Monday Reads: It’s a New Day and a New Dawn

BN-OR109_0627wa_P_20160627110845Good Afternoon!

Hope you’re not going to get tired of me posting Nina Simone songs because I just had to do it again.  I woke up and feel optimistic for a nice change.  I would like to say that my life is on the up  and up but this is much less specific than that.  I feel better about being a woman in the USA and that’s a big deal.

Two really great SCOTUS decisions  came down today that protect women’s right to choose and the victims of domestic abuse who are overwhelmingly women and children. The Supremes have thrown out the Texas Trap Law and refused to water down  gun bans for domestic abusers. Then, there was some campaign excitement! Senator Elizabeth Warren tore up the stage with a Donald Burning and an enthusiastic Hillary support speech in Cincinnati.  Women on the Supreme Court made a huge difference!  Can you imagine the difference a woman President may make?

Dahlia Lithwick–writing for Slate—argued that the women took over and the voices of the three women resound through out the important decisions.  Here’s the Lithwick lede: “In oral arguments for the Texas abortion case, the three female justices upend the Supreme Court’s balance of power.”  The Texas restrictions were stuck down vehemently.

It felt as if, for the first time in history, the gender playing field at the high court was finally leveled, and as a consequence the court’s female justices were emboldened to just ignore the rules. Time limits were flouted to such a degree that Chief Justice John Roberts pretty much gave up enforcing them. I counted two instances in which Roberts tried to get advocates to wrap up as Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor simply blew past him with more questions. There was something wonderful and symbolic about Roberts losing almost complete control over the court’s indignant women, who are just not inclined to play nice anymore.

The case involves a crucial constitutional challenge to two provisions in Texas’ HB 2, the state’s omnibus abortion bill from 2013. The first requires doctors to obtain admitting privileges from a hospital 30 miles from the clinic where they perform abortions; the second requires abortion clinics to be elaborately retrofitted to comply with building regulations that would make them “ambulatory surgical centers.” If these provisions go into full effect, Texas would see a 75 percent reduction in the number of clinics serving 5.4 million women of childbearing age. The constitutional question is whether having 10 clinics to serve all these women, including many who would live 200 miles away from the nearest facility, represents an “undue burden” on the right to abortion deemed impermissible after the Casey decision. Each of the female justices takes a whacking stick to the very notion that abortion—one of the safest procedures on record—requires rural women to haul ass across land masses larger than the whole state of California in order to take a pill, in the presence of a doctor, in a surgical theater.

The morning starts with an arcane and technical debate that eats up most of Stephanie Toti’s time. Toti, arguing on behalf on the Texas clinics, first has to answer an argument—raised by Ginsburg—that the clinics were precluded from even bringing some of their claims. Between this and factual challenges from Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito as to whether there was any evidence on the record to show that the law itself triggered the closings of Texas clinics, she doesn’t have much time to get to the merits. So frustrated is Justice Elena Kagan by the conservatives’ repeated insistence that perhaps the clinics just coincidentally all closed within days of HB 2’s passage that she finally has to intervene. “Is it right,” she asks Toti, “that in the two­-week period that the ASC requirement was in effect, that over a dozen facilities shut their doors, and then when that was stayed, when that was lifted, they reopened again immediately?” Toti agrees. “It’s almost like the perfect controlled experiment,” continues Kagan, “as to the effect of the law, isn’t it? It’s like you put the law into effect, 12 clinics closed. You take the law out of effect, they reopen?”

rbgI am so relieved that the Trap Law creep has been put down.  Signing such a bill in Louisiana was one of the last things the dread pirate 2016-06-27T125240Z_01_WAS203_RTRIDSP_3_USA-COURT-ABORTIONBobby Jindal did to us.  There are women celebrating all over the south.  Wendy Davis won in the long run.

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down Texas abortion restrictions that have been widely duplicated in other states, a resounding win for abortion rights advocates in the court’s most important consideration of the controversial issue in 25 years.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy joined the court’s liberals in the 5 to 3 decision, which said Texas’s arguments that the clinic restrictions were to protect women’s health were cover for making it more difficult to obtain an abortion.

The challenged Texas provisions required doctors who perform abortions at clinics to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital and said that clinics must meet hospital-like standards of surgical centers.

Similar restrictions have been passed in other states, and officials say they protect patients. But the court’s majority sided with abortion providers and medical associations who said the rules are unnecessary and so expensive or hard to satisfy that they force clinics to close.

As I wrote last week, it was a clear cut case of undue burden and that principle was upheld.  The other clear victory was for sensible gun access control.  They ruled that Domestic Abusers cannot have guns refusing to open the window to all infractions.

 In a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that reckless domestic assaults can be considered misdemeanor crimes to restrict gun ownership. The decision comes as a major victory for women’s rights and domestic violence advocacy groups.

This was an interesting case involving a man in Maine.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday against a Maine resident who argued he should not have been stripped of his ability to possess a firearm despite a prior domestic violence charge in state court.

Stephen Voisine pled guilty to a misdemeanor assault charge in 2004 against a girlfriend. Five years later, he was investigated for shooting a bald eagle and as part of the investigation he turned over a firearm to authorities.

After reviewing his criminal record, Voisine was then charged with unlawful possession of a firearm pursuant to a federal law which makes it unlawful for a person who has been convicted of a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” to possess a firearm or ammunition.

Lawyers for Voisine argued that his misdemeanor offense did not rise to the level to trigger the federal law.

The justices agreed to take the case to interpret the reach of a federal statute. But Justice Clarence Thomas during oral arguments was also interested in the 2nd Amendment implications, breaking in to ask a series of questions for the first time in 10 years during oral arguments.

The three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Voisine and another defendant, holding that the “question before us is a narrow one.”

Congress recognized that “guns and domestic violence are a lethal combination,” the panel said.

Is it really possible that we may see a woman President and Vice President next year?  The rally in Cincinnati this morning with Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren held out that tantalizing option.

BB caught me in bed with a cup of coffee this morning. Turn on the TV! There they were and there it was. No more Texas Trap Laws! Two Powerful women thrashing a Republican Bully while the world and Cincinnati cheered them on! It’s a new day! It’s a new dawn! Warren definitely put the B in the Trump Burn. She was amazing and you could see that Hillary loved every minute of it.

Donald Trump is “a small, insecure money-grubber who fights for no one but himself,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said Monday morning at the Cincinnati’s Union Terminal, as the possible vice presidential candidate lit up the crowd in her first appearance with Hillary Clinton.

“What kind of a man?” Warren said of the presumptive GOP nominee, with whom she has had drawn out Twitter battles. “A nasty man who will never become president of the United States, because Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States.”

Warren, who is popular with many progressives who backed Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont in the primary, lobbed attacks at Trump as she stood below the terminal lobby’s large mosaic of of iron-workers, railroad men and farmers. Clinton stood beside her, grinning and clapping.

The joint appearance, and Warren’s enthusiasm for attacking Trump, added to speculation about her likelihood of receiving the nod to join Clinton as the vice presidential candidate on the Democratic ticket. Clinton and her supporters have touted Warren’s endorsement as the former first lady seeks to unite Democrats after a long primary battle with Sanders.

At Union Terminal, Warren punctuated her criticisms of Trump and praise of Clinton by raising her fist and shouting “Yes!” Drawing applause and supportive laughter, Warren turned and clapped wildly for Clinton, then joined the crowd in shouts of “Hillary! Hillary!” and a “Woo!”

“Donald Trump thinks poor, sad little Wall Street brokers need to be free to defraud everyone they want,” said Warren, known for her anti-Wall Street stances. “Hillary fights for us.”

“You know I could do this all day. I really could,” Warren said of attacking Trump. “But I won’t. OK, one more.”

“You just saw why she is considered so terrific, so formidable, because she tells it like it is,” Clinton said of Warren. “I just love how she gets under Donald Trump’s skin.”

These two are a great tag team.  I can’t wait to watch the thin, orange-skinned one’s twitter feed.  He hates it when women put him in his place.

Hillary Clinton after being introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren at a campaign rally in Cincinnati, Ohio. REUTERS/Aaron Josefczyk

Hillary Clinton after being introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren at a campaign rally in Cincinnati, Ohio. REUTERS/Aaron Josefczyk

Warren and Clinton both share a desire to do everything they can to “stop Donald Trump” from becoming president, and, according to a campaign aide, they will both warn of the risks Trump would have on the economy during their event today, according to HASKELL and KREUTZ. “The Republicans underestimated and underestimated and underestimated Donald Trump. Look where that got them. They kept saying, no, no, no, that’s not going to happen, we don’t have to worry about that,” Warren said when she endorsed Clinton. “Donald Trump is a genuine threat to this country. He is a threat economically to this country. But he is a threat to who we are as a people. There is an ugly side to Donald Trump that we all have to stop and think about what’s going on here.” As Clinton and Warren’s relationship continues to evolve and Warren’s stock grows as a possible choice for vice president, it appears the senator is diving head first into helping elect Clinton. She even stopped by Clinton’s Brooklyn presidential campaign headquarters 10 days ago to give staffers a pep talk telling them “Don’t screw this up.”

They didn’t screw it up. It was marvelous, darlin’!

So, there’s some good news!

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?

49 Comments on “Monday Reads: It’s a New Day and a New Dawn”

  1. jane says:

    yes! I saw some of that and I would just love to see a Clinton/Warren ticket!! I think they would make a good team on the campaign trail! but then I am prejudiced, I am female.

    • dakinikat says:

      I just worry about men being ready for it. At least the old stodgy ones.

