Author: admin

By erecting tariffs and threatening to tear up trade agreements, President Donald Trump has done more to achieve one of the left’s longstanding policy goals than any other modern president.

For the Democrats running for office in 2020, this creates a conundrum: They can’t say they like what Trump is doing, but they’re also not really willing to criticize his trade war. In fact, many of the 2020 Democratic candidates are espousing protectionist views that sound a lot like what Trump was saying in 2016.

The Democrats are essentially arguing that all we need is a more competent protectionist in the White House. But there’s no way to “correctly” implement policies that stop individuals from peacefully exchanging goods and services, just because they live in different countries. Whether imposed by Trump or by Bernie Sanders, these ideas are a catastrophe for all Americans.

Written by Eric Boehm. Produced and edited by Mark McDaniel.

Photos:
Allison Dinner/ZUMA Press/Newscom
Kevin Dietsch/CNP/AdMedia/SIPA/Newscom
Paul Kitagaki Jr./ZUMA Press/Newscom

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2PRM8ej
via IFTTT

Federal and state investigators have identified a common element in many of the cases where people have suffered respiratory illnesses after vaping. The Washington Post reports that tests by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found vitamin E acetate, an oil-based nutritional supplement, in 10 of 18 THC fluids used by patients, while a New York state laboratory found “very high levels of vitamin E acetate in nearly all” the cannabis extracts it tested. That substance was not found in any of the nicotine e-fluid tested by the FDA or the lab.

These findings reinforce the suspicion that the respiratory illnesses reported to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—215 at last count—are caused largely by additives or contaminants in black-market THC products. Illegal nicotine products may also have played a role in some of these cases, although so far the CDC and the FDA have not identified a common element in patients who vaped nicotine. Notwithstanding attempts to blame these illnesses on the use of legal nicotine products, there is no evidence that standard e-cigarettes are causing the patients’ symptoms. That insinuation was always implausible, given that e-cigarettes have been in wide use for years and these conditions were reported only recently.

While vitamin E acetate is safe to consume orally as a nutritional supplement, it is potentially dangerous when inhaled. As the Post explains, citing Bryn Mawr chemist Michelle Francl, “When that vapor cools down in the lungs, it returns to its original state at that temperature and pressure, she said, which means ‘it has now coated the inside of your lungs with that oil.'” That observation is consistent with reports from Utah of lipoid pneumonia, a rare condition caused by fat particles in the lungs, in patients who had vaped cannabis extracts.

“Vitamin E acetate is not an approved additive for New York State Medical Marijuana Program-authorized vape products and was not seen in the nicotine-based products that were tested,” the New York State Department of Health said in a press release issued yesterday. “As a result, vitamin E acetate is now a key focus of the Department’s investigation of potential causes of vaping-associated pulmonary illnesses. Vitamin E acetate is a commonly available nutritional supplement that is not known to cause harm when ingested as a vitamin supplement or applied to the skin. However, the Department continues to investigate its health effects when inhaled because its oil-like properties could be associated with the observed symptoms.”

Assuming that vitamin E acetate is the culprit in many of these cases, it is clearly not a complete explanation, since it was not detected in all of the fluids vaped by patients. The FDA and the CDC are still trying to figure out which other agents may be causing the respiratory illnesses.

In states that have reported what patients were vaping, Boston University public health professor Michael Siegel notes, the vast majority of cases have involved THC oil: all 21 cases in California, all eight cases in New Mexico, and 24 of 27 cases in Wisconsin. But despite the evidence implicating black-market THC products, public health officials are continuing to issue general warnings about “vaping” and “e-cigarettes,” implying that all such products are equally dangerous. “In their zeal to demonize e-cigarettes,” Siegel writes, “the CDC and other health agencies have put the lives of our nation’s youth at risk.”

The risk is twofold. First, without specific information about the potential hazards of black-market THC oil, people may continue to use those products. Second, people who have switched from combustible cigarettes to e-cigarettes may switch back, even though smoking is indisputably much more dangerous, while smokers who had been considering a switch to e-cigarettes may decide to continue smoking. Both of those choices increase the risk of respiratory illnesses, along with the litany of other diseases caused by smoking. You might think that government officials who claim to be promoting public health would recognize those hazards.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2HQOFyX
via IFTTT

Some discrimination against Jews is based on their religion, and is generally forbidden in employment and other contexts by federal and state laws banning religious discrimination. But many anti-Semites dislike Jews based on their ethnicity, a hostility that also covers irreligious Jews and Jewish converts to other religion.

American antidiscrimination laws generally don’t expressly ban discrimination based on ethnicity, but they do ban discrimination based on race and national origin. Judge Dee D. Drell’s decision in Bonadona v. Louisiana College (W.D. La. Aug. 28, 2019), illustrates how complicated this can end up being:

Joshua Bonadona was born to a Catholic father and Jewish mother. He was raised both culturally and religiously as a member of the Jewish community. His mother is both racially and religiously Jewish…. [While a student at Louisiana College, he] converted to Christianity.

