It is utterly inevitable that when the U.S. government floods the streets with a new crop of hastily trained and prepared agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and give those people arbitrary quotas to achieve in meting out government brutality against illegal immigrants, that ordinary American citizens are going to get swept up into the net of pain.
Conservatives have increasingly argued that transgender women and girls have an unfair advantage in sports, that their hormone levels make them stronger and faster. And for that reason, they say, trans women should be banned from competition. But Lindsay Hecox wasn't faster. She tried out for her track and field team at Boise State University and didn't make the cut. A 2020 Idaho bill banned her from a club team, anyway.
During the Civil Rights Movement, the Chicago Freedom Movement took place from 1965 to 1967. Dr. King co-led this campaign with local activists to confront racial discrimination, segregation, and housing inequities in one of America's largest cities. Unlike the Jim Crow laws of the South, segregation in Chicago was often enforced through policy, lending practices and real estate discrimination rather than explicit laws.
Sheriff's deputies don't generally spend their time arresting anyone. They serve warrants, guard prisoners and keep court in order. Under other circumstances, Bilal's comments could be dismissed as a Democratic elected official throwing red meat at a blue audience. But she's not alone. Last year, municipal leaders in cities including Chicago, Portland and Charlotte made simple promises for their police not to cooperate with immigration enforcement, and to monitor the activities of ICE for civil remedies.
And on Tuesday, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement that "there is currently no basis for a criminal civil rights investigation." The statement, first reported by CNN, did not elaborate on how the department had reached a conclusion that no investigation was warranted. Federal officials have said that the officer acted in self-defense and that the driver of the Honda was engaging in "an act of domestic terrorism" when she pulled forward toward him.
But inside the courtroom, the argument barely touched speech or religion. Instead, the justices together gravitated toward something else entirely: a problem about time, causation, and whether constitutional authority can be temporally partitioned. Does the Constitution operate only forward? Can a law be unconstitutional tomorrow yet legally untouchable yesterday? And can a single conviction permanently close the courthouse doors to the people most harmed by an unconstitutional rule?
In a year marked by escalating attacks on transgender people, the Trump administration has seemed to outdo its own cruelty at every turn. While the administration has led a series of attempts to curtail trans people's rights, recognition, and safety, neither Congress nor the Supreme Court seem willing to provide a meaningful check on the administration's brazen targeting of trans people and other demonized communities.
This morning on the Winter Solstice, our mother, grandmother, and great grandmother, Betty Reid Soskin, passed away peacefully at her home in Richmond, CA at 104 years old. She was attended by family. She led a fully packed life and was ready to leave. We understand the public nature of Betty's life, however we ask that you please respect the family's privacy at this time..
When I learn that an acquaintance supports stripping my rights away, I distance myself from them. Because of this, I've received some comments like, It's such a shame that you can't even be friends with me because we disagree on politics.
This morning in a much anticipated decision, the Supreme Court struck down a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Writing for a five-four majority, Chief Justice John Roberts ruled that Congress' action to protect minority voting rights in nine states was based on outdated data, and the formula used to determine which areas were subject to federal oversight was thus unconstitutional.
The LGBTQ+ Victory Institute's International Leaders Conference in Washington, D.C., opened its second day with a rare scene: three of the nation's top law enforcement officials detailed what it means to confront a federal government they describe as destabilizing democratic norms in real time. The Friday plenary, titled "Women + Power: Attorneys General Defending Equality and Justice," brought Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel to the stage of the JW Marriott's grand ballroom.
On Tuesday morning, a cohort of Democratic lawmakers reintroduced the Artificial Intelligence Civil Rights Act, a bill that would establish protections for individual civil rights when someone's personal data is processed by algorithms for a diverse range of consequential life decisions. Spearheaded by Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., along with Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Reps. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., and Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., the AI Civil Right Act's comes as Markey asserts tech companies are lobbying to include a recently defeated moratorium on AI regulations at the state level in this year's National Defense Authorization Act.
