What To Expect From Federal Judges Appointed By Trump or Harris − based On What We’ve Seen From Trump And Biden Picks For The Supreme Court And Lower Courts

BY PAUL M. COLLINS JR.

PROFESSOR OF LEGAL STUDIES 

AND POLITICAL SCIENCE,

UMASS AMHERST

The past eight years have clearly demonstrated that who sits on the federal courts matters.

The country has watched the Supreme Court take a sharp turn to the right on issues such as abortion, the Second Amendment and presidential power.

And the public has lost faith in the Supreme Court, which has an approval rating of 40%, a record low.

The opening of the court’s term on Oct. 7, 2024, provides an opportunity to think about how presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris differ with respect to the appointment of judges.

During their terms, the Trump-Pence administration appointed 223 federal district court and court of appeals judges, and the Biden-Harris administration has thus far appointed more than 210 district court and court of appeals judges. Together, this makes up just over half of all judges serving on these courts.

As a leading expert in the selection of federal judges and judicial decision-making, I have thoroughly analyzed both candidates’ records regarding judicial nominations. What emerges is a stark contrast between the two.

The Trump-Pence administration emphasized the selection of very conservative jurists with deep ties to the conservative legal movement. In contrast, the Biden-Harris administration sought to diversify the federal bench, making it more closely reflect the America it represents.

Trump-Pence administration’s extreme, conservative judges

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump made two unprecedented moves regarding the appointment of federal judges.

That year, Trump was the first candidate in American history to release a list of his potential Supreme Court picks during the campaign, which he did again in 2020. He has not yet done this in his 2024 election bid.

True to his word, Trump’s three Supreme Court nominees came from these lists, which were assembled and made public to alleviate the concerns of conservatives skeptical of his candidacy.

Second, Trump outsourced the selection of his federal judges to elites in the conservative legal movement, a network of wealthy individuals and organizations devoted to advancing conservative causes in the legal system. Issues central to the movement include restricting access to abortion, limiting business regulation and promoting originalism, a judicial philosophy based on the idea that the Constitution has a fixed meaning.

Elite individuals with ties to the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation, two of the most powerful organizations in the conservative legal movement, played the foremost roles in selecting Trump’s judicial nominees.

In particular, Leonard Leo, the current co-chairman and former executive vice president of the Federalist Society, which describes itself as placing a “premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law,” was primarily responsible for the selection of the judges Trump nominated to the federal bench.

For Trump and the conservative legal movement, this was a winning strategy. With Republicans in control of the Senate during Trump’s presidency, these judges were overwhelmingly confirmed even when they lacked the qualifications expected of a typical federal judge, such as trial court experience.

Once confirmed, Trump’s judicial nominees advanced the conservative agenda through their votes and opinions. The overturning of Roe v. Wade, which was opposed by more than 60% of the public, is clearly demonstrative of this conservative agenda, and there is a broader pattern.

Research shows that judges affiliated with the Federalist Society are substantially more conservative than even their counterparts in the Republican Party who are not associated with the organization.

Since Trump was able to appoint more than 200 federal judges to lifetime terms, including three Supreme Court justices, this means that the conservative turn will last for decades, if not generations.

In short, Trump’s judges are true believers in the mission of the conservative legal movement, and their decision-making reflects this.

Biden-Harris administration’s focus on diversity

The Biden-Harris administration took a different approach to selecting federal judges.

For almost all of the nation’s history, federal judges were chosen from an elite group of white men.

Qualified individuals were kept out of becoming federal judges because of their race, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or a combination of these identities. Under Trump, 84% of judges confirmed were white and 76% were men.

This resulted in an American judiciary that looked very different than the mosaic that makes up the country.

Biden pledged to change this.

And he did.

This was most obvious in Biden’s 2022 promise to appoint the first Black women to the Supreme Court, which resulted in the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson.

It was also demonstrated by the administration’s lower court nominations.

Unlike the Trump-Pence administration, whose federal judicial appointees were overwhelmingly white men, the Biden-Harris administration identified and nominated a diverse group of qualified federal judges. In fact, the federal judiciary under the Biden-Harris administration is the most diverse in terms of race, gender and ethnicity in the nation’s history. Only 38% of judges confirmed under the Biden-Harris administration were white, and only 36% were men.

And racial and gender diversity on the bench matters. Judges admit that their personal experiences can shape how they approach cases, and research confirms this. Scholars have shown that female judges and judges of color are more progressive than other judges, particularly on issues that they have unique experiences with, such as gender and racial discrimination.

For instance, Biden appointee Judge Candace Jackson-Akiwumi is only the second Black women to serve on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In a 2022 case, she wrote the majority opinion allowing a Black couple to present their claims of racial discrimination relating to housing to a jury. In contrast, Trump appointee Amy Joan St. Eve, a white woman, dissented and downplayed the negative consequences of the racial epithets used against the couple.

And beyond judicial decisions, research also shows that having diverse representation on the courts can lead to an increase in support for courts among women and people of color.

Although it is a bit too early to reach firm conclusions, it appears that the Biden-Harris administration’s judicial appointees are moderate liberals. For instance, thus far Brown Jackson is more moderate than liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, who were appointed by President Barack Obama.

The bottom line

The Trump-Pence and Biden-Harris administrations took very different approaches to the selection of federal judges.

Trump will be remembered for his ideological approach, working with elites in the conservative legal movement to select very conservative judges. In contrast, the Biden-Harris administration’s legacy will be its focus on diversity, which resulted in the appointment of judges who reflect the many identities of the American public.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

More And More, Business Schools Want To Show They’re Making A Positive Impact On Society. But How Should They Measure It?

BY ANDREW GAUDES

PROFESSOR OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND

FORMER DEAN, GOODMAN SCHOOL 

OF BUSINESS, BROCK UNIVERSITY

Back in 1970, the economist Milton Friedman famously argued that businesses have a single responsibility: to increase profit. For decades, the so-called “Friedman doctrine” amounted to dogma in certain circles, including at many business schools.

A lot has changed since those days. Governments and other education funders are increasingly demanding that universities prioritize social goals, like those set out in the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Meanwhile, business schools are dealing with new market pressures, including global rankings that are now taking societal impact into account, and students, professors and accrediting bodies that increasingly value social responsibility.

But just what is “societal impact,” and can it be measured? As a professor of entrepreneurship and the former dean of a business school that went through the process of determining impact, my interest in these questions is more than just theoretical.

A new standard of impact

In 2020, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, or AACSB — the organization that accredits more than 600 business schools in the U.S. — made a big decision: It revised its accreditation standards to include engagement and societal impact.

Societal impact, as defined by AACSB, refers to “how a school makes a positive impact on the betterment of society, as identified in the school’s mission and strategic plan.” While AACSB-accredited schools are now required to “demonstrate positive societal impact,” the organization offers schools wide discretion on how they work toward meeting the standard.

