Biden presidency even though he is a longtime moderate. He wont be able to win without them, which will render him beholden. But these are the same people for whom an assault on traditional American liberalism has become the cornerstone of their political philosophy.

How does one reconcile maintaining the rule of law in a nation that defunds and dismantles law enforcement? Its not the job of the community to police itself.

Those who upend the priorities of liberalism and terrorize free thought say that they are compensating for the imbalance of power that historically silenced voices belonging to people of color. True enough. But what seeks to replace it is a radical departure from the liberal tradition, where political pluralism was no less important.With liberalism as their crowning achievement, our Founding Fathers would be surprised to learn that we didnt fight to preserve what was, for them, so hard-won.

Thane Rosenbaumis a novelist, essayist, law professor and Distinguished University Professor at Touro College, where he directs theForum on Life, Culture & Society. He is thelegal analyst for CBS News Radioand appears frequently on cable TV news programs.His most recent book is titled Saving Free Speech From Itself.

Visit link:

The Devaluation of Free Speech in the Land of the Free - Jewish Journal

A military veteran who was sentenced to life in prison for selling $30 of marijuana will be freed – WXII The Triad

A military veteran serving a life sentence for selling less than $30 worth of marijuana will soon be released from prison, his attorney said.Derek Harris, who was arrested in 2008 in Louisiana for selling an officer .69 grams of marijuana, was recently resentenced to time served. He's already served nine years in prison.Initially, Harris was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison, according to the Louisiana Supreme Court. He was resentenced in 2012 to life in prison under the Habitual Offender Law, which allows judges to impose stricter sentences on someone who's been charged before.Prosecutors in Vermilion Parish agreed to release Harris from prison after the Louisiana Supreme Court granted him a new hearing last month, said his lawyer Cormac Boyle.The Louisiana Supreme Court agreed with Harris' argument claiming he had "ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing on post-conviction review." The matter was sent back to the trial court for an evidentiary writ.The District Attorney's office agreed that Harris "received ineffective assistance at sentencing and was entitled to a lesser sentence," Boyle said in a statement.He also noted that Harris had a substance abuse problem that started when he returned from Desert Storm, a U.S. military operation during the Gulf War launched in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990."His prior offenses were nonviolent and related to his untreated dependency on drugs," Louisiana Supreme Court Justice John Weimer wrote in his opinion.Weimer noted in his opinion that the trial judge said that Harris was "not a drug kingpin" and didn't fit what they thought of "as a drug dealer, so far as I can tell."Weimer wrote that those were the main reasons the maximum 30-year sentence was not imposed. He also said that the trial court imposed a life sentence when the multiple offender bill was passed.Related video: 12 trash bags full of marijuana found in Oklahoma creekCNN has reached out to the district attorney in Vermilion Parish but has not heard back.Boyle told CNN on Friday that he is working with the Louisiana Department of Corrections on Harris' release and hoped to have him out soon. He said the Harris would be moving to be closer to family in Kentucky and that he was looking forward to spending time with his brother, Antoine, and his family.Another decision by the Louisiana Supreme Court last week was roundly criticized: Justices voted to uphold a man's life sentence for stealing hedge clippers.Fair Wayne Bryant was convicted in 1997 on one count of attempted simple burglary and sentened to life in prison. His attorney called his sentence of life in prison "unconstitutionally harsh and excessive."Five white, male justices voted to uphold his conviction, while the lone Black, female justice provided the one dissenting vote.

A military veteran serving a life sentence for selling less than $30 worth of marijuana will soon be released from prison, his attorney said.

Derek Harris, who was arrested in 2008 in Louisiana for selling an officer .69 grams of marijuana, was recently resentenced to time served. He's already served nine years in prison.

Initially, Harris was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison, according to the Louisiana Supreme Court. He was resentenced in 2012 to life in prison under the Habitual Offender Law, which allows judges to impose stricter sentences on someone who's been charged before.

Prosecutors in Vermilion Parish agreed to release Harris from prison after the Louisiana Supreme Court granted him a new hearing last month, said his lawyer Cormac Boyle.

The Louisiana Supreme Court agreed with Harris' argument claiming he had "ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing on post-conviction review." The matter was sent back to the trial court for an evidentiary writ.

The District Attorney's office agreed that Harris "received ineffective assistance at sentencing and was entitled to a lesser sentence," Boyle said in a statement.

He also noted that Harris had a substance abuse problem that started when he returned from Desert Storm, a U.S. military operation during the Gulf War launched in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990.

"His prior offenses were nonviolent and related to his untreated dependency on drugs," Louisiana Supreme Court Justice John Weimer wrote in his opinion.

Weimer noted in his opinion that the trial judge said that Harris was "not a drug kingpin" and didn't fit what they thought of "as a drug dealer, so far as I can tell."

Weimer wrote that those were the main reasons the maximum 30-year sentence was not imposed. He also said that the trial court imposed a life sentence when the multiple offender bill was passed.

Related video: 12 trash bags full of marijuana found in Oklahoma creek

CNN has reached out to the district attorney in Vermilion Parish but has not heard back.

Boyle told CNN on Friday that he is working with the Louisiana Department of Corrections on Harris' release and hoped to have him out soon. He said the Harris would be moving to be closer to family in Kentucky and that he was looking forward to spending time with his brother, Antoine, and his family.

Another decision by the Louisiana Supreme Court last week was roundly criticized: Justices voted to uphold a man's life sentence for stealing hedge clippers.

Fair Wayne Bryant was convicted in 1997 on one count of attempted simple burglary and sentened to life in prison. His attorney called his sentence of life in prison "unconstitutionally harsh and excessive."

Five white, male justices voted to uphold his conviction, while the lone Black, female justice provided the one dissenting vote.

See the rest here:

A military veteran who was sentenced to life in prison for selling $30 of marijuana will be freed - WXII The Triad

How the Pandemic Defeated America – The Atlantic

Editors Note: The Atlantic is making vital coverage of the coronavirus available to all readers. Find the collection here.

Image above: A masked worker cleans a New York City subway entrance.

Updated at 1:12 p.m. ET on August 4, 2020.

How did it come to this? A virus a thousand times smaller than a dust mote has humbled and humiliated the planets most powerful nation. America has failed to protect its people, leaving them with illness and financial ruin. It has lost its status as a global leader. It has careened between inaction and ineptitude. The breadth and magnitude of its errors are difficult, in the moment, to truly fathom.

To hear more feature stories, get the Audm iPhone app.

In the first half of 2020, SARSCoV2the new coronavirus behind the disease COVID19infected 10 million people around the world and killed about half a million. But few countries have been as severely hit as the United States, which has just 4 percent of the worlds population but a quarter of its confirmed COVID19 cases and deaths. These numbers are estimates. The actual toll, though undoubtedly higher, is unknown, because the richest country in the world still lacks sufficient testing to accurately count its sick citizens.

Despite ample warning, the U.S. squandered every possible opportunity to control the coronavirus. And despite its considerable advantagesimmense resources, biomedical might, scientific expertiseit floundered. While countries as different as South Korea, Thailand, Iceland, Slovakia, and Australia acted decisively to bend the curve of infections downward, the U.S. achieved merely a plateau in the spring, which changed to an appalling upward slope in the summer. The U.S. fundamentally failed in ways that were worse than I ever could have imagined, Julia Marcus, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School, told me.

Since the pandemic began, I have spoken with more than 100 experts in a variety of fields. Ive learned that almost everything that went wrong with Americas response to the pandemic was predictable and preventable. A sluggish response by a government denuded of expertise allowed the coronavirus to gain a foothold. Chronic underfunding of public health neutered the nations ability to prevent the pathogens spread. A bloated, inefficient health-care system left hospitals ill-prepared for the ensuing wave of sickness. Racist policies that have endured since the days of colonization and slavery left Indigenous and Black Americans especially vulnerable to COVID19. The decades-long process of shredding the nations social safety net forced millions of essential workers in low-paying jobs to risk their life for their livelihood. The same social-media platforms that sowed partisanship and misinformation during the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Africa and the 2016 U.S. election became vectors for conspiracy theories during the 2020 pandemic.

The U.S. has little excuse for its inattention. In recent decades, epidemics of SARS, MERS, Ebola, H1N1 flu, Zika, and monkeypox showed the havoc that new and reemergent pathogens could wreak. Health experts, business leaders, and even middle schoolers ran simulated exercises to game out the spread of new diseases. In 2018, I wrote an article for The Atlantic arguing that the U.S. was not ready for a pandemic, and sounded warnings about the fragility of the nations health-care system and the slow process of creating a vaccine. But the COVID19 debacle has also touchedand implicatednearly every other facet of American society: its shortsighted leadership, its disregard for expertise, its racial inequities, its social-media culture, and its fealty to a dangerous strain of individualism.

SARSCoV2 is something of an anti-Goldilocks virus: just bad enough in every way. Its symptoms can be severe enough to kill millions but are often mild enough to allow infections to move undetected through a population. It spreads quickly enough to overload hospitals, but slowly enough that statistics dont spike until too late. These traits made the virus harder to control, but they also softened the pandemics punch. SARSCoV2 is neither as lethal as some other coronaviruses, such as SARS and MERS, nor as contagious as measles. Deadlier pathogens almost certainly exist. Wild animals harbor an estimated 40,000 unknown viruses, a quarter of which could potentially jump into humans. How will the U.S. fare when we cant even deal with a starter pandemic?, Zeynep Tufekci, a sociologist at the University of North Carolina and an Atlantic contributing writer, asked me.

Despite its epochal effects, COVID19 is merely a harbinger of worse plagues to come. The U.S. cannot prepare for these inevitable crises if it returns to normal, as many of its people ache to do. Normal led to this. Normal was a world ever more prone to a pandemic but ever less ready for one. To avert another catastrophe, the U.S. needs to grapple with all the ways normal failed us. It needs a full accounting of every recent misstep and foundational sin, every unattended weakness and unheeded warning, every festering wound and reopened scar.

A pandemic can be prevented in two ways: Stop an infection from ever arising, or stop an infection from becoming thousands more. The first way is likely impossible. There are simply too many viruses and too many animals that harbor them. Bats alone could host thousands of unknown coronaviruses; in some Chinese caves, one out of every 20 bats is infected. Many people live near these caves, shelter in them, or collect guano from them for fertilizer. Thousands of bats also fly over these peoples villages and roost in their homes, creating opportunities for the bats viral stowaways to spill over into human hosts. Based on antibody testing in rural parts of China, Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit that studies emerging diseases, estimates that such viruses infect a substantial number of people every year. Most infected people dont know about it, and most of the viruses arent transmissible, Daszak says. But it takes just one transmissible virus to start a pandemic.

Sometime in late 2019, the wrong virus left a bat and ended up, perhaps via an intermediate host, in a humanand another, and another. Eventually it found its way to the Huanan seafood market, and jumped into dozens of new hosts in an explosive super-spreading event. The COVID19 pandemic had begun.

There is no way to get spillover of everything to zero, Colin Carlson, an ecologist at Georgetown University, told me. Many conservationists jump on epidemics as opportunities to ban the wildlife trade or the eating of bush meat, an exoticized term for game, but few diseases have emerged through either route. Carlson said the biggest factors behind spillovers are land-use change and climate change, both of which are hard to control. Our species has relentlessly expanded into previously wild spaces. Through intensive agriculture, habitat destruction, and rising temperatures, we have uprooted the planets animals, forcing them into new and narrower ranges that are on our own doorsteps. Humanity has squeezed the worlds wildlife in a crushing gripand viruses have come bursting out.

