SAY NO TO CLUSTER BOMBS 
Ukraine seeks US cluster bombs to adapt for drone use - lawmakers





Mon, March 6, 2023
By Jonathan Landay

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Ukraine has broadened a request for controversial cluster bombs from the United States to include a weapon that it wants to cannibalize to drop the anti-armor bomblets it contains on Russian forces from drones, according to two U.S. lawmakers.

Kyiv has urged members of Congress to press the White House to approve sending the weapons but it is by no means certain that the Biden administration will sign off on that. Cluster munitions, banned by more than 120 countries, normally release large numbers of smaller bomblets that can kill indiscriminately over a wide area, threatening civilians.

Ukraine is seeking the MK-20, an air-delivered cluster bomb, to release its individual explosives from drones, said U.S. Representatives Jason Crow and Adam Smith, who both serve on the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee. That is in addition to 155 mm artillery cluster shells that Ukraine already has requested, they said.

They said Ukrainian officials urged U.S. lawmakers at last month's Munich Security Conference to press for White House approval.

Ukraine hopes cluster munitions will give it an edge in the grinding fight against Russian forces in eastern Ukraine.

The Ukrainian government has said publicly that it wants U.S. cluster munitions. The petition for MK-20s - also known as CBU-100s - has not been reported previously.

The Ukrainian Embassy referred Reuters to the defense ministry in Kyiv, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A National Security Council spokesperson said that while Ukraine and the White House "closely coordinate" on military aid, she had no "new capabilities to announce."

FIGHTING THE "HUMAN WAVE"

Ukraine wants the artillery rounds - the Dual-Purpose Conventional Improved Munitions (DPICM) - to halt the kinds of "human wave" attacks that Russia has mounted in its months-long drive to overrun the ruined eastern city of Bakhmut, the lawmakers said.

Each shell disperses 88 submunitions.

The MK-20 is delivered by aircraft. It opens in mid-flight, releasing more than 240 dart-like submunitions, or bomblets.

The Ukrainian military believes these submunitions "have better armor-piercing capability" than the weapons it has been dropping from drones, said Smith, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee.

Ukraine, battling an enemy with more manpower and weaponry, has used drones extensively for surveillance and for dropping explosives on Russian forces.

Crow, a Democrat and U.S. Army veteran, said he might support giving the MK-20 with assurances that Ukrainians would remove the bomblets and "use them in a non-cluster employment."

Production of the MK-20s ended years ago, but the U.S. military retains a stockpile of the Cold War-era weapon.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who also participated in last month's conference, confirmed that Ukrainian officials in Munich urged U.S. lawmakers to press the White House to provide Kyiv with cluster munitions. He said he would do so this week.

The congressional aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Ukrainian officials also privately have been lobbying lawmakers in Washington to press for White House approval.

"That's not going to happen," Smith said, referring to Biden administration signoff.

CONTROVERSIAL WEAPONS

Since the start of the conflict Ukraine has asked for - and largely received - weapons that the U.S. initially refused, including HIMARS missile launchers, Patriot air defense batteries and Abrams tanks. But cluster munitions could be a step too far for the administration and some in Congress.

Opponents argue that when bomblets scatter they can maim and kill civilians and have high failure rates, with duds posing a danger for years after a conflict ends.

A 2008 pact prohibiting the production, use and stockpiling of cluster munitions has been adopted by 123 countries, including most of NATO's 28 members. The United States, Russia and Ukraine have declined to join.

Giving the Ukrainians "a banned weapon would undermine their moral authority in a way that (Russian President Vladimir) Putin would exploit," said Tom Malinowski, a former congressman who served as the top State Department human rights official.

But there is some support in Congress. The congressional aide said most Republicans "are fairly amenable" to Ukraine's requests.

"This is a war where (the Ukrainians) are outmanned," Graham told Reuters. "And cluster munitions really are pretty lethal to mass formations as well as armor. In the areas where they are going to use this stuff there are no civilians."

A 2009 law bans exports of U.S. cluster munitions with bomblet failure rates higher than 1 percent, which covers virtually all of the U.S. military stockpile. U.S. President Joe Biden can waive the prohibition.

Ukrainian and Russian forces both have used such weapons since Russia first seized Ukrainian territory in 2014, according to news reports and human rights groups.

The U.S. Army is spending more than $6 million a year to decommission 155 mm cluster artillery shells and other older munitions, according to budget documents

Providing DCIPMs would ease shortages of other kinds of 155 mm shells that Washington has been shipping to Kyiv in massive quantities, the congressional aide said.

Crow said he opposed providing the DCIPMs to Ukraine because of the high failure rate of the bomblets, which would worsen Ukraine’s already massive unexploded ordnance problem.

The State Department says that some 174,000 square-kilometers of territory – nearly one-third of Ukraine – are contaminated by landmines or other "explosive remnants of war."

(Additional reporting by Mike Stone; Editing by Don Durfee and Alistair Bell)

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/en-gb/cluster-bombs/what-is-a-cluster-bomb.aspx

What is a Cluster Bomb? - Cluster Munition Coalition 

Cluster bombs have killed and injured thousands of civilians during their history of use and continue to do so today.A cluster munition, or cluster bomb, ...

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org

Cluster Munition Coalition | CMC 

The Cluster Munition Coalition is an international civil society campaign working to eradicate cluster munitions, prevent further casualties and put an end ...

https://www.hrw.org/topic/arms/cluster-munitions

Cluster Munitions | Human Rights Watch 

Cluster munitions pose an immediate threat to civilians during conflict by randomly scattering submunitions or bomblets over a wide area.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_munition

Cluster munition - Wikipedia 

A cluster munition is a form of air-dropped or ground-launched explosive weapon that releases or ejects smaller submunitions. Commonly, this is a cluster ...

