Correction officers union head Boscio slams city's bid to appoint DOC Commissioner Maginley-Liddie as NYC jails receiver
Correction officers union chief Benny Boscio has slammed the city's attempt to convince a federal judge to appoint DOC Commissioner Lynelle Maginley-Liddie as receiver over New York jails.
In a statement to members, Boscio called Maginley-Liddie a 'wolf in sheep's clothing' for 'constantly bending to the will of the [federal] monitor time and time again.'
Boscio, president of the Correction Officers Benevolent Association, wrote it is 'disingenuous' for Magnley-Liddie to claim to part of the 'Boldest' family while asking the court to give her power to change the union contract.
'The commissioner is pushing policies that will diminish our rights as union members rather than defend them, at a time when our members need the support of their commissioner and their agency the most,' Boscio writes.
The Correction Department press office did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
The letter was sparked by a flurry of court filings late Friday evening, in which lawyers representing the Justice Department and the interests of people held in the jails laid out their proposal for a receiver — a court-appointed official who would be granted broad powers to run the beleaguered jail system.
The city, meanwhile, proposed Maginley-Liddie act as both commissioner and 'compliance director,' or the city's version of a receiver. With those roles, the city proposed, she would serve both the mayor and the court over a five-year tenure, the filing said.
The filings came in Nunez v. the City of New York, a class action lawsuit on violence and staff use of excessive force in the jails filed in 2011. Four years later, it led to the appointment of the federal monitor empowered to closely track problems in the jails and offer recommendations to fix them.
Nearly a decade later, the plaintiffs argue, the jails remain so dangerous that control needs to be taken from the city's hands. Last fall, Judge Laura Taylor Swain found the city in contempt of a range of court orders and directed the parties to file proposals for an independent receiver.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs say the receiver should be an 'outside person' with the power to change DOC policies, run the disciplinary system, renegotiate union contracts, hire and fire staff and redeploy officers as necessary, the filing states.
The city's filing calls for similar powers and claims giving Maginley-Liddie the dual post is the 'most narrowly tailored, speedy and effective means' of fixing the jails. The Daily News first reported on Dec. 11 the city was backing Maginley-Liddie for the post.
But the plaintiffs immediately dismissed the proposal as 'convoluted and confusing.' 'The current Commissioner is obviously not an 'outside person,'' they wrote.
'She has held top DOC leadership positions during a period when the jails became more violent and unsafe, DOC violated core provisions of the Nuñez orders, and DOC failed to 'demonstrate' diligent attempts to comply with the Contempt Provisions in a reasonable manner.''
Overall, they wrote, the city's proposal 'does little more than preserve the status quo when … the Department of Correction is in need of transformational change.'
Meanwhile, last week, the city held a mandated hearing on the contract for the new borough jail for Manhattan to replace The Tombs, which is being demolished as part of the Close Rikers plan.
Under the timeline of the contract, the new Manhattan jail would be completed by 2032, the advocacy group Freedom Agenda said based on a review of the contract documents. The completion date is five years after the legally mandated closure of Rikers Island in 2027.
'Mayor Adams says he will always follow the law, but is clearly making no effort to do that,' said Freedom Agenda co-director Darren Mack. 'With a blueprint already in place for the borough jail designs, there is no conceivable reason that the Manhattan jail should be completed five years after the legal deadline.'
A spokesman for the city Department of Design and Construction, which is overseeing the project, did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Braun says Indiana is out of execution drugs, signals willingness to debate capital punishment
Gov. Mike Braun speaks to reporters at the Indiana Statehouse on Tuesday, June 3, 2025. (Casey Smith/Indiana Capital Chronicle) Indiana has exhausted its supply of lethal injection drugs after carrying out two executions in the past six months — and Gov. Mike Braun said Tuesday he doesn't plan to buy more, at least for now. The governor's remarks followed the state's December execution of Joseph Corcoran — Indiana's first since 2009 — and last month's execution of Benjamin Ritchie. Recent reporting by the Indiana Capital Chronicle revealed the state spent $900,000 last year to obtain pentobarbital to carry out executions, but officials wouldn't say how much was purchased and refused to provide information on expiration dates, storage or other details. Braun said the high cost and short shelf life of the drug should prompt new discussions on how the state approaches capital punishment moving forward. ... I'm not going to be for putting it on the shelf and then letting them expire. – Indiana Gov. Mike Braun 'We've got to address the broad issue of, what are other methods, the discussion of capital punishment in general, and then something that costs, I think, $300,000 a pop that has a 90-day shelf life — I'm not going to be for putting it on the shelf and then letting them expire,' the governor told reporters at the Indiana Statehouse. Braun, a Republican in his first year as governor, said the question of whether Indiana should continue to carry out executions at all is one that lawmakers should weigh in the months ahead. 'There are legislators that wonder if it's still relevant,' Braun continued. 'I'm going to listen to them, the courts, and the broader discussion in general.' Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita and former Gov. Eric Holcomb announced the state's acquisition of pentobarbital in June 2024, but it's not clear when the state ultimately received the drugs. Indiana Department of Correction officials have refused to disclose how many doses of pentobarbital were used for each of recent executions, or how close the drug was to its expiration when it was administered. 'I think we got in a pickle where we stored three, and now it looks like … it will be coming up again,' Braun said Tuesday, appearing to refer to execution drug expiration. 