While the overall response has been positive, business schools have been seeking additional insight that will help them identify and measure their societal impact. After all, universities benefit their communities in many ways. If you wanted to track a business school’s impact, where should you even begin?

Tools for assessing impact

Based on my personal experience, it’s good for a business school to start by looking at its strategic plan.

That’s because determining impact is a complex process that requires analyzing massive amounts of data. Because it can be so sprawling, determining and measuring impact is best approached in alignment with the strategic intent of the organization.

A school’s strategic plan can serve as a strong basis for identifying areas of impact that align with the school’s aspirations. It also sends a message to accreditors and all stakeholders that the areas of impact are close to the core of its operations.

The next step for many schools, including my university, is to adopt an impact framework. An impact framework is a tool that organizations use to identify initiatives and measure progress toward goals. Research shows that impact frameworks can be effective at keeping organizations locked into a purposeful journey, offering guardrails to prevent people from losing sight of their objectives.

One such framework bespoke to business schools is offered by the European Foundation for Management Development, which is a global accrediting organization based in Brussels. Alongside its accreditation activities, the foundation offers the service known as the Business School Impact System, which has been initiated at more than 90 business schools worldwide.

The Business School Impact System is likely the longest-established system of its sort, since it was launched in 2012. At that time there was no other resource available – unless a school acquired the services of a consulting firm to undertake an impact analysis at great expense. The Business School Impact System framework looks at 120 indicators across seven dimensions of impact.

Other organizations, such as the U.N.-sponsored Principles for Responsible Education, offer further guidance.

What’s in it for business schools

Assessing impact offers many benefits for business schools. For example, it can boost a program’s reputation, attracting prospective students, employers and faculty. It can also offer compelling evidence for fundraising campaigns and grant applications. Additionally, insights from impact assessments can inform curriculum development, making programs relevant to contemporary social challenges.

Finally, societal impact assessments can foster stronger partnerships with community organizations and industry, encouraging universities to prioritize real-world learning opportunities for students and enabling them to contribute directly to society through collaborative projects and research initiatives.

Business schools have long played a crucial role in shaping society — it was true in Milton Friedman’s era, and it’s still true now. What’s new is that business schools are trying to measure their impact. I think this is a welcome change.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Jimmy Carter And His Hometown Of Plains Celebrate The 39th President’s 100th Birthday

An estimated crowd of 35,000 people gather for a noontime speech by Presidential candidate Jimmy Carter in downtown Philadelphia, October 26, 1976. (AP Photo, File)

BY BILL BARROW

PLAINS, GA. (AP) — Longtime friends, family and fans of Jimmy Carter milled around his hometown of Plains to celebrate his 100th birthday on Tuesday, the first time an American president has lived a full century and the latest milestone in a life that took the Depression-era farmer’s son to the White House and across the world as a Nobel Peace Prize-winning humanitarian and advocate for democracy.

Living the last 19 months in home hospice care, the 39th president keeps defying expectations, just as he did through a remarkable rise from his family peanut farming and warehouse business to the world stage. The Democrat served one presidential term from 1977 to 1981 and then for four decades led The Carter Center, which he and his wife Rosalynn co-founded in 1982 to “wage peace, fight disease, and build hope.”

“Not everybody gets 100 years on this earth, and when somebody does, and when they use that time to do so much good for so many people, it’s worth celebrating,” his grandson Jason Carter, chair of The Carter Center governing board, said in an interview.

“These last few months, 19 months, now that he’s been in hospice, it’s been a chance for our family to reflect,” he continued, “and then for the rest of the country and the world to really reflect on him. That’s been a really gratifying time.”

James Earl Carter Jr. was born Oct. 1, 1924 in Plains, where he lives in the same one-story home he and Rosalynn built in the early 1960s, before his first election to the Georgia state Senate. The former first lady, also from Plains, died last November at 96.

About 25 family members filled his home Tuesday, enjoying cupcakes on the front lawn while antique World War II planes flew over in his honor. At night, they planned to gather around the TV to watch the vice-presidential debate.

Chip Carter said his father’s next goal is to make it to Election Day.

“He’s plugged in,” Carter said in an interview. “I asked him two months ago if he was trying to live to be 100, and he said, No, I’m trying to live to vote for Kamala Harris.”

Chip Carter sat in the front row of a naturalization ceremony held annually on his father’s birthday for 100 new citizens at Plains High School, which his father attended. The building is now a museum.

Jill Stuckey, superintendent of the Jimmy Carter National Historic Park, recalled that a teacher once told Carter’s class that one of the students would be president someday. She said Carter “took it to heart.”

“One thing I’ve learned is to never underestimate Jimmy Carter, because if you do, he will prove you wrong,” Stuckey said.

President Joe Biden, the first sitting senator to endorse Carter’s 1976 campaign, praised his longtime friend for an “unwavering belief in the power of human goodness.”

“You’ve always been a moral force for our nation and the world (and) a beloved friend to Jill and me and our family,” the 81-year-old president said in a tribute video, recorded in front of Carter’s White House portrait. Carter asked Biden to eulogize him at his state funeral when the time comes.

But even on Carter’s 100th birthday, Donald Trump could not pass up repeating his longstanding jab at the Georgia Democrat. Trump labeled Biden “the worst president,” and said Carter is “the happiest man because Carter is considered a brilliant president by comparison.” It was hollow praise for the one-term president who was defeated by Ronald Reagan in 1980 but went on to become a respected world figure.

Georgia’s Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, for his part, declared Tuesday “Jimmy Carter Day” to recognize his legacy as the state’s 76th governor. Other birthday events have included a musical gala in Atlanta with dozens of artists, airing Tuesday evening on Georgia Public Broadcasting, that has raised more than $1.2 million for The Carter Center. Townspeople in Plains planned another concert Tuesday evening.

And Habitat for Humanity volunteers are devoting this week to build 30 houses in his honor in St. Paul, Minnesota. The Carters served as ambassadors for the organization, hosted annual building projects into their 90s.

Minister Barbara Green and Deacon William Le Green of Americus came to Main Street in Plains to honor Carter, who helped build their Habitat for Humanity home in the early 2000s. Le Green recalled how Carter gave the couple hammers to keep, along with their keys.

“He didn’t mind getting his hands dirty, or anything of the kind,” Le Green said.

Jimmy Carter was last seen publicly nearly a year ago, visibly diminished and silent as he used a reclining wheelchair to attend his wife’s two funeral services. Jason Carter said the family hadn’t expected to enjoy his 100th birthday after she died. The former president’s hospital bed had been set up so he could see and talk to his wife of 77 years in her final days and hours.

“We frankly didn’t think he was going to go on much longer,” Jason Carter said. “He’s really given himself over to what he feels is God’s plan. He knows he’s not in charge. But in these last few months, especially, he has gotten a lot more engaged in world events, a lot more engaged in politics, a lot more, just engaged, emotionally, with all of us.”

He said the centenarian president, born four years after women were granted the constitutional right to vote and four decades before Black women won ballot access, is eager to cast his 2024 presidential ballot for the Democrat who would be first woman, second Black person and first person of south Asian descent to reach the Oval Office.

