• TUSD-WB: An open letter to Leila Counts

  • Tuesday round-up

    Read more of this story here from SCOTUSblog by Edith Roberts.

    Tuesday round-up

    Yesterday the justices issued additional orders from their conference last Friday; as expected, they did not add any cases to their merits docket. Amy Howe covers the order list for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court. At Bloomberg Law, Jordan Rubin reports that the court “chose not to hear a case on the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause …, turning away an appeal from Alabama but sparking a noteworthy dissent in the process” from “a pairing not seen yet this term, Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor.” Additional coverage comes from Marcia Coyle at Law.com. At Reason, Damon Root observes that “[w]hile it’s common nowadays to think of the Supreme Court exclusively in terms of its conservative and liberal blocs, Gorsuch and Sotomayor have shown that the story is more complicated when it comes to questions of criminal justice.”

    Briefly:

    • The latest episode of First Mondays (podcast) features “a deep dive into Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, a nerdy-but-interesting procedural case that arises from some particularly spicy factual allegations.”
    • At SCOTUS OA, Tonja Jacobi and Matthew Sag maintain that “[t]he Supreme Court’s two current pending death penalty cases” “illustrate the added value of empirical analysis of oral argument over purely qualitative or impressionistic readings” in predicting case outcomes.
    • At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman analyzes a sample of cert petitions “to see if experts are using different and unique writing techniques to get the attention of the [justices’ law] clerks.”
    • At Balkinization, Marty Lederman explains why one of the court’s newest cases for OT 2018, In re Department of Commerce, et al., a dispute arising out of a challenge to the administration’s decision to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census, is “a very strange, almost inexplicable, grant.”
    • In the latest episode of the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, “the Heritage Foundation and National Constitution Center partner[] to bring you a live Supreme Trivia event.”
    • At National Review, John Yoo and James Phillips argue that “[w]ith Justice Kavanaugh now providing conservatives with a more secure majority, the Court can end its sidestepping of the Second Amendment.”
    • At The World and Everything In It, Mary Reichard discusses the oral argument in Bucklew v. Precythe, in which an inmate argues that because he suffers from a rare medical condition, execution by lethal injection will cause him intolerable pain and would violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel on an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in this case.]
    • In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, Timothy Shriver weighs in on the “troubling” case of Texas death-row inmate Bobby Moore, whose lawyers “are going back to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking enforcement of its own previous decision that Texas must use medical standards, rather than its own stereotypes, to determine intellectual disability.”
    • At the Washington Blade, Chris Johnson writes that “an anti-LGBT legal group is calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to block a Pennsylvania’s school district policy allowing transgender kids to use the restroom consistent with their gender identity.”

    We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up.  If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!

    The post Tuesday round-up appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

  • Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s New Asylum Ban

    Read more of this story here from Newsy Headlines by Newsy Headlines.


    Watch Video

    A federal judge says the Trump administration can't deny asylum to immigrants who cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally.

    The administration issued a rule earlier this month that temporarily required asylum seekers who cross the southern border to apply at U.S. ports of entry.

    But the ACLU filed a lawsuit, arguing that the new rules violated the Immigration and Nationality Act. That law says people can apply for asylum regardless of how they enter the country.

    The judge sided with the plaintiffs, writing in his order, "Whatever the scope of the President's authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden."

    The judge's temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration's new policy will remain in effect until Dec. 19. 

    The White House didn't immediately comment on the ruling. It comes as thousands of Central American migrants have reached Tijuana, Mexico, which is across the border from San Diego, California. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents already started processing some of their asylum claims, but are reportedly only accepting about 100 claims each day — so some migrants might be waiting in Tijuana for months. 

    Additional reporting from Newsy affiliate CNN.

  • Nuclear ‘knots’ could unravel the mysteries of atoms

    Read more of this story here from Latest Headlines | Science News by Emily Conover.

    Skyrmions might help loosen scientific snarls in studies of atomic nuclei.
  • Court Blocks U.S. From Enforcing Trump’s Asylum Ban

    Read more of this story here from Truthdig RSS by NOMAAN MERCHANT / The Associated Press.

    HOUSTON — A federal judge barred the Trump administration on Monday from refusing asylum to immigrants who cross the southern border illegally.

    U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar issued a temporary restraining order after hearing arguments in San Francisco. The request was made by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights, which quickly sued after President Donald Trump issued the ban this month in response to the caravans of migrants that have started to arrive at the U.S.-Mexico border.

    Trump issued a proclamation on Nov. 9 that said anyone who crossed the southern border would be ineligible for asylum. The regulations, which will remain in place for three months absent a court order, could potentially make it harder for thousands of people who enter the U.S. to avoid deportation.

