Category: reason

Former Biden Senior COVID Adviser Admonishes Americans for Their Lack of ‘Sacrifice’ During the Pandemic


reason-slavitt

The Biden administration’s COVID-19 czar thinks Americans didn’t sacrifice enough during the pandemic. At the risk of being unpopular, former White House senior COVID-19 adviser Andy Slavitt knows who to blame for the 600,000 American lives lost during the pandemic: It’s you, the viewer.

Slavitt resigned from his position on the Biden administration’s pandemic policy team last week and has since been making the rounds to promote his book Preventable. A big part of his message is that had individuals done more to curb their own selfish desires for social interaction during the last 18 months, we would have seen far fewer COVID-19 deaths.

“I also think we all need to look at one another and ask ourselves, ‘what do we need to do better next time?'” said Slavitt during a Monday appearance on CBS This Morning. “Being able to sacrifice a little bit for one another to get through this and save more lives is essential.”

“Preventing the spread of the disease is really about a couple of simple things; not breathing near one another in large spaces. That’s really it if you want to be overly simple about it. That requires a bit of sacrifice and change,” he continued in a clip posted to Twitter by conservative journalist Tom Elliott.

His comments sparked some heated backlash from folks who pointed out that people did sacrifice a lot as part of that interminable two-week effort to “flatten the curve.”

Indeed, anyone who remembers the first few months of the pandemic should be keenly aware of how readily Americans heeded the advice of public health officials to stay in their homes. Whole industries shut down. Churches were closed. Traffic volumes were nearly cut in half, and public transit ridership fell over 90 percent in some cities. Weddings were postponed. Funerals were canceled.

Whatever the benefits in terms of lives saved by this extreme social distancing, it obviously wasn’t a viable long-term strategy for controlling the pandemic.

By focusing on the supposed selfishness of the American public, Slavitt skates over the numerous failures of government officials to embrace alternatives to societywide isolation and lockdowns as a means of preventing COVID-19 deaths.

The U.S. government’s initial messaging on masks dishonestly downplayed their effectiveness. Even when officials changed their tune, they were incredibly slow at approving new facilities needed to pump out high-quality N95 masks.

Likewise, federal regulators actively suppressed private efforts to create COVID-19 tests that might have made a test-and-trace strategy workable. It wasn’t until December 2020 that the Food and Drug Administration approved an over-the-counter at-home rapid COVID-19 test.

During the height of the pandemic last winter, when some 3,000 people were dying every day from the virus, regulators were still denying approval of vaccines that were already at work saving lives abroad.

Slavitt gives a nod to some of these problems in his remarks on CBS, saying that “we had a set of technical mistakes with the testing and the [personal protective equipment] that we know about.”

To prevent a resurgence of COVID-19 deaths this coming winter, however, his advice still hinges, in part, on telling people to just stay inside.

When we practice social distancing, “we reduce the amount of spread pretty dramatically,” says Slavitt. “If the variants come back in the fall, as they will, the people who are unvaccinated are going to have to pay serious attention to that and consider getting vaccinated.”

FREE MARKETS

California—the capital of COVID-19 restrictions—has fully and officially reopened. Starting today, all businesses statewide will be allowed to operate at 100 percent capacity, inside and out, for the first time since March 2020.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is also expected to sign an updated order later this week clarifying that employees who are vaccinated need not wear masks or socially distance in the workplace. Earlier guidance from state officials had said they could only go maskless if everyone around them was vaccinated as well.

Not everything is completely back to normal. People attending large events will have to show proof of vaccination. Newsom also has yet to rescind the emergency declaration he used to shut down the state in the first place.

FREE MINDS

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has said that the Department of Justice (DOJ) will tighten its rules for when it seizes lawmakers’ data, reports The New York Times. The announcement comes after the recent revelations that the DOJ, under the Trump administration, subpoenaed Apple for the records of several Democratic members of Congress as well as reporters for the Times, CNN, and The Washington Post. Former Trump White House Counsel Don McGahn’s Apple subscriber information was also subpoenaed.

People who haven’t been elected to Congress will have a wait a little longer for the DOJ to start respecting their privacy.

QUICK HITS

• People are going back to stores and restaurants, but not the office, reports The Wall Street Journal.

• Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R–Ga.) visits the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., where she apologizes for comparing mask mandates to that genocide.

• Some 7 million Americans are behind on their rent, according to the latest Household Pulse Survey released by the U.S. Census Bureau. That’s despite the $46 billion Congress has dedicated to rent relief.

• President Joe Biden and European Union officials have agreed to a five-year suspension of tariffs on select goods, including aircraft, wine, and cheese, reports NPR.

• Housing prices are at all-time highs. Will we see a repeat of 2008?

• Like stoner metal and The Simpsons? There’s a band for that.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3zCqXA3
via IFTTT

A Composer Condemned Arson. Now No One Will Hire Him.