“He, like a lot of us, was incredibly gratified by his friend Joe Biden’s courageous choice to pass the torch,” the younger Carter said. “You know, my grandfather and The Carter Center have observed more than 100 elections in 40 other countries, right? So, he knows how rare it is for somebody who’s a sitting president to give up power in any context.”

Early voting in Georgia begins Oct. 15, two weeks into Carter’s 101st year.

Barrow reported from Atlanta.

Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Accused Of Sexual Misconduct By 120 People, Attorney Says

Houston lawyer Tony Buzbee holds a news conference at his office announcing that he's representing 120 accusers who have come forward with sexual misconduct allegations against Sean "Diddy" Combs, the Hip Hop mogul who is awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, Tuesday October 1, 2024, in Houston (Elizabeth Conley/Houston Chronicle via AP)

By JUAN A. LOZANO

HOUSTON (AP) — An attorney said Tuesday he is representing 120 accusers who have come forward with sexual misconduct allegations against Sean “Diddy” Combs, the hip-hop mogul who is awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

Houston attorney Tony Buzbee said he expects lawsuits to be filed within the next month, with most expected to be filed in New York and Los Angeles. Buzbee described the victims as 60 males and 60 females, and that 25 were minors at the time of the alleged misconduct. One individual alleged he was 9 years old when he was abused, Buzbee said. The allegations cover a period from 1991 to this year.

“This type of sexual assault, sexual abuse, sexual exploitation should never happen in the United States or anywhere else. This should have never been allowed to go on for so long. This conduct has created a mass of individuals who are injured, scared and scarred,” Buzbee said at a news conference.

Following the announcement of the accusations in Texas, an attorney for Combs said the performer “cannot address every meritless allegation in what has become a reckless media circus.”

“That said, Mr. Combs emphatically and categorically denies as false and defamatory any claim that he sexually abused anyone, including minors,” attorney Erica Wolff said in a statement. “He looks forward to proving his innocence and vindicating himself in court, where the truth will be established based on evidence, not speculation.”

Buzbee said more than 3,280 individuals contacted his firm and alleged they were victimized by Combs and that after vetting the allegations, his firm decided to represent 120 people. Other cases are still being reviewed. He said some of his clients have spoken with the FBI.

The individuals that Buzbee’s firm is representing are from more than 25 states, with the majority from California, New York, Georgia and Florida.

The abuse that’s being alleged took place mostly at parties held in New York, California and Florida where individuals were given drinks that were laced with drugs, Buzbee said.

Some of the alleged conduct took place at auditions where “many times, especially young people, people wanting to break into the industry were coerced into this type of conduct in the promise of being made a star,” Buzbee said.

Combs, 54, has been locked up at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn since pleading not guilty Sept. 17 to federal charges that he used his “power and prestige” to induce female victims into drugged-up, elaborately produced sexual performances with male sex workers in events dubbed “Freak Offs.”

Other alleged victims have already filed lawsuits against Combs that include allegations of sexual assault.

Combs has pleaded not guilty to racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking. His attorney said he is innocent and will fight to clear his name.

Combs is one of the best-known music executives, producers and performers across hip-hop, having won three Grammys and worked with artists such as Notorious B.I.G., Mary J. Blige, Usher, Lil Kim, Faith Evans and 112. He founded Bad Boy Records in 1993, the influential fashion line Sean John, a vodka brand and the Revolt TV network. He sold off his stake in the latter company in June of this year.

Buzbee has also represented women who accused NFL quarterback Deshaun Watson of sexual assault and misconduct.

Follow Juan A. Lozano on Twitter: https://twitter.com/juanlozano70

Iran’s Strikes On Israel Are The Latest Sign That The Conflict In The Middle East Is Spiraling, Presenting Rising Global Security Threats

Israeli police officers inspect a damaged school building in the southern city of Gedera, following Iran’s barrage of missiles fired on Oct. 1, 2024. Menahem Kahana/AFP

BY JAVED ALI

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF PRACTICE 

OF PUBLIC POLICY

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

Iran fired at least 180 ballistic missiles at Israel on Oct. 1, 2024, amplifying tensions in the Middle East that are increasingly marked by “escalation after escalation,” as United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres put it.

Iran’s attacks – which Israel largely deterred with its Iron Dome missile defense system, along with help from nearby U.S. naval destroyers – followed Israel’s killing of Hassan Nasrallah, the longtime leader of the Tehran-backed Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, on Sept. 27.

Hezbollah has been sending rockets into northern Israel since the start of the Gaza war, which began after Hamas and other militants invaded Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and killed nearly 1,200 people. Hezbollah’s rocket attacks have displaced around 70,000 people from their homes in northern Israel.

Amy Lieberman, a politics and society editor at the Conversation U.S., spoke with counterterrorism expert Javed Ali to better understand the complex history and dynamics that are fueling the intensifying conflict in the Middle East.

How much more dangerous has the Middle East become in recent weeks?

The Middle East is in much more volatile situation than it was even a year ago. This conflict has expanded far outside of fighting primarily between Israel and Hamas.

Now, Israel and Hezbollah have a conflict that has developed over the past year that appears more dangerous than the Israel-Hamas one. This involves the use of Israeli special operations units, which have operated clandestinely in Lebanon in small groups since November 2023. In addition, Israel has been accused by Hezbollah of conducting unconventional warfare operations – like the exploding walkie-talkies and pagers – and launched hundreds of air and missile strikes in Lebanon over the past few weeks. The combination of these operations has destroyed Hezbollah’s weapons caches and military infrastructure and killed several senior leaders in the group, including Hassan Nasrallah.

The human costs of these attacks is significant, as more than 1,000 people in Lebanon have died. Among this total, it is unclear how many of the dead or wounded are actually Hezbollah fighters.

Israel and Hezbollah last had a direct war in 2006, which lasted 34 days and killed over 1,500 people between Lebanese civilians and Hezbollah fighters. Since then, Israel and Hezbollah have been in a shadow war – but not with the same kind of intensity and daily pattern that we have seen in the post-Oct. 7 landscape.

Now, the conflict has the potential to widen well outside the region, and even globally.

What does Iran have to do with the conflict between Israel and Hamas and Hezbollah?

Iran has said it fired the missiles into Israel as retaliation for attacks on Hezbollah, Hamas and the Iranian military.

A coalition of groups and organizations has now been labeled as Iran’s “Axis of Resistance.” Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khameini, and senior military commanders in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, or the IRGC, have issued unifying guidance to all the different elements, whether it is Hamas in the Gaza Strip, the Houthi rebels in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon, or Shia militias in Iraq and Syria.

Before Oct. 7, 2023, all of these groups were ideologically opposed to Israel, to a degree. But they were also fighting their own conflicts and were not rallying around supporting Hamas. Now, they have all become more active around a common goal of destroying Israel.