    “Individuals are entitled to asylum if they cross between ports of entry,” said Baher Azmy, a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights. “It couldn’t be clearer.”

    In recent years, tens of thousands of immigrants each year have shown up in the Arizona desert or on the north bank of the Rio Grande in Texas, surrendered to immigration agents and requested asylum. The Department of Homeland Security estimates around 70,000 people a year claim asylum between official ports of entry.

    Trump has argued that the recent caravans are a threat to national security.

    Around 3,000 people from the first of the caravans have arrived in Tijuana, Mexico, across the border from San Diego, California. U.S. Customs and Border Protection said Monday that it closed off northbound traffic for several hours at the San Ysidro crossing. It has also installed movable, wire-topped barriers, apparently to stop a potential mass rush of people.

    As of Monday, 107 people detained between official crossings have sought asylum since Trump’s order went into effect, according to DHS, which oversees Customs and Border Protection. Officials didn’t say whether those people’s cases were still progressing through other avenues left to them after the proclamation.

    DHS has said it wants asylum seekers at the southern border to appear at an official border crossing. But many border crossings such as San Ysidro already have long wait times. People are often forced to wait in shelters or outdoor camps on the Mexican side, sometimes for weeks.

    ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt said that some people seeking asylum cross between official ports because “they’re in real danger,” either in their countries of origin or in Mexico.

    “We don’t condone people entering between ports of entry, but Congress has made the decision that if they do, they still need to be allowed to apply for asylum,” he said.

    ___

    Associated Press journalists Jill Colvin and Colleen Long in Washington contributed to this report.

  • Nov. 16, 2018 Newscast | Cronkite News

    Read more of this story here from Cronkite News RSS Feed by Cronkite News RSS Feed.

    Staff

    Monday, Nov. 19, 2018

    Nov. 16, 2018 Newscast | Cronkite News

    We look at the final results of Arizona's midterm election; and more.
  • The Mainstream Media Is Lying About the California Fires

    Read more of this story here from Truthdig RSS by Lee Camp.

    I don’t like accurately predicting the future. But it happens to me sometimes. And it’s never a good thing.

    Not once have I predicted that I would stumble upon a great sum of money or that a friendly squirrel would mysteriously leave a fresh, delicious scone on my windowsill. No, the things I’ve said that have come true years later have always been utterly awful. And the latest one has to do with California.

    This week, Donald Trump has continued to blame the horrific fires in California on forest mismanagement—basically saying that if the parks service had just raked up a few more dry leaves, then countless people, homes and buildings would not have been incinerated. I unintentionally predicted this kind of idiocy. I said something similar in a 2011 stand-up comedy album titled Chaos For The Weary.”

    To paraphrase, I said, “You notice no matter how close they say the major effects of global warming are, it doesn’t change how we all behave. … Soon they’ll be saying, ‘People in California are ON FIRE!’ and everyone will be like, ‘They probably live in a very fiery area. They’re probably storing dry stuff in their homes—like old magazines and elderly people.”

    And sure enough, here we are. People in California are on fire, and the president is saying it’s because they stored too many dry pine needles around their homes. Trump is able to do this because most of the mainstream media are allowing him to fill a void—a void that represents the answer to these questions: “Why is this happening? Why is our nation turning into one of the lower circles of hell?”

    Don’t get me wrong—the corporate media have extensively covered that California is ON FIRE. They have. They just can’t bring themselves to say the words “climate change” very often. No. It gets caught in their throat like a dry falafel puck. They look like they want to say it but just can’t—like a dog that wants to tell you it has a thorn in its paw. But it’s just impossible.

    Take, for example, “NBC Nightly News.” You can’t get a finer news program anywhere (in the building where they tape). I watched a full six-minute segment last week covering multiple California fires, the destruction, the loss of life; they even had reporters on the ground. And yet throughout the entire report, they never uttered the words “climate change,” “global warming” or even simply, “We are fucked.” Instead, they made it sound like fires are a tragic yet common occurrence, and the cities will rebuild.

    Never speaking the words “climate change” while whole towns literally go up in flames is like covering the drowning death of someone and never mentioning he was being waterboarded at the time. The real cause of these fires is at least half the story, if not more.

    NBC host Kate Snow did say these fires are “ones for the history books,” but I guess those books are going to get shorter and shorter because “1,000-year fires” are quickly becoming “5-year fires.” Saying these fires are “ones for the history books” implies that 20 years from now, the children in California will be reading about the Great fires of 2018.

    But they won’t.