463701_395403377141461_1143249768_o

Until last year, Daniel Elder—a 34-year-old musician who lives in Nashville, Tennessee—had a promising career ahead of him. The theme of the prize-winning composer’s work, truth through emotion, is evident across his catalogue of choral music, including his debut commercial album, The Heart’s Reflection.

Elder isn’t composing very much these days. And even if he were, no one in the industry is willing to buy his work. His publisher has blackballed him. Local choral directors refuse to program his music for fear of provoking a backlash. They won’t even let him sing in the choir.

“My artistic wellspring is capped,” says Elder. “I think it will come back, but things have remained in quite a rough place after all this happened.”

What happened? Elder made a short statement on Instagram that went viral during the George Floyd protests in the summer of 2020.

The young composer is hardly the first person to suffer significant professional consequences after causing a social media firestorm: Virtually every day brings more examples of people saying slightly offensive things that stoke the fury of some mob. The problem is now so exhaustively covered in the media that “cancel culture” has become a top issue for many Republican voters, even though conservatives engage in cancelation as well.

But even among those cancel-culture excesses, Elder’s supposed transgression stands out as particularly absurd. Though he was tarred and feathered as a racist contrarian, the Instagram post that caused all the trouble was neither racist nor contrarian. An overwhelming majority of people likely agree with the sentiment behind it, which was basically this: Arson is bad.

Elder always considered himself a man of the center-left. He was not particularly political or outspoken, but he supported liberal causes, including police reform and opposition to racism. The fact that he was on the same side as the progressive activists “made this sort of a strange betrayal,” he says.

Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police on May 25, 2020, caused widespread protests across the country. On May 30, around 1,000 peaceful protesters marched down the streets of Nashville as part of an “I Will Breathe” rally. But not everyone on the streets was peaceful: A group of activists joined the protest as it was drawing to a close and started smashing windows and spraying graffiti on the sides of buildings. They threw rocks at police cars, and eventually someone set the city’s historic courthouse on fire.

“The courthouse windows were smashed, its walls were spray painted with graffiti and fires were started inside the building, damaging a portion of the mayor’s office,” noted the Nashville Tennessean. “A plaque commemorating the civil rights movement in Nashville was destroyed.”

The destruction spooked Elder, who lived nearby and was thus under a city-wide curfew. He also found himself increasingly unnerved by the large number of emotional social media posts coming across his feeds that seemed to justify radicalism and groupthink.

“I saw a mob mentality around my own friends, and I worried that was what was happening on the outside, too,” says Elder.

Dismayed, disenchanted, and unable to sleep, Elder decided to deleted his Instagram account. He penned one last farewell message, which was cross-posted to his Twitter and professional Facebook page: “Enjoy burning it all down, you well-intentioned, blind people. I’m done.”

The post was unambiguous: Elder was criticizing the activists who had set the courthouse on fire. He did not malign their cause or their ethnicity (and in fact, the perpetrator was white). He did not attack the Black Lives Matter movement or criminal justice reform. He implied that the militants had good motives (“well-intentioned”) but were oblivious (“blind”) when it came to the self-defeating nature of their tactics.

These sentiments are not racist; in fact, they are correct. Social science research and voter surveys show that violent and destructive protests tend to backfire, eroding support for the cause in question. While a small number of far-left agitators support these tactics, the overwhelming majority of people oppose looting, riots, and arson. That is especially true of those who live in communities of color.

One might not have expected Elder’s mild declaration to attract much attention. But when he woke up the next morning, critics were spamming his Facebook and YouTube pages with comments accusing him of being a racist and a “white supremacist piece of garbage.” He began to receive nasty emails as well. Some were anonymously authored, expletive-laden, and ugly from start to finish. Others confessed a previous appreciation for Elder’s music but noted that they could never listen to him again.

“I’ve relatively recently become aware of your work and have enjoyed your compositions for their sensitivity and artistry,” wrote one former fan. “However, after learning of your insensitive comments on social media, however perceived as misunderstood, I’ve decided to unsubscribe from your [YouTube] channel and will no longer recommend your compositions to colleagues.”

“It’s really a shame,” wrote another. “Such beautiful music and I feel like I can’t do any of it now.”

“I am a choir director and department head for the music department for a private school in Ohio,” declared another. “I want to inform you that your rhetoric surrounding the recent protests is unacceptable and my school will not be programming your music unless and until a public apology is issued.”

Many former appreciators of Elder’s music expressed regret that it had come to this. One recommended that he read Robin diAngelo’s White Fragility. Another expressed “hope that you find a way to lose that hate in your heart.”

Again, Elder’s “hateful” rhetoric was a two-sentence objection to the fire at the courthouse. He had not condemned the broader movement at all. Yet the messages did not cease.