Iran and Hezbollah, in particular, have a deep relationship, dating back to the Iranian Revolution in 1979 and the creation of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In 1982, Israel invaded southern Lebanon in order to thwart cross-border attacks the Palestinian Liberation Organization and other Palestinian groups were launching into Israel. The newly formed Iranian IRGC sent advisers and trainers to southern Lebanon to work with like-minded Lebanese Shiite militants who were already fighting in Lebanon’s civil war. They wanted to fight against the Israeli military and elements of the multinational force comprised of U.S., French and other Western troops that were originally sent as peacekeepers to put an end to the fighting.

How does Hezbollah’s history help explain its operations today?

The relationships between these Iranian experts and Lebanese militants during Lebanon’s 15-year civil war led to the formation of Hezbollah as a small, clandestine group in 1982.

During the following few years, Hezbollah launched a brutal campaign of terrorist attacks against U.S., French and other Western interests in Lebanon. The group, then known as Islamic Jihad, first attacked the U.S. embassy in Beirut on April 18, 1983. That attack killed 52 Lebanese and American embassy employees. However, at the time, U.S. intelligence personnel and other security experts were not clear who was responsible for the embassy bombing. And given this lack of understanding and insight on Hezbollah as an emerging terrorist threat, the group aimed even higher later in 1983.

Following the embassy attack, Hezbollah carried out the October 1983 Marine barracks bombing that killed 241 U.S. service personnel. Before the 9/11 attacks, this was the biggest single act of international terrorism against the U.S.

Hezbollah was also responsible for the kidnapping and murder of American citizens, including William Buckley, the CIA station chief for Beirut. And it carried out airplane hijackings, include the infamous TWA 847 incident in 1985, in which a U.S. Navy diver was murdered.

So, Hezbollah has a long history of regional and global terrorism.

Within Lebanon, Hezbollah is a kind of parallel government to Lebanon. The Lebanese government has allowed Hezbollah to be this state within a state, but they don’t collaborate on military operations. Currently, the Lebanese military is not responding to Israel’s attacks on Lebanon. This shows how dominant of a force Hezbollah has become.

How damaging are Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah?

Hezbollah has clearly taken losses in fighters, but Hezbollah is a far bigger group than Hamas and operates on a much bigger physical territory across Lebanon.

It has far more inventory of advanced weapons than Hamas ever did, and a large fighting force that includes 40,000 to 50,000 regular forces organized into a conventional military structure. It also has 150,000 to 200,000 rockets, drones and missiles of varying range. It operates a dangerous global terrorist unit known as the External Security Organization that has attacked Israeli and Jewish interests in the 1990s in Argentina and Jewish tourists in 2012 in Bulgaria.

The Israeli military assesses they have destroyed at least half of Hezbollah’s existing weapons stockpile, based on the volume and intensity of their operations over the past few weeks. If true, this, would present a serious challenge to Hezbollah’s long-term operational capability that took decades to acquire.

What security risks does this evolving conflict present for the US?

Looking at how Hezbollah demonstrated these capabilities over a 40-year stretch of time, and based now on how Israel has hit the militant group, it would not be a stretch to speculate that Hezbollah has ordered or is considering some kind of terrorist attack far outside the region – similar to what the group did in Argentina in 1992 and 1994. What that plot would like look, how many people would be involved, and the possible target of any such attack are not clear.

Hezbollah’s leaders have said that they blame Israel for the attacks on it. About a week before Nasrallah’s death, he said that Israel’s exploding pager and walkie-talkie operations in Lebanon were a “declaration of war” and the “the enemy had crossed all red lines.”

Since then, Hezbollah has remained defiant, in spite of the significant losses the group has sustained by Israel these past few weeks. Questions also remain about how Hezbollah’s leadership will likewise hold the U.S. responsible for Israel’s actions. And if so, would that mean a return to the type of terrorism that Hezbollah inflicted on U.S. interests in the region in the 1980s? As recent events have shown, the world is facing a dangerous and volatile security environment in the Middle East.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Dikembe Mutombo, A Hall Of Fame Player And Tireless Advocate, Dies At 58 From Brain Cancer

Retired Denver Nuggets center Dikembe Mutombo waves to the crowd as his jersey number was retired by the team during halftime of the Nuggets basketball game against the Portland Trail Blazers on Sunday, Octobder 29, 2016, in Denver. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski, File)

BY TIM REYNOLDS

Dikembe Mutombo, a Basketball Hall of Famer who was one of the best defensive players in NBA history and a longtime global ambassador for the game, died Monday from brain cancer, the league announced. He was 58.

His family revealed two years ago that he was undergoing treatment in Atlanta for a brain tumor. The NBA said he died surrounded by his family.

“Dikembe Mutombo was simply larger than life,” NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said. “On the court, he was one of the greatest shot blockers and defensive players in the history of the NBA. Off the floor, he poured his heart and soul into helping others.”

Mutombo was distinctive in so many ways — the playful finger wag at opponents after blocking their shots, his height, his deep and gravelly voice, his massive smile. Players of this generation were always drawn to him and Philadelphia 76ers star Joel Embiid, who was born in Cameroon, looked to Mutombo as an inspiration.

“It’s a sad day, especially for us Africans, and really the whole world,” Embiid said Monday. “Other than what he’s accomplished on the basketball court, I think he was even better off the court. He’s one of the guys that I look up to, as far as having an impact, not just on the court, but off the court. He’s done a lot of great things. He did a lot of great things for a lot of people. He was a role model of mine. It is a sad day.”

Mutombo spent 18 seasons in the NBA, playing for Denver, Atlanta, Houston, Philadelphia, New York and the then-New Jersey Nets. The 7-foot-2 center out of Georgetown was an eight-time All-Star, three-time All-NBA selection and went into the Hall of Fame in 2015 after averaging 9.8 points and 10.3 rebounds per game for his career.

He also was part of one of the league’s most iconic playoff moments, helping eighth-seeded Denver oust top-seeded Seattle in the first round of the 1994 Western Conference playoffs. That best-of-five series marked the first time a No. 8 beat a No. 1 in NBA history.

“It’s really hard to believe,” Toronto President Masai Ujiri said Monday, pausing several times because he was overcome with emotion shortly after hearing the news of Mutombo’s death. “It’s hard for us to be without that guy. You have no idea what Dikembe Mutombo meant to me. ... That guy, he made us who we are. That guy is a giant, an incredible person.”

Mutombo last played during the 2008-09 season, devoting his time after retirement to charitable and humanitarian causes. He spoke nine languages and founded the Dikembe Mutombo Foundation in 1997, concentrating on improving health, education and quality of life for the people in the Congo.

And on occasion, LeBron James pointed out with a laugh on Monday, Mutombo didn’t necessarily improve the health of others.

“My fondest memory of Dikembe Mutombo? He fractured my face on my birthday in Cleveland with an elbow,” James, the Los Angeles Lakers’ star, said while taking several minutes Monday to pay tribute to Mutombo’s life. “I never even got an opportunity to tell him about that. But yeah. I don’t remember how old … I was in Cleveland, my first stint, and I think I was turning 22 maybe?