Curtailing those viruses after they spill over is more feasible, but requires knowledge, transparency, and decisiveness that were lacking in 2020. Much about coronaviruses is still unknown. There are no surveillance networks for detecting them as there are for influenza. There are no approved treatments or vaccines. Coronaviruses were formerly a niche family, of mainly veterinary importance. Four decades ago, just 60 or so scientists attended the first international meeting on coronaviruses. Their ranks swelled after SARS swept the world in 2003, but quickly dwindled as a spike in funding vanished. The same thing happened after MERS emerged in 2012. This year, the worlds coronavirus expertsand there still arent manyhad to postpone their triennial conference in the Netherlands because SARSCoV2 made flying too risky.

In the age of cheap air travel, an outbreak that begins on one continent can easily reach the others. SARS already demonstrated that in 2003, and more than twice as many people now travel by plane every year. To avert a pandemic, affected nations must alert their neighbors quickly. In 2003, China covered up the early spread of SARS, allowing the new disease to gain a foothold, and in 2020, history repeated itself. The Chinese government downplayed the possibility that SARSCoV2 was spreading among humans, and only confirmed as much on January 20, after millions had traveled around the country for the lunar new year. Doctors who tried to raise the alarm were censured and threatened. One, Li Wenliang, later died of COVID19. The World Health Organization initially parroted Chinas line and did not declare a public-health emergency of international concern until January 30. By then, an estimated 10,000 people in 20 countries had been infected, and the virus was spreading fast.

The United States has correctly castigated China for its duplicity and the WHO for its laxitybut the U.S. has also failed the international community. Under President Donald Trump, the U.S. has withdrawn from several international partnerships and antagonized its allies. It has a seat on the WHOs executive board, but left that position empty for more than two years, only filling it this May, when the pandemic was in full swing. Since 2017, Trump has pulled more than 30 staffers out of the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions office in China, who could have warned about the spreading coronavirus. Last July, he defunded an American epidemiologist embedded within Chinas CDC. America First was America oblivious.

Even after warnings reached the U.S., they fell on the wrong ears. Since before his election, Trump has cavalierly dismissed expertise and evidence. He filled his administration with inexperienced newcomers, while depicting career civil servants as part of a deep state. In 2018, he dismantled an office that had been assembled specifically to prepare for nascent pandemics. American intelligence agencies warned about the coronavirus threat in January, but Trump habitually disregards intelligence briefings. The secretary of health and human services, Alex Azar, offered similar counsel, and was twice ignored.

Being prepared means being ready to spring into action, so that when something like this happens, youre moving quickly, Ronald Klain, who coordinated the U.S. response to the West African Ebola outbreak in 2014, told me. By early February, we should have triggered a series of actions, precisely zero of which were taken. Trump could have spent those crucial early weeks mass-producing tests to detect the virus, asking companies to manufacture protective equipment and ventilators, and otherwise steeling the nation for the worst. Instead, he focused on the border. On January 31, Trump announced that the U.S. would bar entry to foreigners who had recently been in China, and urged Americans to avoid going there.

Travel bans make intuitive sense, because travel obviously enables the spread of a virus. But in practice, travel bans are woefully inefficient at restricting either travel or viruses. They prompt people to seek indirect routes via third-party countries, or to deliberately hide their symptoms. They are often porous: Trumps included numerous exceptions, and allowed tens of thousands of people to enter from China. Ironically, they create travel: When Trump later announced a ban on flights from continental Europe, a surge of travelers packed Americas airports in a rush to beat the incoming restrictions. Travel bans may sometimes work for remote island nations, but in general they can only delay the spread of an epidemicnot stop it. And they can create a harmful false confidence, so countries rely on bans to the exclusion of the things they actually need to dotesting, tracing, building up the health system, says Thomas Bollyky, a global-health expert at the Council on Foreign Relations. That sounds an awful lot like what happened in the U.S.

This was predictable. A president who is fixated on an ineffectual border wall, and has portrayed asylum seekers as vectors of disease, was always going to reach for travel bans as a first resort. And Americans who bought into his rhetoric of xenophobia and isolationism were going to be especially susceptible to thinking that simple entry controls were a panacea.

And so the U.S. wasted its best chance of restraining COVID19. Although the disease first arrived in the U.S. in mid-January, genetic evidence shows that the specific viruses that triggered the first big outbreaks, in Washington State, didnt land until mid-February. The country could have used that time to prepare. Instead, Trump, who had spent his entire presidency learning that he could say whatever he wanted without consequence, assured Americans that the coronavirus is very much under control, and like a miracle, it will disappear. With impunity, Trump lied. With impunity, the virus spread.

On February 26, Trump asserted that cases were going to be down to close to zero. Over the next two months, at least 1 million Americans were infected.

As the coronavirus established itself in the U.S., it found a nation through which it could spread easily, without being detected. For years, Pardis Sabeti, a virologist at the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, has been trying to create a surveillance network that would allow hospitals in every major U.S. city to quickly track new viruses through genetic sequencing. Had that network existed, once Chinese scientists published SARSCoV2s genome on January 11, every American hospital would have been able to develop its own diagnostic test in preparation for the viruss arrival. I spent a lot of time trying to convince many funders to fund it, Sabeti told me. I never got anywhere.

The CDC developed and distributed its own diagnostic tests in late January. These proved useless because of a faulty chemical component. Tests were in such short supply, and the criteria for getting them were so laughably stringent, that by the end of February, tens of thousands of Americans had likely been infected but only hundreds had been tested. The official data were so clearly wrong that The Atlantic developed its own volunteer-led initiativethe COVID Tracking Projectto count cases.

Diagnostic tests are easy to make, so the U.S. failing to create one seemed inconceivable. Worse, it had no Plan B. Private labs were strangled by FDA bureaucracy. Meanwhile, Sabetis lab developed a diagnostic test in mid-January and sent it to colleagues in Nigeria, Sierra Leone, and Senegal. We had working diagnostics in those countries well before we did in any U.S. states, she told me.

Its hard to overstate how thoroughly the testing debacle incapacitated the U.S. People with debilitating symptoms couldnt find out what was wrong with them. Health officials couldnt cut off chains of transmission by identifying people who were sick and asking them to isolate themselves.

Read: How the coronavirus became an American catastrophe

Water running along a pavement will readily seep into every crack; so, too, did the unchecked coronavirus seep into every fault line in the modern world. Consider our buildings. In response to the global energy crisis of the 1970s, architects made structures more energy-efficient by sealing them off from outdoor air, reducing ventilation rates. Pollutants and pathogens built up indoors, ushering in the era of sick buildings, says Joseph Allen, who studies environmental health at Harvards T. H. Chan School of Public Health. Energy efficiency is a pillar of modern climate policy, but there are ways to achieve it without sacrificing well-being. We lost our way over the years and stopped designing buildings for people, Allen says.

The indoor spaces in which Americans spend 87 percent of their time became staging grounds for super-spreading events. One study showed that the odds of catching the virus from an infected person are roughly 19 times higher indoors than in open air. Shielded from the elements and among crowds clustered in prolonged proximity, the coronavirus ran rampant in the conference rooms of a Boston hotel, the cabins of the Diamond Princess cruise ship, and a church hall in Washington State where a choir practiced for just a few hours.

The hardest-hit buildings were those that had been jammed with people for decades: prisons. Between harsher punishments doled out in the War on Drugs and a tough-on-crime mindset that prizes retribution over rehabilitation, Americas incarcerated population has swelled sevenfold since the 1970s, to about 2.3 million. The U.S. imprisons five to 18 times more people per capita than other Western democracies. Many American prisons are packed beyond capacity, making social distancing impossible. Soap is often scarce. Inevitably, the coronavirus ran amok. By June, two American prisons each accounted for more cases than all of New Zealand. One, Marion Correctional Institution, in Ohio, had more than 2,000 cases among inmates despite having a capacity of 1,500.

Other densely packed facilities were also besieged. Americas nursing homes and long-term-care facilities house less than 1 percent of its people, but as of mid-June, they accounted for 40 percent of its coronavirus deaths. More than 50,000 residents and staff have died. At least 250,000 more have been infected. These grim figures are a reflection not just of the greater harms that COVID19 inflicts upon elderly physiology, but also of the care the elderly receive. Before the pandemic, three in four nursing homes were understaffed, and four in five had recently been cited for failures in infection control. The Trump administrations policies have exacerbated the problem by reducing the influx of immigrants, who make up a quarter of long-term caregivers.

Read: Another coronavirus nursing-home disaster is coming

Even though a Seattle nursing home was one of the first COVID19 hot spots in the U.S., similar facilities werent provided with tests and protective equipment. Rather than girding these facilities against the pandemic, the Department of Health and Human Services paused nursing-home inspections in March, passing the buck to the states. Some nursing homes avoided the virus because their owners immediately stopped visitations, or paid caregivers to live on-site. But in others, staff stopped working, scared about infecting their charges or becoming infected themselves. In some cases, residents had to be evacuated because no one showed up to care for them.

Americas neglect of nursing homes and prisons, its sick buildings, and its botched deployment of tests are all indicative of its problematic attitude toward health: Get hospitals ready and wait for sick people to show, as Sheila Davis, the CEO of the nonprofit Partners in Health, puts it. Especially in the beginning, we catered our entire [COVID19] response to the 20 percent of people who required hospitalization, rather than preventing transmission in the community. The latter is the job of the public-health system, which prevents sickness in populations instead of merely treating it in individuals. That system pairs uneasily with a national temperament that views health as a matter of personal responsibility rather than a collective good.

At the end of the 20th century, public-health improvements meant that Americans were living an average of 30 years longer than they were at the start of it. Maternal mortality had fallen by 99 percent; infant mortality by 90 percent. Fortified foods all but eliminated rickets and goiters. Vaccines eradicated smallpox and polio, and brought measles, diphtheria, and rubella to heel. These measures, coupled with antibiotics and better sanitation, curbed infectious diseases to such a degree that some scientists predicted they would soon pass into history. But instead, these achievements brought complacency. As public health did its job, it became a target of budget cuts, says Lori Freeman, the CEO of the National Association of County and City Health Officials.

Today, the U.S. spends just 2.5 percent of its gigantic health-care budget on public health. Underfunded health departments were already struggling to deal with opioid addiction, climbing obesity rates, contaminated water, and easily preventable diseases. Last year saw the most measles cases since 1992. In 2018, the U.S. had 115,000 cases of syphilis and 580,000 cases of gonorrheanumbers not seen in almost three decades. It has 1.7 million cases of chlamydia, the highest number ever recorded.

Since the last recession, in 2009, chronically strapped local health departments have lost 55,000 jobsa quarter of their workforce. When COVID19 arrived, the economic downturn forced overstretched departments to furlough more employees. When states needed battalions of public-health workers to find infected people and trace their contacts, they had to hire and train people from scratch. In May, Maryland Governor Larry Hogan asserted that his state would soon have enough people to trace 10,000 contacts every day. Last year, as Ebola tore through the Democratic Republic of Congoa country with a quarter of Marylands wealth and an active war zonelocal health workers and the WHO traced twice as many people.

Ripping unimpeded through American communities, the coronavirus created thousands of sickly hosts that it then rode into Americas hospitals. It should have found facilities armed with state-of-the-art medical technologies, detailed pandemic plans, and ample supplies of protective equipment and life-saving medicines. Instead, it found a brittle system in danger of collapse.

Compared with the average wealthy nation, America spends nearly twice as much of its national wealth on health care, about a quarter of which is wasted on inefficient care, unnecessary treatments, and administrative chicanery. The U.S. gets little bang for its exorbitant buck. It has the lowest life-expectancy rate of comparable countries, the highest rates of chronic disease, and the fewest doctors per person. This profit-driven system has scant incentive to invest in spare beds, stockpiled supplies, peacetime drills, and layered contingency plansthe essence of pandemic preparedness. Americas hospitals have been pruned and stretched by market forces to run close to full capacity, with little ability to adapt in a crisis.