...

https://treaties.unoda.org/t/cluster_munitions

Convention on Cluster Munitions - UNODA Treaties - United Nations 

Convention on Cluster Munitions. Status of the treaty; Text of the treaty. Adopted in Dublin: 30 May 2008. Opened for signature in Oslo: 3 December 2008.

https://www.nytimes.com/topic/subject/cluster-munitions

Cluster Munitions - The New York Times 

America's Dark History of Killing Its Own Troops With Cluster Munitions ... The weapons are notorious for their effects on civilians. But five years of reporting ...

https://www.un.org/disarmament/convention-on-cluster-munitions

Convention on Cluster Munitions – UNODA - the United Nations 

A cluster munition is a weapon consisting of a container or dispenser from which many submunitions or bomblets are scattered over wide areas. Many submunitions ...

https://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/clustermunitions

Cluster Munitions – UNODA - the United Nations 

Cluster munitions have a “wide-area effect”, which makes them inherently inaccurate when used. Moreover, unexploded duds lying around form a ...

https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/weapons/cluster-munitions

Cluster munitions | International Committee of the Red Cross 

Cluster munitions kill and injure large numbers of civilians and cause long lasting socio-economic problems. The 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions ...

Mississippi Senate OKs bill affecting majority-Black Capitol city


More than 200 people gather on the steps of the Mississippi Capitol on Jan. 31, 2023, to protest against a bill that would expand the patrol territory for the state-run Capitol Police within the majority-Black city of Jackson and create a new court system with appointed rather than elected judges. 

(AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis, File)


EMILY WAGSTER PETTUS
Tue, March 7, 2023 

JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — The majority-white and Republican-led Mississippi Senate voted Tuesday to pass its version of a bill that would allow an expanded role for state police and appointed judges inside the majority-Black capital city of Jackson, which is led by Democrats.

“It is vastly improved from where it started, but it is still a snake,” Democratic Sen. John Horhn of Jackson said of the bill during Tuesday’s debate.

Critics say that in a state where older African Americans still remember the struggle to gain access to the ballot decades ago, the bill is a paternalistic attempt to intrude on local decision-making and voting rights in the capital, which has the highest percentage of Black residents of any major U.S. city.

The Mississippi House — which is also majority-white and Republican-led — passed the first version of the bill last month. The House version would have created two permanent new courts inside Jackson with judges appointed by the Mississippi Supreme Court chief justice. The current justice is a conservative white man.

Jackson Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba, who is Black, said the proposal reminds him of apartheid.

The Senate voted 34-15 to pass its revised version of the bill Tuesday, with Republicans in favor and Democrats opposed.

Supporters of the bill say they are trying to improve public safety in Jackson, which has had more than 100 homicides during each of the past three years.

“We all know the nation is watching. They have been,” Republican Sen. Brice Wiggins of Pascagoula said before Tuesday’s Senate vote. “And with this bill, we are standing up for the citizens of Jackson and for our state capital.”

The bill returns to the House, which could accept the Senate changes or seek final negotiations in the next few weeks.

Republican Gov. Tate Reeves has decried crime in Jackson but has not said whether he would sign the bill if it lands on his desk.

The Senate version removed the permanent new courts. Instead, it would allow the chief justice to appoint one judge to work within the existing court system through December 2026.

Hinds County, which is home to Jackson, currently has four elected circuit court judges who handle criminal and civil cases. Mississippi is already spending some of its federal COVID-19 relief money to pay for four appointed judges to temporarily help the elected judges in Hinds County with a backlog of cases that developed when courts were closed because of the pandemic. The Senate version of the bill would add a fifth appointed temporary judge.

The Senate version also would authorize the state-run Capitol Police to patrol the entire city of Jackson. Currently, Capitol Police officers patrol in downtown and some nearby neighborhoods where state government buildings are located. Officers from the city-run Jackson Police Department patrol the entire city.

The House version of the bill would have expanded Capitol Police territory into affluent parts of Jackson, including shopping areas and predominantly white neighborhoods — but not into the entire city.

Arkela Lewis, whose 25-year-old son Jaylen Lewis was shot to death by Capitol Police last year, told lawmakers Monday that the proposal to expand the territory of the state-run police department terrifies and angers her.

Oklahoma voters reject legalizing recreational marijuana





 Oklahoma Marijuana Store manager Josh Poole is pictured in a Mango Cannabis medical marijuana dispensary, Monday, March 6, 2023, in Oklahoma City. 
ASSOCIATED PRESS

March 7, 2023


OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Oklahoma voters on Tuesday rejected the legalization of recreational marijuana, following a late blitz of opposition from faith leaders, law enforcement and prosecutors.

Oklahoma would have become the 22nd state to legalize adult use of cannabis and join conservative states like Montana and Missouri that have approved similar proposals in recent years. Many conservative states have also rejected the idea, including Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota last year.

Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt and many of the state’s GOP legislators, including nearly every Republican senator, opposed the idea. Former Republican Gov. Frank Keating, an ex-FBI agent, and Terri White, the former head of the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services, led the "no" campaign.

“We’re pleased the voters have spoken," said Pat McFerron, a Republican political strategist who ran the opposition campaign. "We think this sends a clear signal that voters are not happy with the recreational nature of our medicinal system. We also think it shows voters recognize the criminal aspects, as well as the need for addressing mental health needs of the state.”

Oklahoma voters already approved medical marijuana in 2018 by 14 percentage points and the state has one of the most liberal programs in the country, with more than 2,800 licensed dispensaries and roughly 10% of the state’s adult population having a medical license to buy and consume cannabis.

On Tuesday's legalization question, the “no” side was outspent more than 20-to-1, with supporters of the initiative spending more than $4.9 million, compared to about $219,000 against, last-minute campaign finance reports show.

State Question 820, the result of a signature gathering drive last year, was the only item on the statewide ballot, and early results showed heavy opposition in rural areas.

“Oklahoma is a law and order state," Stitt said in a statement after Tuesday's vote. "I remain committed to protecting Oklahomans and my administration will continue to hold bad actors accountable and crack down on illegal marijuana operations in our state.”

The proposal, if passed, would have allowed anyone over the age of 21 to purchase and possess up to 1 ounce of marijuana, plus concentrates and marijuana-infused products. Recreational sales would have been subjected to a 15% excise tax on top of the standard sales tax. The excise tax would be used to help fund local municipalities, the court system, public schools, substance abuse treatment and the state’s general revenue fund.

The prospect of having more Oklahomans smoking anything, including marijuana, didn't sit well with Mark Grossman, an attorney who voted against the proposal Tuesday at the Crown Heights Christian Church in Oklahoma City.