    They won’t be in the history books—because in 20 years the history books will be ON FIRE. And the great fires of 2018 will look like nothing but a warm day with a piña colada. Here’s an example of what I mean: a headline from HuffPost read, “California’s Wildfires This Year Have Been Breaking Records—The state has experienced some of the biggest and deadliest fires in its history this year.”

    Sounds pretty accurate, doesn’t it? The only problem is that article is from December 2017. LAST year. Did they go down in the history books? How often does everyone huddle under the blankets and take turns telling scary tales about the 2017 fires?

    Acting like each year’s fires are a fluke that will never happen again—that in and of itself is denying climate change. It is lying to the American people in order to cover up that we are promoting a system based on big oil, big factory farming and big environmental destruction. A new Media Matters report found the mainstream media only say “climate change” in reports about these recent fires 4 percent  of the time.

    Now, some of you may be thinking, “You can’t prove these fires were caused by climate change.” And you’re right. I can’t. But the Union of Concerned Scientists can.

    They said, “The effects of global warming on temperature, precipitation levels, and soil moisture are turning many of our forests into kindling during wildfire season.” The scientists also pointed out that wildfires are increasing and that the wildfire season is getting longer in the U.S. In terms of forest fires over 1,000 acres in size, in the 1980s, there were 140. In the 1990s, there were 160. And from 2000 to 2012, there were 250. And as mentioned before, 2017 was California’s worst wildfire season. … Until 2018.

    So if they’re not willing to talk about the obvious causes of our pop-up infernos, what was “NBC Nightly News” reporting on? Well, they spent a good amount of time on the firefighters—correctly informing viewers that these men and women are heroes, and they’re putting their lives on the line to try to save people they’ve never met. Good job, NBC. You only missed one thing. You somehow failed to say that many of the firefighters you highlighted are PRISONERS LOCKED AWAY IN CALIFORNIA’S CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM!

    Estimates are that 30 percent of the state’s firefighters are prisoners, and it’s clear from the uniforms that many of the ones NBC filmed were indeed inmates. Sure, they volunteered for that job, but many of them are locked up for small crimes and see no way out of the misery and hardship of prison other than to “volunteer” for fire duty. It’s kind of like how I “volunteered” to give my wallet and shoes to that guy with a gun when he casually noted that he liked my wallet and shoes.

    Furthermore, the inmates are working as firefighters for roughly $1 per hour.

    ONE DOLLAR PER HOUR.

    They get paid less than the amount of money most people are willing to bend down to pick up if they see it in a puddle. But NONE of this is said by “NBC Nightly News” even as they show video of the inmates fighting fires. This would be like showing Nike sweatshop workers in Indonesia and saying, “These fine craftsmen are making your shoes. Oh man, do they love making shoes. They volunteered to do it.”

    Are you starting to get the point? Kate Snow’s job—like most of those in mainstream media—is to cover up your reality. Her job is to make you think we live in a system that can recover from this carnage WITHOUT large-scale changes, without a new economic paradigm that doesn’t reward waste and planned obsolescence and profiting off the lives of others. Generally speaking, the job of mainstream corporate outlets is to ignore the harsh reality that our endless consumption and furious appetite for fossil fuels are burning our country, turning it into a desert wasteland—and the easiest response is to throw slave labor at the problem.

    On the other hand, it’s the job of you and me to see through the propaganda, through the spectacle and the bullshit, and to fight for a better world.

    Maybe it will help if I predict that 20 years from now we all will have woken up from this mass delusion and switched to a sustainable, green, egalitarian economic system.

    It’s about time I had a positive prediction come true.

    If you’d like to hear my other latest predictions, check out my brand new stand-up comedy special “Super Patriotic Very Uncle Sam Comedy Special Not Allowed On American TV.” It’s only available at LeeCampComedySpecial.com

    This column is similar to a monologue I wrote and performed on my TV show “Redacted Tonight.”

  • Four Dead After A Shooting At A Chicago Hospital

    Read more of this story here from Newsy Headlines by Newsy Headlines.


    Watch Video

    A doctor, a police officer, and a pharmaceutical assistant died after a shooting at Chicago's Mercy hospital Monday afternoon.

    According to the Chicago Police Superintendent, the gunman who also died was in a relationship with one of the victims.  

    Authorities say after a verbal altercation took place in the hospital's parking lot, shots were fired both outside and inside the hospital. 

    Additional reporting for this story provided by Newsy affiliate CNN.

  • Residents Protest Arrival Of Migrants In Tijuana, Mexico

    Read more of this story here from Newsy Headlines by Newsy Headlines.


    Watch Video

    On Sunday, residents of Tijuana, Mexico, protested against the arrival of thousands of Central American migrants.

    Some protesters held signs that said "stop the invasion" and "Mexico first" while they chanted for the migrants to leave the country.