“I went to the hole and caught one of those Dikembe elbows, and if anybody know about the Dikembe elbows, they do not feel good. He fractured my face, and I went to the hospital that night, and I wore a mask for a little bit. That is my memory of Dikembe,” James said.

James was close on the details: Dec. 29, 2004, was when that play happened, late in the first half, one day before his 20th birthday.

Mutombo told reporters that night he wasn’t sure how James got hurt. “He was laying there and I was like, ‘What happened, what happened?’” Mutombo told the Houston Chronicle after that game. “All I know, I was running to the basket. ... LeBron turned around to stop me going to the basket. The collision happened.”

Ryan Mutombo, the Hall of Famer’s son, said in a tribute posted on social media that his father “loved others with every ounce of his being.”

“My dad is my hero because he simply cared,” Ryan Mutombo wrote. “He remains the purest heart I have ever known.”

Mutombo served on the boards of many organizations, including Special Olympics International, the CDC Foundation and the National Board for the U.S. Fund for UNICEF.

“There was nobody more qualified than Dikembe to serve as the NBA’s first Global Ambassador,” Silver said. “He was a humanitarian at his core. He loved what the game of basketball could do to make a positive impact on communities, especially in his native Democratic Republic of the Congo and across the continent of Africa.”

Mutombo is one of three players to win the NBA’s Defensive Player of the Year four times. The others: reigning DPOY winner Rudy Gobert of the Minnesota Timberwolves, and Hall of Famer Ben Wallace.

“He was always there to talk to me and advise me on how to approach the season and take care of my body and icing after games and stretching and trying different things like yoga,” Milwaukee Bucks star Giannis Antetokounmpo said. “He will be always remembered and may his soul rest in peace.”

Philadelphia 76ers president Daryl Morey — who was with Mutombo for many seasons in Houston — was informed of his friend’s death during the team’s media day on Monday. Tears welled in Morey’s eyes as he processed the news.

“There aren’t many guys like him,” Morey said. “Just a great human being. When I was a rookie GM in this league, my first chance in Houston, he was someone I went to all the time. ... His accomplishments on the court, we don’t need to talk about too much. Just an amazing human being, what he did off the court for Africa. Rest in peace, Dikembe.”

AP Sports Writers Steve Megargee in Milwaukee, Greg Beacham in Los Angeles and Dan Gelston in Camden, New Jersey, and Associated Press writer Ian Harrison in Toronto contributed to this report.

AP NBA: https://apnews.com/hub/nba

Does Hezbollah Represent Lebanon? And What Impact Will The Death Of Longtime Leader Hassan Nasrallah Have?

Hassan Nasrallah (Wikipedia)

BY MIREILLE REBEIZ

CHAIR OF MIDDLE EAST STUDIES & ASSOCIATE 

PROFESSOR OF FRANCOPHONE & WOMEN'S,

GENDER AND SEXUALITY STUDIES,

DICKINSON COLLEGE

Israel has killed the leader of the militant group Hezbollah in a airstrike in Beirut, marking a further escalation of hostilities in the region.

The death of Hassan Nasrallah, confirmed by Hezbollah on Sept 28, 2024, forms part of a major Israeli push against the Iran-backed group in recent days that has resulted in the death of several top leaders – but also killed hundreds of civilians and left many more fleeing Lebanon’s south in fear of a ground invasion.

But what is Hezbollah? What exactly is its role in Lebanon? And how big a blow is Nasrallah’s death? The Conversation turned to Mireille Rebeiz, a Lebanon expert at Dickinson College who is writing her second book on Hezbollah, to help explain.
What is Hezbollah? And what role does it play in Lebanon?

Hezbollah, which means “party of God” in Arabic, was born during the Lebanese Civil War after Israel’s invasion and occupation of Lebanon in 1982.

Officially, the group came into existence in 1985 with the publication of a manifesto that detailed Hezbollah’s aims for the region. The manifesto outlined a plan to duplicate the Iranian revolution of 1979 in Lebanon and create a Shiite Islamic state. It pledged allegiance to the Supreme Leader of the Iranian Revolution, Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini, and vowed to fight the Israeli occupation of Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

The Lebanese Civil War ended in 1991 with the signing of the “Taif Agreement,” in which warring factions agreed that a political and democratic process was the only way to move forward in Lebanon. Consequently, Hezbollah had to develop a political wing, and in 1992 Hezbollah entered the political ring, running for national elections and winning 12 out of 128 parliamentarian seats.

But while the peace agreement called for the disarmament of militia groups, Hezbollah was allowed to retain its armed wing as a “resistance” group, fighting Israeli occupation in south Lebanon.

Many Lebanese political parties allied themselves with Hezbollah at this juncture. While these parties did not necessarily share the group’s views or its commitment to Iran, they were similarly committed to fight the Israeli occupation, and Hezbollah fighters were the main force doing so.

Hezbollah’s presence in parliament and the Lebanese government, and its alliance with various political parties, allowed it to control the country and veto decisions that do not fit its agenda or promote its interest.

This is particularly apparent in the country’s recurrent presidential vacuum.

Since 2005, Lebanon has had three presidential lapses: from Nov. 2007 to May 2008, from May 2014 to October 2016, and from Oct. 31, 2023 until today. The parliamentarian Speaker, Nabih Berri, who is Shiite and known for his allegiance to Hezbollah, refuses to convene the parliament for presidential elections unless the nominee is approved by Hezbollah and its allies.

As well as having a political and military wing, Hezbollah also provides various services, such as social welfare, health care, utilities, education and even security to his community.
Is it right to see Hezbollah primarily as a Iran-backed militia?

Yes — Hezbollah is primarily an Iranian-backed militia. It exists to serve the Iranian regime and expand its ideology in the region, as set out in the group’s 1985 manifesto. In 2009, Hezbollah issued a new manifesto in which it reaffirmed its commitment to the Shiite Islamic resistance led by Tehran.

As to its financial and military support, in 2016, Nasrallah confirmed: “Hezbollah’s budget, everything it eats and drinks, its weapons and rockets, comes from the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Furthermore, with the backing of Iran, Hezbollah was able to create and expand its own illegal financial network through money laundering, drug trafficking and other unlawful activities.

Along with Iran, Syria has played a major role in Hezbollah’s development. The Taif Agreement called for Syrian Armed Forces to enter Lebanon for a two-year period to help establish law and order after more than a decade of civil war.

But it stayed in Lebanon for over 16 years, and the Syrian government’s closeness to the Iranian regime made Hezbollah a perfect ally. So much so, that when civil war broke out in Syria in 2011, Hezbollah emerged as a major actor in that conflict, sending thousands of Lebanese fighters to Syria to assist the government’s efforts to suppress a popular uprising.
How popular is Hezbollah in Lebanon?

Support for Hezbollah has fluctuated over the years. When Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, many Lebanese celebrated Hezbollah as the country’s liberator.