“Do some research and maybe some inner reflection and maybe figure out where your racist tendencies are coming from,” wrote another critic. “You are canceled. Black lives matter!”

Within 24 hours, the controversy had garnered the attention of GIA Publications. In the world of choral music, GIA is not merely a publisher; it is the major publisher of religious content, thanks to its association with the post–Vatican II Roman Catholic Church. GIA was Elder’s publisher, and an important source of his income. On the morning of June 1, GIA President Alec Harris and media editor Susan LaBarr contacted Elder about posting an apology.

This apology had already been written by GIA; all Elder had to do was post it. The remarks prepared on his behalf are as follows, and worth reading in full:

“Over the weekend I made a post on my social media accounts that was insensitive and wrongly-worded. I deeply apologize for the anger, offense, and harm that this post caused. While this offense was not intended, it is what was created. For this I am truly sorry.

“There is no justification that I can offer for my post. So, rather than try to offer an excuse for what was done, I offer a promise for what I will do going forward. I commit to making amends and to dialogue. I commit to continue educating myself about privilege and bias. I commit to continue seeking an understanding of the experience of others, especially the Black community. I know that working for justice requires that we each first act justly. My work begins now.”

LaBarr added that while “we know that you write music that promotes social justice,” this was not clear to people who had read the Instagram post.

“We’re feeling time pressure on this as some people are calling for boycotts,” added LaBarr. “It’s all very heavy.”

Elder wasn’t inclined to make such a groveling apology, and was dismayed to see his colleagues siding with his critics.

“I chose to be that guy who didn’t issue the apology,” he says. “Things went from there and it wasn’t good.”

Within hours, GIA issued a denunciation of Elder.

“The views expressed in composer Daniel Elder’s incendiary social media post on Sunday evening do not reflect the values of GIA or our employees,” it read. “GIA opposes racism in all its forms and is committed to do what Michelle Obama called ‘the honest, uncomfortable work of rooting it out.'”

Note this PR statement endorses the view that Elder had made an “incendiary” statement. Neither Harris nor LaBarr responded to a request for clarification as to which aspect of Elder’s anti-arson agenda they oppose.

GIA also announced that the company would no longer publish Elder.

“We are grateful to those who brought this to our attention and to all who continue to hold individuals and organizations to account,” the statement concluded.

GIA made this announcement on Facebook. Virtually all the comments were supportive, though one person asked why the company had not scrubbed all referenced to Elder on its website. (“What’s the plan?” asked this individual. “Keep supporting a bigot?”)

For Elder, the consequences were far-reaching. The coronavirus pandemic had already upended his business: In the era of COVID-19, few activities had become as verboten as choir singing. Without the support of a publisher and professional network, Elder’s work was impossible. Moreover, local choral directors refuse to do business with him because of the controversy. They are afraid to associate with him, or to be seen as defending him in any way.

“It’s a bad look for them,” says Elder. “It’s really quite extreme, the effect this has had.”

The toll on Elder’s mental well-being has been equally catastrophic: losing countless friends, colleagues, and fans is no small matter for an artist. He has seen a therapist and a psychiatrist, and he says he has needed to be “talked off the ledge” several times. Needless to say, he has struggled to compose new music since everything fell apart.

Over the past year, the saliency of the term cancel culture has risen dramatically. Partisans have appropriated the term; every time a political figure comes under attack, his or her allies whine about cancelation. This is true for both major parties. Republicans complain that legitimate criticisms of former President Donald Trump and QAnon-curious Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R–Ga.) are attempted cancelations; New York’s embattled Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said the same about his own situation. None of those people were fit for office, and wanting them to face political consequences is democratic accountability, not cancel culture.

This partisan corruption of the term is a shame, because the phenomenon is real. What happened to Elder has happened to countless others. And as with so many of those others, Elder’s story doesn’t have a happy ending. He has survived his ordeal only in the most literal sense: His career is in shambles, and recovering will be extremely difficult. Social media has a long memory.

Nevertheless, the experience has positively impacted Elder in one way, he tells me: It has made him less ideologically narrow-minded.

“Because I was exiled, I started listening to voices on the right and the center, especially these classical liberals who have been exiled from the leftist movement,” he says. “The strange silver lining is this shook me out of my prejudices a little bit.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3gpAR08
via IFTTT

A Composer Condemned Arson. Now No One Will Hire Him.


463701_395403377141461_1143249768_o

Until last year, Daniel Elder—a 34-year-old musician who lives in Nashville, Tennessee—had a promising career ahead of him. The theme of the prize-winning composer’s work, truth through emotion, is evident across his catalogue of choral music, including his debut commercial album, The Heart’s Reflection.

Elder isn’t composing very much these days. And even if he were, no one in the industry is willing to buy his work. His publisher has blackballed him. Local choral directors refuse to program his music for fear of provoking a backlash. They won’t even let him sing in the choir.