    The thousands of migrants traveling through Mexico plan to seek asylum in the U.S. One group of about 200 migrants left El Salvador over the weekend.

    Meanwhile, Politico reports all of the nearly 6,000 troops President Trump deployed to the southern border for increased security are expected to end their mission and return home by mid-December.

    Additional reporting by Newsy affiliate CNN.

Tuesday round-up

Read more of this story here from SCOTUSblog by Edith Roberts.

Tuesday round-up

Yesterday the justices issued additional orders from their conference last Friday; as expected, they did not add any cases to their merits docket. Amy Howe covers the order list for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court. At Bloomberg Law, Jordan Rubin reports that the court “chose not to hear a case on the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause …, turning away an appeal from Alabama but sparking a noteworthy dissent in the process” from “a pairing not seen yet this term, Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor.” Additional coverage comes from Marcia Coyle at Law.com. At Reason, Damon Root observes that “[w]hile it’s common nowadays to think of the Supreme Court exclusively in terms of its conservative and liberal blocs, Gorsuch and Sotomayor have shown that the story is more complicated when it comes to questions of criminal justice.”

Briefly:

  • The latest episode of First Mondays (podcast) features “a deep dive into Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, a nerdy-but-interesting procedural case that arises from some particularly spicy factual allegations.”
  • At SCOTUS OA, Tonja Jacobi and Matthew Sag maintain that “[t]he Supreme Court’s two current pending death penalty cases” “illustrate the added value of empirical analysis of oral argument over purely qualitative or impressionistic readings” in predicting case outcomes.
  • At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman analyzes a sample of cert petitions “to see if experts are using different and unique writing techniques to get the attention of the [justices’ law] clerks.”
  • At Balkinization, Marty Lederman explains why one of the court’s newest cases for OT 2018, In re Department of Commerce, et al., a dispute arising out of a challenge to the administration’s decision to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census, is “a very strange, almost inexplicable, grant.”
  • In the latest episode of the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, “the Heritage Foundation and National Constitution Center partner[] to bring you a live Supreme Trivia event.”
  • At National Review, John Yoo and James Phillips argue that “[w]ith Justice Kavanaugh now providing conservatives with a more secure majority, the Court can end its sidestepping of the Second Amendment.”
  • At The World and Everything In It, Mary Reichard discusses the oral argument in Bucklew v. Precythe, in which an inmate argues that because he suffers from a rare medical condition, execution by lethal injection will cause him intolerable pain and would violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel on an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in this case.]
  • In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, Timothy Shriver weighs in on the “troubling” case of Texas death-row inmate Bobby Moore, whose lawyers “are going back to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking enforcement of its own previous decision that Texas must use medical standards, rather than its own stereotypes, to determine intellectual disability.”
  • At the Washington Blade, Chris Johnson writes that “an anti-LGBT legal group is calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to block a Pennsylvania’s school district policy allowing transgender kids to use the restroom consistent with their gender identity.”

We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up.  If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!

The post Tuesday round-up appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

Read more

Court Blocks U.S. From Enforcing Trump’s Asylum Ban

Read more of this story here from Truthdig RSS by NOMAAN MERCHANT / The Associated Press.

HOUSTON — A federal judge barred the Trump administration on Monday from refusing asylum to immigrants who cross the southern border illegally.

U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar issued a temporary restraining order after hearing arguments in San Francisco. The request was made by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights, which quickly sued after President Donald Trump issued the ban this month in response to the caravans of migrants that have started to arrive at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Trump issued a proclamation on Nov. 9 that said anyone who crossed the southern border would be ineligible for asylum. The regulations, which will remain in place for three months absent a court order, could potentially make it harder for thousands of people who enter the U.S. to avoid deportation.

“Individuals are entitled to asylum if they cross between ports of entry,” said Baher Azmy, a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights. “It couldn’t be clearer.”

In recent years, tens of thousands of immigrants each year have shown up in the Arizona desert or on the north bank of the Rio Grande in Texas, surrendered to immigration agents and requested asylum. The Department of Homeland Security estimates around 70,000 people a year claim asylum between official ports of entry.

Trump has argued that the recent caravans are a threat to national security.

Around 3,000 people from the first of the caravans have arrived in Tijuana, Mexico, across the border from San Diego, California. U.S. Customs and Border Protection said Monday that it closed off northbound traffic for several hours at the San Ysidro crossing. It has also installed movable, wire-topped barriers, apparently to stop a potential mass rush of people.

As of Monday, 107 people detained between official crossings have sought asylum since Trump’s order went into effect, according to DHS, which oversees Customs and Border Protection. Officials didn’t say whether those people’s cases were still progressing through other avenues left to them after the proclamation.