“I was a no vote because I'm against smoking,” Grossman said. “Tobacco smoking was a huge problem for my family.”

The low barriers for entry into Oklahoma's medical marijuana industry has led to a flood of growers, processors and dispensary operators competing for a limited number of customers. Supporters had hoped the state's marijuana industry would be buoyed by a rush of out-of-state customers, particularly from Texas, which has close to 8 million people in the Dallas-Fort Worth area just a little more than an hour drive from the Oklahoma border.

Michelle Tilley, campaign director for Yes on 820, said despite Tuesday's result, full marijuana legalization was inevitable. She noted that almost 400,000 Oklahomans already use marijuana legally and “many thousands more” use it illegally.

“A two-tiered system, where one group of Oklahomans is free to use this product and the other is treated like criminals does not make logical sense,” she said in a statement.

Oklahoma Voters Overwhelmingly Reject Effort To Legalize Recreational Marijuana

Jonathan Nicholson
Tue, March 7, 2023 

Oklahoma voters sharply rejected a ballot initiative to legalize recreational marijuana Tuesday, a defeat that came almost five years after voters had easily approved the legalization of medical marijuana.

With almost all precincts having reported, the vote on State Question 820 was 62% opposed and 38% in favor.

“We think this sends a clear message that Oklahomans oppose the unfettered access to marijuana we have experienced under our so-called medical program. Voters clearly want to protect our children, crack down on organized crime and improve the mental health of those in our state,” said Pat McFerron, a spokesperson and pollster for Protect Our Kids No 820.

The campaign was a relatively low-key affair, though, as the vote was pushed back from the November 2022 date marijuana proponents had been hoping for to March, where the initiative was the sole item to be voted on in many places.

Supporters of legalized recreational marijuana saw that placement as one of the main obstacles to its approval.

“With a March special election and no other issues on the ballot, we knew from the beginning this would be an uphill battle,” said Brian Vicente, a lawyer and a steering committee member for the pro-legalization group Yes on 820.

Michelle Tilley, the group’s campaign director, said it was only a matter of time before Oklahoma joined 21 other states in approving marijuana for recreational use.

With a March special election and no other issues on the ballot, we knew from the beginning this would be an uphill battle.Brian Vicente, steering commitee member for the Yes on 820 pro-legalization group

“There are almost 400,000 Oklahomans ― that’s almost 10% of our population ― using marijuana legally; there are many thousands more using marijuana acquired off the illicit market,” she said.

“A two-tiered system, where one group of Oklahomans is free to use this product and the other is treated like criminals does not make logical sense.”

Proponents touted the prospect of additional tax revenue for the state from expanding the marijuana market and the fairness of allowing people with minor convictions in marijuana cases to have them expunged.

Opponents, led by former Republican Gov. Frank Keating, a onetime FBI agent, pointed to problems with the existing medical marijuana regime as well as fears that legalizing recreational marijuana would bring more crime and environmental problems.

Legalization advocates held a decisive edge in cash for the campaign, raising $3.2 million through the end of 2022 and airing broadcast TV commercials in the closing weeks. The anti-legalization side, according to its pollster Pat McFerron, was expected to spend only about $250,0000 and concentrate on satellite and cable TV ads.

Ethan McKee, vice president of Mango Cannabis, weighs marijuana flowers at an Oklahoma City dispensary on Feb. 28.

Ethan McKee, vice president of Mango Cannabis, weighs marijuana flowers at an Oklahoma City dispensary on Feb. 28.

But the backdrop was in many ways unfavorable to marijuana advocates. In November, four Chinese nationals were found shot to death at a farm in rural Kingfisher County in a crime that made headlines statewide and that law enforcement officials said showed the potential pitfalls of a larger cannabis industry.

In addition, there had been growing and bipartisan consensus that regulation of medical marijuana, which was approved in a similar statewide vote by a 57% to 43% margin in 2018, had not kept up with the industry’s explosive growth. Oklahoma has nearly three times as many licensed cannabis dispensaries and almost as many licensed grow facilities as California, despite the latter having 10 times Oklahoma’s population and having already legalized recreational marijuana years ago.

Gentner Drummond, Oklahoma’s Republican attorney general praised the vote Tuesday, saying, “Regardless of where one stands on the question of marijuana legalization, the stark reality is that organized crime from China and Mexico has infiltrated Oklahoma’s medical marijuana industry.”

The recreational marijuana measure voted on Tuesday would have allowed sales to residents 21and older and taxed them at 15%. Proceeds from the taxes would have been split among schools, drug treatment programs and state and local governments. It also would have allowed for the expungement of minor marijuana-related criminal convictions.

According to the pro-legalization advocates, about 4,500 Oklahomans are arrested annually over small amounts of marijuana. Ryan Kiesel, a senior adviser to Yes on 820, said expungement of criminal records must still be fought for.

“We have thousands of families being torn apart and thrown into chaos every year because a mom or a dad has a small amount of marijuana that would be legal in 21 other states and legal in Oklahoma for medical card holders,” he said.

Ahead of the vote, Drummond told the Tulsa-based Black Wall Street Times he was willing to look at making expungement easier.

“If it does not pass, I do think in the spirit of criminal justice reform, marijuana possession and consumption should be addressed. And there should be a mechanism considered by the legislature that I’m happy to administer toward the expungement of those things,” he said.

America is more energy independent than ever

Rick Newman
·Senior Columnist
Tue, March 7, 2023

A recent Citibank research note got my attention.

“Total gross crude and other liquid exports hit a record of 11.128 million barrels per day, more than the total output of either Russia or Saudi Arabia,” Citi energy analysts wrote on March 1. “U.S. net crude imports fell to lows not seen since the 1950s.”

You won’t hear the Biden administration bragging about these fossil-fuel developments, but they’re welcome nonetheless. More U.S. energy production will put downward pressure on gasoline and electricity prices and make the United States less vulnerable against Russian efforts to use energy as a weapon.

Many Americans think U.S. “energy independence” is a thing of the past, overtaken by President Biden’s focus on green energy. But Citi is highlighting data showing that American dependence on foreign energy has continued to decline under President Biden, even besting levels reached under President Trump, who championed fossil fuels.

U.S. energy independence is a bit of a misnomer, since it implies the nation can produce all the energy it needs for its own consumption, without buying any from foreign countries. It doesn’t work like that. We import certain types of fuel to certain regions because it’s cheaper or more efficient than sending U.S. product there. Same with exports: U.S. producers can sometimes earn more selling overseas than at home. Energy markets are complex, and it doesn’t make sense to limit production or consumption to domestic sources.

But the degree of dependence on foreign energy does matter, and that trend has been dramatically improving for years. The fracking revolution produced a boom in U.S. oil and natural gas production beginning around 2011, and that has continued, with only a few interruptions (such as the COVID pandemic). In 2015, President Obama signed a law allowing the export of U.S. crude oil for the first time in 40 years. U.S. production went higher still, with the opening of new foreign markets triggering more drilling that coincidentally benefited Americans through lower prices.

In 2019, the United States became a net energy exporter for the first time since the 1950s. That means in terms of all forms of energy—oil, gas, coal, refined products and so on—the United States exports more than it imports, as measured in BTUs. The United States has remained a net energy exporter ever since. The trend didn’t change when Biden took office, even though he has bashed fossil fuels and signed sweeping legislation to boost green energy.

As a champion of green energy, Biden landed in a awkward spot last year as oil prices surged and gasoline hit $5 per gallon, enraging drivers. Biden urged U.S. energy companies to produce more oil and gas, ignoring basic economics weighing on the industry. Energy industry profitability was terrible for several years leading up to 2021, forcing drillers to invest less in new production and boost payouts to shareholders. The global push to replace carbon fuel with renewables further depressed new fossil-fuel investment. Biden likely knows all this, but it's politically easy to bash oil companies Americans love to hate.

Yet higher prices caused by tight global markets and Russia’s war in Ukraine are bringing more U.S. supply onto the market, anyway. The U.S. Energy Information Administration forecasts U.S. oil production of 12.5 million barrels per day in 2023, inching up to 12.6 million barrels next year. That would slightly exceed the 2019 record of 12.3 million barrels per day. Natural gas is often a byproduct of oil drilling and will likely hit new production records this year and next, as well.

Adding renewable energy capacity improves energy independence, since solar power and wind on their own aren’t exportable. It’s possible to export some of the electricity renewable energy generates, but that’s not practical at scale. Renewables will likely rise from 22% of U.S. electricity production in 2022 to 26% by 2024, according to Intl. Energy Agency (IEA), with that share likely to continue rising.

Oil Independence: Good, for prices? A Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, gas station in late 2022. U.S. October 19, 2022. REUTERS/Aimee Dilger

None of this means energy prices will plunge, unfortunately. Sanctions relating to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are beginning to bite, with Russian production of both oil and natural gas likely to decline this year. “The well-supplied oil balance at the start of 2023 could quickly tighten as western sanctions affect Russian production and exports,” the IEA advised in late February. China’s reopening after a year of COVID-related shutdowns could also boost global demand for energy and push prices up. Oil prices are set in global markets and the United States can only affect that by adding to global supply.

U.S. energy firms are also unwilling to subsidize low prices by overproducing, as they did during the years leading up to the COVID pandemic in 2020. That especially applies to refineries, which are costly to build and upgrade. U.S. refining capacity has actually declined slightly since 2020, as operators close underperforming facilities.

Chevron CEO Mike Wirth said last year he didn’t think the industry would ever build another U.S. oil refinery because regulation is too difficult and the return on investment takes too long. That bottleneck will put a floor on gasoline prices and raise the spread between the wholesale price of oil and the retail price of refined products such as gasoline. Biden has complained about higher profit margins for refiners, but he hasn't done anything to cut the red tape or the cost of building new refineries.

As U.S. production of U.S. oil and natural gas hits new records, so do exports. Biden has threatened to halt U.S. energy exports if domestic prices get too high, but that’s populist posturing with no teeth. The simple idea is that exporting more leaves less energy for Americans, and therefore raises prices. But U.S. drillers would also produce less, and maybe a lot less, if they couldn’t earn money through exports. And again, the biggest effect on retail prices isn’t the supply of raw energy, it’s tight refining capacity.

Those additional U.S. energy exports, meanwhile, are helping Europe weather the near-total shutoff of natural gas from Russia. And more U.S. oil in world markets will help keep prices steady if Russian production drops off, as expected. The United States can’t keep all its energy to itself, but adding to global capacity is good for Americans, anyway.

Rick Newman is a senior columnist for Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Twitter at @rickjnewman

U.S. Supreme Court won't decide scope of wage-and-hour class actions


Daniel Wiessner
Mon, March 6, 2023
By Daniel Wiessner

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday again declined to settle a split among appeals courts over whether federal wage law allows workers to bring nationwide class action-style lawsuits, turning away a case involving FedEx Corp.

The justices denied a petition by FedEx security specialist Christa Fischer for review of a July ruling by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that said because her overtime pay lawsuit was filed in Pennsylvania, only workers from that state could join.

Companies and business groups have been pushing courts to limit nationwide wage-and-hour lawsuits, citing a 2017 Supreme Court ruling that said people who lived outside California could not join a product liability case filed in state court against Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

The 3rd Circuit in the FedEx case joined the 6th and 8th Circuits, which in 2021 had both said courts lack jurisdiction over residents of other states.

But the 1st and 7th Circuits have gone the other way, saying the wage law was designed to enable large-scale collective actions against companies operating in multiple states. The Supreme Court last year declined to take up appeals of those cases.

Tennessee-based FedEx did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Nor did lawyers for Fischer.

Fischer in a 2019 lawsuit in Philadelphia federal court alleged FedEx misclassified security specialists across the country as independent contractors rather than its employees and deprived them of overtime pay required by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.

Under the FLSA, workers can file "collective actions" that are similar to class action lawsuits but have some key procedural differences, including that other workers must opt in to be included.

A federal judge in 2020 refused to allow FedEx employees from New York and Maryland to join the case, citing the Bristol-Myers ruling. The 3rd Circuit upheld that ruling last year, prompting Fischer's Supreme Court petition.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the country's largest business lobby, had urged the 3rd Circuit to rule for FedEx. In a 2021 amicus brief, the group said allowing nationwide FLSA lawsuits would subject employers to uncertainty and encourage workers to "forum shop" by filing in plaintiff-friendly courts.

The case is Fischer v. Federal Express Corp, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 22-396.

For Fischer: Adam Hansen of Apollo Law

For FedEx: David Salmons of Morgan Lewis & Bockius

Read more:

Cases to Watch: Bid to limit nationwide FLSA class actions is reaching appeals courts

Court greenlights nationwide wage lawsuits amid bid to limit their scope

Chamber asks 3rd Circuit to limit nationwide FLSA collectives

Out-of-state workers barred from FLSA action against FedEx – appeals court

U.S. Supreme Court again limits where companies can be sued

'We are going to keep showing up.' Activists rally at Oklahoma Capitol for gun reforms

Aspen Ford and Jessie Christopher Smith, Oklahoman
Tue, March 7, 2023 

More than 50 gun safety advocates rallied Monday morning at the Oklahoma Capitol to demand legislators strengthen the state's gun laws.

Members and volunteers of the Oklahoma chapter of Moms Demand Action ― a nationwide movement that started after the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting more than 10 years ago ― and the parent nonprofit Everytown for Gun Safety gathered on the steps of the Capitol to call for tightening gun loopholes and passing commonsense gun reform.

"I know we’re dealing with a false reputation here that we’re trying to take people’s guns, but we're gun owners," said Beth Furnish, a volunteer leader for the Moms Demand Action chapter. "Like a lot of Oklahomans, we have firearms at home. We have veterans. We have a broad representation of concerned people that are just fed up with lawmakers not doing anything to address gun violence that’s impacting people’s lives."

Members and volunteers of the Oklahoma chapter of Moms Demand Action and the parent nonprofit Everytown for Gun Safety gathered Monday on the steps of the Capitol to call for tightening gun loopholes and passing common sense gun reform.

More:How America’s schools have changed since deadliest mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary

Several other participants at the rally voiced similar feelings, emphasizing that they were not opposed to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the right to bear arms, but felt that passing "reasonable regulations" would help lessen higher rates of gun violence.

Cacky Poarch, 55, said she joined Oklahoma's Moms Demand Action after the Parkland shooting in 2018, and feels compelled by the mass shootings she sees in media reports to advocate for more gun safety.

"We, of course, have seen so many school shootings over and over and over," Poarch said. "Unfettered access to firearms makes us less safe on so many levels."

Joshua Harris-Till, a cousin of the late Emmett Till, also joined the group Monday. He said people in his family have been affected by gun violence and believes the state needs to do a better job preventing people with histories of mental health issues from having such easy access to firearms.

"My two little brothers were 13 and 10 the first time they got shot, and I lost my sister to that," Harris-Till said. "It’s something that’s extremely important. And there’s multiple stories for folks in our organization who relate to things like that, who don’t want other families to go through what they’ve gone through."

Harris-Till told The Oklahoman he believes that many of the state's legislators, who are overwhelmingly Republican, don't necessarily advocate so fiercely for loosening gun restrictions because they believe the bills will make it out of committee, but because they want to remain part of a national narrative and need to "prove they're more 2A than the next guy" to their constituents.

"It’s not like their constituents are saying, 'Hey, we need more pro-gun bills'; it’s them saying, 'Hey, I have to be pro-gun to be reelected,'" Harris-Till said, attributing the state's hyper-partisan focus on guns to "demagoguery."

Moms Demand Action members rally Monday on the south plaza of the Capitol.

State Rep. Trish Ranson, D-Stillwater, championed a bill that would repeal the state's 2020 anti-red flag law and allow for "extreme risk protection orders" that prohibit or temporarily remove firearms from an individual if they pose a threat to themselves or others. Ranson said the bill never even had a committee hearing.

“But I wanted to start the conversation," Ranson said. "I think we need to have common sense gun laws so that way everyone is safe, but not just gun owners.”

Ranson said she is often discouraged by the state's high rate of domestic abuse and increasingly vitriolic rhetoric against teachers who, under some proposals, could even be asked to carry firearms in place of security personnel. Ranson believes it would be unhealthy for both the teachers and the students to have the dynamics of their classroom relationship complicated by a gun.

"At some point, people have to understand the logic in the way we treat each other," Ranson said. "I just feel like there will be a time when things balance out and the pendulum will swing back and we’ll be able to find some common sense gun laws that we can put in place."

State Sen. Julia Kirt was originally scheduled to speak at the rally Monday, but could not attend due to illness. Her office, however, provided a statement of support for the organizers.

"I always appreciate having people in the People's House voicing their concerns and sharing the common sense reforms they see to issues like gun violence," Kirt's statement read.

Candace Frates, of Tulsa, claps Monday at Moms Demand Action rally on the south plaza of the Capitol.

Some advocates consider SB 1046 ― a bill proposed by state Sen. Darrell Weaver and state Rep. Robert Manger that would make the first conviction of violence against a pregnant woman a felony ― as the most viable proposal out of Oklahoma's current Legislature.

But activists with Moms Demand Action hope that continued advocacy will bring awareness to other statewide proposals.

"The gun violence doesn’t stop, so we are going to keep showing up," Furnish said. "Until lawmakers respond to the people in this state, we’re going to keep coming. We make our presence known, we’re watching, we’re demanding that they do something."

This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Organizers, volunteers rally at Oklahoma Capitol to demand gun reform

Leading American medical journal continues to omit Black research, reinforcing a legacy of racism in medical knowledge

Cherice Escobar Jones, PhD Candidate, Northeastern University, 

Gwendolynne Reid, Assistant Professor of English, Emory University, 

Mya Poe, Associate Professor of English, Northeastern University

THE CONVERSATION
Tue, March 7, 2023 

Medical research is one of the keys in providing health care. SJ Objio for Unsplash, CC BY-SA

The leading U.S. medical journal, read regularly by doctors of all specialties, systematically ignores an equally reputable and rigorous body of medical research that focuses on Black Americans’ health.

The American Medical Association created a segregated “whites only” environment more than 100 years ago to prohibit Black physicians from joining their ranks. This exclusionary and racist policy prompted the creation in 1895 of the National Medical Association, a professional membership group that supported African American physicians and the patients they served. Today, the NMA represents more than 30,000 medical professionals.

In 2008, the AMA publicly apologized and pledged to right the wrongs that were done through decades of racism within its organization. Yet our research shows that despite that public reckoning 15 years ago, the opinion column of the AMA’s leading medical journal does not reflect the research and editorial contributions by NMA members.

Invisibility in the opinion column of one of the most prominent medical journals in the U.S. is another form of subtle racism that continues to lessen the importance of equitable medical care and health issues for Black and underserved communities.

As rhetoricians and researchers who study scientific communication, we look at the ways scientific writing perpetuates or addresses racial inequity. Our recent study traced how research is referenced by medical professionals and colleagues, known as citations, of flagship journals of the NMA and AMA: the Journal of the National American Association and the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Invisible research

Our research began with a question: Has the AMA’s 2008 apology had any effect on the frequency with which JAMA opinion writers draw on insights and research of JNMA scholars and authors?

We studied opinion columns, also referred to as editorials, precisely because they are useful indicators of current and future research as well as priorities and agendas. The purpose of editorials is to critically analyze and sift through various opinions and evidence. Effective editorials in scientific journals are especially rich forums for debate within the medical community.

Medical publications like JNMA and JAMA do not simply convey knowledge. They also establish professional community values through the topics that are studied and who is credited for ideas related to research. When writers choose to reference or cite another scholar, they are acknowledging and highlighting that expertise.

Influential medical journals serve to inform and shape health care. Harlie Raethel for Unsplash

As such, citations play an important role in the visibility of research. Articles and authors with more citations are more likely to have a greater effect on the scientific community and patient care. Opinion pieces can shape the broader conversation among medical professionals, and citations can widen that circle of communication.

Invisible racism

We traced how frequently JAMA and JNMA opinion writers referenced one another from 2008 to 2021 by reviewing the 117 opinion pieces published in JNMA and 1,425 published in JAMA during this 13-year period. We found that JAMA opinion columns have continued to, in effect, uphold racial bias and segregation by ignoring JNMA findings.

The work of Black medical proessionals is being overlooked in national medical journals. 

Piron Guillaume for Unsplash, CC BY-ND

Even when focusing on race, racism and health disparities, topics that JNMA has explored in great detail, JAMA opinion columns did not reference JNMA colleagues or research. Only two JNMA articles were credited and referenced in the 1,425 JAMA opinion pieces that we reviewed.

Editors at JAMA did not respond to our requests for their comments on our analysis.

Racial equity in medicine

The story of the AMA and NMA is not only a reminder of the racist history of medicine. It demonstrates how the expertise of Black professionals and researchers continues to be ignored today. The lack of JNMA citations in JAMA research undercuts the AMA’s own work on racial equity and potentially compromises the quality of medical knowledge published in its journals.

For example, a recent study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that scientists from underrepresented groups innovate, or contribute novel scientific findings, at a higher rate than those from majority groups.

An article published in the weekly medical journal of the Public Library of Science noted that diverse research teams are often more successful in developing new knowledge to help treat women and underrepresented patients with greater precision.

Dissolving systemic bias

One way to intentionally tackle racial bias and segregation in medical knowledge is by deliberately referencing Black researchers and their work. To change this dynamic of racial bias, medical journals must pay attention to how much and how often the Black medical establishment is referenced. Health issues in underserved communities would likely become more visible and achieve greater quality of care in keeping with the AMA’s commitment to social justice.

Journal editors could tell writers and editorial staff to prioritize citation practices. Individual authors might conduct research and evaluate their reading habits to intentionally include research from the Black medical community.

However, this work must go beyond individuals. Undoing decades of collective habits and embedded racism requires collaborations that work across systems, institutions and disciplines.

Racial disparities in health care often result in lower-quality medical treatment and worse health care outcomes for Black Americans.

Towfiqu Barbhuiya for Unsplash, CC BY-ND

For example, libraries, databases, and search engines that help researchers find and evaluate medical publications might review today’s research tools. It is hard to contribute to a research conversation if your work is invisible or can’t be found.

Many tools, like impact factors, rank research according to how influential it is. If research begins in a category of less importance, it can be harder for the technology to rank it equitably. JNMA’s work was already marginalized when the tools that rank research were developed.

Thus, search results can hinder efforts of individual authors to work toward equitable citation practices. Black researchers and their research of Black health were excluded from the beginning, and existing systems of sharing knowledge and drawing attention to important studies incorporate that structural racism.

The AMA apology in 2008 and its recent progress on addressing racism in its publication process are promising steps. Influential medical journals serve to inform and shape health care. Who is referenced in these journals matters to the medical establishment, research funders and, ultimately, to the patients that are served by innovations in medicine.

Attention to citation can help reduce systemic bias in medical knowledge to achieve greater fairness in health care and, in the long run, help increase attention and resources that will help solve health issues in underserved communities.

This article is republished from The Conversation, an independent nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts.

It was written by: Cherice Escobar Jones, Northeastern University; Gwendolynne Reid, Emory University, and Mya Poe, Northeastern University.

Read more:

Republicans are trying to build a multiracial right – will it work?

Declaring racism a public health crisis brings more attention to solving long-ignored racial gaps in health

UN 'alarmed' at West Bank violence day after Israeli raid

Wed, March 8, 2023 


The UN Middle East peace envoy urged Israel and the Palestinians Wednesday to calm surging violence in the occupied West Bank, a day after the latest Israeli raid killed six people.

"We are in the midst of a cycle of violence that must be stopped immediately," Tor Wennesland said in a statement.

"The Security Council has spoken with one voice, calling on the parties to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric."

The call came a day after intense fighting during an Israeli raid in the flashpoint northern West Bank city of Jenin, in which the soldiers killed six Palestinians, including a member of Hamas accused of killing two Israeli settlers last month.

Wennesland said he was "alarmed" at the violence, which the army said included soldiers launching shoulder-fired rockets amid ferocious gunfire.