“My artistic wellspring is capped,” says Elder. “I think it will come back, but things have remained in quite a rough place after all this happened.”

What happened? Elder made a short statement on Instagram that went viral during the George Floyd protests in the summer of 2020.

The young composer is hardly the first person to suffer significant professional consequences after causing a social media firestorm: Virtually every day brings more examples of people saying slightly offensive things that stoke the fury of some mob. The problem is now so exhaustively covered in the media that “cancel culture” has become a top issue for many Republican voters, even though conservatives engage in cancelation as well.

But even among those cancel-culture excesses, Elder’s supposed transgression stands out as particularly absurd. Though he was tarred and feathered as a racist contrarian, the Instagram post that caused all the trouble was neither racist nor contrarian. An overwhelming majority of people likely agree with the sentiment behind it, which was basically this: Arson is bad.

Elder always considered himself a man of the center-left. He was not particularly political or outspoken, but he supported liberal causes, including police reform and opposition to racism. The fact that he was on the same side as the progressive activists “made this sort of a strange betrayal,” he says.

Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police on May 25, 2020, caused widespread protests across the country. On May 30, around 1,000 peaceful protesters marched down the streets of Nashville as part of an “I Will Breathe” rally. But not everyone on the streets was peaceful: A group of activists joined the protest as it was drawing to a close and started smashing windows and spraying graffiti on the sides of buildings. They threw rocks at police cars, and eventually someone set the city’s historic courthouse on fire.

“The courthouse windows were smashed, its walls were spray painted with graffiti and fires were started inside the building, damaging a portion of the mayor’s office,” noted the Nashville Tennessean. “A plaque commemorating the civil rights movement in Nashville was destroyed.”

The destruction spooked Elder, who lived nearby and was thus under a city-wide curfew. He also found himself increasingly unnerved by the large number of emotional social media posts coming across his feeds that seemed to justify radicalism and groupthink.

“I saw a mob mentality around my own friends, and I worried that was what was happening on the outside, too,” says Elder.

Dismayed, disenchanted, and unable to sleep, Elder decided to deleted his Instagram account. He penned one last farewell message, which was cross-posted to his Twitter and professional Facebook page: “Enjoy burning it all down, you well-intentioned, blind people. I’m done.”

The post was unambiguous: Elder was criticizing the activists who had set the courthouse on fire. He did not malign their cause or their ethnicity (and in fact, the perpetrator was white). He did not attack the Black Lives Matter movement or criminal justice reform. He implied that the militants had good motives (“well-intentioned”) but were oblivious (“blind”) when it came to the self-defeating nature of their tactics.

These sentiments are not racist; in fact, they are correct. Social science research and voter surveys show that violent and destructive protests tend to backfire, eroding support for the cause in question. While a small number of far-left agitators support these tactics, the overwhelming majority of people oppose looting, riots, and arson. That is especially true of those who live in communities of color.

One might not have expected Elder’s mild declaration to attract much attention. But when he woke up the next morning, critics were spamming his Facebook and YouTube pages with comments accusing him of being a racist and a “white supremacist piece of garbage.” He began to receive nasty emails as well. Some were anonymously authored, expletive-laden, and ugly from start to finish. Others confessed a previous appreciation for Elder’s music but noted that they could never listen to him again.

“I’ve relatively recently become aware of your work and have enjoyed your compositions for their sensitivity and artistry,” wrote one former fan. “However, after learning of your insensitive comments on social media, however perceived as misunderstood, I’ve decided to unsubscribe from your [YouTube] channel and will no longer recommend your compositions to colleagues.”

“It’s really a shame,” wrote another. “Such beautiful music and I feel like I can’t do any of it now.”

“I am a choir director and department head for the music department for a private school in Ohio,” declared another. “I want to inform you that your rhetoric surrounding the recent protests is unacceptable and my school will not be programming your music unless and until a public apology is issued.”

Many former appreciators of Elder’s music expressed regret that it had come to this. One recommended that he read Robin diAngelo’s White Fragility. Another expressed “hope that you find a way to lose that hate in your heart.”

Again, Elder’s “hateful” rhetoric was a two-sentence objection to the fire at the courthouse. He had not condemned the broader movement at all. Yet the messages did not cease.

“Do some research and maybe some inner reflection and maybe figure out where your racist tendencies are coming from,” wrote another critic. “You are canceled. Black lives matter!”

Within 24 hours, the controversy had garnered the attention of GIA Publications. In the world of choral music, GIA is not merely a publisher; it is the major publisher of religious content, thanks to its association with the post–Vatican II Roman Catholic Church. GIA was Elder’s publisher, and an important source of his income. On the morning of June 1, GIA President Alec Harris and media editor Susan LaBarr contacted Elder about posting an apology.