DHS has said it wants asylum seekers at the southern border to appear at an official border crossing. But many border crossings such as San Ysidro already have long wait times. People are often forced to wait in shelters or outdoor camps on the Mexican side, sometimes for weeks.

ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt said that some people seeking asylum cross between official ports because “they’re in real danger,” either in their countries of origin or in Mexico.

“We don’t condone people entering between ports of entry, but Congress has made the decision that if they do, they still need to be allowed to apply for asylum,” he said.

___

Associated Press journalists Jill Colvin and Colleen Long in Washington contributed to this report.

Read more

AIM-WEST Annual SF West Coast Conference Summit November 17-18, 2018

Read more of this story here from CENSORED NEWS by Brenda Norrell.

Saturday, today, at AIM West Photo by Tony Gonzalez By Tony Gonzalez AIM West Censored NewsLocation 2969 Mission Street San Francisco.Welcome all my American Indian Movement-West (AIM-WEST), an inter-tribal non-profit human rights organization based in San Francisco is pleased to welcome everyone to its annual AIM-West Coast Conference/Summit in San Francisco beginning Read more

Bustos busting up local talk radio after purchase of KVOI, but is it being designed to fail?

Tucson talk radio may never be the same again.

The future of conservative talk radio is holding on by a thread in Tucson, Arizona. Right-wing hosts Jon Justice and JT Harris have already gotten the boot from the local radio airwaves on The Truth – 104.1, a misnomer if there ever was one for a station, showing that 4-hour blocks of morning right-wing rambling is not an economically feasible model.

The recent purchase of KVOI 1030-AM has led the new owner, Bustos Media, to switch to a new all-local talk format a week ago on November 1st. One of the first things KVOI did was to start off its day of 13 hours of local talk (6am – 7pm) with a new 4-hour show hosted by a conservative who looks forward to bringing down local governments, craving the collapse of the county and without any critique, promoting fringe politicians who proclaim that they are “White and PROUD” in response to a killing at a white supremacy rally in Charleston. read more

Read more

TUSD-WB: An open letter to Leila Counts

Three Sonorans is not a member of the TUSD Whistleblowers and has zero input on the content of this letter and all their letters.

78th Open Letter to Leila Counts

From: TUSD Whistleblowers– Comprised of a Large Group of Extremely Concerned TUSD Administrators, Teachers, Former Students/Class of 2018, Retired Administrators, Parents, & Grandparents

Subject: Please, Please Make Us Wrong and Fly Far Away from the Flock of Mean Girls

Dear Leila Counts:

When you swear/affirm to the following oath in January 2019, a new day will begin for you and 47,255 TUSD students and their parents. read more

Read more

Tuesday round-up

Read more of this story here from SCOTUSblog by Edith Roberts.

Tuesday round-up

Yesterday the justices issued additional orders from their conference last Friday; as expected, they did not add any cases to their merits docket. Amy Howe covers the order list for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court. At Bloomberg Law, Jordan Rubin reports that the court “chose not to hear a case on the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause …, turning away an appeal from Alabama but sparking a noteworthy dissent in the process” from “a pairing not seen yet this term, Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor.” Additional coverage comes from Marcia Coyle at Law.com. At Reason, Damon Root observes that “[w]hile it’s common nowadays to think of the Supreme Court exclusively in terms of its conservative and liberal blocs, Gorsuch and Sotomayor have shown that the story is more complicated when it comes to questions of criminal justice.”

Briefly:

  • The latest episode of First Mondays (podcast) features “a deep dive into Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, a nerdy-but-interesting procedural case that arises from some particularly spicy factual allegations.”
  • At SCOTUS OA, Tonja Jacobi and Matthew Sag maintain that “[t]he Supreme Court’s two current pending death penalty cases” “illustrate the added value of empirical analysis of oral argument over purely qualitative or impressionistic readings” in predicting case outcomes.
  • At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman analyzes a sample of cert petitions “to see if experts are using different and unique writing techniques to get the attention of the [justices’ law] clerks.”
  • At Balkinization, Marty Lederman explains why one of the court’s newest cases for OT 2018, In re Department of Commerce, et al., a dispute arising out of a challenge to the administration’s decision to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census, is “a very strange, almost inexplicable, grant.”
  • In the latest episode of the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, “the Heritage Foundation and National Constitution Center partner[] to bring you a live Supreme Trivia event.”
  • At National Review, John Yoo and James Phillips argue that “[w]ith Justice Kavanaugh now providing conservatives with a more secure majority, the Court can end its sidestepping of the Second Amendment.”
  • At The World and Everything In It, Mary Reichard discusses the oral argument in Bucklew v. Precythe, in which an inmate argues that because he suffers from a rare medical condition, execution by lethal injection will cause him intolerable pain and would violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel on an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in this case.]
  • In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, Timothy Shriver weighs in on the “troubling” case of Texas death-row inmate Bobby Moore, whose lawyers “are going back to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking enforcement of its own previous decision that Texas must use medical standards, rather than its own stereotypes, to determine intellectual disability.”
  • At the Washington Blade, Chris Johnson writes that “an anti-LGBT legal group is calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to block a Pennsylvania’s school district policy allowing transgender kids to use the restroom consistent with their gender identity.”