When hospitals do create pandemic plans, they tend to fight the last war. After 2014, several centers created specialized treatment units designed for Ebolaa highly lethal but not very contagious disease. These units were all but useless against a highly transmissible airborne virus like SARSCoV2. Nor were hospitals ready for an outbreak to drag on for months. Emergency plans assumed that staff could endure a few days of exhausting conditions, that supplies would hold, and that hard-hit centers could be supported by unaffected neighbors. Were designed for discrete disasters like mass shootings, traffic pileups, and hurricanes, says Esther Choo, an emergency physician at Oregon Health and Science University. The COVID19 pandemic is not a discrete disaster. It is a 50-state catastrophe that will likely continue at least until a vaccine is ready.

Wherever the coronavirus arrived, hospitals reeled. Several states asked medical students to graduate early, reenlisted retired doctors, and deployed dermatologists to emergency departments. Doctors and nurses endured grueling shifts, their faces chapped and bloody when they finally doffed their protective equipment. Soon, that equipmentmasks, respirators, gowns, glovesstarted running out.

American hospitals operate on a just-in-time economy. They acquire the goods they need in the moment through labyrinthine supply chains that wrap around the world in tangled lines, from countries with cheap labor to richer nations like the U.S. The lines are invisible until they snap. About half of the worlds face masks, for example, are made in China, some of them in Hubei province. When that region became the pandemic epicenter, the mask supply shriveled just as global demand spiked. The Trump administration turned to a larder of medical supplies called the Strategic National Stockpile, only to find that the 100 million respirators and masks that had been dispersed during the 2009 flu pandemic were never replaced. Just 13 million respirators were left.

In April, four in five frontline nurses said they didnt have enough protective equipment. Some solicited donations from the public, or navigated a morass of back-alley deals and internet scams. Others fashioned their own surgical masks from bandannas and gowns from garbage bags. The supply of nasopharyngeal swabs that are used in every diagnostic test also ran low, because one of the largest manufacturers is based in Lombardy, Italyinitially the COVID19 capital of Europe. About 40 percent of critical-care drugs, including antibiotics and painkillers, became scarce because they depend on manufacturing lines that begin in China and India. Once a vaccine is ready, there might not be enough vials to put it in, because of the long-running global shortage of medical-grade glassliterally, a bottle-neck bottleneck.

The federal government could have mitigated those problems by buying supplies at economies of scale and distributing them according to need. Instead, in March, Trump told Americas governors to try getting it yourselves. As usual, health care was a matter of capitalism and connections. In New York, rich hospitals bought their way out of their protective-equipment shortfall, while neighbors in poorer, more diverse parts of the city rationed their supplies.

While the president prevaricated, Americans acted. Businesses sent their employees home. People practiced social distancing, even before Trump finally declared a national emergency on March 13, and before governors and mayors subsequently issued formal stay-at-home orders, or closed schools, shops, and restaurants. A study showed that the U.S. could have averted 36,000 COVID19 deaths if leaders had enacted social-distancing measures just a week earlier. But better late than never: By collectively reducing the spread of the virus, America flattened the curve. Ventilators didnt run out, as they had in parts of Italy. Hospitals had time to add extra beds.

Social distancing worked. But the indiscriminate lockdown was necessary only because Americas leaders wasted months of prep time. Deploying this blunt policy instrument came at enormous cost. Unemployment rose to 14.7 percent, the highest level since record-keeping began, in 1948. More than 26 million people lost their jobs, a catastrophe in a country thatuniquely and absurdlyties health care to employment. Some COVID19 survivors have been hit with seven-figure medical bills. In the middle of the greatest health and economic crises in generations, millions of Americans have found themselves disconnected from medical care and impoverished. They join the millions who have always lived that way.

The coronavirus found, exploited, and widened every inequity that the U.S. had to offer. Elderly people, already pushed to the fringes of society, were treated as acceptable losses. Women were more likely to lose jobs than men, and also shouldered extra burdens of child care and domestic work, while facing rising rates of domestic violence. In half of the states, people with dementia and intellectual disabilities faced policies that threatened to deny them access to lifesaving ventilators. Thousands of people endured months of COVID19 symptoms that resembled those of chronic postviral illnesses, only to be told that their devastating symptoms were in their head. Latinos were three times as likely to be infected as white people. Asian Americans faced racist abuse. Far from being a great equalizer, the pandemic fell unevenly upon the U.S., taking advantage of injustices that had been brewing throughout the nations history.

Read: COVID-19 can last for several months

Of the 3.1 million Americans who still cannot afford health insurance in states where Medicaid has not been expanded, more than half are people of color, and 30 percent are Black.* This is no accident. In the decades after the Civil War, the white leaders of former slave states deliberately withheld health care from Black Americans, apportioning medicine more according to the logic of Jim Crow than Hippocrates. They built hospitals away from Black communities, segregated Black patients into separate wings, and blocked Black students from medical school. In the 20th century, they helped construct Americas system of private, employer-based insurance, which has kept many Black people from receiving adequate medical treatment. They fought every attempt to improve Black peoples access to health care, from the creation of Medicare and Medicaid in the 60s to the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010.

A number of former slave states also have among the lowest investments in public health, the lowest quality of medical care, the highest proportions of Black citizens, and the greatest racial divides in health outcomes. As the COVID19 pandemic wore on, they were among the quickest to lift social-distancing restrictions and reexpose their citizens to the coronavirus. The harms of these moves were unduly foisted upon the poor and the Black.

As of early July, one in every 1,450 Black Americans had died from COVID19a rate more than twice that of white Americans. That figure is both tragic and wholly expected given the mountain of medical disadvantages that Black people face. Compared with white people, they die three years younger. Three times as many Black mothers die during pregnancy. Black people have higher rates of chronic illnesses that predispose them to fatal cases of COVID19. When they go to hospitals, theyre less likely to be treated. The care they do receive tends to be poorer. Aware of these biases, Black people are hesitant to seek aid for COVID19 symptoms and then show up at hospitals in sicker states. One of my patients said, I dont want to go to the hospital, because theyre not going to treat me well, says Uch Blackstock, an emergency physician and the founder of Advancing Health Equity, a nonprofit that fights bias and racism in health care. Another whispered to me, Im so relieved youre Black. I just want to make sure Im listened to.

Black people were both more worried about the pandemic and more likely to be infected by it. The dismantling of Americas social safety net left Black people with less income and higher unemployment. They make up a disproportionate share of the low-paid essential workers who were expected to staff grocery stores and warehouses, clean buildings, and deliver mail while the pandemic raged around them. Earning hourly wages without paid sick leave, they couldnt afford to miss shifts even when symptomatic. They faced risky commutes on crowded public transportation while more privileged people teleworked from the safety of isolation. Theres nothing about Blackness that makes you more prone to COVID, says Nicolette Louissaint, the executive director of Healthcare Ready, a nonprofit that works to strengthen medical supply chains. Instead, existing inequities stack the odds in favor of the virus.

Native Americans were similarly vulnerable. A third of the people in the Navajo Nation cant easily wash their hands, because theyve been embroiled in long-running negotiations over the rights to the water on their own lands. Those with water must contend with runoff from uranium mines. Most live in cramped multigenerational homes, far from the few hospitals that service a 17-million-acre reservation. As of mid-May, the Navajo Nation had higher rates of COVID19 infections than any U.S. state.

Americans often misperceive historical inequities as personal failures. Stephen Huffman, a Republican state senator and doctor in Ohio, suggested that Black Americans might be more prone to COVID19 because they dont wash their hands enough, a remark for which he later apologized. Republican Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, also a physician, noted that Black people have higher rates of chronic disease, as if this were an answer in itself, and not a pattern that demanded further explanation.

Clear distribution of accurate information is among the most important defenses against an epidemics spread. And yet the largely unregulated, social-media-based communications infrastructure of the 21st century almost ensures that misinformation will proliferate fast. In every outbreak throughout the existence of social media, from Zika to Ebola, conspiratorial communities immediately spread their content about how its all caused by some government or pharmaceutical company or Bill Gates, says Rene DiResta of the Stanford Internet Observatory, who studies the flow of online information. When COVID19 arrived, there was no doubt in my mind that it was coming.

Read: The great 5G conspiracy

Sure enough, existing conspiracy theoriesGeorge Soros! 5G! Bioweapons!were repurposed for the pandemic. An infodemic of falsehoods spread alongside the actual virus. Rumors coursed through online platforms that are designed to keep users engaged, even if that means feeding them content that is polarizing or untrue. In a national crisis, when people need to act in concert, this is calamitous. The social internet as a system is broken, DiResta told me, and its faults are readily abused.

Beginning on April 16, DiRestas team noticed growing online chatter about Judy Mikovits, a discredited researcher turned anti-vaccination champion. Posts and videos cast Mikovits as a whistleblower who claimed that the new coronavirus was made in a lab and described Anthony Fauci of the White Houses coronavirus task force as her nemesis. Ironically, this conspiracy theory was nested inside a larger conspiracypart of an orchestrated PR campaign by an anti-vaxxer and QAnon fan with the explicit goal to take down Anthony Fauci. It culminated in a slickly produced video called Plandemic, which was released on May 4. More than 8 million people watched it in a week.

Doctors and journalists tried to debunk Plandemics many misleading claims, but these efforts spread less successfully than the video itself. Like pandemics, infodemics quickly become uncontrollable unless caught early. But while health organizations recognize the need to surveil for emerging diseases, they are woefully unprepared to do the same for emerging conspiracies. In 2016, when DiResta spoke with a CDC team about the threat of misinformation, their response was: Thats interesting, but thats just stuff that happens on the internet.

From the June 2020 issue: Adrienne LaFrance on how QAnon is more important than you think

Rather than countering misinformation during the pandemics early stages, trusted sources often made things worse. Many health experts and government officials downplayed the threat of the virus in January and February, assuring the public that it posed a low risk to the U.S. and drawing comparisons to the ostensibly greater threat of the flu. The WHO, the CDC, and the U.S. surgeon general urged people not to wear masks, hoping to preserve the limited stocks for health-care workers. These messages were offered without nuance or acknowledgement of uncertainty, so when they were reversedthe virus is worse than the flu; wear masksthe changes seemed like befuddling flip-flops.

The media added to the confusion. Drawn to novelty, journalists gave oxygen to fringe anti-lockdown protests while most Americans quietly stayed home. They wrote up every incremental scientific claim, even those that hadnt been verified or peer-reviewed.

There were many such claims to choose from. By tying career advancement to the publishing of papers, academia already creates incentives for scientists to do attention-grabbing but irreproducible work. The pandemic strengthened those incentives by prompting a rush of panicked research and promising ambitious scientists global attention.

In March, a small and severely flawed French study suggested that the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine could treat COVID19. Published in a minor journal, it likely would have been ignored a decade ago. But in 2020, it wended its way to Donald Trump via a chain of credulity that included Fox News, Elon Musk, and Dr. Oz. Trump spent months touting the drug as a miracle cure despite mounting evidence to the contrary, causing shortages for people who actually needed it to treat lupus and rheumatoid arthritis. The hydroxychloroquine story was muddied even further by a study published in a top medical journal, The Lancet, that claimed the drug was not effective and was potentially harmful. The paper relied on suspect data from a small analytics company called Surgisphere, and was retracted in June.**

Science famously self-corrects. But during the pandemic, the same urgent pace that has produced valuable knowledge at record speed has also sent sloppy claims around the world before anyone could even raise a skeptical eyebrow. The ensuing confusion, and the many genuine unknowns about the virus, has created a vortex of fear and uncertainty, which grifters have sought to exploit. Snake-oil merchants have peddled ineffectual silver bullets (including actual silver). Armchair experts with scant or absent qualifications have found regular slots on the nightly news. And at the center of that confusion is Donald Trump.