      • ANonOMouse says:

        I have the same concern Dak, but if Hillary decides to double down on WOMAN, I will not be disappointed. Somethings happening in this country and it’s not an anti-establishment movement. It might well be that FINALLY women are standing up for one another and declaring that our voices must be heard. With a few exceptions, men have controlled the world throughout much of recorded history and it’s hard to argue that they’ve done a good job of ruling the world. It’s time for Women to have the opportunity to make decisions about our future and about the future of our planet.

      • Fannie says:

        I hear you, but we are with HER and HER for sure.

      • RalphB says:

        I think any man who worries a lot about two women on the ticked will worry just as much about one woman on the ticket.

        • ANonOMouse says:

          You’re probably right Ralph. I just know whoever Hillary picks is OK with me. I trust her judgment.

          • Jslat says:

            That’s how I feel, too. She’s run a good campaign. She’ll make a good choice.

            Ralph, you are exactly right. One or two won’t matter to those folks.

        • dakinikat says:

          I just want her to win. I don’t want anything to hex that.

          • Joanelle says:

            Uh o, the other shoe is about to drop. The Repugs are about to release yet another report on Bengazi – just in time for the general campaign to start

          • dakinikat says:

            Yea. Gowdy is a hell realm being. He shouldn’t even be considered human.

  2. ANonOMouse says:

    Warren puts Donald Trump in his place….0…1ac.1.64.img..3.18.1597…0i10j0i30j0i24.fAwn9tQgFck#imgdii=aYruC04FQW6J6M%3A%3BaYruC04FQW6J6M%3A%3BYWxiuzhYH20l4M%3A&imgrc=aYruC04FQW6J6M%3A

  3. Sweet Sue says:

    I like Warren, but not for Veep.
    The Media would be pushing the “cat fight” meme twenty four seven.
    No thanks.
    It’s not because I live in Ohio, but I really hope that HRC picks Sherrod Brown and that he says yes.
    He’d appeal to most union members and a slice of white working men, which apparently is the only demographic that counts.;)

    • William says:

      Yes, Brown is a safer and better pick. I just wonder how well Warren wears on the campaign trail. And I think that Brown is more knowledgeable about a larger array of topics. She can definitely help in the campaign, but Brown and Hillary work better together, I think.

      I’m just now watching a stupid CNN roundtable, and I get so tired of this “she’s all that Hillary is not,” idiocy. This is not casting for a movie. However, I would probably prefer Warren to most of the other candidates for VP. I’m starting to think that it is between Warren and Brown now. Go, Sherrod!

      • ANonOMouse says:

        Sherrod would be good. He brings incredible experience and political skills to the table, but he has said on many occasions that he isn’t interested in the job.

  4. Jslat says:

    Dak, great happy days post! The SCOTUS rulings and Clinton – Warren campaigning…….Wow!

    This is a repost from end of last thread. Hillary is winning Sanders voters at a faster rate than Obama did in 2008. I think the Warren effect is part of the reason for this.

  5. bostonboomer says:

    Isn’t it wonderful to have some good news to write about for a change? Thanks Dak!

    • palhart says:

      YES!!! I can quit reading about the doom and gloom at FT and The Economist and jump over the moon. Whee! I thank Wendy Davis, those marvelous, take-no-prisoners 3 women Supremes, Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, and everyone who has fought for women’s rights. It’s time to break open a bottle and give some “Bravas”. It’s been too long between wins.

    • ANonOMouse says:

      It’s so great to have such EXCELLENT NEWS I might give twerking another try. 🙂

  6. janicen says:

    Yes, I’m celebrating too. My daughter and I protested TRAP laws at the Virginia Department of Health 3 or 4 years ago. It’s part of what drove me to become a rabid Terry McAuliffe supporter because I knew we had a hell of a fight on our hands to keep Ken Cuccinelli out of the Gov’s mansion. These SCOTUS rulings and seeing Hillz and Liz bringing down the house have me very excited. The snowball of women’s equality and liberation is gathering speed and nothing is going to stop it. Next step, ERA!!!!!

  7. jackyt says:

    I would love to see Warren play a major role in the next Clinton administration. But I’d like to see the veep slot filled by an unabashed, unapologetic male feminist. Al Franken fits the bill for me. Sherrod Brown would be a close second.

    • dakinikat says:

      I think it’s important she stay in the Senate. Mass has a Republican governor. Plus we need women there and she’s got good Committee assignments.

      • jackyt says:

        I’m good with that, too, for all the same reasons. I sure wouldn’t mind if she became senate majority leader, though.

  8. Ron4Hills says:

    The news about Coach Pat Summit is absolutely devastating.
    Coach Pat was the embodiment of toughness and class.
    She was so venerated at our house that I feel like we’ve lost a family friend.
    I know you can’t compare the two but I feel this loss just as much as the passing of Muhammad Ali.

    R.I.P. Coach.