We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up.  If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!

The post Tuesday round-up appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

Read more

Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s New Asylum Ban

Read more of this story here from Newsy Headlines by Newsy Headlines.


Watch Video

A federal judge says the Trump administration can't deny asylum to immigrants who cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally.

The administration issued a rule earlier this month that temporarily required asylum seekers who cross the southern border to apply at U.S. ports of entry.

But the ACLU filed a lawsuit, arguing that the new rules violated the Immigration and Nationality Act. That law says people can apply for asylum regardless of how they enter the country.

The judge sided with the plaintiffs, writing in his order, "Whatever the scope of the President's authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden."

The judge's temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration's new policy will remain in effect until Dec. 19. 

The White House didn't immediately comment on the ruling. It comes as thousands of Central American migrants have reached Tijuana, Mexico, which is across the border from San Diego, California. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents already started processing some of their asylum claims, but are reportedly only accepting about 100 claims each day — so some migrants might be waiting in Tijuana for months. 

Additional reporting from Newsy affiliate CNN.

Read more

Court Blocks U.S. From Enforcing Trump’s Asylum Ban

Read more of this story here from Truthdig RSS by NOMAAN MERCHANT / The Associated Press.

HOUSTON — A federal judge barred the Trump administration on Monday from refusing asylum to immigrants who cross the southern border illegally.

U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar issued a temporary restraining order after hearing arguments in San Francisco. The request was made by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights, which quickly sued after President Donald Trump issued the ban this month in response to the caravans of migrants that have started to arrive at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Trump issued a proclamation on Nov. 9 that said anyone who crossed the southern border would be ineligible for asylum. The regulations, which will remain in place for three months absent a court order, could potentially make it harder for thousands of people who enter the U.S. to avoid deportation.

“Individuals are entitled to asylum if they cross between ports of entry,” said Baher Azmy, a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights. “It couldn’t be clearer.”

In recent years, tens of thousands of immigrants each year have shown up in the Arizona desert or on the north bank of the Rio Grande in Texas, surrendered to immigration agents and requested asylum. The Department of Homeland Security estimates around 70,000 people a year claim asylum between official ports of entry.

Trump has argued that the recent caravans are a threat to national security.

Around 3,000 people from the first of the caravans have arrived in Tijuana, Mexico, across the border from San Diego, California. U.S. Customs and Border Protection said Monday that it closed off northbound traffic for several hours at the San Ysidro crossing. It has also installed movable, wire-topped barriers, apparently to stop a potential mass rush of people.

As of Monday, 107 people detained between official crossings have sought asylum since Trump’s order went into effect, according to DHS, which oversees Customs and Border Protection. Officials didn’t say whether those people’s cases were still progressing through other avenues left to them after the proclamation.

DHS has said it wants asylum seekers at the southern border to appear at an official border crossing. But many border crossings such as San Ysidro already have long wait times. People are often forced to wait in shelters or outdoor camps on the Mexican side, sometimes for weeks.

ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt said that some people seeking asylum cross between official ports because “they’re in real danger,” either in their countries of origin or in Mexico.

“We don’t condone people entering between ports of entry, but Congress has made the decision that if they do, they still need to be allowed to apply for asylum,” he said.

___

Associated Press journalists Jill Colvin and Colleen Long in Washington contributed to this report.

Read more

The Mainstream Media Is Lying About the California Fires

Read more of this story here from Truthdig RSS by Lee Camp.

I don’t like accurately predicting the future. But it happens to me sometimes. And it’s never a good thing.

Not once have I predicted that I would stumble upon a great sum of money or that a friendly squirrel would mysteriously leave a fresh, delicious scone on my windowsill. No, the things I’ve said that have come true years later have always been utterly awful. And the latest one has to do with California.

This week, Donald Trump has continued to blame the horrific fires in California on forest mismanagement—basically saying that if the parks service had just raked up a few more dry leaves, then countless people, homes and buildings would not have been incinerated. I unintentionally predicted this kind of idiocy. I said something similar in a 2011 stand-up comedy album titled Chaos For The Weary.”