'Violent' moment during Indiana execution draws scrutiny; DOC officials deny 'botched' process Current Indiana law only allows lethal injection as a means of execution. The one-drug method is a departure from the state's protocol used since 1995, involving a series of three chemicals. But with ongoing drug shortages and increasing legal and political complications, some states have revived older execution methods — or approved new ones. South Carolina recently reinstated the firing squad as an option after years of delays due to its inability to obtain lethal injection drugs. The state has so far carried out two executions by firing squad in 2025 — the first in the U.S. in 15 years. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, prior to South Carolina's move only three executions by firing squad had taken place nationwide since 1977 — all in Utah. It's expected to be the primary method for executions in Idaho starting in 2026. Mississippi and Oklahoma also permit firing squads, but only as a secondary method to lethal injection. Braun pointed to South Carolina, specifically, but he didn't endorse any specific execution method. Nine states permit executions by lethal gas, but only five — Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oklahoma — specifically authorize death by nitrogen hypoxia, a process that deprives inmates of oxygen using nitrogen gas. So far, Alabama and Louisiana are the only states that have performed executions by nitrogen gas, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Arizona and Mississippi additionally allow gas chambers, a method in which inmates are exposed to a lethal gas — traditionally hydrogen cyanide — inside a sealed chamber. The process can take several minutes, however, and has drawn criticism over the risk of prolonged suffering. Earlier this year, some Indiana lawmakers — from both sides of the aisle — questioned the future of capital punishment in the state. Rep. Bob Morris, R-Fort Wayne, filed House Bill 1030, which sought to abolish the death penalty altogether in Indiana and replace it with life without parole. He later discussed plans to scale back the bill — and instead focus on execution drug rules and witness guidelines — hoping that a narrowed proposal could give it a better chance at advancing through the legislative process. Despite some bipartisan support, Morris' bill never received a committee hearing in the House, effectively killing the measure. Separately, an amendment Morris offered on another bill sought to require that Indiana State Police test pentobarbital between 12 and 24 hours before an execution to ensure the substance is '100% effective' before it's administered. But that proposal never moved, either. Other Republican and Democratic lawmakers have previously suggested narrowing the list of crimes eligible for execution or mandating that any new methods meet constitutional and ethical standards. No one has been added to death row in Indiana since 2013 as many prosecutors choose life in prison without parole over the cost of a death penalty trial. The next opportunity for lawmakers to file and debate bills is during next year's legislative session, slated to begin in January 2026. The last person executed in Indiana before Corcoran was Eric Wrinkles in 2009. Six inmates currently remain on Indiana's death row, and more than a dozen capital punishment cases are still pending statewide. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
Meet Doc Holliday: The blue heeler starring in the Army's 250th anniversary parade
As the nation gets ready for a big military parade on June 14, held to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, there is one unexpected guest star of the parade — a 2-year-old blue heeler named Doc Holliday. Named after a character in the movie Tombstone, the dog is a cherished member of the Horse Cavalry Detachment, an equestrian military unit posted at Fort Cavazos, Texas. The Horse Cavalry Detachment was activated in 1972 and is a subordinate unit of the 1st Cavalry Division. Doc joined the detachment as a young puppy more than two years ago, according to Army Col. Kamil Sztalkoper, a spokesman for the III Armored Corps. The unit, mostly used to support public relations and recruiting efforts, includes a wagon pulled by two mules, per ABC News. Sztalkoper said Doc is a playful dog, but he 'knows his place very well when it's time for the parade.' From the back of the unit's wagon, Doc has participated in several ceremonies and parades. In fact, Doc has participated twice in the Rose Parade in Pasadena, California. This is not the first time Doc has been included in a big parade lineup. He traveled to Washington, D.C., to be in the inaugural parade this past January, but when the inauguration moved indoors, Doc missed his chance, per The Washington Post. But this time around, Doc is set to take the spotlight as Army officials said the parade is a 'rain-or-shine event,' the Post reported. Doc will be marching alongside 6,700 soldiers, 28 M1 Abrams, 28 Stryker vehicles, a World War II-era B-25 bomber, 34 horses, six Paladin self-propelled howitzers and two mules, per The New York Times. The parade is set for June 14, which not only marks the Army's 250th anniversary but also Flag Day and President Donald Trump's 79th birthday. Even though it's been two years in the making, it wasn't until after Trump's inauguration that officials began to explore options to make the event bigger with a parade. Army spokesman Steve Warren said they want it to be a national, global, and 'even interstellar' event, as Army Col. Anne McClain, now serving on the International Space Station, will be phoning in, per The New York Times. Designed to tell the history of the Army from the Revolutionary era to World War II, as well as to showcase uniforms from every past U.S. conflict, the parade will go for about a mile from Constitution Avenue to the Washington Monument. At the end of the parade, the Army's Golden Knight parachutists will descend near the Ellipse and present Trump with a folded flag. Additionally, the president will enlist and reenlist 250 recruits and soldiers. The last big military parade, the National Victory Celebration parade, was held in the U.S. capital to celebrate the conclusion of the Gulf War in 1991. According to The Washington Post, that parade cost $8 million, or almost $19 million in today's money. Trump's parade is set to cost between $25 million to $45 million, according to Army officials. Army officials expect about 200,000 attendees. People can request free tickets, two per person.
Forbes
29-05-2025
- Forbes
Gloomy Days For Global Solar Power
The tariffs announced by the Trump Administration at the beginning of April have cast a shadow across international energy supply chains. The new policies were delayed for ninety days less than a week later, and the much-feared shortages and price hikes haven't yet materialized. Nevertheless, the mood in the industry remains pessimistic. In May, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced that companies based in Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam are dumping solar panel cells at low rates into the U.S. market while receiving subsidies from the Chinese government, setting the stage for the imposition of tariffs on all parties involved. The paradox is that, for years, the United States encouraged the transfer of industrial production from China to these Southeast Asian countries. The rationalization was that while 'friendshoring' would still partially enrich China, it would decrease China's profit share while empowering neighbors with contentious relations to Beijing and friendlier attitudes towards Washington. Now, the Trump administration and the solar power industry must contend not only with likely supply chain disruptions but also with the possibility that the tariffs designed to harm Chinese manufacturing and empower America could have precisely the opposite effect. The International Trade Commission has until June 2nd to decide whether to accept the DOC's final determination. If tariffs are imposed, domestic results will be mixed. American solar manufacturers, which filed the initial complaint in 2024 and triggered the DOC's investigation, will likely benefit immediately from relief from overseas competition. However, in the short term, the price of solar panels in the United States is likely to rise. Since news about the tariffs broke, companies like First Solar have seen significant decreases in their stock prices. Tariff proponents argue that, in the longer term, the American solar industry will expand, bringing jobs to the US. Currently, 77% of all American solar module imports originate in the countries named in the DOC's report. U.S. solar manufacturing has grown in recent years and will need to continue to do so to meet the predicted increase in demand. The American solar cell industry produced only 2.2% of the global supply in 2023, while the demand for solar technology and for energy overall continues to grow rapidly. Even with tariffs in place, the high cost of US manufacturing may hinder the transition to solar energy in America. The Southeast Asian market is heavily linked to China, the world's foremost solar energy leader. Beijing controls roughly 80% of the global solar supply chain and continues focusing on growing the industry abroad. Chinese domestic electricity production capacity from solar also continues to grow, boasting a 227 gigawatt increase in 2024. This brought it to the top rank globally at 887 GW – more than quadruple that of the second-place United States. Cambodian, Malaysian, Thai, and Vietnamese solar manufacturers could sell back to China, break into the emerging Middle Eastern and European markets, or focus more on their largely untapped domestic markets. Experts believe that roadblocks remain for demand to increase exponentially in domestic South-Eastern markets, as buy-in and infrastructure tend to be lacking in these markets. In light of the coming tariffs, many Chinese and foreign-owned solar cell manufacturers have already moved out of the four countries. The path ahead for the United States will necessitate substantial investment and growth in American solar cell production. The White House has placed greater emphasis on promoting fossil fuels and nuclear energy rather than on renewable energy. However, limiting China's market share in the solar energy industry is critical to reducing its value offerings overseas. On the other hand, American renewable energy continues to grow, and even outproduced fossil fuels in terms of total electricity flowing to the U.S. grid for the first time in March 2025. Reports indicate that even in the face of a government skeptical of clean energy, rising electricity demand will enable 'green' production to grow rapidly. China is likely to maintain its current course, regardless of the tariffs. The Chinese government is far from pleased with the recent developments, warning not only of negative consequences but also potential breaches in World Trade Organization rules by the United States. There is the possibility of further retaliatory tariffs from Beijing. Still, China primarily focuses on growing its international influence rather than wrestling with the United States. Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam will face the brunt of the economic harm from these tariffs. This economic dislocation may be a boon to Beijing's regional foreign policy aspirations. Vietnam has already come to the negotiating table looking to avoid the worst of what the tariffs could bring, and others may follow suit. As with the broader wave of tariffs announced at the beginning of April, a pause, reduced rates, or even the abandonment of the solar production tariffs remain possible. However, if implemented, these tariffs could drive significant shifts in the global distribution of photovoltaic panel and component production, adversely affecting the competitiveness of the American solar industry and impacting US ties with South Asian partners.