This apology had already been written by GIA; all Elder had to do was post it. The remarks prepared on his behalf are as follows, and worth reading in full:

“Over the weekend I made a post on my social media accounts that was insensitive and wrongly-worded. I deeply apologize for the anger, offense, and harm that this post caused. While this offense was not intended, it is what was created. For this I am truly sorry.

“There is no justification that I can offer for my post. So, rather than try to offer an excuse for what was done, I offer a promise for what I will do going forward. I commit to making amends and to dialogue. I commit to continue educating myself about privilege and bias. I commit to continue seeking an understanding of the experience of others, especially the Black community. I know that working for justice requires that we each first act justly. My work begins now.”

LaBarr added that while “we know that you write music that promotes social justice,” this was not clear to people who had read the Instagram post.

“We’re feeling time pressure on this as some people are calling for boycotts,” added LaBarr. “It’s all very heavy.”

Elder wasn’t inclined to make such a groveling apology, and was dismayed to see his colleagues siding with his critics.

“I chose to be that guy who didn’t issue the apology,” he says. “Things went from there and it wasn’t good.”

Within hours, GIA issued a denunciation of Elder.

“The views expressed in composer Daniel Elder’s incendiary social media post on Sunday evening do not reflect the values of GIA or our employees,” it read. “GIA opposes racism in all its forms and is committed to do what Michelle Obama called ‘the honest, uncomfortable work of rooting it out.'”

Note this PR statement endorses the view that Elder had made an “incendiary” statement. Neither Harris nor LaBarr responded to a request for clarification as to which aspect of Elder’s anti-arson agenda they oppose.

GIA also announced that the company would no longer publish Elder.

“We are grateful to those who brought this to our attention and to all who continue to hold individuals and organizations to account,” the statement concluded.

GIA made this announcement on Facebook. Virtually all the comments were supportive, though one person asked why the company had not scrubbed all referenced to Elder on its website. (“What’s the plan?” asked this individual. “Keep supporting a bigot?”)

For Elder, the consequences were far-reaching. The coronavirus pandemic had already upended his business: In the era of COVID-19, few activities had become as verboten as choir singing. Without the support of a publisher and professional network, Elder’s work was impossible. Moreover, local choral directors refuse to do business with him because of the controversy. They are afraid to associate with him, or to be seen as defending him in any way.

“It’s a bad look for them,” says Elder. “It’s really quite extreme, the effect this has had.”

The toll on Elder’s mental well-being has been equally catastrophic: losing countless friends, colleagues, and fans is no small matter for an artist. He has seen a therapist and a psychiatrist, and he says he has needed to be “talked off the ledge” several times. Needless to say, he has struggled to compose new music since everything fell apart.

Over the past year, the saliency of the term cancel culture has risen dramatically. Partisans have appropriated the term; every time a political figure comes under attack, his or her allies whine about cancelation. This is true for both major parties. Republicans complain that legitimate criticisms of former President Donald Trump and QAnon-curious Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R–Ga.) are attempted cancelations; New York’s embattled Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said the same about his own situation. None of those people were fit for office, and wanting them to face political consequences is democratic accountability, not cancel culture.

This partisan corruption of the term is a shame, because the phenomenon is real. What happened to Elder has happened to countless others. And as with so many of those others, Elder’s story doesn’t have a happy ending. He has survived his ordeal only in the most literal sense: His career is in shambles, and recovering will be extremely difficult. Social media has a long memory.

Nevertheless, the experience has positively impacted Elder in one way, he tells me: It has made him less ideologically narrow-minded.

“Because I was exiled, I started listening to voices on the right and the center, especially these classical liberals who have been exiled from the leftist movement,” he says. “The strange silver lining is this shook me out of my prejudices a little bit.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3gpAR08
via IFTTT

State Legislators Want to Nullify Federal Gun Control


topicsguns

As President Joe Biden takes executive action to strengthen federal gun laws, state legislators across the country are working to weaken their enforcement by emulating immigration activists.

Since 1987, Oregon has prohibited law enforcement agencies from arresting or detaining people whose only crime was entering or living in the U.S. illegally. Hundreds of other jurisdictions have followed suit, becoming so-called sanctuary cities.

“The methods that we need to use are the ones already being used by the left,” says Anthony Sabatini, a Republican member of the Florida House of Representatives. “Nullifying unconstitutional federal laws is both legal and the right thing to do.”

Sabatini is co-sponsoring a Florida bill that would bar state employees from enforcing or attempting to enforce any of several listed federal gun controls, including taxes, registrations, bans, and more. State employees who violate that prohibition would be permanently barred from working for Florida’s government.

