Latest news with #U.S.SupremeCourt
Axios
3 hours ago
- Health
- Axios
Texas is one of most restrictive states for birth control access
Texas is among states with the most restrictive access to contraception, a new scorecard from the Population Reference Bureau shows. Why it matters: Contraception access has become a political flashpoint since the U.S. Supreme Court ended Roe v. Wade, with Democrats unsuccessfully pressing to codify contraceptive access nationwide and some patients concerned that conservative state legislatures could enact new curbs. Zoom in: While Texas expanded Medicaid coverage for family-planning services through the Healthy Texas Women waiver, it hasn't adopted a broader expansion of the health insurance program for low-income residents. That has left gaps in coverage for men and people under 18, per the scorecard. The state requires insurers to cover prescription birth control if they cover other prescription drugs but doesn't mandate coverage of over-the-counter methods. Texas allows minors to consent to contraceptive services only if they're married or meet narrow exceptions. Texas also doesn't require sex education in schools, per the report. The big picture: Nearly 35% of Americans, or 121 million people, live in a state that actively restricts access. The most protective states included California, Washington, Connecticut, New York, New Mexico, Maryland and Oregon. What they're saying:"Reproductive health care access depends on where you live," said Cathryn Streifel, senior program director at PRB and co-author of the scorecard.
The Hindu
18 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Universities everywhere are in crisis
On July 21, a federal judge challenged the U.S. administration's reasons for slashing billions of dollars in federal funding to Harvard University. The funding threats and cuts reflect a larger worldwide trend of right-wing governments forcing higher education institutions with their ideological agendas. Across the world, universities, once imagined as havens of free inquiry, are now being transformed into sites of political control. Weaponised budgets This pressure is particularly evident in the U.S., where Ivy League universities have become the centre of a cultural conflict. Portraying these institutions as havens for 'anti-Americanism', Mr. Trump tightened visas for overseas students and threatened funding cuts to colleges that defied his definition of 'free speech'. The U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 ruling ending affirmative action in college admissions gave right-wing activists even more confidence and spurred calls for broad changes in admissions rules. While Columbia University was pushed into adopting a strict definition of antisemitism, a measure critics say silences legitimate debate about Israel and Palestine, the 2024 congressional campaign forced Harvard's president, Claudine Gay, to resign. Major donors withdrew millions in funding from institutions that resisted these pressures, leaving faculty fearful that discussions on race, gender, or foreign policy might provoke similar reprisals. The effects are felt globally. In Australia, using the nebulous concept of 'national interest', ministers have vetoed peer-reviewed humanities research proposals covering topics such as climate activism and Indigenous politics. Law faculties have faced criticism for deviating from 'black letter law' and incorporating decolonisation into their courses. Universities are also under pressure to pass anti-foreign interference audits to protect rich international student enrolment and engage in persuasive self-censorship on sensitive subjects, such as China, Palestine, and Australia's colonial past. In India, populist leaders see public universities as elitist strongholds. Police visit campuses to quell dissent; budgets are cut; and vice-chancellors replaced. Jawaharlal Nehru University, once a hub of open debate, now frequently faces the label of 'anti-national'. In 2023, the University Grants Commission mandated compulsory courses in 'Indian knowledge systems'; this is seen as advancing Hindu nationalist narratives. The South Asian University, established by SAARC as an international institution, pressured a faculty member to leave after his PhD student cited Noam Chomsky's criticism of the Modi government. From Budapest to Bahrain, the pattern is clear. Viktor Orbán forced Central European University out of Hungary. Turkey dismissed thousands of academics who supported a peace petition. Brazil and the Philippines drastically cut social sciences' funding, silencing studies on inequality. Gulf states impose tight restrictions on conversations about religion, gender, and labour rights. Independent research is now seen across continents as a threat to national security. Along with these direct attacks is a quieter but equally destructive force: the neoliberal makeover of higher education. Rankings, patent creation, and the pursuit of student 'employability' are transforming universities into corporate entities. People discount feminist studies, sociology, history and other subjects which explore power dynamics as unnecessary