During a pandemic, leaders must rally the public, tell the truth, and speak clearly and consistently. Instead, Trump repeatedly contradicted public-health experts, his scientific advisers, and himself. He said that nobody ever thought a thing like [the pandemic] could happen and also that he felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic. Both statements cannot be true at the same time, and in fact neither is true.

A month before his inauguration, I wrote that the question isnt whether [Trump will] face a deadly outbreak during his presidency, but when. Based on his actions as a media personality during the 2014 Ebola outbreak and as a candidate in the 2016 election, I suggested that he would fail at diplomacy, close borders, tweet rashly, spread conspiracy theories, ignore experts, and exhibit reckless self-confidence. And so he did.

No one should be shocked that a liar who has made almost 20,000 false or misleading claims during his presidency would lie about whether the U.S. had the pandemic under control; that a racist who gave birth to birtherism would do little to stop a virus that was disproportionately killing Black people; that a xenophobe who presided over the creation of new immigrant-detention centers would order meatpacking plants with a substantial immigrant workforce to remain open; that a cruel man devoid of empathy would fail to calm fearful citizens; that a narcissist who cannot stand to be upstaged would refuse to tap the deep well of experts at his disposal; that a scion of nepotism would hand control of a shadow coronavirus task force to his unqualified son-in-law; that an armchair polymath would claim to have a natural ability at medicine and display it by wondering out loud about the curative potential of injecting disinfectant; that an egotist incapable of admitting failure would try to distract from his greatest one by blaming China, defunding the WHO, and promoting miracle drugs; or that a president who has been shielded by his party from any shred of accountability would say, when asked about the lack of testing, I dont take any responsibility at all.

Trump is a comorbidity of the COVID19 pandemic. He isnt solely responsible for Americas fiasco, but he is central to it. A pandemic demands the coordinated efforts of dozens of agencies. In the best circumstances, its hard to make the bureaucracy move quickly, Ron Klain said. It moves if the president stands on a table and says, Move quickly. But it really doesnt move if hes sitting at his desk saying its not a big deal.

In the early days of Trumps presidency, many believed that Americas institutions would check his excesses. They have, in part, but Trump has also corrupted them. The CDC is but his latest victim. On February 25, the agencys respiratory-disease chief, Nancy Messonnier, shocked people by raising the possibility of school closures and saying that disruption to everyday life might be severe. Trump was reportedly enraged. In response, he seems to have benched the entire agency. The CDC led the way in every recent domestic disease outbreak and has been the inspiration and template for public-health agencies around the world. But during the three months when some 2 million Americans contracted COVID19 and the death toll topped 100,000, the agency didnt hold a single press conference. Its detailed guidelines on reopening the country were shelved for a month while the White House released its own uselessly vague plan.

Again, everyday Americans did more than the White House. By voluntarily agreeing to months of social distancing, they bought the country time, at substantial cost to their financial and mental well-being. Their sacrifice came with an implicit social contractthat the government would use the valuable time to mobilize an extraordinary, energetic effort to suppress the virus, as did the likes of Germany and Singapore. But the government did not, to the bafflement of health experts. There are instances in history where humanity has really moved mountains to defeat infectious diseases, says Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Its appalling that we in the U.S. have not summoned that energy around COVID19.

Instead, the U.S. sleepwalked into the worst possible scenario: People suffered all the debilitating effects of a lockdown with few of the benefits. Most states felt compelled to reopen without accruing enough tests or contact tracers. In April and May, the nation was stuck on a terrible plateau, averaging 20,000 to 30,000 new cases every day. In June, the plateau again became an upward slope, soaring to record-breaking heights.

Read: Ed Yong on living in a patchwork pandemic

Trump never rallied the country. Despite declaring himself a wartime president, he merely presided over a culture war, turning public health into yet another politicized cage match. Abetted by supporters in the conservative media, he framed measures that protect against the virus, from masks to social distancing, as liberal and anti-American. Armed anti-lockdown protesters demonstrated at government buildings while Trump egged them on, urging them to LIBERATE Minnesota, Michigan, and Virginia. Several public-health officials left their jobs over harassment and threats.

It is no coincidence that other powerful nations that elected populist leadersBrazil, Russia, India, and the United Kingdomalso fumbled their response to COVID19. When you have people elected based on undermining trust in the government, what happens when trust is what you need the most? says Sarah Dalglish of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who studies the political determinants of health.

Trump is president, she says. How could it go well?

The countries that fared better against COVID19 didnt follow a universal playbook. Many used masks widely; New Zealand didnt. Many tested extensively; Japan didnt. Many had science-minded leaders who acted early; Hong Kong didntinstead, a grassroots movement compensated for a lax government. Many were small islands; not large and continental Germany. Each nation succeeded because it did enough things right.

Read: What really doomed Americas coronavirus response

Meanwhile, the United States underperformed across the board, and its errors compounded. The dearth of tests allowed unconfirmed cases to create still more cases, which flooded the hospitals, which ran out of masks, which are necessary to limit the viruss spread. Twitter amplified Trumps misleading messages, which raised fear and anxiety among people, which led them to spend more time scouring for information on Twitter. Even seasoned health experts underestimated these compounded risks. Yes, having Trump at the helm during a pandemic was worrying, but it was tempting to think that national wealth and technological superiority would save America. We are a rich country, and we think we can stop any infectious disease because of that, says Michael Osterholm, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. But dollar bills alone are no match against a virus.

Public-health experts talk wearily about the panic-neglect cycle, in which outbreaks trigger waves of attention and funding that quickly dissipate once the diseases recede. This time around, the U.S. is already flirting with neglect, before the panic phase is over. The virus was never beaten in the spring, but many people, including Trump, pretended that it was. Every state reopened to varying degrees, and many subsequently saw record numbers of cases. After Arizonas cases started climbing sharply at the end of May, Cara Christ, the director of the states health-services department, said, We are not going to be able to stop the spread. And so we cant stop living as well. The virus may beg to differ.

At times, Americans have seemed to collectively surrender to COVID19. The White Houses coronavirus task force wound down. Trump resumed holding rallies, and called for less testing, so that official numbers would be rosier. The country behaved like a horror-movie character who believes the danger is over, even though the monster is still at large. The long wait for a vaccine will likely culminate in a predictable way: Many Americans will refuse to get it, and among those who want it, the most vulnerable will be last in line.

Still, there is some reason for hope. Many of the people I interviewed tentatively suggested that the upheaval wrought by COVID19 might be so large as to permanently change the nations disposition. Experience, after all, sharpens the mind. East Asian states that had lived through the SARS and MERS epidemics reacted quickly when threatened by SARSCoV2, spurred by a cultural memory of what a fast-moving coronavirus can do. But the U.S. had barely been touched by the major epidemics of past decades (with the exception of the H1N1 flu). In 2019, more Americans were concerned about terrorists and cyberattacks than about outbreaks of exotic diseases. Perhaps they will emerge from this pandemic with immunity both cellular and cultural.

There are also a few signs that Americans are learning important lessons. A June survey showed that 60 to 75 percent of Americans were still practicing social distancing. A partisan gap exists, but it has narrowed. In public-opinion polling in the U.S., high-60s agreement on anything is an amazing accomplishment, says Beth Redbird, a sociologist at Northwestern University, who led the survey. Polls in May also showed that most Democrats and Republicans supported mask wearing, and felt it should be mandatory in at least some indoor spaces. It is almost unheard-of for a public-health measure to go from zero to majority acceptance in less than half a year. But pandemics are rare situations when people are desperate for guidelines and rules, says Zo McLaren, a health-policy professor at the University of Maryland at Baltimore County. The closest analogy is pregnancy, she says, which is a time when womens lives are changing, and they can absorb a ton of information. A pandemic is similar: People are actually paying attention, and learning.

Redbirds survey suggests that Americans indeed sought out new sources of informationand that consumers of news from conservative outlets, in particular, expanded their media diet. People of all political bents became more dissatisfied with the Trump administration. As the economy nose-dived, the health-care system ailed, and the government fumbled, belief in American exceptionalism declined. Times of big social disruption call into question things we thought were normal and standard, Redbird told me. If our institutions fail us here, in what ways are they failing elsewhere? And whom are they failing the most?

Americans were in the mood for systemic change. Then, on May 25, George Floyd, who had survived COVID19s assault on his airway, asphyxiated under the crushing pressure of a police officers knee. The excruciating video of his killing circulated through communities that were still reeling from the deaths of Breonna Taylor and Ahmaud Arbery, and disproportionate casualties from COVID19. Americas simmering outrage came to a boil and spilled into its streets.

Defiant and largely cloaked in masks, protesters turned out in more than 2,000 cities and towns. Support for Black Lives Matter soared: For the first time since its founding in 2013, the movement had majority approval across racial groups. These protests were not about the pandemic, but individual protesters had been primed by months of shocking governmental missteps. Even people who might once have ignored evidence of police brutality recognized yet another broken institution. They could no longer look away.

It is hard to stare directly at the biggest problems of our age. Pandemics, climate change, the sixth extinction of wildlife, food and water shortagestheir scope is planetary, and their stakes are overwhelming. We have no choice, though, but to grapple with them. It is now abundantly clear what happens when global disasters collide with historical negligence.

COVID19 is an assault on Americas body, and a referendum on the ideas that animate its culture. Recovery is possible, but it demands radical introspection. America would be wise to help reverse the ruination of the natural world, a process that continues to shunt animal diseases into human bodies. It should strive to prevent sickness instead of profiting from it. It should build a health-care system that prizes resilience over brittle efficiency, and an information system that favors light over heat. It should rebuild its international alliances, its social safety net, and its trust in empiricism. It should address the health inequities that flow from its history. Not least, it should elect leaders with sound judgment, high character, and respect for science, logic, and reason.

The pandemic has been both tragedy and teacher. Its very etymology offers a clue about what is at stake in the greatest challenges of the future, and what is needed to address them. Pandemic. Pan and demos. All people.

* This article has been updated to clarify why 3.1 million Americans still cannot afford health insurance.

** This article originally mischaracterized similarities between two studies that were retracted in June, one in The Lancet and one in the New England Journal of Medicine. It has been updated to reflect that the latter study was not specifically about hydroxychloroquine.

This article appears in the September 2020 print edition with the headline Anatomy of an American Failure.

Listen to Ed Yong discuss this story on an episode of Social Distance, The Atlantics podcast about life in the pandemic:

Subscribe to Social Distance on Apple Podcasts or Spotify (How to Listen)

Read more:

How the Pandemic Defeated America - The Atlantic

Your Worst Nightmare: Waking Up to the Sound of Your Door Being Kicked In – Blue Virginia

by Cindy

Youre asleep in your bed in the middle of the night, when you suddenly hear a crash coming from the living room. Your dog freaks out and runs to the living room, barking and growling. Amid the noise of stomping feet and barking, you hear a gunshot and Rufus is suddenly quiet.

What do you do?

If youre someone who owns a firearm for self-defense, this is exactly the kind of situation you probably had in mind. You quickly grab your gun from your nightstand, and run out your bedroom door into the dark hallway.

Its not clear how this story ends, but its highly likely it ends with either you shooting your intruders, or your intruders shooting you, or both. If youre someone who doesnt own a firearm, youre probably equally likely to end up being shot.

But heres the rub. They arent intruders. Theyre law enforcement officers, entering your house in the middle of the night, unannounced, with whats called a no-knock warrant to search your house.

The 4th Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees a right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure. That reasonableness was found by the Supreme Court in 1995 to extend to the manner of serving a warrant, determining that the common-law policy of knock and announce should be the default. However, a 1997 Supreme Court case determined that an exception was allowed in specific cases where a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing their presence, under the particular circumstances, would be dangerous or futile, or that it would inhibit the effective investigation of the crime.

This is another aspect of the war on drugs. No-knock warrants are issued to increase the odds of law enforcement finding the drugs before the individual has time to flush them down the toilet. Their use has skyrocketed from 3,000 per year in 1981 to at least 20,000 per year (50,000 estimated in 2005). And although they are meant to be an exception to the rule of knock and announce only in narrow cases, judges approve requests more than 95% of the time.

And the story ends in tragedy far too often. Breonna Taylorshot eight times and killed in her own house as officers stormed in shooting with a no-knock warrant meant for someone else across town. 92-year-old Kathryn Johnston, who fired one shot over the head of the officers who broke down her door and entered her Atlanta house in search of crack cocaine they never found; they returned fire with 39 shots, several of which struck her and killed her. Or Berwyn Heights, Maryland mayor, Cheye Calvo, whose dogs were killed when a SWAT team stormed into his house with a no-knock warrant to investigate a package of marijuana that had been mailed to his house.

Ending no-knock warrants is one of those rare ideas for which there is bipartisan support. Republican Rand Paul has introduced a bill to ban the practice at the federal level. The federal Justice in Policing Act introduced by Democrats in Congress includes a ban. The South Carolina Supreme Court has temporarily banned the practice. Kentuckys Republican Senate Leader is drafting a bill to ban the practice state-wide, and Oregon has banned no-knock warrants since 2009.

But there will be those who oppose. In the third House joint Courts of Justice/Militia, Police and Public Safety hearing, speakers from the Virginia State Police as well as the Fluvanna Sheriffs office spoke against banning no-knock warrants, saying they oppose anything that affects their crisis decision-making. While I think we clearly dont want to unnecessarily put law enforcement officers in life-threatening situations, there are many who argue that no-knock warrants do exactly that, by creating a fight or flight instinct in those who are being surprised by the officers. Additionally, even with knocking and announcing (often a matter of a few seconds), the officers plan the service, know well in advance the time and place, have protective gear available, choose numbers of officers according to the expected risk, and enter with weapons drawn, so the risks are minimized and dont differ greatly depending on knocking and announcing or not.

This kind of tragedy doesnt happen often fortunately, but its almost entirely avoidable. This is everyones worst nightmarebeing suddenly attacked in your home while youre doing nothing wrong. A typo in an address, a mistaken name, a bad tip, and a 26 year old EMT like Breonna Taylor is gone, her family distraught. Lets fix this before we lose another innocent life.

Continue reading here:

Your Worst Nightmare: Waking Up to the Sound of Your Door Being Kicked In - Blue Virginia

Advancing Equity: Women’s Crisis Center staff repeats this phrase and means it ‘We are still here’ – User-generated content

Part of a series by NKYs nonprofits who stand together against racism and any acts that dehumanize people.

We are still here.

As the impact of Covid-19 became increasingly evident, Womens Crisis Centers staff repeated this phrase quite often. Power-based personal violence such as sexual assault, stalking, and partner violence didnt disappear just because a pandemic showed up. The ugly truth, in fact, was that stay-at-home mandates meant that some people were stuck at home with the people who were hurting them. The way we helped folks in our community had to change. As a result, it was painfully urgent and incredibly important for us to let it be known that even though things looked somewhat different, we hadnt left. We were still there for those who needed us when they needed us. We were making sure to include that simple message in our social media posts, our press releases, in the various interviews, and even in the signs that hang on our front doors.

We are still here.

On May 25, the murder of George Floyd by four Minneapolis police officers became the most recent public display of the pillars of white supremacy upon which this country was built. George Floyds name was added to a centuries-long list of Black people who have been killed unjustly in our country. In our own state of Kentucky, Breonna Taylors life had been stolen by police officers just two months prior. Sam DuBose was shot and killed by a police officer a short five years ago just across the river in Cincinnati. And it doesnt seem that long ago that the streets of Cincinnati erupted in sadness and anger after Timothy Thomas was killed by police. Our state, our region, and certainly our country are no strangers to the oppression that continues to happen time and time again to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC). This isnt a new issue. It can be traced back to racist stop-and-frisk policies. Or a war on drugs that disproportionately targeted communities of color. It can be traced back to Jim Crow laws and segregation. It can be seen in our Constitutions 13th Amendment, and indeed in the enslavement of people during the very formation of this country and for nearly a century after. The progress that we have seen hasnt carried us very far away from our racist roots. We are in a very familiar place.

We are still here.

Its infuriating that a phrase used by our agency to provide reassurance and stability to folks in our community can also be used to remind us what a poor job we have done addressing racial disparities, oppression, and hatred in our country and in our communities. How disheartening it is to still be having the same discussions with what feels like such little progress.

When a person walks through Womens Crisis Centers doors for help, they bring with them the traumas that they have experienced, the most apparent of which might be a recent encounter they have had with violence. However its important for us to remember as advocates, as service providers, and as human beings that different identities carry different traumas. When we support someone who has been impacted by violence, we need to remember the additional traumas they may have experienced due to racism, homophobia, transphobia or xenophobia. These traumas stack, compound, and can weave themselves together. This is all before even considering the generational trauma that exists in individuals belonging to groups who have been historically oppressed.

A large part of our agencys work is in violence prevention. We place enormous emphasis on the role that each individual plays in preventing violence. We work with middle school, high school, and college students as well as individuals throughout our communities to stop violence from happening in the first place, and to create a culture that is utterly intolerant of violence. We have seen hope, and we have seen small changes. But we know that we can not end one form of violence without ending all forms of violence. Just as our identities intersect, so does violence and the roles it plays. We can not eliminate power-based personal violence without also eliminating prejudice. We can not create policies to support survivors of sexual and domestic violence without also abolishing policies that have systemically upheld white supremacy. We can not be an agency for all people without recognizing that the word all has historically meant something entirely contrary. The same man who penned we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal enslaved over 600 people in his adult life. Racial oppression and white supremacy are present in the very fibers of our countrys fabric.

It is critically important at this time in history to specifically name those who have historically been excluded from all.

Black lives matter.Native lives matter.Trans lives matter.

These statements stand alone. It is unacceptable to be anything but deliberate in shouting these phrases that have been left unsaid for far too long.

As an agency, Womens Crisis Center has committed to reviewing and improving our own internal practices and trainings. Through the lens of absolute loyalty to survivors of power-based personal violence, we will examine and evaluate the relationships we hold with our communities, with partner agencies and the systems survivors navigate. We will amplify the voices of BIPOC through our internal and external messaging. We will strive to maintain better representation of BIPOC on our staff, within our leadership, and on our board. A full breakdown of our plan and commitment can be found at wccky.org.

We must understand the role we have played in maintaining white supremacy. We must recognize that our allegiances have not always been defined clearly enough. We must accept that we have been wrong. These statements are true not only for us as an agency, but as a much larger movement of violence prevention and intervention.

We are still here, and we want to be here in a better, more impactful, and much more intentional way for the BIPOC in our communities who rely on us. And we will be.

Womens Crisis Centers Christy Burch, Executive Director, Jamie Sivrais, Communications Coordinator, and Reagan Amith, director of Non-Residential Services, contributed to this commentary.

Read more:

Advancing Equity: Women's Crisis Center staff repeats this phrase and means it 'We are still here' - User-generated content

7 of the best Steven Soderbergh films to watch right now, from crime dramas to caper comedies – Minneapolis Star Tribune

In the history of the Academy Awards, Steven Soderbergh is the only director who had to compete against himself. And he won.

Prognosticators figured Soderbergh hurt his chances by directing two of 2000s five best pictures. (Actually, lets make that two of the four best; how did the insipid Chocolat make the cut?) The conventional wisdom was Soderbergh would cancel himself out with Traffic and Erin Brockovich splitting the vote, but he was the surprise victor for best director with Traffic. Thats even more surprising when you consider that best picture, an award that usually went hand-in-hand with best director in those days, went to Gladiator.

It cant hurt that Soderbergh is not only insanely prolific and smart but that actors by far, the biggest group of Oscar voters love to work with him. Many top Hollywood names are Soderbergh recidivists, including Julia Roberts, Don Cheadle and George Clooney. Maybe a bunch of those folks solved the double-nomination problem by conspiring to put their votes behind Traffic?

Well never know, but we do know something happened in Soderberghs career around 1998. After making a splash at the 1989 Sundance Film Festival with Sex, Lies, and Videotape, he built a reputation as a cerebral, experimental writer/director but never made anything resembling a popular movie until Out of Sight. That began a string of five wildly entertaining titles in a three-year span, including The Limey, Brockovich, Traffic and his biggest hit, the glittering remake of Oceans 11.

Although those movies vary in tone, ranging from the grit of Traffic to the larkiness of Oceans, they all share an element Soderbergh often returns to: the caper. His characters are usually trying to get away with something illegal and Soderbergh likes to let us in on the planning, so we can see where it goes right or, more often, wrong.

One of my favorites of his is the noirish caper The Underneath, starring Elisabeth Shue, but I cant find it streaming anywhere. The following seven, fortunately, are easy to find. (Out of Sight is not on the list because I included it on my list of best Steve Zahn movies a couple of weeks ago.)

Erin Brockovich (2000)

Not for the first time, I think the Oscars got it wrong with Soderbergh because Brockovich is better than Traffic. Probably the most conventional movie the prolific director has made a fish-out-of-water, little-guy-fights-city-hall biopic its a crowd-pleaser that doesnt make you feel stupid for loving it. A #MeToo movie before that movement launched, its also a showcase for Roberts, who won an Oscar for her weary, cut-the-crap performance.

The Informant! (2009)

Ive never understood why this comedy, written by Golden Valley native Scott Z. Burns (also the screenwriter of the next two movies on this list) wasnt a hit. It stars Matt Damon, at the peak of his popularity, as a moron whom the FBI enlists as a mole in an investigation of corporate malfeasance. (One benefit of working frequently with the same actors is that they trust Soderbergh to cast them in a variety of roles, and respond with the kind of vanity-free work Damon does here.) Its hilarious and, with its theme of government and business incompetence, troubling.

Side Effects (2013)

Soderbergh, also the cinematographer and editor of Side Effects, may have been born three decades too late. Hollywood loved twisty, clever thrillers in the 70s and 80s but had given up on them by the time this one hit theaters. Fans of The Usual Suspects will eat up the murder mystery, which, like quite a few Soderbergh titles, has nasty things to say about Big Pharma. Besides Channing Tatum, Rooney Mara, Jude Law and Catherine Zeta-Jones, the cast includes St. Paul native Laila Robins (thats her warning, Its gonna follow you around forever, in the trailer).

Contagion (2011)

Did she mention seeing anyone who was sick? is not a phrase any of us wants to hear in the era of contact tracing, but this melodrama about a pandemic feels creepily prescient. Partly set in the Twin Cities but shot outside of Chicago, it features yet another all-star cast (Damon, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kate Winslet, Marion Cotillard) and yet another Minnesota native (Alexandrias John Hawkes).

