House Democrats on Friday morning passed a more than $2 trillion bill to overhaul the country’s health care, climate, education and tax laws, moving beyond months of disputes between liberals and moderates that have stalled President Biden’s economic agenda.
The legislation builds off a framework that Biden unveiled to party lawmakers and includes new spending to enhance child care, provide free prekindergarten, combat climate change and advance a slew of tax benefits that chiefly aid low-income Americans.
But the bill omits many of Democrats’ top priorities, a reflection of the party’s difficult work to scale back a package once valued at $3.5 trillion. It now moves to the Senate, where it may face further cuts.
What follows is a guide to the legislation, one of the most significant overhauls of domestic policy in generations.
Head over to the WaPo to read summaries of all the important ways the bill could change the country.
And while the jury’s decision drew harsh criticism from the victims’ loved ones, legal experts say they were not surprised by the verdict….
Among the trial’s most key moments was the testimony from Rittenhouse, who told the court he acted in self-defense when he shot Rosenbaum, who he said threatened him earlier, chased him, threw a bag at him and lunged for his gun. At one point, 18-year-old Rittenhouse broke down in tears while on the stand.
Cat’s Pause, by Bonnie Mason
“If I would have let Mr. Rosenbaum take my firearm from me, he would have used it and killed me with it and probably killed more people,” he testified.
Rittenhouse referred to the other people he shot at as part of a “mob” chasing him, telling the court Huber came at him, struck him with a skateboard, and grabbed his gun. Rittenhouse shot him once in the chest, killing him. Finally, he said he saw Grosskreutz lunge at him and point a pistol at his head, so Rittenhouse shot him, he testified.
“Number one, you humanize him… More important, number two, he explained his uses of force,” CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson said.
Rittenhouse’s testimony gave jurors the ability to hear what he thought at the time and whether he believed he was in danger — a claim the prosecution, ultimately failed to undermine, former federal prosecutor Elie Honig said.
“They (prosecutors) pointed out some sort of minor inconsistencies and things he said on the night of, and said later, but nothing that undermines sort of the core defense argument, which was, he was attacked,” Honig told CNN’s Alisyn Camerota on Friday. “Every time he shot, he was attacked.”
“The prosecution did not make enough of a dent in Kyle Rittenhouse,” Honig added.
More experts:
What the trial came down to, according to civil rights attorney Charles F. Coleman Jr. were two competing narratives: one of Rittenhouse being a victim who was attacked, and one of being a vigilante who provoked the violence.
“The jury bought the narrative of Kyle Rittenhouse being a victim, they thought that his self-defense claim was a lot stronger than the prosecution’s provocation claim,” he said.
Wisconsin law allows the use of deadly force only if “necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.” And because Rittenhouse’s attorneys claimed self-defense, state law meant the burden fell on prosecutors to disprove Rittenhouse was acting in self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
And it was an uphill battle to climb from the start, because of the facts in this case, experts said.
“(Prosecutors) weren’t able to show that his response to each of these men, to each of these sets of threats was unreasonable,” criminal defense attorney Sara Azari told CNN’s Pamela Brown.
Kyle Rittenhouse, who was 17 years old when he shot three people, killing two, officially got away with murder. A jury of his white peers ruled that Rittenhouse acted in self-defense when he illegally acquired a gun, traveled across state lines, lied about his status as a medic, pointed his gun at protesters, and then used it to kill others.
The verdict is not surprising, if you are familiar with how the criminal justice system works for white people. Wisconsin Judge Bruce Schroeder, who presided over the Rittenhouse trial, consistently made rulings in the best interest of the white gunman. He refused to punish Rittenhouse for violating the terms of his bail; excluded evidence of Rittenhouse’s behavior before and after the shooting that spoke to his intent and lack of remorse; allowed the defense to mischaracterize the people Rittenhouse killed as “rioters”; yelled at prosecutors in front of the jury; dismissed an illegal gun charge against the gunman; and had the jury clap for one of Rittenhouse’s expert witnesses.
Others might want to argue about why Schroeder was biased toward the defendant (I think the judge’s MAGA ringtones and off-color jokes tell you all you need to know about why he was sympathetic to a white gunman who shot up anti–police violence protesters at the height of the Black Lives Matter movement). But that he was biased toward Rittenhouse was obvious to those watching the trial without blinders.
Still, a sympathetic judge and a predominately white jury are just standard gifts the criminal justice system gives to white boys accused of criminal violence. Rittenhouse also enjoyed hero status among white supremacists and Republicans as well as favorable media coverage from Fox News and The New York Times.
No doubt, some people will express shock at the verdict over the next few days. But Rittenhouse’s freedom is not a “miscarriage” of justice—it is our white justice system working as intended. This system is designed to free people like Rittenhouse: white vigilantes who kill to maintain the best interests of whiteness. It doesn’t always work (I still believe the people who lynched Ahmaud Arbery will be found guilty). But it works often enough (see George Zimmerman) that it gives comfort and confidence to any white person who clearly realizes that they might do an obviously illegal and violent thing (like, say, storm the US Capitol) and either get away with it completely or receive a light punishment.
Morris Hirshfield, Angora Cat, 1937-39
I wholeheartedly agree with Mystal. As he writes in the article, a black 17-year-old who did what Rittenhouse did would suffer a completely different fate. Frankly, that black teenager would most likely be killed by police before he had a chance to stand trial.
The specter of the angry Black man has been evoked in politics and popular culture to convince White folks that a big, bad Black man is coming to get them and their daughters.
I’ve seen viral videos of innocent Black men losing their lives because of this stereotype. I’ve watched White people lock their car doors or clutch their purses when men who look like me approach. I’ve been racially profiled….
But as I’ve watched three separate trials about White male violence unfold across the US these past few weeks — the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, the Ahmaud Arbery death trial and the civil case against organizers of the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville — I’ve come to a sobering conclusion:
There is nothing more frightening in America today than an angry White man.
It’s not the “radical Islamic terrorist” that I fear the most. Nor is it the brown immigrant or the fiery Black Lives Matter protester, or whatever the latest bogeyman is that some politician tells me I should dread.
It’s encountering an armed White man in public who has been inspired by the White men on trial in these three cases.
Of course it’s not all White men, Blake writes.
But recent events have convinced me it’s time to put another character on trial: A vision of White masculinity that allows some White men to feel as if they “can rule and brutalize without consequence.”
Reynaldo Fonseca, Figure and Cats, 2003
This angry White man has been a major character throughout US history. He gave the country slavery, the slaughter of Native Americans, and Jim Crow laws. His anger also helped fuel the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol.
It’s this angry White man — not the Black or brown man you see approaching on the street at night — who poses the most dangerous threat to democracy in America.
That’s a sweeping claim. But these trials represent something bigger than questions of individual guilt or innocence. They offer a disturbing vision of the future, and a choice about what kind of country we want to live in.
Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D- NY) called for the Justice Department to review the Kyle Rittenhouse case after a jury found Rittenhouse not guilty on all charges Friday.
Nadler, the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, reacted to the verdict by remarking, “This heartbreaking verdict is a miscarriage of justice and sets a dangerous precedent which justifies federal review by DOJ. Justice cannot tolerate armed persons crossing state lines looking for trouble while people engage in First Amendment-protected protest.”
About how they had to say Rittenhouse wasn’t guilty because they had to accept that he was acting in self-defense:
All the women in jail for killing their abusers would like to have a word.
NW Luna
Excellent and painful point, Q.
I’ve read that the available videos did show that Rittenhouse’s attackers were really attacking him and that the 2nd one had his own gun out pointing at Rittenhouse. Also, the gun wasn’t taken across state lines; it was already at a relative’s house in Kenosha. So, not surprising that within that state’s law that Rittenhouse was found not guilty. The men he shot were white, so the shooting wasn’t triggered by racism (although I suspect Rittenhouse is indeed racist, that’s just my supposition.)
It’s still very disturbing that Rittenhouse was carrying an assault weapon to and at the protest. More outrage should be directed at laws allowing sale and carrying of these weapons rather than all outrage directed at the verdict. It’s also certainly the case that a black man with the same situation would have likely been found guilty and given a harsh sentence.
I also find it disturbing that all the vociferous protests against the verdict are about race, and not sex. No one’s pointing out that women who have to use deadly force to defend themselves against attackers get cruelly unfair sentences. There’s the recent case of a rapist, guilty of multiple rapes, who gets let off because the judge “prayed over the sentencing” and decided the rapist didn’t need punishment.
Lost internet access last week when Century Link, the only ISP in my area, inadvertently (aka parts of the company not knowing what other parts are doing) cut off access while updating lines to fiber optic. It would be a comedy of errors if I didn’t have to go through all the screw-ups piling on screw-ups. Some of the time without online access was rather peaceful as I tried to use it to withdraw from internet addiction. Missed you all though.
Since I couldn’t work remotely and do telehealth remotely I had to drive into work. This means taking a long detour as the route I’d normally take includes the busiest bridge in Seattle which has been shut down since last year because it was found so unsafe it might collapse. Infrastructure. The detour route is on local roads and is about, oh, 10 x the mileage and time. There’s an alternate bridge but they’re only allowing transit on it because it will become unsafe with too much traffic. The wonderful infrastructure in the US. Just grand. So days at work and commuting were looong.
Comments
12 responses to “Lazy Caturday Reads: The Rittenhouse Verdict”
https://twitter.com/DeanObeidallah/status/1462090803984089089?s=20
https://twitter.com/ashtonpittman/status/1462064370360410120?s=20
This is a delightful read.
https://twitter.com/Dakinikat/status/1462141907723767813
About how they had to say Rittenhouse wasn’t guilty because they had to accept that he was acting in self-defense:
All the women in jail for killing their abusers would like to have a word.
Excellent and painful point, Q.
I’ve read that the available videos did show that Rittenhouse’s attackers were really attacking him and that the 2nd one had his own gun out pointing at Rittenhouse. Also, the gun wasn’t taken across state lines; it was already at a relative’s house in Kenosha. So, not surprising that within that state’s law that Rittenhouse was found not guilty. The men he shot were white, so the shooting wasn’t triggered by racism (although I suspect Rittenhouse is indeed racist, that’s just my supposition.)
It’s still very disturbing that Rittenhouse was carrying an assault weapon to and at the protest. More outrage should be directed at laws allowing sale and carrying of these weapons rather than all outrage directed at the verdict. It’s also certainly the case that a black man with the same situation would have likely been found guilty and given a harsh sentence.
I also find it disturbing that all the vociferous protests against the verdict are about race, and not sex. No one’s pointing out that women who have to use deadly force to defend themselves against attackers get cruelly unfair sentences. There’s the recent case of a rapist, guilty of multiple rapes, who gets let off because the judge “prayed over the sentencing” and decided the rapist didn’t need punishment.
More like preyed.
Just unbearable.
Catching up on the blog …
Lost internet access last week when Century Link, the only ISP in my area, inadvertently (aka parts of the company not knowing what other parts are doing) cut off access while updating lines to fiber optic. It would be a comedy of errors if I didn’t have to go through all the screw-ups piling on screw-ups. Some of the time without online access was rather peaceful as I tried to use it to withdraw from internet addiction. Missed you all though.
Since I couldn’t work remotely and do telehealth remotely I had to drive into work. This means taking a long detour as the route I’d normally take includes the busiest bridge in Seattle which has been shut down since last year because it was found so unsafe it might collapse. Infrastructure. The detour route is on local roads and is about, oh, 10 x the mileage and time. There’s an alternate bridge but they’re only allowing transit on it because it will become unsafe with too much traffic. The wonderful infrastructure in the US. Just grand. So days at work and commuting were looong.
I missed you Luna. I’m glad you’re back online.
I can so relate but it’s expected here not there in the land of all that tech stuff!!!
Missed you too! Sad to hear about the hugely tedious consequences of the blithering ISP.
For Caturday!
https://twitter.com/MalteseAnna/status/1462138731003973636
Awwww