In April, Republican governors in Arizona, West Virginia, and Montana signed similar bills into law, while Arkansas’ governor, also a Republican, vetoed a bill. Such measures have passed in the Alabama Senate, the Missouri House, and the South Carolina House as well as legislative committees in Texas, New Hampshire, and Louisiana. Bills also have been introduced in North Carolina, Georgia, Minnesota, Ohio, Nebraska, and Iowa.

Many states already defy federal law, through both immigration sanctuaries and marijuana legalization. “In terms of the method, it’s identical,” says Sabatini. Sanctuary cities have “stopped reporting to or dealing with [Immigration and Customs Enforcement], and that’s basically what we’re doing.”

The legal case does not depend on the constitutionality of the law a state wants to nullify in this way. Under the anti-commandeering doctrine, a principle that has been upheld in five Supreme Court cases from 1842 to 2018, the federal government can’t require state or local officials to participate in the enforcement of federal laws.

“We know this stuff has been working,” says Michael Boldin, founder and executive director of the Tenth Amendment Center. “The right can continue to complain about the things that the left is successful at, or they can look at it, learn from it, and replicate it.”

The right has been wary of embracing nullification, however. In March 2018, when the Trump administration was battling sanctuary cities, soon-to-be National Security Advisor John Bolton challenged the concept in an interview with Breitbart. “The idea that law enforcement at lower levels shouldn’t be required to cooperate with the feds is just unthinkable,” he said. “That was also proposed by South Carolina Sen. John C. Calhoun before the Civil War, to say that South Carolina and other slave states would not enforce federal law regarding slavery.”

Boldin says that argument is ahistorical. The anti-commandeering doctrine originated in the 1842 Supreme Court case Prigg v. Pennsylvania, which upheld the Keystone State’s right not to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. “The bottom line is nullification (banning participation in federal enforcement) was actually a tool of the anti-slavery, abolitionist North,” Boldin says. “And when South Carolina seceded…they issued a document to explain their rationale, specifically [citing] Northern nullification of the federal Fugitive Slave Act.”

The most effective opponents of gun nullification bills have been law enforcement groups such as the sheriffs associations in Missouri and Arkansas, which have tried to render them toothless. Boldin thinks police departments want to continue enforcing federal law because it’s lucrative, bringing in money from federal grants and civil asset forfeiture. “I don’t think they’ll admit that they’re getting a bunch of loot to do this federal enforcement,” he says, “but they certainly are.”

The most effective way to oppose federal overreach is at the local level, Boldin argues. “The whole idea of federalism is so important, because it’s the only way you can have a country with a few hundred million people with a wide range of social, economic, [and] political viewpoints living together in peace.”

Nullification also can flow back upward. Now that 36 states have nullified federal marijuana prohibition by allowing medical or recreational use, Boldin argues, the federal government will soon have to follow suit. “I think we can replicate that on other issues,” he says, “and learn that localism is really the way forward for liberty.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3zqmY9n
via IFTTT

State Legislators Want to Nullify Federal Gun Control


topicsguns

As President Joe Biden takes executive action to strengthen federal gun laws, state legislators across the country are working to weaken their enforcement by emulating immigration activists.

Since 1987, Oregon has prohibited law enforcement agencies from arresting or detaining people whose only crime was entering or living in the U.S. illegally. Hundreds of other jurisdictions have followed suit, becoming so-called sanctuary cities.

“The methods that we need to use are the ones already being used by the left,” says Anthony Sabatini, a Republican member of the Florida House of Representatives. “Nullifying unconstitutional federal laws is both legal and the right thing to do.”

Sabatini is co-sponsoring a Florida bill that would bar state employees from enforcing or attempting to enforce any of several listed federal gun controls, including taxes, registrations, bans, and more. State employees who violate that prohibition would be permanently barred from working for Florida’s government.

In April, Republican governors in Arizona, West Virginia, and Montana signed similar bills into law, while Arkansas’ governor, also a Republican, vetoed a bill. Such measures have passed in the Alabama Senate, the Missouri House, and the South Carolina House as well as legislative committees in Texas, New Hampshire, and Louisiana. Bills also have been introduced in North Carolina, Georgia, Minnesota, Ohio, Nebraska, and Iowa.

Many states already defy federal law, through both immigration sanctuaries and marijuana legalization. “In terms of the method, it’s identical,” says Sabatini. Sanctuary cities have “stopped reporting to or dealing with [Immigration and Customs Enforcement], and that’s basically what we’re doing.”

The legal case does not depend on the constitutionality of the law a state wants to nullify in this way. Under the anti-commandeering doctrine, a principle that has been upheld in five Supreme Court cases from 1842 to 2018, the federal government can’t require state or local officials to participate in the enforcement of federal laws.

“We know this stuff has been working,” says Michael Boldin, founder and executive director of the Tenth Amendment Center. “The right can continue to complain about the things that the left is successful at, or they can look at it, learn from it, and replicate it.”