extravagances. Students become paying customers, faculty members turn into disposable service providers, and trustees prioritise brand management above intellectual exploration. The far right exploits this market-driven logic, portraying universities as taxpayer-funded breeding grounds for sedition, while simultaneously cutting public funding essential for maintaining intellectual diversity. Defending the commons According to the Academic Freedom Index, produced by V-Dem and partner organisations, academic freedom declined in 34 countries between 2014 and 2024, not only in autocracies but in democracies as well. Indicators measuring institutional autonomy, freedom of research, and campus integrity dropped to their lowest levels since the early 1980s. Every erosion of academic freedom limits society's ability to tackle pressing global challenges such as climate change, the impacts of AI, and democratic deterioration. Despite these challenges, hope remains. Networks of academics, students, and civil society groups around the world are resisting ideological pressure. Faculty groups and student coalitions in the U.S. actively promote inclusive education, which forces some colleges to rethink too rigid definitions of antisemitism. Legal collectives and independent academic platforms still guard areas for critical inquiry in India. However, survival alone is insufficient. Universities must recover their public agenda. Governing boards should shield hiring, promotions, and funding decisions from political interference. Donors must support uncomfortable inquiry rather than dictate it. Alumni can fund independent academic chairs or legal defence efforts. Faculty members must engage in university governance instead of leaving it to bureaucrats, while students should remember that campuses are democratic commons, not merely credential factories. If fear, profit motives, or majoritarian arrogance dictate what can be taught or expressed, we risk inheriting not just weakened universities but diminished democracies. Amrita Nambiar, Assistant Professor of Law, Vinayaka Mission's Law School, Vinayaka Mission's Research Foundation (DU); Amrithnath Sreedevi Babu, Sessional Academic and PhD candidate, Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University, Australia
Time Magazine
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Time Magazine
The True Story Behind the 'Sunday Best'
On July 21, Netflix debuted Sunday Best, a documentary about The Ed Sullivan Show—the longest-running variety show in U.S. broadcast history—and how it featured Black American performers at a time when discrimination was still rampant in the U.S. in the 1950s and 1960s. Though the U.S. Supreme Court ruled segregated schools unconstitutional in 1954, and the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964, the documentary highlights how racism never really went away. The Ed Sullivan Show, which aired from 1948 to 1971 and boasted between 35 and 50 million viewers each Sunday night, was one of the first mainstream stages to showcase Black talent—as the artists wanted to be seen. Viewers will see snippets of past performances on the show by Harry Belafonte, Stevie Wonder, Nat King Cole, Nina Simone, James Brown, The Jackson 5, and The Supremes. In the documentary, entertainment greats like Belafonte and Smokey Robinson talk about the influence of Sullivan's show, and through a recreation of Ed Sullivan's voice, Sunday Best features Sullivan's comments on racial issues over the years, verbatim from his letters, articles, and columns. 'He was a door opener, especially for Black artists,' says Otis Williams, lead singer of The Temptations. 'This man opened up his door and let artists come on his show to express and be seen.' Here's a look at how the doc dives into Sullivan's modern (for his time) worldview, featuring the Black entertainers who talk about how much it meant to be on his Sunday night show. A progressive streak Sunday Best argues that one of the reasons that Sullivan was so open-minded was because he grew up poor in Harlem, at a time when it had a sizable Irish and Jewish population. The Irish had a history of facing discrimination, so Sullivan was more attuned to the mistreatment of Black people in America. As a high schooler in Port Chester, N.Y., Sullivan played baseball and regularly encountered teams with Black players, so he believed in integration from an early age. As Sullivan explains in a TV interview, 'When we played baseball [at] Port Chester High School, there were Negroes in the league, and some fellas actually said they would not play against a Negro. I always resented them very deeply because the Irish had gone through that when they first came…My parents knew these things were wrong, and they were not just broad-minded, but sensible.' In fact, during his first career as a journalist, he slammed New York University's decision to bench a Black player during a game against the University of Georgia in a column he wrote as sports editor for the New York Evening Graphic. 'I was sickened to read NYU's agreement to bench a negro player for the entire game,' he wrote in 1929. 