Nabil Abu Rudeina, spokesman for Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas, called the use of rockets in Jenin refugee camp on Tuesday an act of "all-out war", Palestinian news agency Wafa reported.

The Jenin raid was the latest in a string of deadly military operations in the Palestinian territory, which Israel has occupied since the Six-Day War of 1967.

Among the six killed was Abdel Fatah Hussein Khroushah, 49. The Israeli army said he was a "terrorist operative" suspected of killing two Israeli settlers in the Palestinian town of Huwara on February 26.

The killing of the two settlers, which came just hours after Israeli and Palestinian officials pledged in Jordan to "prevent further violence", sparked fury among Israeli settlers, with hundreds later torching Palestinian homes and cars in the West Bank town.

"I am deeply disturbed by the continuing violence," Wennesland said, condemning both Israeli settler violence against Palestinians and Palestinian attacks against Israelis.

"Israel, as the occupying power, must ensure that the civilian population is protected and perpetrators are held to account," he said.

Overnight, a rocket was fired from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip but fell short and exploded inside the coastal enclave, the Israeli military said.

Commitments made by the two sides in Jordan last month, when they agreed to "commit to de-escalation", must be implemented if "we are to find a way forward", Wennesland said.

"The parties must refrain from further steps that would lead us to more violence," he added.

pjm/kir

Opinion: Right now, to love Israel is to denounce it

Nadav Ziv
Wed, March 8, 2023 

Protesters clash with Israeli security forces at the entrance to the Palestinan village of Hawara on March 3. (Xinhua News Agency via Getty Images)

When my maternal grandmother was around 7 years old, she was nearly the victim of a pogrom. It was the late 1930s. Europe was a stretched rubber band, soon to snap. My grandma was visiting family in a small Polish town. One day, the non-Jewish inhabitants wielded knives and sticks as they pursued Jews. My grandma ran, closed the blinds, hid and waited.

I’ve heard this story of the pogrom in two related contexts. First, as proof of antisemitism — even absent Nazi compulsion. Second, as part of the need for a state where Jews can be safe.

Last week, Jewish settlers conducted a pogrom of a Palestinian village named Hawara. They set fire to houses and cars. They threw stones. In one sickening video, the settlers pray with the village smoking in the background, as if their violence honors God rather than desecrating holy commandments and the rule of law alike.

I have never felt so ashamed to be Israeli. I have never felt as angry as I did watching these settlers pervert past Jewish victimhood into a right to harm innocent people, contorting Jewish practice into their colonial ambitions to create a carte blanche for abuses.

While the settlers’ actions were extreme, they cannot be categorized as fringe. Not when Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said afterward that Hawara should be “wiped out” by the state of Israel. Not when National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir legitimizes illegal settlements and speaks of crushing enemies “one by one.” Like the Trump years in the United States, government actions and statements, no matter how unrepresentative of popular will, still carry the weight of institutional endorsement.

My grandma just celebrated her 92nd birthday. She resides in Haifa at an assisted living facility. When I speak with her, she is despondent at the state of the country — settler pogroms, racist government officials and a judicial coup being led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Yet she is insistent that Jews must still have a country.

The antisemitism my grandma experienced in her youth has not gone away. Globally and in the United States, hatred of Jews is rising, seen recently in antisemitic fliers in Maryland, Montana and Ohio and a plot to kill Jewish elected officials in Michigan. Anti-Jewish hate crimes in California are at a record high.

This is only part of the heartbreak. At a time when Jews feel less safe in our communities, Israel no longer feels like a safe option. As countries around the world trend toward autocracy, Israel is part of the data set rather than an exception. But most of all: seeing that some members of a group that has experienced so much persecution can brazenly inflict pain on others.

In a lecture he gave at Stanford in January 2007, the late Israeli author Amos Oz spoke about the nature of dreams.

Israel, he said, is “a fulfillment of a dream, perhaps it is a fulfillment of many dreams. As such it is flawed by definition and has the sour taste of a disappointment.” Oz said this isn’t about the nature of the state of Israel, but about the nature of dreams.

I disagree. Because national dreams, like personal choices, are not projectiles whose trajectories are set at the moment of release. They are hulking tankers, whose weight leaves them vulnerable to inertia but can nevertheless be steered. Israel will always be flawed in some ways. But it does not have to be flawed the way it is today.

Hundreds of thousands of Israelis are protesting against autocracy and racism, and for democracy, equal rights and common dignity — for a better Israel. “Where were you in Hawara?” they chant to the security forces. They hold up banners depicting Netanyahu as “Crime Minister.”

They understand that right now, to love Israel is to denounce it. That external threats such as Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah cannot destroy Israel the way that Jews can internally. American Jewish leaders, some of whom have been historically reticent to publicly criticize Israel, should fight for an Israel they can be proud of, not just the one that exists now.

My late grandfather from my father’s side escaped near-certain death as a teenager when he was deported to Siberia by the Soviets. Soon after, the Nazis murdered 90% of the Jews in his native Lithuania. He eventually escaped the gulag, spent a few years in postwar Germany and moved to Israel in 1949.

In the weeks before he died, my dad asked him what Israel meant to him for one of my class writing projects:

“In one word … mine.”

“And in two words?” my dad asked.

“That I feel like my fate is in my own hands, that I’m not a foreigner.”

My grandfather found a new home in Israel. He felt a sense of personal self-determination — a freedom from the historical forces that yanked him from Lithuania to the gulag — made possible by the collective self-determination of a nation.

His wife, my other grandmother, recently celebrated her 90th birthday. She’s gone to the recent protests with other family members. Because right now, Israel is betraying my late grandfather. It is betraying the memory of past Jews and the prospects of future ones. And it is betraying Jews in Israel and Jews abroad.

So, shame on the settlers, on Netanyahu, on Ben-Gvir, on Smotrich, on their hundreds of thousands of supporters and the seething hatred they espouse. To deal with these racists and autocrats, we must learn from our experience with antisemites and show no compromise, tolerance or legitimization of their policies and actions. We must fight and shame them, for as long as it takes.

Nadav Ziv is a writer whose work includes essays about Judaism, antisemitism and Israel. @nadavsziv

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Israeli military caught up in divide over Netanyahu's plan





Israeli army Chief of Staff Dan Halutz arrives to attend the Israeli weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem Sunday Aug. 13, 2006. A contentious judicial overhaul that is dividing Israel is tearing at the country's main unifying force: the military. Halutz has said he wouldn't show up for duty after the overhaul if Israel was at war. He said soldiers won't agree to become "mercenaries for a dictator."

 (AP Photo/Ronen Zvulun, Pool, File)

TIA GOLDENBERG
Mon, March 6, 2023

TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Shraga Tichover is hanging up his fatigues. After more than three decades as a reservist in the Israeli military, the paratrooper says he will no longer put his life on the line for a country slipping toward autocracy.

Tichover is part of a wave of unprecedented opposition from within the ranks of the Israeli military to a contentious government plan to overhaul the judiciary. Like Tichover, some reservists are refusing to show up for duty and former commanders are defending their actions as a natural response to the impending change.

“The values of this country are going to change. I am not able to serve the military of a state that is not a democracy,” said Tichover, a 53-year-old volunteer reservist who has served in southern Lebanon, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

The typically taboo talk of defying military orders underlines how deeply the overhaul has divided Israel and is now tearing at what Israeli Jews see as their most respected institution, the military. Concerns are growing that the protest could trickle down to young conscripts as well.

In a declaration that has sent shock waves through the country, three dozen reservist fighter pilots said they wouldn't show up for training on Wednesday in protest. The airmen are seen as the cream of the military's personnel and irreplaceable elements of many of Israel’s battle plans.

After appeals from top officials, the pilots announced they would show up to their base — but only for a dialogue with their commanders, Israeli media reported. “We have full confidence in our commanders,” the reports quoted the pilots as saying in a letter.

The military’s chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Herzl Halevi, reportedly warned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week that the reservists’ protest risks harming the military’s capabilities. Halevi and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant met late Tuesday with a group of senior reservists to discuss the crisis.

“The army cannot operate without the reservists,” Halevi told them. But, he said, “insubordination is a red line.”

For Israel's Jewish majority, most of whom must serve in the military, the army is a source of unity and a rite of passage. Military service is an important launching pad into civilian life and the workforce.

After completing three years of mandatory service, many men continue in the reserves until their 40s, when service becomes voluntary. Most of those threatening to halt their service are volunteers, protecting them from potential punishment.

Recognizing the threat to its stability, the military has pleaded to be kept out of the heated public discourse. But it’s become central to the debate over what kind of Israel will emerge after the overhaul.

Netanyahu, a former soldier in an elite unit, and his government are pushing forward on a plan to weaken the Supreme Court and limit the independence of the judiciary. His allies say the changes are meant to streamline governance, while critics say the plan will upend Israel's system of checks and balances and slide the country toward authoritarianism. They also say Netanyahu, who is on trial for corruption, is motivated by a personal grudge and has a conflict of interest.

The overhaul, which is moving ahead in parliament, has sparked an outcry from business leaders and legal officials. Tens of thousands of protesters have been taking to the streets each week.

Not everyone identifies with the soldiers. Critics say the military, as the enforcer of Israel's rule over millions of Palestinians in an open-ended occupation, has subjugated another people and eroded the country's democratic ideals. The reserve units now protesting, including pilots and intelligence units, have been behind deadly strikes or surveillance against Palestinians.

Israel's own Palestinian minority has largely stayed on the sidelines of the anti-government protests, in part because of Israel's treatment of their Palestinian brethren in the occupied West Bank and Gaza.

But Jewish Israelis see the military as a pillar of security in the face of myriad threats. Israel is mired in a bloody round of violence with Palestinians and archenemy Iran is blazing ahead with its nuclear program. Israel says Iran is developing a nuclear bomb — a charge that Tehran denies.

Those developments have not stopped the creeping challenge within the military. Israel's pool of reservists are the backbone of the force when security crises erupt.

Ehud Barak, a former military chief of staff, defense minister and prime minister, has said it would be acceptable to defy orders from what he calls a dictatorial regime. Dan Halutz, another former military chief, said soldiers won't agree to become “mercenaries for a dictator.”

In addition to the protesting pilots, hundreds of reservists have signed letters promising not to serve if the overhaul passes.

“Hit the emergency brake now," reservists from the 8200 intelligence unit warned the government in a letter last week. Many 8200 graduates join the country's booming tech sector, also a fierce opponent of the overhaul.

A mass protest movement demonstrating against the overhaul has its own reservist contingent. A new group, “Do it Yourself,” is calling on secular families to refuse to allow their children to serve in the occupied West Bank. A group of soldiers has asked permission to join the mass protests.

Activists warn that the overhaul is threatening to hurt future morale.

“The generations after us will not follow us,” said Eyal Naveh, 47, a reservist from an elite unit and protest leader. “What will a person who halted his reserve duty tell his son? To go to the army or not?”

Naveh said reservists are also concerned the changes will leave soldiers exposed to war crimes charges at international courts. One of Israel's defenses against war crimes accusations is that it has an independent legal system capable of investigating any potential wrongdoing.

Debate has emerged in the past over whether soldiers ideologically opposed to an order should refuse to carry it out, particularly over the evacuation of Jews from settlements. But the mere suggestion of insubordination is rare.

Tichover, the volunteer reservist, said he struggled during his service with what he called “irrational” orders that harmed Palestinians, like being told to damage Palestinian cars. He said he found ways to skirt around such orders but never overtly defied them.

Late on Monday, Netanyahu met with members of the paramilitary border police force at a base in the occupied West Bank, telling them there was no room for politics in the military.

“There is no place for refusal now, and there won't be a place in the future,” he said.

Reflecting the military's public standing, opposition leaders have also spoken out against the calls to defy orders.

“Do not lend a hand to insubordination,” said Benny Gantz, an opposition leader and former military chief.

The looming threat to the military isn't the reservists' protest, said Idit Shafran Gittleman, an expert on the military at the Institute for National Security Studies, a Tel Aviv think tank. She says the overhaul could lead to a constitutional crisis over who is in charge.

“There will be chaos," she said. “The military won’t know who it must take orders from.”