The right has been wary of embracing nullification, however. In March 2018, when the Trump administration was battling sanctuary cities, soon-to-be National Security Advisor John Bolton challenged the concept in an interview with Breitbart. “The idea that law enforcement at lower levels shouldn’t be required to cooperate with the feds is just unthinkable,” he said. “That was also proposed by South Carolina Sen. John C. Calhoun before the Civil War, to say that South Carolina and other slave states would not enforce federal law regarding slavery.”

Boldin says that argument is ahistorical. The anti-commandeering doctrine originated in the 1842 Supreme Court case Prigg v. Pennsylvania, which upheld the Keystone State’s right not to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. “The bottom line is nullification (banning participation in federal enforcement) was actually a tool of the anti-slavery, abolitionist North,” Boldin says. “And when South Carolina seceded…they issued a document to explain their rationale, specifically [citing] Northern nullification of the federal Fugitive Slave Act.”

The most effective opponents of gun nullification bills have been law enforcement groups such as the sheriffs associations in Missouri and Arkansas, which have tried to render them toothless. Boldin thinks police departments want to continue enforcing federal law because it’s lucrative, bringing in money from federal grants and civil asset forfeiture. “I don’t think they’ll admit that they’re getting a bunch of loot to do this federal enforcement,” he says, “but they certainly are.”

The most effective way to oppose federal overreach is at the local level, Boldin argues. “The whole idea of federalism is so important, because it’s the only way you can have a country with a few hundred million people with a wide range of social, economic, [and] political viewpoints living together in peace.”

Nullification also can flow back upward. Now that 36 states have nullified federal marijuana prohibition by allowing medical or recreational use, Boldin argues, the federal government will soon have to follow suit. “I think we can replicate that on other issues,” he says, “and learn that localism is really the way forward for liberty.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3zqmY9n
via IFTTT

Brickbat: Every Picture Tells a Story


copwphone_1161x653

Former Minnesota State Patrol trooper Albert Kuehne has pleaded guilty to non-consensual dissemination of private sexual images. Kuehne went through the phone of a woman he had stopped for DUI and sent himself three sexually explicit images he found on it. He then deleted the messages from her phone. But the woman’s boyfriend found them on a linked device. Kuehne faces up to three years in prison. He has been fired from the State Patrol and has also lost his law enforcement certification.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3vtA4PY
via IFTTT

Brickbat: Every Picture Tells a Story


copwphone_1161x653

Former Minnesota State Patrol trooper Albert Kuehne has pleaded guilty to non-consensual dissemination of private sexual images. Kuehne went through the phone of a woman he had stopped for DUI and sent himself three sexually explicit images he found on it. He then deleted the messages from her phone. But the woman’s boyfriend found them on a linked device. Kuehne faces up to three years in prison. He has been fired from the State Patrol and has also lost his law enforcement certification.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3vtA4PY
via IFTTT

Financial Privacy May Be Spiraling


Etienne-Girardet-on-Unsplash-2

Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, and Nick Gillespie are all about the IRS budget increases, taxes, and surveillance you’ve been hearing about—all about getting rid of them, that is. Tune in for their takes on the latest headlines on this week’s Reason Roundtable.

Discussed in the show:

2:22: The Biden administration, Elizabeth Warren, and Janet Yellen want to increase the IRS budget. Here’s why they want to, and why they shouldn’t.

13:22: The mechanisms of tax compliance.

31:08: Gag orders and third-party snooping.

43:10: Weekly Listener Question: I’m a freelance writer who can do my work anywhere, and I’m planning on moving in the next year. What’s the most libertarian U.S. state?

48:55: Media recommendations for the week.

This weeks links:

Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today’s sponsors:

  • Stop using a fund that creates barriers to investing in the causes and freedoms you care about. DonorsTrust is the national donor-advised fund that shares and honors your values. DonorsTrust can help you roll over a preexisting account in three simple steps or help you get started with a new donor-advised account. See how with your free Donor Prospectus. Go to donorstrust.org/REASON.
  • If you feel something interfering with your happiness or holding you back from your goals, BetterHelp is an accessible and affordable source for professional counseling. BetterHelp assesses your needs and matches you with a licensed therapist you can start talking to in under 24 hours, all online.

Audio production by Ian Keyser.
Assistant production by Regan Taylor.
Music: “Angeline,” by The Brothers Steve.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3zrsQzi
via IFTTT

Financial Privacy May Be Spiraling


Etienne-Girardet-on-Unsplash-2

Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, and Nick Gillespie are all about the IRS budget increases, taxes, and surveillance you’ve been hearing about—all about getting rid of them, that is. Tune in for their takes on the latest headlines on this week’s Reason Roundtable.

Discussed in the show:

2:22: The Biden administration, Elizabeth Warren, and Janet Yellen want to increase the IRS budget. Here’s why they want to, and why they shouldn’t.