To paraphrase, I said, “You notice no matter how close they say the major effects of global warming are, it doesn’t change how we all behave. … Soon they’ll be saying, ‘People in California are ON FIRE!’ and everyone will be like, ‘They probably live in a very fiery area. They’re probably storing dry stuff in their homes—like old magazines and elderly people.”

And sure enough, here we are. People in California are on fire, and the president is saying it’s because they stored too many dry pine needles around their homes. Trump is able to do this because most of the mainstream media are allowing him to fill a void—a void that represents the answer to these questions: “Why is this happening? Why is our nation turning into one of the lower circles of hell?”

Don’t get me wrong—the corporate media have extensively covered that California is ON FIRE. They have. They just can’t bring themselves to say the words “climate change” very often. No. It gets caught in their throat like a dry falafel puck. They look like they want to say it but just can’t—like a dog that wants to tell you it has a thorn in its paw. But it’s just impossible.

Take, for example, “NBC Nightly News.” You can’t get a finer news program anywhere (in the building where they tape). I watched a full six-minute segment last week covering multiple California fires, the destruction, the loss of life; they even had reporters on the ground. And yet throughout the entire report, they never uttered the words “climate change,” “global warming” or even simply, “We are fucked.” Instead, they made it sound like fires are a tragic yet common occurrence, and the cities will rebuild.

Never speaking the words “climate change” while whole towns literally go up in flames is like covering the drowning death of someone and never mentioning he was being waterboarded at the time. The real cause of these fires is at least half the story, if not more.

NBC host Kate Snow did say these fires are “ones for the history books,” but I guess those books are going to get shorter and shorter because “1,000-year fires” are quickly becoming “5-year fires.” Saying these fires are “ones for the history books” implies that 20 years from now, the children in California will be reading about the Great fires of 2018.

But they won’t.

They won’t be in the history books—because in 20 years the history books will be ON FIRE. And the great fires of 2018 will look like nothing but a warm day with a piña colada. Here’s an example of what I mean: a headline from HuffPost read, “California’s Wildfires This Year Have Been Breaking Records—The state has experienced some of the biggest and deadliest fires in its history this year.”

Sounds pretty accurate, doesn’t it? The only problem is that article is from December 2017. LAST year. Did they go down in the history books? How often does everyone huddle under the blankets and take turns telling scary tales about the 2017 fires?

Acting like each year’s fires are a fluke that will never happen again—that in and of itself is denying climate change. It is lying to the American people in order to cover up that we are promoting a system based on big oil, big factory farming and big environmental destruction. A new Media Matters report found the mainstream media only say “climate change” in reports about these recent fires 4 percent  of the time.

Now, some of you may be thinking, “You can’t prove these fires were caused by climate change.” And you’re right. I can’t. But the Union of Concerned Scientists can.

They said, “The effects of global warming on temperature, precipitation levels, and soil moisture are turning many of our forests into kindling during wildfire season.” The scientists also pointed out that wildfires are increasing and that the wildfire season is getting longer in the U.S. In terms of forest fires over 1,000 acres in size, in the 1980s, there were 140. In the 1990s, there were 160. And from 2000 to 2012, there were 250. And as mentioned before, 2017 was California’s worst wildfire season. … Until 2018.

So if they’re not willing to talk about the obvious causes of our pop-up infernos, what was “NBC Nightly News” reporting on? Well, they spent a good amount of time on the firefighters—correctly informing viewers that these men and women are heroes, and they’re putting their lives on the line to try to save people they’ve never met. Good job, NBC. You only missed one thing. You somehow failed to say that many of the firefighters you highlighted are PRISONERS LOCKED AWAY IN CALIFORNIA’S CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM!

Estimates are that 30 percent of the state’s firefighters are prisoners, and it’s clear from the uniforms that many of the ones NBC filmed were indeed inmates. Sure, they volunteered for that job, but many of them are locked up for small crimes and see no way out of the misery and hardship of prison other than to “volunteer” for fire duty. It’s kind of like how I “volunteered” to give my wallet and shoes to that guy with a gun when he casually noted that he liked my wallet and shoes.

Furthermore, the inmates are working as firefighters for roughly $1 per hour.

ONE DOLLAR PER HOUR.

They get paid less than the amount of money most people are willing to bend down to pick up if they see it in a puddle. But NONE of this is said by “NBC Nightly News” even as they show video of the inmates fighting fires. This would be like showing Nike sweatshop workers in Indonesia and saying, “These fine craftsmen are making your shoes. Oh man, do they love making shoes. They volunteered to do it.”

Are you starting to get the point? Kate Snow’s job—like most of those in mainstream media—is to cover up your reality. Her job is to make you think we live in a system that can recover from this carnage WITHOUT large-scale changes, without a new economic paradigm that doesn’t reward waste and planned obsolescence and profiting off the lives of others. Generally speaking, the job of mainstream corporate outlets is to ignore the harsh reality that our endless consumption and furious appetite for fossil fuels are burning our country, turning it into a desert wasteland—and the easiest response is to throw slave labor at the problem.

On the other hand, it’s the job of you and me to see through the propaganda, through the spectacle and the bullshit, and to fight for a better world.

Maybe it will help if I predict that 20 years from now we all will have woken up from this mass delusion and switched to a sustainable, green, egalitarian economic system.

It’s about time I had a positive prediction come true.

If you’d like to hear my other latest predictions, check out my brand new stand-up comedy special “Super Patriotic Very Uncle Sam Comedy Special Not Allowed On American TV.” It’s only available at LeeCampComedySpecial.com

This column is similar to a monologue I wrote and performed on my TV show “Redacted Tonight.”

Read more

Four Dead After A Shooting At A Chicago Hospital

Read more of this story here from Newsy Headlines by Newsy Headlines.


Watch Video

A doctor, a police officer, and a pharmaceutical assistant died after a shooting at Chicago's Mercy hospital Monday afternoon.

According to the Chicago Police Superintendent, the gunman who also died was in a relationship with one of the victims.  

Authorities say after a verbal altercation took place in the hospital's parking lot, shots were fired both outside and inside the hospital. 

Additional reporting for this story provided by Newsy affiliate CNN.

Read more

Residents Protest Arrival Of Migrants In Tijuana, Mexico

Read more of this story here from Newsy Headlines by Newsy Headlines.


Watch Video

On Sunday, residents of Tijuana, Mexico, protested against the arrival of thousands of Central American migrants.

Some protesters held signs that said "stop the invasion" and "Mexico first" while they chanted for the migrants to leave the country.

The thousands of migrants traveling through Mexico plan to seek asylum in the U.S. One group of about 200 migrants left El Salvador over the weekend.

Meanwhile, Politico reports all of the nearly 6,000 troops President Trump deployed to the southern border for increased security are expected to end their mission and return home by mid-December.

Additional reporting by Newsy affiliate CNN.

Read more

White House Reinstates Jim Acosta’s Press Pass

Read more of this story here from Newsy Headlines by Newsy Headlines.


Watch Video

The White House said Monday that CNN correspondent Jim Acosta will be allowed to attend its press briefings again — so long as he follows a new set of rules for reporters.

The rules mandate that journalists only ask one question at a time and say it's up to the president or White House officials to allow follow-up questions. It also added that journalists need to "physically [surrender] the microphone to White House staff" when they're finished speaking.

Failure to follow the new set of rules will result in either "a suspension or revocation of the journalist's hard pass."

The news came after CNN and Acosta asked for an emergency hearing on their motion to stop the Trump administration from revoking Acosta's credentials until the litigation was over with. But now that Acosta's press pass has been reinstated, CNN has decided to drop its lawsuit.

The White House suspended Acosta's press pass earlier this month after he and President Donald Trump had a heated exchange during a press conference. In response, CNN filed a lawsuit against Trump and several members of his staff, saying the administration violated Acosta's First and Fifth Amendment rights. 

Additional reporting from Newsy affiliate CNN.

Read more

Gunman Opens Fire at Chicago’s Mercy Hospital

Read more of this story here from Truthdig RSS by By AMANDA SEITZ / Associated Press.

CHICAGO — A gunman opened fire Monday at a Chicago hospital, wounding at least four people, including a police officer and a hospital employee, authorities said.

A police spokesman said the gunman was dead, but it was not immediately clear if he took his own life or was killed by police at Mercy Hospital on the city’s South Side.

A witness named James Gray told reporters that it looked as if the attacker “was turning and shooting people at random.”

The shooting apparently began as the suspect was walking with a woman near a parking lot. He turned and repeatedly shot the woman in the chest. He then entered the hospital and continued firing, Gray said.

Four people were in critical condition, including an officer. At least one of the four was a hospital employee, police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said.

Authorities asked people to avoid the area.

A message left for hospital officials was not immediately returned.

Television footage showed several people, including some wearing white coats, walking through a parking lot with their arms up.

Hundreds of police cars, firetrucks and ambulance encircled the hospital. Police blocked off streets in the surrounding neighborhood.

Mercy has a rich history as the city’s first chartered hospital. It began in 1852, when the Sisters of Mercy religious group converted a rooming house. During the Civil War, the hospital treated both Union soldiers and Confederate prisoners of war, according to its website.

Read more