'What a shameful state of affairs this is…If a New York City university allows the Mason-Dixon line to be erected in the center of its playing field, then that university should disband its football [team] for all time.' And he didn't hold back when he started hosting a variety TV show in 1948—renamed The Ed Sullivan Show in 1955. 'We've been called upon to search our hearts and souls of hatred, cleanse them of a natural hate and fear for our neighbors…Bigotry and intolerance, racial or religious hate and discrimination are spiritual acts of treason.' He also called upon Americans to 'join in this great crusade for our brotherhood' for a 'united America is the sole remaining hope for our shattered world.' Door opener In Sunday Best, singer Dionne Warwick says Sullivan 'wanted his audience to understand that there was a lot of talent out there that needed exposure.' Belafonte, who appeared on the Ed Sullivan show 10 times, says Sullivan 'pushed the envelope as far as the envelope could be pushed.' He says CBS network executives almost stopped him from first performing on the show in 1953 because of his left-wing politics, and Sullivan called him to tell him he might have to cancel the appearance. But Sullivan was the one who convinced the network to let the show go on. 'He gave me a chance to talk to him about acts considered rebellious,' Belafonte explains. 'Those who weren't happy about giving us the platform with us about politics…Ed took the position, 'let's test it, and see where it would go.'' Ed Sullivan still had Nat King Cole on the show in May 1956, a month after the entertainer was attacked in Birmingham, Alabama. He had the child prodigy Stevie Wonder on in 1964 when he was only 13 years old. Members of the Jackson 5 talked about how their 1969 appearance helped launch them to a new level of fame. 'To Motown, The Ed Sullivan Show was the ultimate,' Berry Gordy, Motown Records founder, says in the doc. 'If it was a hot act, Ed Sullivan had them. It was American culture.' And though Sullivan died in 1974 at the age of 73, music can still bring people together. As Robinson puts it, 'Music is the international language. It's the barrier breaker.'
Chicago Tribune
2 days ago
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
‘You had the power to stop this:' Ex-ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore sentenced to 2 years in prison in scheme to bribe Speaker Madigan
Once a rising corporate star, former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore was sentenced Monday to 2 years in federal prison for her role in an elaborate scheme to funnel more than $1.3 million and other perks to associates of then-House Speaker Michael Madigan in exchange for help with the utility's ambitious legislative agenda. In handing down the sentence, U.S. District Judge Manish Shah acknowledged Pramaggiore's transformative leadership at ComEd and her history of charitable works, but said the evidence at trial showed she also participated in a nearly decade-long scheme that undermined the public's trust in government. 'This was secretive sophisticated criminal corruption of important public policy,' Shah said. 'When it came to Mr. Madigan … you didn't think to change the culture of corruption. Instead you were all in.' Shah said the dichotomy in Pramaggiore's life led him to 'conclude that people like you, good people in positions of power and authority, need to be deterred too.' 'You had the power to stop this,' the judge said. 'You could have said 'No, this is not how legislation should be done.' You had the power to change the culture at ComEd.' He also found that she had lied repeatedly during her testimony at trial, particularly in denying knowledge of the connection of ComEd's no-work subcontractors to the powerful Democratic speaker and telling the jury she made no effort to cover it up. Pramaggiore, who turns 67 in two weeks, showed little outward reaction as Shah announced his sentence, which also included a $750,000 fine. A few minutes earlier, Pramaggiore had been given the chance to address the judge but declined to do so. 'Thank you your honor. I will stand on my able attorney's commentary and submissions,' she said while remaining seated at the defense table. Shah ordered Pramaggiore to report to prison by Dec. 1. However her attorney, Scott Lassar, told the judge he will ask for Pramaggiore to remain free on bond pending appeal, given what he said are significant legal issues in the case. Shah asked Lassar to submit something in writing in three weeks. After the hearing, Pramaggiore walked out of the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse without comment. Lassar also declined to make a statement to reporters. The defense later issued a statement through a spokesman maintaining Pramaggiore's innocence and vowing to appeal all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. 'We are disappointed by the sentence imposed today,' the statement read. 