Latest news with #FirstAmendments
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ahead of No Kings protest, Stitt, Mayor Holt remember response to 2020 protests differently
Ahead of a planned protest against President Donald Trump's policies in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma's governor claimed he had to take action during the 2020 protests while local officials stood aside. The "No Kings National Day of Defiance" has been planned for Saturday, June 14, in response to what organizers call authoritarian actions from the Trump administration and Saturday's multimillion-dollar, Washington, D.C., military parade to honor the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary. In a video posted on Gov. Kevin Stitt's X account, the governor talked to Newsmax about the upcoming protests — planned in hundreds of cities across the nation — and Oklahoma's response to the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. '... Even some of our big city mayors in Oklahoma were really just refusing to kind of get involved, so then as the governor I stepped in. I had our state police down there arresting people,' he said. The Oklahoman reported between May 30 and May 31, 2020, the Oklahoma City Police Department made 24 arrests on allegations including vandalism, assault on police officers and violating Oklahoma City Mayor David Holt's emergency curfew order. Holt, at the time only two years into his first term, talked to protesters and met with leadership from Black Lives Matter. Over the following days, the city council had a six-hour meeting listening to public comments on race relations and police work, according to The Oklahoman. 'Protesting is a part of American life and it is generally a routine event in OKC. I have full confidence that everyone will handle any scheduled events appropriately,' Holt told The Oklahoman over text. ➤ Be the first to know: Sign up for The Oklahoman's breaking news alerts Meyer Siegfried, a spokesperson for Stitt, said because of the governor's intentional preparations and firm warnings in 2020, protests didn't escalate to the violent events in other states. 'Governor Stitt strongly believes in Americans' First Amendments rights and expects any demonstrations or protests to remain peaceful,' Siegfried said. Stitt did activate the Oklahoma National Guard during the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020. '... I do not want to see people blocking intersections, I don't want to see broken windows, people carrying stuff out of a Target,' Stitt said when recalling the 2020 protests. 'I said 'You simply arrest them and this stuff will stop,' and that's exactly what we did. We didn't have the unrest that you saw in other big cities around the country.' Since 2020, the city has adopted 39 recommendations from a task force and working group formed out of those conversations in 2020. So far, 16 recommendations have been implemented, including review of de-escalation, use of force and mental health response, and another 11 are close to implementation. Working on implementation is the Public Safety Partnership, a collaboration of city leaders, police officers, subject matter experts and community members. With 13 demonstrations planned across the state, including one in Oklahoma City and three in Tulsa, law enforcement officials are preparing to keep the public safe. Stitt has already taken to social media to tell protesters that while 'peaceful assembly is allowed,' the state troopers are 'standing ready.' 'In Oklahoma, we won't tolerate any threats to our communities, citizens, property owners or law enforcement,' Stitt added in a post made on Wednesday, June 11. 'Just like the summer of 2020, if they show up in our state, we will arrest anyone breaking the law — that's a fact.' Department of Public Safety Commissioner Tim Tipton could not be reached by the time of publication, but he told News 9 that state troopers protect the right to assemble and peacefully protest, but if a protest turns violent, they're prepared. So far, they're expecting a peaceful protest and haven't seen any credible threats. In Oklahoma City, the 'No Kings OKC' march will start at 9 a.m. at the corner of Hudson Avenue and Oklahoma City Boulevard. The march will end at City Hall Park, where a rally with speakers will take place, ending at noon. Oklahoma City Police Sgt. Dillon Quirk said the department is 'aware' of the planned protest. 'Those gathering are free to peacefully assemble, however if someone chooses to violate or break the law, it will be addressed by law enforcement,' Quirk said. The department did not respond to a question regarding whether the department is taking any specific safety measures ahead of the protest. In Washington, D.C., a military parade honoring the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary is still occurring as scheduled, but there are no 'No Kings' protests planned in the district so as not to detract from honoring veterans, according to national protest organizers. The parade could cost anywhere from $25 million to $40 million, USA TODAY reported, and will feature dozens of armored combat vehicles, helicopters, vintage warplanes, thousands of soldiers in uniforms from the Revolutionary War to the present, horses, two mules and a dog. 'This is not intended to be performative,' Army Secretary Dan Driscoll told USA TODAY. 'We sincerely believe this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity.' But the city of Lawton, Oklahoma, home to the Army's Fort Sill, shared in a social media post it has canceled its own annual Army birthday parade due to 'credible security threats amid planned protests.' "When credible intelligence indicated almost certain violence from groups with national ties, we faced an impossible choice. We simply cannot invite families and children to an event where violence is very likely to occur. No celebration is worth putting our community, especially our children, at risk," the post said. A group called 'Lawton Veterans United for Action' was approved to march in the parade, and according to KSWO-TV in Lawton and an event page, planned to use their spot in the parade to protest Trump policies that have impacted veterans. The group organizer, Cindy McIntyre, told KSWO-TV that the parade's safety concerns may stem from social media posts identifying 'No Kings' protesters as 'troublemakers.' Lawton Mayor Stan Booker called the city 'one of the most patriotic communities in America,' and the cancellation will not lessen the city's spirit or ability to celebrate the military and the nation's freedoms. Booker said Lawton residents can still look forward to the upcoming Juneteenth and Independence Day celebrations in the next few weeks. This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Ahead of No Kings Day, Stitt, Hold disagree on OKC response to 2020
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Freedom of the Press's Internal Threat
Americas biggest threat to freedom of the press is its establishment media. This is the inescapable conclusion coming from the medias flurry of apologies over their response during the last four years two biggest events: the administrations manipulation of the public during the COVID pandemic and Bidens incapacitation in office. Through both, the establishment media were at least derelict in their duty; at worst they were accessories. On Feb. 26, the New York Times printed David Wallace-Wells opinion piece, "The Covid Alarmists Were Closer to the Truth Than Anyone Else." It was a confession not just for a paper but for an industry. Following hot on the heels of pandemic apologies, confessions have cascaded from Biden administration insiders and mainstream reporters about what they saw of the presidents declining performance and the administrations increasingly aggressive compensation for it. There is a push, particularly on the part of the establishment media and the elites on whom they depend, to let bygones be bygones and reputations return to what they were. Not so fast, it must not be so easy. The pandemic response struck at the core of how American society operated; the presidents inability to function struck at the core of American constitutional government. The establishment medias response to both struck at the core of the First Amendments freedom of the press. Beyond consequential, these issues are constitutional. Throughout the COVID crisis, the establishment media failed to report objectively. On issue after issue -the Wuhan lab leak theory, vaccine efficacy, social distancing, herd immunity, school closures, and refusal to reevaluate positions as new data emerged - the establishment media locked arms with the administration around an enforced consensus. Missouri v. Biden confirmed that the administration was censoring dissenters and pressuring social media platforms to do likewise. Recalling administration efforts to dictate Metas content, Mark Zuckerberg stated: "Basically, these people from the Biden administration would call up our team and, like, scream at them and curse." Questioners of the enforced COVID consensus - including experts such as those who signed the Great Barrington Declaration - were censored and vilified. For the most part, the establishment media stood silently by or joined the chorus against them. What they didnt do was investigate and ask the questions that informed dissenters were raising: they did not report; they did not do their job. Listening to revelations from administration staff, celebrity Biden supporters, and establishment media members, virtually everyone in Washington was in on the "secret" of Bidens incapacity. Far from a technical, or even a political, point, presidential incapacity undermines constitutional government. Federal power was purposely placed in a single head - not a cabinet, not the legislative branch, and certainly not unelected staff - to execute our laws. To have the executive branch function otherwise is a violation of the Constitution itself. For how long was Bidens presidential capacity questioned? Who was running the country during these periods? Why was the 25th Amendment not invoked? All these questions and more are still valid, but even more: Why was the establishment media not asking these questions at the time - when they now confirm that they suspected or knew. Clearly more than just friendly to the administration, the establishment media had unparalleled access to the president and his staff. This means unparalleled opportunities to know and ask and investigate. If they suspected, it was their job to investigate; if they knew, it was their job to report. They did neither, as their mea culpas now implicitly confirm. Through the two biggest stories of the last four years, the establishment media were little more than the three monkeys, sitting without hearing, seeing, or speaking. Their stance then and exculpatory attempts now call into question freedom of the presss value if the press decide to not use it. For freedom of the press to work, to have meaning, it must be a two-way street. Certainly, it must be protected, as under the First Amendment. However, to be truly free it must also be exercised. This free exercise was the reason the right was enshrined in the Constitution. All the Constitutions provisions, both directly or through their representatives and the states, ultimately exist to protect the citizenry. Without the presss exercise of its right, this freedom becomes worse than a dead letter: It becomes a ruse. Citizens are not simply uninformed; they are left with the mistaken impression that they have been informed. It was an informed citizenry on which the Constitutions designers rested the government; if the establishment media fails to inform - as they did - the government on which it rests is also threatened. As it was. J.T. Young is the author of the recent book 'Unprecedented Assault: How Big Government Unleashed America's Socialist Left' from RealClear Publishing and has over three decades' experience working in Congress, the Department of Treasury, the Office of Management and Budget, and representing a Fortune 20 company.
Boston Globe
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Cases of two international students detained by Trump administration to be heard in appeals court
They are also pushing to have the Öztürk and Mahdawi cases consolidated into one, an idea lawyers for Öztürk and Mahdawi oppose, records show. Advertisement Lawyers for both Öztürk and Mahdawi contend they have had their First Amendments rights violated because the government has moved to deport them - they are both legally in the US - solely due to their public stances on the Gaza war. Mohsen Mahdawi speaks outside the courthouse after a judge released the Palestinian student activist on Wednesday, April 30, 2025 in Burlington, Vt. (AP Photo/Amanda Swinhart) Amanda Swinhart/Associated Press They were both seized by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents during the Öztürk was studying child and human development at Tufts University when she was taken into custody by masked ICE agents in Somerville on March 25 after the Trump administration revoked her student visa. She was taken to New Hampshire, then Vermont, and then to the detention facility in Louisiana where she remains. Öztürk, 30, was a coauthor of an opinion piece in the Tufts student newspaper that expressed pro-Palestinian views. She was seized during the Advertisement A Turkish national, Öztürk has chronic asthma and said in court papers she has had to endure crowded and contaminated dorms, 45-minute asthma attacks, and uncontrollable coughing. 'It has become progressively harder to recover from these asthma attacks while in detention,' she said in court papers. 'I am very concerned about the severity of these attacks and my ability to manage them.' Mahdawi, who was active during the pro-Palestinian demonstrations at Columbia University in 2024, 'Immigration detention cannot be motivated by a punitive purpose. Nor can it be motivated by the desire to deter others from speaking,' Crawford wrote, while referencing the Red Scare and Mahdwai, 34, recently completed coursework at Columbia and was expected to graduate in May before beginning a master's degree program there in the fall. He has gained supporters across Vermont and New York, including US Senators Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch. Advertisement The three judge panel in New York is composed of Alison J. Nathan, appointed by President Biden; Susan L. Carney, appointed by President Obama; and Barrington D. Parker, who was nominated by President George W. Bush. John R. Ellement can be reached at
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Harvard Sues Trump and Slams His ‘Attack on First Amendment'
Harvard University sued the Trump administration Monday in an attempt to stop the government from freezing billions in federal funding to the elite institution. The scathing lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts, accused the White House of using the funding 'as leverage to gain control of academic decision making at Harvard.' Last week, the Trump administration announced that it would freeze $2.2 billion in federal funding and another $1 billion in grants, and demanded a wide array of concessions, claiming that the measures were necessary to fight antisemitism on campus. Trump himself also threatened to use the IRS to revoke the university's tax exempt status. The letter Harvard received—which included a series of demands regarding the school's hiring policies, admissions, and curriculum—was apparently never meant to be sent in the first place, The New York Times reported last week. The requests were so extreme that Harvard felt it had no choice but to publicly defy Trump. 'No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue," Garber said at the time. Despite the apparent mistake, Trump and his White House team were so incensed by the defiance that they doubled down on the demands anyways, threatening the school's federal funding if they refused to comply. In its lawsuit Monday, Harvard accused the administration of violating its First Amendments rights—and claimed that officials did not follow federal administrative procedures and regulations when stripping the institution of its funding. The complaint was filed against the National Institutes of Health, departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Energy, and Defense, among others. Harvard's president Alan M. Garber said in a message to staff and students Monday that 'as a Jew and as an American,' he understood the 'valid concerns about rising antisemitism.' He added that Harvard 'will continue to fight hate with the urgency it demands.' The institution was under review by Trump's Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism, which has condemned 'the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation's most prestigious universities and colleges.' The administration originally announced that it would be reviewing almost $9 billion in federal funding to Harvard in its effort to crackdown on antisemitism at higher institutions. Trump has also called out the university on Truth Social, saying: 'Perhaps Harvard should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting 'Sickness?'' Two of Harvard's attorneys said that the university would not accept the administration's demands but 'remains open to dialogue.' Harvard has received support from other universities, as well as Harvard Law School graduate and former President Barack Obama.