Upon his graduation from LC in 2013, LC hired Bonadona as an assistant football coach. In June 2015, he resigned his position to pursue a graduate degree and football coaching position at Southeast Missouri State University.

In 2017, LC hired Justin Charles as its new head coach of the football team. Charles reached out to Bonadona about returning to LC as its defensive backs coach. Bonadona submitted an application wherein he identified himself as a Baptist, described his salvation experience, and acknowledged he understood and supported LC’s [Christian] mission statement.

Bonadona interviewed with Charles who advised that the coaching position was his, subject to approval by [LC President Rick] Brewer. Accordingly, Bonadona interviewed with Brewer. During the interview, Brewer asked Bonadona about his parents’ religious affiliations. Bonadona affirmed his father was Catholic and his mother was Jewish but expressed he was a practicing member of the Christian faith and attended a Baptist church in Missouri.

Based on representations made by Charles, Bonadona returned to Missouri and submitted his resignation. According to Bonadona, Charles contacted him a week later to advise that LC decided not to hire him because of his Jewish heritage [according to the complaint, Brewer referred to Bonadona’s “Jewish blood”].

The court allowed Bonadona’s claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (part of the Civil Rights Act of 1866) to move forward; that statute, banning race discrimination in enforcement of contracts, was held by the Court starting with the 1960s to apply to private discrimination as well as governmental discrimination. Because “race” in 1866 covered what we might today label ethnicity, and in particular was used to refer to the “Jewish race,” the Supreme Court had interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1866 as “defin[ing] race to include Jews,” see Shaare Tefila Congregation v. Cobb (1987).

But the court reject Bonadona’s claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, because:

Under the canons of statutory construction, words should be given the meaning they had when the text was adopted. This canon was adhered to by the Supreme Court in Shaare Tefila Congregation, when it noted that while Jews were a protected race in 1866, they are no longer thought of as members of a separate race.

What about national origin discrimination? The Bonadona court didn’t deal with it, because Bonadona hadn’t mentioned it his Complaint. But some other district courts conclude that being Jewish isn’t a national origin, either, because “[S]tating that one is Jewish gives no indication of that individual’s country of origin…. Jews, like Catholics and Protestants, hail from a variety of different countries.” On the other hand, some federal district court cases treat ethnicity-based discrimination against Jews as discrimination based on race or national origin. The Second Circuit has also said that “for purposes of Title VII, ‘race’ encompasses ethnicity, just as it does under § 1981”; that case involved discrimination based on Hispanic ethnicity, but its logic applies equally to Jewish ethnicity.

Of course, well-counseled plaintiffs would generally be able to prevail under § 1981 even if they can’t prevail under Title VII, as we see for Bonadona himself. But the legal controversy remains important; as the Second Circuit noted, “Although Title VII and § 1981 overlap in many respects, there are significant differences with respect to their statutes of limitations, employers’ respondeat superior liability, the cognizability of claims against individuals (as opposed to organizations), and whether a plaintiff must show that discrimination was intentional.” This is especially significant for lawsuits against local governments as employers, where § 1981 rules are more pro-defendant. The disagreement about how Title VII deals with such ethnic discrimination thus remains important.

Note also that LC might well be entitled not to hire non-Christians, because Title VII ban on religious discrimination exempts religious institutions. But there is no such statutory exemption for race or national origin discrimination. (There is a First Amendment exception for any sort of discrimination as to clergy and similar employees, but that wouldn’t cover football coaches.) And of course Bonadona’s claim is that he was discriminated against based on his ethnicity, not based on his current or past religion.

The Anti-Defamation League, by the way, has condemned characterizing discrimination against Jews as race discrimination, even when such characterizations might help fight anti-Semitic discrimination:

ADL is deeply offended by the perception of Jews as a race found in both allegations against the College and the plaintiff’s assertions in the lawsuit.  According to a court filing, the administration was motivated in its actions because of Mr. Bonadona’s “Jewish blood” and Mr. Bonadona is attempting to circumvent the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s religious employer exemption by characterizing his “Jewish heritage” as racial….

The idea that Jews are not only a religious group, but also a racial group, was a centerpiece of Nazi policy, and was the justification for killing any Jewish person who came under Nazi occupation—regardless of whether he or she practiced Judaism. In fact, even the children and the grandchildren of Jews who had converted to Christianity were murdered as members of the Jewish “race” during the Holocaust.

Based on Congress’ 19th Century conception of race, the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1980s ruled that the definition of “non-white races” found in post-Civil War anti-discrimination laws, includes Arabs, Chinese, Jews and Italians.  The 1964 Civil Rights Act, which explicitly covers national origin and religion, does not embody these antiquated views.  Although Mr. Bonadona’s attorney certainly could try to bring claims under these 19th century laws, we believe that attempting to create similar legal precedent under the Civil Rights Act perpetuates harmful stereotypes and views about Jews….

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2ZPsVxA
via IFTTT