But others started pushing for Hezbollah to cease its military operations and for the Lebanese Armed Forces to take over Hezbollah’s task in securing Lebanon’s borders.

In addition, growing anti-Syrian sentiment in Lebanon, in part due to serious human rights violations, also dented Hezbollah’s popularity because of their close ties.

On Feb 14, 2005, Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hairi, who was known for his opposition to Hezbollah and Syria, was assassinated. Evidence suggested that both were involved.

The killing sparked massive anti-government, anti-Syrian and anti-Hezbollah protests on the streets of Beirut. The subsequent Cedar Revolution led to the departure of the Syrian forces from Lebanon and marked a drop in Hezbollah’s popularity, in general.

This drop was apparent in the 2005 elections, in which an anti-Syrian and anti-Hezbollah political coalition claimed victory.

Since 2005, Lebanon has seen a series of events that indicate a clear opposition to Hezbollah. Several journalists and political figures were assassinated for speaking out against Hezbollah and Syria. Their deaths outraged many Lebanese.

And in 2015, the “You Stink” environmental movement was born to protest political corruption and Hezbollah’s control of waste management.

In 2019, a similar protest movement was born in which Lebanese took to the streets to express their frustration against corruption and inflation. Under the slogan “All Means All,” Lebanese protested all political parties — including Hezbollah.

These events indicate Lebanese dissatisfaction with Hezbollah.

A 2020 poll showed a drop in Hezbollah’s popularity even among the Shiite community, which makes up about a third of the population.

Polling during the almost year of hostilities following the Oct. 7, 2023, attack by Hezbollah ally Hamas on Israel suggests that Hezbollah’s influence continues to exceed its popularity. An Arab Barometer poll of Lebanese in early 2024 found that only 30% trust Hezbollah, whereas 55% said they do not trust the group at all. While Hezbollah still retains the trust of 85% of Shiites, only 9% of Sunnis and Druze and 6% of Christians trust the militia.
What is Hezbollah’s structure?

Originally, Hezbollah leadership consisted of a religious council of seven members created in the 1980s; it has branches and committees that govern different affairs including finances, social, political and military issues. This religious council, or “Shura Council,” has regional offices in Beirut, the Bekaa Valley in the country’s eastern region and south Lebanon.

At the end of the Lebanese Civil War, two more bodies were added: an executive council and a politburo, or central political body. The religious council was chaired by Sayyid Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, who offered religious guidance to the Shiite community and was often described as Hezbollah’s spiritual leader.

Both the council and Hezbollah swear allegiance to Iran’s Supreme Leader. The council is also tasked to select Hezbollah’s Secretary General.

After the Israeli assassination of Hezbollah’s co-founder, Abbas al-Musawi, in 1992, Hassan Nasrallah assumed this role and remained Secretary General until his death in Beirut in the current Israeli campaign.
What impact will Nasrallah’s death have on Hezbollah’s operations?

The attacks on Hezbollah’s pagers and other wireless devices were primarily intended to creat chaos and cut communication between different leaders and units.

The assassinations of Hezbollah commanders are meant to remove major decision-makers. The death of Secretary General Nasrallah is a definite blow to the group, which is already vulnerable from last week’s attacks. The goal is to demoralize its fighters.

Furthermore, these attacks convey a clear message that Israel will no longer accept the tit-for-tat attacks on its northern border.

However, Israel may not necessarily get its desired impact.

After Israel assassinated Abbas al-Musawi, his wife and son, his death only reaffirmed Hezbollah’s commitment to its mission. Nasrallah followed Al-Musawi’s footsteps, and under his leadership, the group grew its recruitment, arsenal and reach inside and outside Lebanon.

The situation now is fluid and it’s hard to predict what will happen next. But the fresh wave of violence may only reinforce Hezbollah’s resolve.

Furthermore, it might see more involvement of other Hezbollah-aligned players into the region, such as the Houthis in Yemen and Kata'ib Hizballah in Iraq.

Following the announcement of Nasrallah’s death, Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei threatened Israel and vowed more support to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Autoworkers, Boeing Machinists, Cannabis Drivers: Labor Unions Are Mobilizing In New And Old Industries Alike

(Carlos Felipe Balcazar/Getty)

BY ROBERT FORRANT

PROFESSOR OF U.S. HISTORY AND

LABOR STUDIES, UMASS LOWELL

What do violinists, grocery store clerks, college dorm counselors, nurses, teachers, hotel housekeepers, dockworkers, TV writers, autoworkers, Amazon warehouse workers and Boeing workers have in common?

In the past year or so, they’ve all gone on strike, tried to get co-workers to join a union, or threatened to walk off the job over an array of issues that include retirement plans, technology replacing workers and lagging wages as inflation increased.

The array of Americans who are organizing unions extends to the tech, digital media and cannabis industries. Even climbing gym employees have formed a union.

This is happening as U.S. workers in general are finding themselves in an increasingly precarious position. As a labor historian, I believe mobilization is the result of economic disruption caused by the relocation of jobs, the impact of new technologies on work and the erosion of income stability. It’s become very unlikely that today’s workers will have the same employer for decades, as my father and many men and women of his generation did.

Greatest generation of jobs

My father, a butcher, worked for the same company for 40 years and raised a family of seven on his union-secured wages and benefits. While back in the 1950s and 1960s many working-class Americans took that kind of job security for granted, it’s no longer the case. Some career coaches consider keeping a job for many years as a character flaw.

The upsurge in labor organizing is in part a way for workers to gain some sort of say about what happens to their jobs. It’s also helping employees plan for the future.

Union members are increasingly using strikes to demand higher wages, better benefits and increased job security. Why should it be, some low-income earners are asking, that in my family we must hold down two or three jobs to make ends meet, while CEO pay goes through the stratosphere?

There were 33 major strikes involving nearly a half-million workers in 2023, the most since 2000. Many labor scholars attribute much of this uptick in organizing to several long-term trends. They include stagnating wages, high out-of-pocket health spending costs – even for those with insurance coverage – and growing concerns over job insecurity caused by the expanded use of labor-saving technology.

Precarious work

In many industries, large numbers of the reliable jobs that paid enough for workers to be in the middle class have dwindled. That’s largely due to technological advances that replaced labor with automation and manufacturers moving to lower-income places, including Mexico, China and other foreign countries, as well as southern states such as Alabama and Tennessee. These trends have left behind a Rust Belt strewn with decaying buildings that once housed bustling factories and increasing numbers of what are sometimes called “precarious” jobs, which are poorly paid and lack sick leave, vacation time and other basic protections.

This isn’t new.

I’ve researched how New England’s textile industry fled cities such as Lowell, Massachusetts, as early as the 1920s for nonunion locations in South Carolina, while precision metalworking plants in Springfield, Massachusetts, sent work to Mississippi and South Carolina starting in the 1950s.