Logan Lucky (2017)

The most gleefully silly of all of Soderberghs caper comedies, its another throwback, reminiscent of (but much better than) Smokey and the Bandit. The heist takes place at a NASCAR race, Daniel Craig plays a Southern safecracker named Joe Bang who turns incarcerated into five separate words, Adam Driver keeps losing his prosthetic arm and, eventually, all of that makes sense.

Traffic (2000)

Soderbergh probably won his Oscar for Traffic instead of Brockovich because Traffic (for which he also was the cinematographer) is a flashier demonstration of his skills. Juggling multiple story lines and settings, the drama about the war on drugs remains as potent today as it was 20 years ago.

The Limey (1999)

Soderbergh looks back again, this time to stylized 60s British crime dramas that starred people such as Michael Caine and Terence Stamp. Wittily, Stamp stars in this one, too. Hes a mobster seeking revenge in Los Angeles, and a big part of the movies efficient (less than 90 minutes) fun is how Soderbergh keeps us guessing with tricky editing and visuals.

Read more here:

7 of the best Steven Soderbergh films to watch right now, from crime dramas to caper comedies - Minneapolis Star Tribune

Interview: Ramona Diaz on Documenting Death By Disinformation in A Thousand Cuts – The Moveable Fest

Even if Ramona Diaz hadnt thought of herself in the same vein of the hard-charging reporter Maria Ressa, the subject of her latest film A Thousand Cuts, shes gotten even more of an insight into her world than when they spent time together over the course of the 2019 midterm elections in the Philippines as as Ressa has faced ongoing prosecution from President Rodrigo Dutertes regime as a way of silencing her outlet Rappler.

Ive never done breaking news, so its interesting to fight with news outlets, says Diaz, who has had to update the end credits a few times both leading up to and after the films triumphant premiere at the Sundance Film Festival earlier this year. Thats what they do. They know how to do this and Im like, Oh my God, I just stay and stay and stay until everyone leaves and Im the last one in the room.

That persistence has yielded a form of justice for Ressa and for the cause of journalism in general that she has not been afforded in the courts, where the veteran reporter was found guilty of cyber-libel in June on specious charges (even without going into the particulars, the situation in question happened before laws were even in place for it to be illegal). If A Thousand Cuts proved to be a new experience for the filmmaker, it still fits in well into her body of work, celebrating the strength and resiliency of Filipinos while articulating the often unnecessary hardship that cultivates such grit with films including Dont Stop Believin: Everymans Journey, detailing the improbable rise of Arnel Pineda to become frontman for Journey, and Motherland, which allowed audiences to see grace under pressure amidst the frenzy of the countrys overmatched maternity wards.

With Ressa, the filmmaker finds that reporting the facts has become a crime under President Dutertes watch where countless murders happen every day under the cover of his war on drugs, which has been deployed to artificially lower the nations devastating poverty rate and execute political opponents. But as Diaz shows, his attack isnt only on the streets, but on the internet an equally important sphere in a country that spends more time online than any other in the world at 10 hours a day, on average where the distinction between actual reportage and baseless accusations can be easily blurred and a force of personality with a fervent following, no matter how small it is, such as Duterte can whip up supporters to strike fear into the hearts of those who stand against them.

As terrifying as it is to see the Duterte regime attempt to make an example out of Ressa, A Thousand Cuts becomes galvanizing in showing how she and other journalists at Rappler such as Patricia Evangelista and Pia Ranada remain undaunted as they cover the midterms, which as no shortage of intriguing candidates such as General Bato De La Rosa and social media star Mocha Uson who hope to ride the Presidents coattails to office by taking his bombastic approach to campaigning. Diaz finds an election with ramifications that ripple far beyond the borders of the Philippines and with the film arriving in virtual cinemas before the U.S. presidential election cycle which is bound to be rife with the same issues, the filmmaker spoke about becoming conscious of how perniciously disinformation travels, covering a sprawling campaign and Ressas impressively long memory.

How did this come about?

When Duterte became president in 2016, I knew I wanted to do something in the Philippines under Duterte because it seemed like martial law and Im a marital law baby. I grew up under the Marcos dictatorship, so I was afraid that something amiss was happening again. I was finishing Motherland when he became president and when he started the drug war, you start seeing pictures and I couldnt avert my gaze. I had to see. So I went to the Philippines and I realized that there were so many filmmakers and news [outlets] covering the drug war there, I said something else must be happening. And of course, Maria Ressa was happening, right? She was not only calling out the drug war and all kinds of impunity and abuses the administration was doing, but she was also talking about disinformation and connecting that to drug war impunity.

She was one of the first to talk about algorithms and Facebook and fake news and putting all that together in a very cogent way that Id never heard before. It blew me away because I knew about those things, but to unwrap it in that manner makes you think more [because] disinformation makes it a more global story. So you ask for access [to Maria] and then you ask again and again and again. [laughs] Until they say yes I always say I would never say yes to me, because what I want to be is in your life for a long time. [laughs] But we became friends and she trusted the process and gave me access to a lot of things, so I was very thankful.

You told this great story as part of the AFI Docs screening about how you actually turned down talking to Maria when she was a correspondent for CNN when were doing the rounds for Imelda, your film on Imelda Marcos, because she wanted to speak to you more about the fallout than the film itself. Was that an interesting way to start a relationship?

[laughs] I thought she had forgotten. And its interesting that I turned her down for an interview [because] it was like a note to to self, she doesnt forget stuff, so when she said, I dont forget people who turn me down so Im like Interesting. But more than anyone else Ive filmed, shes the one I really think we couldve been friends even without me filming her. We have very similar lives, but its almost opposite because I was born and raised in the Philippines, and I came to this country [America] for college and I lived here as an adult, and she did the opposite. She came here when she was 10, and then after college, moved to the Philippines, so we had intersecting experience and in some other life, we wouldve been friends, I think.

Its interesting to hear you talk about your own personal experience because I thought you surely might be able to relate to Marias predicament to the extent that it might be getting harder to film in the Philippines, given the attitude towards the press and your reputation at exposing these things.

You would think, but really, it gives me more access actually. The president knew I was making this film because I spoke to his spokesperson because we wanted to be close to him at those rallies. We wanted to be in the pit. We didnt want to be in the media box and that took really special permission, and then of course I was filming General Baton and Mocha Uson, who were both part of his administration then, so they were very aware I was making this film. I think their awareness, the fact that I was so present and so visible, protected me. If I had done it under the radar, I wouldnt have felt as secure.

Obviously, we were also filming Maria and every time she got arrested, you could see us on television because we were following her, so they were well aware we were following her and vice versa Maria knew I was following Mocha and Baton so to be really transparent for me is key. They know of my past work, but they also understand that I speak to an audience beyond the Phillippines because although I make my films there, I produce it here for this audience, so they wanted to be part of that.

From what Ive heard, Maria wasnt immediately the central focus, but grew into that role over time. When you still keep track of Mocha and General Baton, was it tricky dividing up resources to cover a campaign?

I had two units on the ground constantly, and when I decided that the midterm elections was going to be the backdrop of the film, I was still thinking in my head that it was going to be an ensemble of characters very Robert Altman-esque. But a few days after campaigning began, [Maria] got arrested, so her life became parallel with the midterm elections and you couldnt write that kind of stuff. Five weeks later, she got arrested again and at some point, she became the center of gravity for the film, but I had one unit on her exclusively and then the other unit still following Mocha and Baton wherever they were because I thought the campaign itself gave a lot of local color and context to the story. Its a global story of authoritarianism, but still rooted in specificity in the Philippines and local elections, and elections there are very kinetic and cinematic. Its all a spectacle, so I thought it was good.

So much of the story takes place on social media and online, which typically arent very cinematic, but become so here. Were you conscious of how youd weave that element into the film while you were filming?

Yeah, I knew somehow we had to use real exciting graphics, if graphics can be exciting, right? But graphics are organic to the film, so if you notice, the colors of the graphics are the same colors as the headlines of Rappler, and we made it all integrated. But my other films dont have graphics, [and we needed it] in order to unwrap what it is [Maria] talks about because she talks about this information not in terms of content because if you go after content, its a whack-a-mole game. Youll never get on top of it but if you look at systems and networks, you can actually see how disinformation just spreads like wildfire. We had to make that visual. The way she unwrapped it for me, I knew I had to unwrap it for an audience, so we just got what was in her head and tried to make it as cinematic as possible. Its key that people understand how this thing works and how under attack shes been for four years [with this] crazy gendered misogynistic trolling.

One of the other interesting elements of how you structure the film is when youll go back to this 2015 interview she does with Duterte, which you not only use for context, but it becomes more and more improbable that they were once speaking to one another in a civil fashion. How did you want to incorporate that into the film?

Oh my God, thats part of Rappler archives because we started after that [happened], and I couldnt believe that she interviewed him twice. They were very friendly because it was before all the animosity began and in my head, [Im thinking] weve just got to keep going back to it to remind them that this is a relationship between a journalist and a president. It isnt political opposites. I think that reminds people that this is the role of journalists to question power and she questions him really well while still being respectful. She says, You broke the law, Mr. President. Now youre the president and you have to make sure people dont break the law. How are you going to reconcile that? She says that in such a still respectful way, but is telling him, youve already broken the law, so what are you going to do about it? and it became very clear that that has to be a through line you keep going back to.

The film has some wonderful cinematography, particularly how youll have Maria in the foreground of some shots and you get a strong sense of what shes up against by how the background will loom large over her theres a particularly stunning shot involving Duterte on some TV monitors. Were there ideas from the start about how to visually tell this story?

Shooting in a newsroom is great because its full of monitors, and I said, monitors are going to be a theme in this film because social media and the press, so whenever Dutertes behind, its like, Okay, shes talking about increasing her security and Duterte is large on the screen, thats documentary like catching lightning in a bottle and having a really good cinematographer who sees that immediately and racks focus at the right time. That takes real engagement, but also a lot of talking beforehand of what are the visual themes of the film, what is possible, what is not possible and what will we come up against.

It really helps to have great cinematographers who can actually make that operational. Things go by so quickly, but to still have the presence of mind to say, Okay, oh my God, okay Dutertes there, Marias in the foreground, lets rack focus now, thats experience. Its a hard thing to do in an observational situation because if it were fiction, you could set it up and have all those visual themes, but to have a visual theme while trying to capture a story thats unfolding before the lens in real time is really tough. But you try and oh my God, sometimes you get lucky and youre like, Yes, this is why we do this.

It came together so beautifully. And unfortunately, this story doesnt seem to end it does have a natural stopping point, but was it difficult to pull yourself away?

I like containers to films. Like Journey was the first year of Arnel [Pineda] in the band. Motherland was the seven weeks that theyre in the hospital, from intake to discharge. This one was the midterm elections, because I have to have the finishing point in my head, but obviously Marias story goes on because she has all these cases. Even after we finished principal photography, we still traveled with her abroad and the version you saw [recently] was with a new coda, which makes it completely different because the cut we showed at Sundance ended at Christmas. That was very hopeful. Shes talking about love. And its June 15th and she gets convicted, so its a very different kind of ending, but its still optimistic because she says, Dont be afraid. Speak out. So were going to leave it at that because we see the urgency of putting the story out there. It would be crazy to wait. That wasnt even part of the discussion. But it becomes more relevant as the days pass, which in a way is unfortunate because that means its really our reality here is becoming closer to whats happening in the Philippines.

A Thousand Cuts opens in virtual cinemas on August 7th. A full list of theaters is here.