'It is nearly impossible to reconcile the sentence — two years in prison — with the federal Probation Department's recommendation of no jail time and probation.' The sentencing comes more than two years after Pramaggiore's conviction in the 'ComEd Four' case, one of the biggest political corruption scandals in state history. Last week, her former colleague, ex-ComEd executive John Hooker, was given to a year and a half in prison. Sentencing for the other two defendants, Michael McClain and Jay Doherty, remain pending. The investigation, which came to light more than six years ago, ended Pramaggiore's stellar career in Chicago's male-dominated C-suite corporate world, where she'd recently been named chief executive of Exelon, a major Fortune 100 energy company that delivered power to millions of customers in the Chicago area and beyond. Prosecutors asked for a stiff prison term of almost 6 years and a $1.75 million fine, writing in a recent filing that despite all her success, money and professional status, 'she made the choice to participate in a years-long conspiracy that corrupted the legislative process in Springfield' and subverted her own company's internal controls. In asking for a 70-month prison term, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sarah Streicker, Julia Schwartz and Diane MacArthur also wrote that Pramaggiore lied repeatedly in her testimony during the 2023 trial. which ended in sweeping guilty verdicts. 'She could have remained silent,' Streicker argued in court Monday. 'She had every right to do so, but instead she chose to try and obstruct the jury's process…With her back against the wall she chose to testify and lie in order to protect herself.' Pramaggiore's attorneys, meanwhile, argued for probation, writing in a court filing of their own that the conduct for which she was convicted was 'a true aberration' in an otherwise exemplary life, not only in her professional path but also in her dedication to her family and charitable works. They also submitted nearly a hundred letters from friends and supporters attesting to her good character. 'She has lost her reputation, her career, and her law license, and she faces even more potential consequences, including further enforcement actions,' Lassar wrote in a 49-page filing. 'Imposing a prison sentence that takes her away from her family, friends, and community will not serve the ends of justice.' In court Monday, Lassar argued the arrangement to pay Madigan's associates as subcontractors 'was set up by other people,' including McClain, Hooker and former ComEd CEO Frank Clark, who preceded Pramaggiore. Lassar said ComEd's Smart Grid legislation, which was at the center of the alleged bribery scheme, only became law because of years of tough negotiating and broad coalition building in Springfield, bringing in including big labor, environmentalists, and myriad legislative caucuses. 'She never asked Madigan for help in passing legislation,' Lassar said. '…And she was never aware that Madigan helped do anything to get it passed.' Pramaggiore and her three co-defendants — McClain, a former ComEd lobbyist and longtime Madigan confidant, Hooker, who was ComEd's vice president for legislative affairs, and Doherty, a consultant and former City Club of Chicago leader — were convicted on all counts in May 2023 after a two-month trial. The case was then beset by a series of delays, first due to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that reset the rules for a key federal bribery statute and then again after the death of the judge who'd presided over the trial, Harry Leinenweber. After he was selected to take over the case, Shah earlier this year tossed the underlying bribery counts due to the Supreme Court's decision, but kept intact the main conspiracy count as well as guilty verdicts for falsifying ComEd's books and records, which were charged under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. In their statement Monday, Pramaggiore's legal team referenced both the Supreme Court's decision and President Donald Trump's recent pausing of enforcement of the FCPA, citing overreach and prosecutorial abuse. 'That has happened here,' the statement read. 'Ms. Pramaggiore faces jail despite the documents at issue being true. Chicago is not a foreign jurisdiction…There is nothing foreign or corrupt about the facts here.' The bulk of the ComEd allegations centered on a cadre of Madigan allies who were paid a total of $1.3 million from 2011 through 2019 through allegedly do-nothing consulting contracts. Among the recipients were two former aldermen, Frank Olivo and Michael Zalewski, precinct captains Ray Nice and Edward Moody, and former state Rep. Edward Acevedo. In addition, prosecutors alleged ComEd also hired a clouted law firm run by political operative Victor Reyes, distributed numerous college internships within Madigan's 13th Ward fiefdom, and backed former McPier chief Juan Ochoa, a friend of a Madigan ally, for an $80,000-a-year seat on the utility's board of directors, the indictment alleged. In return, prosecutors alleged, Madigan used his influence over the General Assembly to help ComEd score a series of huge legislative victories that not only rescued the company from financial instability but led to record-breaking, billion-dollar profits. Among them was the 2011 smart grid bill that set a built-in formula for the rates ComEd could charge customers, avoiding battles with the Illinois Commerce Commission, according to the charges. ComEd also leaned on Madigan's office to help pass the Future Energy Jobs Act in 2016, which kept the formula rate in place and also rescued two nuclear plants run by an affiliated company, Exelon Generation. Pramaggiore is the second of the ComEd Four to be sentenced. Shah handed a 1 1/2-year prison term to Hooker last week. A hearing for McClain, a retired ComEd lobbyist who doubled as Madigan's right-hand man, will be sentenced Thursday, while the fourth defendant, Doherty, is scheduled to be sentenced in August. Madigan, meanwhile, was convicted in a separate trial of an array of schemes that included the ComEd bribery payments. He was sentenced in June to seven and a half years in prison. Defense attorneys for the ComEd Four have repeatedly argued the government was seeking to criminalize legal lobbying and job recommendations that are at the heart of the state's legitimate political system. They ripped the government's star witness, former ComEd executive Fidel Marquez, as a liar and opportunist who was so terrified when FBI agents confronted him in January 2019 that he flipped without even consulting a lawyer and also agreed to secretly record his friends. Marquez testified in March 2023 that the roster of 'subcontractors' hired by ComEd was curated by McClain and read like a who's who of Madigan's vaunted political operation, including two legendary precinct captains, a former assistant majority leader in the House and two former Chicago aldermen at the center of Madigan's Southwest Side base of power. Over the course of eight years, ComEd paid them hundreds of thousands of dollars, even though they had no particular expertise and ultimately did virtually no work for the utility. Some seemed to be downright incompetent, Marquez told the jury. On cross-examination, Marquez, who pleaded guilty to bribery conspiracy and is awaiting sentencing, acknowledged there was 'no guarantee' that Madigan was going to help pass ComEd bills. But he added the company still tried to make Madigan happy because 'not doing it would cause us to be negatively looked on by' the speaker. He also admitted he initially told the FBI he didn't believe any of it was bribery. Pramaggiore's lawyers argued in their sentencing memo that she should be punished only for the remaining counts of conviction, which all have to do with falsifying ComEd's books. But prosecutors say the entire scope of the scheme is still fair game, even if the specific bribery counts were dropped — a position that Shah has agreed with. At Hooker's sentencing July 14, Shah said the evidence at trial showed the four co-defendants 'were jointly undertaking the quid pro quo bribery of Mr. Madigan, paying out his cronies in exchange for favorable official action.' 'The instructional error doesn't change my factual assessment,' Shah said. 'Not only could a jury reach that conclusion, I reached that conclusion based on my own review.
Axios
2 days ago
- Politics
- Axios
Federal judge blocks part of Tennessee's "abortion trafficking" law
A federal judge struck down a key pillar of Tennessee's so-called "abortion trafficking" law, saying it violated First Amendment speech protections. Why it matters: The judge's July 18 ruling strikes down the "recruitment" section of the 2024 law, which made it illegal for adults to "recruit" minors to get legal, out-of-state abortions. The case highlights how speech has become a new battleground in the abortion debate. Catch up quick: State Rep. Aftyn Behn (D-Nashville) and Nashville attorney Rachel Welty sued to block the law, arguing the "recruitment" section could broadly block their efforts to share information about how to obtain legal abortions in other states. They said the law unconstitutionally criminalized their speech based on their viewpoints. The court agreed, cementing an earlier preliminary injunction that temporarily blocked the law while legal arguments took place. Yes, but: Other prongs of the law making it illegal to help transport or provide shelter for a minor seeking an abortion remain in place. Context: Tennessee banned abortions in 2022, soon after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The state ban only allows for narrow exceptions if the mother's life is in danger. What she's saying: Tennessee's 2024 law "prohibits speech encouraging lawful abortion while allowing speech discouraging lawful abortion. That is impermissible viewpoint discrimination, which the First Amendment rarely tolerates — and does not tolerate here,"senior U.S. Circuit Judge Julia Gibbons wrote. She said the "recruitment" provision was "'an egregious form of content discrimination' that punishes speech based on 'the opinion or perspective of the speaker.'" Gibbons added that "public advocacy, information-sharing, and counseling" about obtaining legal abortions outside of Tennessee were protected forms of speech. Between the lines: Gibbons, who heard the case in Nashville's federal district court, previously served as a judge on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. She was appointed by former President George W. Bush.