But faced with mounting economic uncertainty, public support for unions is increasing. A 2024 Gallup Poll found that 70% of Americans approve of them – close to the 71% level seen in 2022, which was the highest approval rating that unions had gotten in half a century.

Support is even rising among Americans who identify as Republicans, a political party that has historically frowned on organized labor: Gallup found it stood at 49% in 2024, down from 56% two years earlier but up from a low point of 26% in 2011.

Hotel workers strike

On Labor Day weekend in 2024, more than 10,000 hotel workers represented by the UNITE HERE union and employed by 24 hotels from Boston to the West Coast to Hawaii went on strike. Their labor actions disrupted travel plans during a busy time.

Most hotel work stoppages lasted for three days and intended to pressure the companies that own hotels as part of a larger labor contract negotiation strategy. Later in September, workers kept walking off the job at other hotels to pressure management to improve pay, expand health insurance coverage, boost retirement benefits and agree to resolve important job security issues.

Although the hotel industry has been booming since 2023, UNITE HERE contends that employment has decreased by nearly 40%, while wages have stagnated. On the picket line, workers have described living paycheck to paycheck and working one or two additional jobs to cover recent rent hikes.

Hotel workers have more bargaining power today because, according to an industry study, 79% of the 450 hotels surveyed looking to hire people said they could not fill open jobs.

That strike shows no sign of ending. Thousands more hotel workers were joining in by late September.
Boeing strike

Unlike the hotel workers’ brief rolling work stoppages, the Boeing strike hasn’t let up since it began on Sept. 13, 2024. About 32,000 workers, mainly in Seattle, Washington, and Portland, Oregon, have walked off the job.

Boeing workers declared the strike even though the International Association of Machinists District 751 leadership in Seattle wanted to accept a deal from Boeing’s management. But on Sept. 12, 94.6% of all rank-and-file workers rejected the tentative contract their leadership recommended the union accept.

The Boeing strike started the next day; it could last a long time. On Sept. 25, the workers rejected what the company had called its “best and final offer” to settle the strike.

This is the eighth time these workers have gone on strike since their union formed in the 1930s. Its two most recent strikes, in 2008 and 2005, lasted 57 days and 28 days, respectively. Boeing’s management, already reeling from the company’s numerous operational and safety problems, has announced several cost-cutting measures, including furloughs for some nonunion employees.

Boeing’s nonunion backup plan

Boeing has assured its shareholders and the public that the strike would not hinder production of the 787 Dreamliner jets at the company’s nonunion factory in South Carolina.

International Association of Machinists union members have never forgiven Boeing for deciding to build that assembly plant. Operational since 2011, it now employs roughly 6,000 workers. Most of them would have been union members had Boeing built that plant or expanded production in Washington or Oregon, because the existing labor agreement would have covered the new workers.

However, the agreement did not extend to South Carolina.

At the time of the decision, a Boeing spokesperson said, its contract with the machinists’ union “acknowledges our right to locate work elsewhere, and that’s what we chose to do in this case because we just couldn’t get the terms from them that we needed.”

Dockworkers could be next

The timing of the hotel and Boeing strikes makes them perhaps more visible than they might have been because union members’ votes are coveted by both major parties in the 2024 presidential election.

Meanwhile, 25,000 dockworkers who belong to the International Longshoremen’s Association are planning a possible shutdown of ports from Boston to Houston on Oct. 1, over the union’s concern for job loss due to automation.

How job security issues are addressed following this wave of strikes could set the tone for what other hospitality, manufacturing and transportation unions seek when their contracts are up for negotiation again.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Police Stop More Black Drivers, While Speed Cameras Issue Unbiased Tickets − New Study From Chicago

BY WENFEI XU, DAVID LEVINSON, MICHAEL J. SMART AND NEBIYOU YONAS TILAHUN

Traffic stops by Chicago police have more than doubled over the past nine years in what the American Civil Liberties Union, a civil rights group, is calling the “new stop-and-frisk.”

Stop and frisk is when officers stop and search people based on “reasonable suspicion” that they are involved in criminal activity. The practice has been documented to disproportionately target Black and Latino people – not only in Chicago but also in New York and across the United States. In Chicago, it has declined sharply since a 2015 reform agreement between the ACLU and the Chicago Police Department.

Meanwhile, traffic stops have surged in Chicago, rising from less than 200,000 in 2016 to over 570,000 in 2023. And much like stop and frisk, police disproportionately stop Black drivers in Chicago, according to our latest study examining racial bias in traffic enforcement.

Drivers, automated enforcement and police stops

Our research, published in June 2024, used data on the racial composition of drivers on every street in Chicago. We then compared who is driving on roads with who is being ticketed by the city’s speed cameras and who is being stopped by the Chicago police.

Our findings show that when speed cameras are doing the ticketing, the proportion of tickets issued to Black and white drivers aligns closely with their respective share of roadway users. With human enforcement, in contrast, police officers stop Black drivers at a rate that far outstrips their presence on the road.

For instance, on roads where half of drivers are Black, Black drivers receive approximately 54% of automated camera citations. However, they make up about 70% of police stops.

On roadways where half of the drivers are white, white drivers account for around half of automated citations – and less than 20% of police stops.

Driving while Black

Our research adds to other evidence that shows racial bias is a problem in traffic enforcement – a problem sometimes summarized as “driving while Black.”

The civil rights era of the 1960s was rife with law enforcement incidents that targeted Black drivers. As the scholar and historian Gretchen Sorin details in her 2020 book “Driving While Black,” the car simultaneously opened new possibilities of freedom as well as new hazards for Black people.

By the 1990s, the whole world witnessed the punishment that could await those caught driving while Black. In 1991, a Black man named Rodney King was stopped after a high-speed chase and beaten by police in Los Angeles. The violent encounter, captured on videotape and shared on local media, became national news.

The officers’ acquittal sparked the 1992 Los Angeles riots, in which widespread unrest and violence killed over 50 people, injured thousands and inflicted $1 billion in property damage.

In recent years, the police killings of Daunte Wright, Tyre Nichols and other Black drivers have shown how traffic stops can escalate quickly and sometimes lethally.

In September 2024, Miami Dolphins player Tyreek Hill was pulled over by local police on his way to a game at the Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida. Police officers physically pulled Hill from his vehicle and handcuffed him. The incident raised questions about the officers’ aggressive use of force.

Fairer enforcement and safer streets

All humans have biases. These biases can become dangerous when those humans are police – agents of the state who are armed and empowered to make our cities safer.

And even when there’s no excessive use of force, disparate enforcement erodes trust between communities and police.

In recent years, as national conversations around racial bias in policing have accelerated, many police departments have implemented programs such as implicit bias training to establish fairer enforcement. While these initiatives appear to have an effect on officers’ attitudes about implicit bias, they do not seem to change the racial breakdown of whom police stopped, searched or arrested.

To reduce enforcement disparities and improve how traffic violations are handled, more fundamental reforms are likely necessary.

What can more ambitious policy reforms look like?

Several recent potential reforms of traffic enforcement center on decriminalization and de-escalation.