Related

Read more here:

Interview: Ramona Diaz on Documenting Death By Disinformation in A Thousand Cuts - The Moveable Fest

Exploring the reaches of the First Amendment | News, Sports, Jobs – Williamsport Sun-Gazette

Should the First Amendment really permit neo-Nazis to come to Williamsport and yell through a bullhorn F*** your n***** mayor? When I heard the words replayed on a Facebook post, I was more livid than if I read it in a magazine or newspaper. I had difficulty sleeping that night to appreciate that psychopaths abusing the First Amendment can be tolerated. Is such conduct speech at all? The devout purpose of the neo-Nazis who came to Williamsport on July 18 was to evoke violence, while carrying their AK-47s, so as to create another Charlottesville situation. We knew they would be armed because it is contained in their e-mails to City Hall revealed as a result of a Right-to-Know request.

Is there any limit to the First Amendment? The neo-Nazis who came to Williamsport were denied a permit and theoretically could have been arrested on the spot. The mayor correctly thought that protection from COVID-19 was more important at this juncture than the right of crazy people to scream unacceptable vulgar epithets at other people.

The neo-Nazis not only created a clear and present danger but violated Pennsylvanias laws on gathering as a militia, something outlawed when the National Guard was created.

All of the legal developments that we are now witnessing presage the question as to how far the First Amendment can go to protect religious and speech rights and whether there are any discernable limits.

The First Amendment has been turned into a sword as well as a shield in modern times. Three recent court opinions, albeit very different in certain respects, demonstrate the vitality that still defines the scope of First Amendment protections. The First Amendment, as most people fully appreciate, generally addresses religion and speech.

Our Lady of Guadalupe School vs. Morrissey-Berru, (July 8, 2020) written by Justice Alito required the court to determine whether the First Amendment permits courts to intervene in employment disputes involving teachers at religious schools who are entrusted with the responsibility of instructing their students in the faith of the school where they work.

The religious education and formation of students is the reason for the existence of most private religious schools. Some private religious schools are just a form of prep school. However, most religious schools select and supervise teachers who are consistent with the religious mission of the institution. Judicial review of the way in which religious schools discharge those responsibilities, wrote the court, would undermine the independence of religious institutions in a way that the First Amendment does not tolerate.

The same day as Our Lady of Guadalupe School, Justice Thomas wrote the opinion in Little Sisters of the Poor vs. Pennsylvania, (July 8, 2020). The question in Little Sisters was whether the government created lawful exceptions from a regulatory requirement implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2020 (ACA), 124 Stat. 119. Certain employers are required to provide contraceptive coverage for their employees through group health plans. Although contraceptive coverage is not required or addressed in the Affordable Care Act provision reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, the government mandated such coverage by promulgating interim final rules shortly after the ACAs passage. This is known as the contraceptive mandate.

The U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the Department lacked statutory authority to promulgate these exceptions. The U.S. Supreme Court held this was erroneous. The departments had the authority to provide exceptions from the regulatory contraceptive requirements from employers with religious and conscientious objections. The 3rd Circuit was therefore reversed.

Another important First Amendment religious freedom case is Espinoza vs. Montana Department of Revenue, (June 30, 2020), written by Chief Justice Roberts. The Montana Legislature established a program to provide tuition assistance to parents who send their children to private schools. The program grants a tax credit to anyone who donates to certain organizations that in turn award scholarships to selected students attending such schools. When petitioners sought to use the scholarships at a religious school, the Montana Supreme Court struck down the program. The court relied on the no-aid provision of the state constitution, which prohibits any aid to a school controlled by a church, sect, or denomination. The question was whether the Free Exercise Clause of the U.S. Constitution barred the application of the no-aid provision.

The provision, said the U.S. Supreme, was said to burden not only religious schools but also families whose children attend or hope to attend them. The court noted that it had previously recognized the rights of parents to direct the religious upbringing of their children.

The decision in B.L. vs. Mahanoy Area School District, (June 30, 2020), is a bit more difficult to appreciate. The decision by the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals concerned a woman who did not make her high school varsity cheerleading team. In a weekend away from school, the student posted a picture of herself with the caption F*** Cheer to Snapchat. She was suspended from the junior varsity team for a year and sued her school in federal court. The District Court granted summary judgment in B.L.s favor, ruling that the school had violated her First Amendment rights. The 3rd Circuit Court agrees and affirmed that the suspension represented a violation of the students First Amendment rights.

The 3rd Circuit Court easily found that the snap fell outside the school context. This is not a case in which the relevant speech took place in a school-sponsored forum, Fraser, 478 U.S. at 677. Nor is this a case in which the school owns or operates an online platform. Instead, B.L. created the snap away from campus, over the weekend, and without school resources, and she shared it on a social media platform unaffiliated with the school. While the snap mentioned the school and reached 16 MAHS students and officials, J.S. and Layshock claim that those few points of contact are not enough. B.L.s snap, therefore, took place off campus.

Most citizens would find it difficult to understand how a student could post vulgarities on social media and not pay any consequence for it.

Cliff Rieders is a board-certified trial advocate in Williamsport.

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

Go here to read the rest:

Exploring the reaches of the First Amendment | News, Sports, Jobs - Williamsport Sun-Gazette

Varner: Trials and tests of the First Amendment – Bloomington Pantagraph

Sign Up Today and Support Local Journalism

Enjoy more articles from Bloomington's Most Trusted Information Source. Subscribers can log in for unlimited digital access

We interrupt this column Dad was 20 and driving near the farm and his we interrupt was Pearl Harbor. For me, it was Kennedy, Challenger and 9/11. This is not nearly at the same level, but I wrote what is below celebrating American freedom over the Fourth of July weekend and yesterday came the splash headlines of the Trump niece tell-all book.

President Donald Trump has recently failed twice to censor unfavorable writings. The 1960s case New York Times Co. vs. Sullivan is almost total protection for those who are critical of public figures. As discussed below, free speech is upfront and unambiguous. However, the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man free speech waits until paragraph 11. It says it is one of the most precious of rights, but then lists exceptions to that freedom. In the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights, they get around to free speech in article 10. There are four lines on freedom and about a dozen lines on exceptions to free speech.

Now, on to what I wrote over the weekend. America, I am so proud to say, is the world leader, the beacon-on-the-hill of free speech. On the other side, one finds Cuba, North Korea and China giving them a run for the money for last place. Those governments would assay good social order is more important than irresponsible speech. We will see you dont have to be in Cuba to hear that line.

Review first, James Madison, the first sentence of the Bill of Rights: Congress shall make no Law abridging the freedom of Speech. The three dots are a hares HARES? on establishment of religion, and my German students went right for it that in 18th century English and modern German, nouns are capitalized. Free speech is not a gift from government, but an inalienable right that Congress dare not tread upon.

Go here to see the original:

Varner: Trials and tests of the First Amendment - Bloomington Pantagraph

Editorial: Tune in to keep an eye on Loveland City Council – Loveland Reporter-Herald

Looking for some entertaining summer television viewing?

The last hour of last Tuesdays Loveland City Council meeting was riveting, although also at times, as Councilor John Fogle carefully put it, a fertilizer show.

The council, like the country, is grappling with big issues ethics, racism (ageism and sexism also were mentioned), First Amendment rights, bullying on social media and the general frustration that is boiling over in this time of disease, unemployment, the ramped-up politics of a presidential election year and the fears they are bringing out. And those issues boiled over on public display Tuesday.

The meeting, for those who didnt catch it live, can be viewed online at https://bit.ly/3fFFv6G. Start in the eighth section.

Among the issues discussed were concern over whether Councilor Steve Olson violated the councils ethical standards by making accusations against Councilor Andrea Samson and Mayor Jacki Marsh on social media, concern about the Black Lives Matter movement and a question of whether the City Council should commit to not defund police but to provide them with more money for training and equipment to deal with threats and with financial liability protection for officers.

Samson was criticized by fellow councilors in February for commenting on Facebook they had a head buried in the sand perspective about social media. She recalled that Olson told her then he would never trust her again. She said she learned from that incident but was surprised to see Olson do the very thing he had criticized her for when he posted on social media that she and Marsh do not support police and that they support a Marxist organization and violence because they have attended local rallies supporting the Black Lives Matter movement.

Olson flatly refused to apologize to Samson for making those accusations, although at the end of the night he said he would sit down and talk with her if she wanted. I think that would be nice; I appreciate that, she responded.

Samson said earlier in the meeting that she believes the councils role as leaders is to communicate and to have conversations with community members, especially in this time of seemingly increased division.

If the two councilors do have that meeting and truly listen to each other, they will be setting a good example.

In Loveland, which is as Samson pointed out 93% white, people who are not may have a very different experience than those who are. Asking them about their experiences is the first step toward understanding where inequality exists, which could help lead to finding ways to reduce it.

Police also face increasing tensions on the job, even in Loveland where they are under scrutiny after the arrest of a black man on July 13 in the Target parking lot. That case is under review.

The Loveland City Council should bring the matter of police support back in a study session and have a full public review of Olsons requests, finding out from police what they think they need and hearing comment from the public as well.

Watching the council video leads to some reactions:

Will council members be able to find common ground to better serve the community?

Will Samson and Olson listen to each others views?

Will council members besides Marsh and Samson reach out to minority members of the community to learn more about their problems?

Will the Loveland City Council take up the issue of whether to provide Loveland police more funding, training and protection from personal liability?

Tune in again on Tuesday nights.

More here:

Editorial: Tune in to keep an eye on Loveland City Council - Loveland Reporter-Herald

Editorial: Racist is the only word to describe what we witnessed – Traverse City Record Eagle

Yes, sir, you are racist.

In fact, there is no other word to appropriately describe the rhetoric spewed by Leelanau County Road Commissioner Tom Eckerle last week.

Eckerles first utterance, a vile reference to those ns in Detroit during the preamble to a public meeting, probably was enough for us all to get the picture. That was before the 75-year-old Suttons Bay resident confirmed his bigotry to the world by doubling, tripling and quadrupling down on his previous racist statements.

It appears Mr. Eckerle hasnt met a reporter to whom he wont confirm his racism with an encore barrage of n-word laced recitations of his world view.

In several instances, Eckerle coupled escalations of his rhetoric with claims he is not a racist.

We beg to differ.

His right to espouse such repugnant, ignorant and foul beliefs is protected by the First Amendment. But freedom of speech doesnt mean freedom from repercussions.

We were heartened by the immediate, and decisive reaction by Leelanau County residents who, when news of Eckerles rhetoric broke, denounced his behavior and pledged to remove him from office through a recall if he didnt leave of his own volition.

And for about a day it appeared an arduous recall process would be necessary as Eckerle declared he had no plans to resign.

The only other way to boot an elected official from office is through executive action by the governor, and we appreciate Gov. Gretchen Whitmers reluctance to step between public officials and their constituents.

Eckerle and his behavior provides an opportunity for a countywide statement of values either through public declarations and reforms or at the ballot box.

We were relieved when Eckerle reversed course and loosened his stubborn grip on the office he isnt fit to hold.

The semi-retired farmer, who is two years into a six-year term on the county road board, told a Record-Eagle reporter late Friday he plans to forfeit his seat. Not because of the nationwide backlash. Or because his racism has dealt irreparable damage to his community. No, Eckerle said he will resign because he doesnt want to burden a newly-hired, soon-to-start road commission manager with the problems he created.

Thats sure thoughtful from a guy who a day ago seemed hell-bent on digging a pit big enough not just to bury himself, but to take down Leelanau County with him.

We hope all elected and appointed officials pay close attention to the lessons Eckerle presented them. Not the racist dog whistles he spends so much time repeating. No, the lesson here is one of public service.

Holding elected office comes with a bundle of sacrifices time, stress and self interest to name a few.

Self interest is the one on display this week in Leelanau County. Tom Eckerle showed us all how not so serve the constituents who relied upon him to represent them while in office.

He reminded us that some people simply are unfit for office.

The experience also begs for introspection from us all. How we respond to those who casually seed conversations with racial slurs and other more covert racism matters.

Silence is support.

We are making critical coverage of the coronavirus available for free. Please consider subscribing so we can continue to bring you the latest news and information on this developing story.

Original post:

Editorial: Racist is the only word to describe what we witnessed - Traverse City Record Eagle

Texas AG on NY AG seeking to dissolve NRA: In Texas we care about what the founders put in the Constitution – Fox News

TexasAttorney GeneralKen Paxton slammed New York Attorney General Letitia James for trying to dissolve the National Rifle Associationand welcomedthe organization to his state sayingthat in Texas we care about what thefounders put in the Constitution.

Paxton made the comment Sunday on Fox & Friends Weekend,three days after James announced that her officehas filed a lawsuit against the National Rifle Association and its leadership, including Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.

On Sunday Paxton said he is absolutely welcoming the NRA to come to Texas because they have done amazingwork over the years defendingthe Second Amendment.

I can tell you one thinginTexas that we care about,and I think wewill always care about, is Godand guns, he said, explaining that the First Amendment protects freespeech and religious expression and the Second Amendment protects theright of people to own guns.

James accused the NRA of having "a culture of self-dealing," taking millions of dollars for personal use and granting contracts that benefited leaders' family and associates.

NRA LAYS OFF DOZENS OF STAFFERS, CUTS PAY DURING CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC

In addition to asking for the organization to be dissolved, James' office seeks to have LaPierre and general counsel John Frazer removed from their positions, and a declaration from the court saying "that directors or members in control of the NRA have looted or wasted the NRAs charitable assets, have perpetuated the corporation solely for their personal benefit, or have otherwise acted in an illegal, oppressive or fraudulent manner[.]"

Host Griff Jenkins saidmany NRA members have wondered foryears why the NRA seated its charter inNew York to begin with to exposeit.

He then asked Paxton, Would they have a betterprotection? Would there besomething to benefit themlegally in Texas?

I think its a littlelate now, but we certainly wouldinvite them to come to Texas toavoid this in the future becauseif they're in New York, it opensthem up to investigation by theattorney general's office in away that I don't think wouldhappen in Texas, soI would encourage them to moveas soon as they can, Paxton said.

Jenkins then asked Paxton if he thinks there is achance that James actually winsthis?

We don'tknow all the facts yet, Paxton said, adding that his problem is with how the situation is being handled, noting that the lawsuit was filed right before an election with a big press conference.

It looksextremely political, Paxton said.

If you want to do thisinvestigation, do it quietly, he said.If youre going to announce something,announce it after the election, but what it looks like and she [James] claimsthey're a terroristorganization this looks like aterrorist operation goingagainst the NRA in trying to makeit political as opposed to alegitimate investigation.

I think it really hurts thecredibility of the New Yorkoffice when theyve done it inthis manner, Paxton said.

NRA President Carolyn Meadows called the lawsuit "a baseless, premeditated attack," claiming it targeted not just the NRA, but the constitutional rights it defends. She also noted the timing of the lawsuit and said it was a transparent attempt to score political points.

"You could have set your watch by it:the investigation was going to reach its crescendo as we move into the 2020 election cycle," Meadows said in a statement. "Its a transparent attempt to score political points and attack the leading voice in opposition to the leftist agenda. This has been a power grab by a political opportunist a desperate move that is part of a rank political vendetta. Our members wont be intimidated or bullied in their defense of political and constitutional freedom.

Meadows added that the NRA"will not shrink from this fight we will confront it and prevail.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

To that end, the NRA countersued James, seeking a court declaration that they are following state not-for-profit law and alleging that The New York Attorney General is targeting the organization for its political positions, violating its free speech rights.

Fox News Ronn Blitzer contributed to this report.

See more here:

Texas AG on NY AG seeking to dissolve NRA: In Texas we care about what the founders put in the Constitution - Fox News

Weighting the scales – Idaho State Journal

Appellate court decisions result in winners and losers in any specific case, but the issues involved often are worked through murky gray areas. Consider for example the July 30 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Little v. Reclaim Idaho.

The background is fairly well known in Idaho. The group Reclaim Idaho has been trying to promote an Invest in Idaho tax and schools initiative for the November election ballot. When the pandemic hit and Gov. Brad Littles stay-home order was issued, its petition-gathering which in the normal process has to be done face to face was blocked, which meant a part of Idahos election process also was blocked.

That point, essentially an argument over voting civil rights, went to federal court. Idaho U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill ordered that the state either simply place the proposed initiative on the ballot or allow the group to collect the signatures electronically. The state appealed, and the case with startling speed went to the U.S. Supreme Court. On a 4-2 decision, the court sided with the state, ordering a stay of the Winmill decision.

Story continues below video

The Supreme Court, as often happens, didnt go to the center of the issue the voters-rights matter and it did not specifically reverse the Winmill decision, though it may have felt that way. But whats there is worth considering.

First, the majority decision (written by Chief Justice John Roberts) pointed out that, oddly enough, different federal courts have established different guidelines for what states can and cant do in initiative procedures (one reason the high court might have granted certiorari permission to bring this case to it). It said, the States depend on clear and administrable guidelines from the courts. Yet the Circuits diverge in fundamental respects when presented with challenges to the sort of state laws at issue here. According to the Sixth and Ninth Circuits, the First Amendment requires scrutiny of the interests of the State whenever a neutral, procedural regulation inhibits a persons ability to place an initiative on the ballot. ... Other Circuits, by contrast, have held that regulations that may make the initiative process more challenging do not implicate the First Amendment so long as the State does not restrict political discussion or petition circulation.

The Supreme Court didnt really land on this turf in its Idaho decision, but the majority did focus on the right of the state more than the right of the initiative proponent: The District Court did not accord sufficient weight to the States discretionary judgments about how to prioritize limited state resources across the election system as a whole.

Thats not an unreasonable point, but it leaves a massive gap in how to review something like this. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor zeroed in on balancing harms to stay applicant against harms to respondent in other words, balancing the interests of the state and the initiative backers, rather than simply disregarding the interests of the backers. She acknowledged that allowing the electronic signature would be a burden on the state and counties and it would be but she argued it should be considered in context.

Putting a still finer point on it, The stay granted today puts a halt to their signature-collection efforts, meaning that even if respondents ultimately prevail on appeal, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for them to collect enough qualifying signatures by any reasonable deadline for the November ballot. In other words, the delay occasioned by this Courts stay likely dooms to mootness respondents First Amendment claims before any appellate court has had the chance to consider their merits (and, indeed, before this Court has had the chance to consider any potential petition for certiorari).

So in balancing the rights of a state government against those of its voters, the Supreme Courts majority seems to be putting its thumb on the state side of the scale. That may be worth giving some careful thought when you look, as historically we long have, to the nations highest court as a protector of the rights of the American people.

Read more here:

Weighting the scales - Idaho State Journal

Temporary order of protection issued against Meiers Corners woman in hate-crimes case – SILive.com

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- A Meiers Corners woman charged with multiple counts of harassment as a hate crime was a burden and potential threat to several of her neighbors, including multiple children as young as 3 years old, authorities allege.

Lenore Arce, 70, faces charges that include five-counts of first-degree hate crime/harassment, three counts of endangering the welfare of a child, five counts of third-degree stalking and five-counts of fourth-degree stalking.

Racial epithets hurled at neighbors over the course of several months included white trash, n*****, and ch***, while in some cases she followed the victims around their property, the criminal complaint alleges.

Arce, whose first name is also spelled as Leonore in court documents, was arraigned on the charges Friday in Criminal Court in St. George, where a judge released her on her own recognizance.

A temporary order of protection was issued on behalf of the alleged victims, with a following court date scheduled for Nov. 6.

NEIGHBORS ALLEGEDLY BERATED, THREATENED

Arce continuously harassed five households on her Meiers Corners block from Jan. 1 to June 30, in some cases following neighbors around their properties and making remarks based on their race and sexual orientation, the complaint alleges.

One of her targets on multiple occasions was a grandparent and their grandchild, at one point issuing a threat: Im coming for you, you and your white trash family, authorities allege.

The complaint alleges Arce harassed another family, including two children ages 10 and 12, with verbal assaults including, F*** you, you illegal ch***.

Another neighbor was allegedly called a thief and a fa****.

The Advance/SILive.com first reported on the situation in July, publishing disturbing video where she could be heard uttering a stream of racial epithets at a neighbor.

Youre a f****** sick negro ... Put it up your f****** n****** a**, the woman can be heard saying in one video. Youre f****** black trash.

You dont run this f****** neighborhood, n*****, she said in another.

Arce has been a resident of the block for approximately 20 years, neighbors said.

Interviews with a half-dozen residents, some of whom requested anonymity for fear of retaliation from Arce, presented corroborating accounts of residents who said the womans constant harassment affects their everyday lives even causing her neighbors to change their daily routines to avoid coming into contact with her.

I got to look out my window before I come out, said one neighbor who wished to not be named. If I see her outside, I wont go out. But as soon as you step out of your house, she comes running out.

Joshua Benjamin, Arces defense attorney, described the case as a neighbor dispute and said it does not belong in Criminal Court.

Ms. Arce is 70 years old and on a fixed income, he said. She has never been in trouble with the law. She has the absolute legal right to speak her mind. Speech, even speech we dont like, is protected by both Article 1 Section 8 of the New York Constitution and by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

He continued: They can only make a hate speech charge if there is an underlying crime. There is no underlying crime. They are trying to penalize and criminalize a New Yorker for having a big mouth. That is against our laws and the beautiful New York value of speaking your mind.

DE BLASIO CALLS FOR INVESTIGATION

In late July, Mayor Bill de Blasio called a video documenting the racist tirades Arce hurled toward her neighbor shameful and disgusting and vowed an investigation would take place.

These are not New York values, and not what this city represents. Were investigating this, de Blasio said at the time.

Read the original here:

Temporary order of protection issued against Meiers Corners woman in hate-crimes case - SILive.com

RCFP: Journalists covering Portland protests should not be required to obtain a license – Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

Amicus brief filed by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 16 media organizations

Court: U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, Portland Division

Date Filed: Aug. 5, 2020

Update:On Aug. 6, U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon extended the temporary restraining order against federal officers, without modifications, through Aug. 20. During a hearing, Judge Simon thanked the Reporters Committee for its friend-of-the-court brief in the case, and said he was no longer considering the idea of having journalists obtain credentials from the ACLU.

Background: In June, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of journalists targeted by law enforcement while covering Black Lives Matter protests in Portland, Oregon.

A month later, a federal district judge temporarily blocked law enforcement from arresting, assaulting, threatening, or dispersing journalists and legal observers during demonstrations, and said that police could not search or seize journalists equipment. After the government asked the court to modify the temporary restraining order, the judge asked the parties whether the court should restrict the protections to professional or authorized journalists who would be clearly identifiable by wearing vests provided by the ACLU.

Our Position: The district court should not require journalists covering protests to register or obtain a license with the government, ACLU, or any other organization.

Quote: The First Amendment bars any system that would require journalists to be licensed by the government, third party, or otherwise to gather and report the news. Such a system would constitute both an unconstitutional prior restraint and an unacceptable impediment to the publics right to know.

Related: The Reporters Committee has urged public officials in California, New York, Minnesota, and Colorado to immediately stop attacking and arresting journalists covering the Black Lives Matter protests, and to train police officers about First Amendment protections for reporters.

Read this article:

RCFP: Journalists covering Portland protests should not be required to obtain a license - Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press