13:22: The mechanisms of tax compliance.

31:08: Gag orders and third-party snooping.

43:10: Weekly Listener Question: I’m a freelance writer who can do my work anywhere, and I’m planning on moving in the next year. What’s the most libertarian U.S. state?

48:55: Media recommendations for the week.

This weeks links:

Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today’s sponsors:

  • Stop using a fund that creates barriers to investing in the causes and freedoms you care about. DonorsTrust is the national donor-advised fund that shares and honors your values. DonorsTrust can help you roll over a preexisting account in three simple steps or help you get started with a new donor-advised account. See how with your free Donor Prospectus. Go to donorstrust.org/REASON.
  • If you feel something interfering with your happiness or holding you back from your goals, BetterHelp is an accessible and affordable source for professional counseling. BetterHelp assesses your needs and matches you with a licensed therapist you can start talking to in under 24 hours, all online.

Audio production by Ian Keyser.
Assistant production by Regan Taylor.
Music: “Angeline,” by The Brothers Steve.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3zrsQzi
via IFTTT

Michigan Cops Raided a Home, Damaged the House, and Held a Family at Gunpoint. It Was the Wrong Address.


8119760

Michigan State Police (MSP) and a local SWAT team executed a raid on a home in Flint, Michigan, in April, battering down the door and holding the family at gunpoint while they went through their things.

A confidential informant gave them the address—for the wrong house.

This month, attorneys for Renee Dunigan, 56, Michelle Colston, 28, and Colston’s three minor children requested a federal civil rights investigation into the raid that saw scores of officers forcibly enter their home apparently without the proper vetting.

The cops “smashed in their front door without any notice while effectuating a ‘no-knock’ warrant,” reads a letter from William H. Goodman, Julie H. Hurwitz, and Teresa Bingman, the family’s lawyers, addressed to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Pamela Karlan. “They rousted the family at gunpoint, literally from shower, sleep, and bed, and forced them to sit together for one hour—in Michelle’s case unclothed, having just stepped out of the shower—while approximately 50 officers tore the house apart.” The offices of Goodman Hurwitz & James P.C. did not respond to request for comment.

Police set the raid in motion after speaking with their source, who told them that a car parked in the Dunigan-Colston driveway belonged to the family. That same driveway was shared with a neighbor, though law enforcement didn’t verify who actually owned the vehicle before seeking the warrant and executing the raid.

“It appears the police did no pre-raid investigation regarding the Dunigan/Colston home prior to smashing in their front door and never even bothered to confirm the name and registration for the car in question,” notes the letter. “The family has also learned that the [informant] provided this information to protect the neighboring house.”

“They’re clearly still having nightmares, still having problems sleeping, still struggling with seeing police,” Aaron Dunigan, Renee’s son, told the local NBC affiliate. “My three year old nephew sees police and asks, ‘are they going to our house?” he said.

The Michigan family joins an unfortunately long list of people who have been victimized by wrong-door, no-knock raids, where police employed the high-stakes tactic without ensuring basic details were in order, like correct names and addresses.

In 2019, a wrong-door raid on a Chicago woman’s home—who was handcuffed, naked—sparked nearly 100 misconduct allegations in one evening. (It was based on a so-called John Doe warrant, an authorization grounded in confidential, anonymous sources.) Over the last few years, 10 similar lawsuits have been filed in Chicago alone. A few choice examples: Also in 2019, police bust into an innocent family’s house on a John Doe warrant and handcuffed an 8-year-old; during another instance, 17 cops targeted the wrong residence and interrupted a 4-year-old’s birthday get-together with guns drawn.

Consider too the case of Onree Norris, who was sitting in his Georgia home when more than two dozen cops set off flash-bang grenades and barged into his house when they meant to raid the place next door. They originally had the correct address, but diverted to Norris’ home when they showed up on the scene and thought the target residence looked different than expected. Without delay, they turned their attention next door. They had it right the first time.

Most fraught is that all of the officers in that case were awarded qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that bars victims of government malfeasance from bringing lawsuits against state actors if the way in which their constitutional rights were violated hasn’t been meticulously outlined somewhere in a prior court precedent.

Two cops who allegedly stole $225,000 while executing a search warrant, for example, were protected by qualified immunity, because no court ruling said that theft under such circumstances is unconstitutional. So, too, were the four cops who beat a man during a routine traffic stop, the two cops who assaulted and filed bogus charges against a man for standing outside of his own house, and the cop who debased a man’s car during a drug search that he initiated with fabricated information.

Put differently, a federal court told Norris last month that he will not be able to sue the cops who threw explosives in his house prior to doing the most basic homework.

Aaron Dunigan says his family wants compensation. Understandably. Yet should they decide to seek it, it’s not unlikely that they’ll meet the same fate as Norris.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3vy9yFr
via IFTTT