Legislators in Illinois recently proposed a bill that would prohibit traffic stops solely based on noncriminal and minor offenses such as improper vehicle registration, seat belt violations or lane usage mistakes.

Berkeley, California, is considering using trained civilians for traffic enforcement to reduce the opportunity for escalation. The idea is akin to how parking enforcement is done in many cities, including Chicago, which has unarmed parking units separate from the police.

The rationale for many police traffic stops is safety, which should remain a priority. Between 2013 and 2022 in Chicago, crashes on average killed 44 pedestrians, seven bicyclists and 78 vehicle passengers each year.

In contrast, the Norwegian capital of Oslo had four traffic deaths a year between 2015 and 2019. If Chicago’s streets were as safe as Oslo’s, crashes would kill 15 people each year – not 129.

More reliance on automated traffic enforcement could improve traffic safety and transform policing.

Cameras can detect dangerous moving violations, such as serious speeding and running red lights, without the need for immediate police involvement. Automated enforcement alone won’t guarantee safe streets, but cameras have reduced fatal and serious injury crashes substantially where deployed, including in Chicago.

Over half of police stops in Chicago for 2023 were license plate, registration or equipment related. Automating enforcement of such nonmoving violations would eliminate a major reason for police-driver interaction, reducing the potential for bias and escalation.

This, in turn, would free police resources to focus on nontraffic priorities.

And as our data shows, cameras are equal opportunity ticketers: They don’t have racial bias and carry no risk of escalation.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Post-Election Violence Is Possible In US, Political Scientist Says − And It Could Be Worse Than Jan. 6

Armed Trump supporters breach the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in the worst attack on Washington, D.C., since the War of 1812. AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana

BY ALEXANDER COHEN

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL

SCIENCE, CLARKSON UNIVERSITY

Should Americans be bracing for bloodshed if Donald Trump loses the 2024 presidential election?

As a political scientist who studies American politics, I can easily imagine a repeat of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection – or worse – following this November’s presidential election.

Flashback to 2020

Four years ago, in an attempt to overturn his loss in the 2020 presidential election, then-President Donald Trump and his surrogates furiously challenged its results. Lodging 63 lawsuits, Trump and his surrogates tried to discredit or override vote counting, election processes and certification standards in nine states.

None of these attempts was successful. Many were dismissed as baseless – often by Trump-appointed judges – before they even saw trial. Simply put, there is no evidence of widespread fraud. Even a voter data expert hired by Trump concluded that the 2020 election was not stolen.

The U.S. legal system agreed, demonstrating that courts remain an important bulwark protecting American democracy. Yet the legal system cannot prevent political violence wrought by election denialism, as the country soon learned.

On Jan. 6, 2021, over 2,000 people stormed the United States Capitol to forcibly prevent Congress from certifying the 2020 presidential election. Four people died and 138 police officers were injured during the riot, which inflicted nearly US$3 million of damage. Four officers who responded to the riot would later kill themselves.

The mob was spurred, at least in part, by Trump’s rousing speech at a rally in Washington, D.C., earlier that day. There, he reiterated his claims that the 2020 election had been “stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats” and warned the crowd of approximately 53,000 that “if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

Many legal scholars considered this to be incitement.

“He clearly knew there were people in that crowd who were ready to and intended to be violent,” legal scholar Garrett Epps told the BBC. “He not only did nothing to discourage it, he strongly hinted it should happen.”

Trump: A sore loser … and winner

Trump has a long history of denying the results of any contest whose outcome he does not like.

Before entering the political arena, Trump called the 2012 Emmys “dishonest” because his show, “The Apprentice,” did not win. In 2012, he dismissed then-President Barack Obama’s reelection as a “total sham” and questioned the accuracy of vote tallies and voting machines. Unleashing a barrage of tweets, Trump urged citizens to “fight like hell” against a “disgusting injustice.”

As a presidential candidate in 2016, Trump called the Republican primaries fraudulent after his competitor Sen. Ted Cruz won in Iowa, tweeting that the Texan “stole it.”

Ultimately, Trump won the Republican primaries and the national presidential campaign against Hillary Clinton in 2016. Nonetheless, he falsely claimed that he only lost the popular vote – Trump fell 2 million short of Clinton’s 65.8 million votes – due to massive voting among illegal immigrants.

Attacking the 2024 election

Trump has doubled down on his election denial this election cycle. By May 2024, The New York Times had documented 550 such statements, up from roughly 100 in the entire 2020 campaign.

Continuing to insist that the 2020 election was “rigged,” Trump predicts a repeat in 2024.

This narrative of pervasive victimization has been bolstered by a flurry of lawsuits and criminal investigations brought against the former president. Since 2020, state and federal prosecutors have charged Trump with 94 crimes, including business fraud, mishandling classified documents and interfering with the federal election.

In New York, he was convicted of 34 counts of corporate fraud and found liable for sexual abuse in a civil case filed by author E. Jean Carroll.

Trump has cast these legal challenges as a deliberate attempt by President Joe Biden to interfere with the 2024 election over 350 times.

“My legal issues, every one of them, civil and the criminal ones, are all set up by Joe Biden,” Trump told a New York City crowd in January 2024. “They’re doing it for election interference.”

His surrogates amplify this message. For instance, Mike Howell, director of the right-leaning Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project, proclaimed on June 6, 2024, at a public Washington event that there is a “0% chance of a free and fair election.”

From denialism to violence: Warning signs

Lying about election results is no mere tantrum. It is a cornerstone of Trump’s strategy to paint himself as the victim of an elitist deep state – an image that appeals to his base, particularly among white working-class voters, some of whom feel that they are victims themselves of globalization and shadowy elites.

This strategy is working.

A September 2023 survey by the independent pollster PRRI showed that 32% of Americans believe that the 2020 election was stolen. Even though the question has been comprehensively litigated and dismissed in the courts, many American citizens simply do not believe, under any circumstances, that Trump can lose in a fair election.

That fact, combined with other statistics from the same poll, explains why I believe another Jan. 6 is possible.

About 23% of Americans and 33% of Republicans believe that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country” – a 5% increase among Republicans and 8% among the general public since 2021.

Meanwhile, 75% of Americans believe that American democracy is at risk in the 2024 election. That, too, may be something worth fighting for – especially when 39% of Trump supporters and 42% of Biden supporters report having no friends who support the opposing candidate. When people do not trust or socialize with people unlike them, violence between groups is more likely.

I fear little can be done to prevent such violence.

In 2022, Congress, acting in rare bipartisan fashion, approved the Electoral Count Reform and Transition Improvement Act of 2022, which closed many doors that President Trump attempted to use to thwart the 2020 election. Yet, as history shows, rule of law is not a certain brace against violence.

Given the perceived stakes of the election for most Americans, along with Trump’s ever-sharpening incendiary rhetoric, it is hard to imagine that Jan. 6, 2021, was an isolated chapter in American history.

Indeed, it may have been just a prelude.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE