It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Sunday, June 18, 2023
AMERIKA
White communities prefer to risk repeat flooding rather than move to safer but more diverse neighborhoods
Distribution of owner–occupant FEMA HMGP participants, 1990–2017. Credit: Environmental Research Letters (2023). DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/acd654
Even after suffering flood damage, homeowners in mostly white communities prefer to accept higher risk of disaster repeating itself than relocate to areas with more racial diversity and less flood risk, according to new research from Rice University.
James Elliott , professor and chair of sociology, and Jay Wang, a senior spatial analyst at Rice's Kinder Institute for Urban Research, are the authors of "Managed retreat: a nationwide study of the local, racially segmented resettlement of homeowners from rising flood risks," published today in Environmental Research Letters.
To conduct their research, they tracked where nearly 10,000 Americans sold their flood-prone homes and moved through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program—the largest managed retreat program in the country—between 1990 and 2017. The data included address-to-address residential relocation information, flood risks of different addresses, community-level racial and ethnic composition, average housing values and more.
"We found that across the U.S., the best predictor of the risk level at which homeowners voluntarily retreat is not whether they live in a coastal or inland area, or whether they live in a big city or a small town," Elliott said. "It is the racial composition of their immediate neighborhood."
He and Wang found that homeowners in majority-white neighborhoods are willing to endure a 30% higher flood risk before retreating than homeowners in majority-Black neighborhoods, after accounting for the various types of areas people live in (coastal, urban, rural, etc.).
"But, there are also some universal tendencies," Wang said. "One is that, regardless of location, most retreating homeowners do not move far."
Nationwide, the average driving distance between people's bought-out homes and new destinations is just 7.4 miles. Nearly three-quarters—74%—stay within 20 miles of their flood-ravaged homes.
"In other words, homeowners are not migrating long distances to safer towns, states and regions," Elliott said. "They are moving within their neighborhoods and between nearby areas."
The research also showed that despite being short-distance, these moves do reduce homeowners' future flood risks. Nationwide, the average reduction is 63%, from 5.6 on First Street's flood factor at origin to 2.1 at destination.
"This shows that sustained community attachment and risk reduction can go together," Wang said. "But, these dynamics remain deeply divided by race, especially for those living in majority-white communities."
More information: James R Elliott et al, Managed retreat: a nationwide study of the local, racially segmented resettlement of homeowners from rising flood risks, Environmental Research Letters (2023). DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/acd654
Drawing on history, public opinion surveys, and personal experience, Robert P. Jones delivers a provocative examination of the unholy relationship between American Christianity and white supremacy and issues an urgent call for white Christians to reckon with this legacy for the sake of themselves and the nation.
“This book is a marvel. It manages to quietly excoriate the insidious, entrenched attitudes that continue to sow racial hatred and division and to show the large and small ways that they continue. Devoid of moralizing, this powerful, heavily researched and annotated book is a must-read for religious leaders and academics.” —Booklist (Starred Review)
“A concise yet comprehensive combination of deeply documented religious history, social science research about contemporary religion, and heartfelt memoir. . . . An indispensable study of Christianity in America.” —Kirkus Reviews (Starred Review)
“A refreshing blend of historical accounting, soul-searching reflection, and analysis of white supremacy within the American Christian identity. . . . Jones’s introspective, measured study is a revelatory unpacking of influence and history of white Christian nationalism.” —Publishers Weekly
“Robert P. Jones’s searing White Too Long brilliantly argues that his fellow white Christians must dissent from their received faith and embrace a theology of racial justice. White Too Long is a prophetic call of redemption for folk who have too often idolized whiteness and worshipped America instead of the God of Martin, Fannie Lou and Jesse.” —Michael Eric Dyson, University Professor of Sociology, Georgetown University; author of Tears We Cannot Stop: A Sermon to White America
“White Too Long is a powerful and much-needed book. It is a direct challenge to white Christians to finally put aside the idolatry of whiteness in order to release the country and themselves into a different possibility. With clarity of moral vision, historical nuance, and the sensitivity of an artist’s pen, Jones has written a critical book for these troubled times.” —Eddie S. Glaude Jr., James S. McDonnell Distinguished University Professor of African American Studies, Princeton University; author of Begin Again: James Baldwin’s America and Its Urgent Lesson for Our Own
“In White Too Long, Robert Jones offers both searching personal testimony and a rigorous look at the facts to call white Christians to account for the scandalous ways white supremacists have regularly distorted and manipulated a faith dedicated to love and justice to rationalize racism. Jones is a rare and indispensable voice in our public conversation about religion because he combines painstaking data analysis with a sure moral sense. May this book encourage soul-searching, repentance, and conversion.” —E. J. Dionne Jr., Columnist for The Washington Post; author of Code Red: How Progressives and Moderates Can Unite to Save Our Country
“White Too Long is meticulously researched and compelling throughout. It’s also a damning moral indictment of the way white supremacy has infected the white church in the United States from its very beginnings—which lays bare the need, now more than ever, for white Christians to systematically repent of white supremacy.” —Jim Wallis, Founder and President of Sojourners; author of Christ in Crisis? Why We Need to Reclaim Jesus
“With integrity and vulnerability, Jones exposes the subtle but profound compatibility between white supremacist ideology and white Christian theology. This remarkably courageous, must read book helps white Christians in America finally face the question Jones had to ask himself, “Can you be “white” and Christian?” —The Very Reverend Kelly Brown Douglas, Dean of Episcopal Divinity School at Union Theological Seminary; Canon Theologian, Washington National Cathedral
“Robert Jones combines the passion of a memoirist, the rigor of a social scientist, and the tenacity of a historian to produce this piercing exploration of the dark ties that bind aspects of American Christianity to the nation’s original sin of racism. For anyone hoping to understand the cultural, racial, and religious fault lines that divide America today, White Too Long is timely, insightful and indispensable.” —Ronald Brownstein, Senior Editor at The Atlantic, Senior Political Analyst for CNN
Synopsis:
As the nation grapples with demographic changes and the legacy of racism in America, Christianity’s role as a cornerstone of white supremacy has been largely overlooked. But white Christians—from evangelicals in the South to mainline Protestants in the Midwest and Catholics in the Northeast—have not just been complacent or complicit; rather, as the dominant cultural power, they have constructed and sustained a project of protecting white supremacy and opposing black equality that has framed the entire American story.
With his family’s 1815 Bible in one hand and contemporary public opinion surveys by Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) in the other, Robert P. Jones delivers a groundbreaking analysis of the repressed history of the symbiotic relationship between Christianity and white supremacy. White Too Long demonstrates how deeply racist attitudes have become embedded in the DNA of white Christian identity over time and calls for an honest reckoning with a complicated, painful, and even shameful past. Jones challenges white Christians to acknowledge that public apologies are not enough—accepting responsibility for the past requires work toward repair in the present.
White Too Long is not an appeal to altruism. Drawing on lessons gleaned from case studies of communities beginning to face these challenges, Jones argues that contemporary white Christians must confront these unsettling truths because this is the only way to salvage the integrity of their faith and their own identities. More broadly, it is no exaggeration to say that not just the future of white Christianity but the outcome of the American experiment is at stake.
Outrage as Algeria lengthens jail sentence for prominent reporter El Kadi
An Algerian court of appeal on Sunday increased to seven years the prison term issued to a prominent media boss, but suspended two years, a watchdog said.
Issued on: 18/06/2023 -
The media boss Ihsane El Kadi in a screen grab from a video published online on March 31, 2021.
Ihsane El Kadi, 63, whose release had been sought by the European Union and international media, is one of the last independent media leaders in the North African nation. He is director of the Maghreb Emergent news website and Radio M.
He "was condemned to seven years in prison, including five behind bars with two suspended by the Alger Court of Appeal," North Africa representative for Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF), Khaled Drareni, said on Twitter.
"A totally incomprehensible verdict," he added.
Open letter calling for journalist's release
In April, El Kadi had been sentenced to five years for "foreign financing of his business", in a case denounced by rights groups, but he was effectively serving three years because two were suspended.
Seven years is the maximum penalty under an article in Algeria's penal code which criminalises anyone who receives "funds, a grant or otherwise... to carry out acts capable of undermining state security".
El Kadi has been in custody since December 29.
Algeria ranks 136th out of 180 countries and territories on RSF's 2023 World Press Freedom Index. 'Trumped-up'
The court has ordered the dissolution of the company Interface Medias, which is behind El Kadi's two outlets, and the confiscation of its assets. The company was also fined 10 million dinars (about $73,500), while El Kadi himself received a 700,000-dinar fine.
At the time of the April verdict his lawyer, Abdelghani Badi, told AFP that he would appeal, though the defence team boycotted that session over the "absence of just trial conditions".
In January, Amnesty International said the accusations against El Kadi were "trumped-up state security related offences".
"El Kadi's unjustified detention by the Algerian authorities... is yet another example of their ruthless campaign to silence voices of dissent through arbitrary detention and the closure of media outlets," said Amnesty's Amna Guellali.
Earlier that month, 16 international media figures including Russian journalist Dmitri Muratov, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, called for his release and urged Algeria to lift "unacceptable" restrictions on his media outlets.
In response to a European Parliament resolution last month calling for El Kadi's "immediate and unconditional release", Algeria's legislature denounced "flagrant interference in the affairs of a sovereign country."
El Kadi had been sentenced in June last year to six months in prison but remained free at the time as a warrant was not issued for his arrest.
Less than two weeks after his April sentencing Algeria's parliament passed a law further restricting press freedom in the North African country by tightening media ownership rules and preventing journalists from protecting sources.
(AFP)
Algerian court sentences prominent journalist to 5 years
April 2, 2023 GMT
ALGIERS, Algeria (AP) — A court in Algiers on Sunday sentenced a prominent journalist in the North African country to five years in prison with two years suspended and ordered his website and a radio station shut down based on the accusation that they threaten state security.
Ihsane El-Kadi was detained Dec. 23 at his home in the capital, Algiers. He was accused of receiving foreign funding for his outlets. He has remained in custody since his arrest and appeared in court on Sunday for the verdict, along with a collective of lawyers, defending him, journalists and family members.
The court also ordered El-Kadi to pay a fine of 700,000 Algerian dinars ($5,200). The media company which owns El-Kadi’s website and radio station was ordered dissolved, its assets seized, and a fine of one million Algerian dinars ($7,390) was slapped on its owners.
El-Kadi, who was active in Algeria’s Hirak pro-democracy protest movement in 2019, appears to be the latest target of an encroaching crackdown on dissenting voices in the North African country.
The case against him is linked to the crowdfunding used to finance his media outlets, Maghreb Emergent and Webradio. The website and radio station operated in Algeria for years but did not have government recognition as official media organizations.
El-Kadi was accused of violating an article in the criminal code targeting anyone who receives funds aimed at “inciting acts susceptible to threaten state security,” stability or Algeria’s fundamental interests, his lawyers said before the verdict.
Israel set to approve thousands of settlements in West Bank
Israel vows to continue with settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank despite their illegality and pressure from ally Washington.
The New Arab Staff & Agencies 18 June, 2023 The settlements are deemed illegal by most of the international community [Getty/archive]
Israel's hard-line government on Sunday tabled plans to approve thousands of building permits in the occupied West Bank, despite US pressure to halt settlement expansion that Washington sees as an obstacle to peace with Palestinians.
The plans for approval of 4,560 settlement units in various areas of the occupied West Bank were included on the agenda of Israel's Supreme Planning Council that meets next week, although only 1,332 were up for final approval, with the remainder still going through the preliminary clearance process.
"We will continue to develop the settlement of and strengthen the Israeli hold on the territory," said Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who also holds a defence portfolio that gives him a leading role in West Bank administration.
The international community deems Israeli settlements, built on Palestinian land captured by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war, as illegal.
Palestinians seek to establish an independent state in the West Bank and besieged Gaza Strip with occupied East Jerusalem as their capital. Peace talks that had been brokered by the United States have been frozen since 2014. Since entering office in January, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's far-right cabinet has approved the promotion of more than 7,000 new housing units, most deep in the West Bank.
It also amended a law to clear the way for settlers to return to four settlements that had previously been evacuated.
In response to Sunday's Israeli decision, the Palestinian Authority - which exercises limited self-rule in parts of the occupied West Bank - said it would boycott a meeting of the Joint Economic Committee with Israel scheduled for Monday.
The Palestinian Hamas group, which has ruled Gaza since 2007, after Israel's withdrawal of soldiers and settlers, condemned the move, saying it "will not give (Israel) legitimacy over our land. Our people will resist it by all means".
(Reuters)
FAR-REACHING MOVE HAILED BY SETTLERS, DENOUNCED BY OPPONENTS
Netanyahu hands Smotrich full authority to expand existing settlements
Cabinet decision with immediate effect also dramatically expedites approval process for construction at settlements, scraps requirement for okay from defense minister or cabinet
The Times of Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks with Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich during the cabinet meeting at the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem on June 18, 2023. (Amit Shabi/POOL)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government passed a controversial resolution Sunday that gives practically all control over planning approval for construction in West Bank settlements to Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, an ultranationalist advocate of settlements.
The decision approved at Sunday morning’s cabinet meeting, which takes immediate effect, also dramatically expedites and eases the process for expanding existing West Bank settlements and retroactively legalizing some illegal outposts.
The resolution was warmly welcomed by settlement leaders for the expected boost to settlement construction it is likely to create.
According to the resolution, which is an amendment to a 1996 government decision, the numerous stages of authorization hitherto needed from the defense minister for the approval of land usage designation masterplans will be reduced to just one required approval.
And, in line with a previous agreement, that approval will now come from Smotrich, the head of the far-right Religious Zionism party, in his secondary role as a minister within the Defense Ministry.
Settlement leaders praised Smotrich and Netanyahu for advancing and approving the change, and welcomed the streamlined approval process, which they said would make planning approval “routine” and make construction planning in the West Bank more similar to that in sovereign Israel.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich takes part in a march to the illegal West Bank outpost of Evyatar, near the West Bank city of Nablus, during the Passover holiday, on April 10, 2023. (Sraya Diamant/Flash90)
Groups opposed to the settlement movement denounced the decision, saying it constituted further “de facto annexation” of the West Bank and would allow for unchecked expansion of the settlements.
According to the amendment, a key clause in government resolution 150 — which required the approval of the defense minister before a planning committee could hold hearings on a proposed land usage masterplan — has now been erased.
Previously, there were at least five stages in the planning process that required the authorization of the defense minister, although the minister could give approval for more than one stage at once.
In practice, this process meant that planning for settlement expansion or the legalization of illegal outposts required input from the political echelon at every stage, and the defense minister could take into account defense and diplomatic considerations at those stages.
According to legal activist Michael Sfard, an attorney who campaigns against the settlement enterprise, the protracted approvals process has often helped put the brakes on settlement planning in the West Bank, since there were numerous windows of opportunity for internal and international pressure to be applied against such steps.
Under the terms of the amended resolution, the minister need only need give his approval once, or a maximum of twice in certain circumstances, in order to advance a masterplan, meaning that the process can advance much more rapidly.
The only other requirements for settlement planning approval are the authorization of technical issues by the Higher Planning Committee of the Civil Administration and its subcommittees — which are under the authority of the Defense Ministry’s Civil Administration department, which in turn comes under Smotrich’s authority as an additional minister in the Defense Ministry.
The change does not give Smotrich the authority to approve new settlements, which still require cabinet approval.
Head of the Benjamin Regional Council in the West Bank Yisrael Gantz applauded the government for the decision, saying it would “reduce international scrutiny and criticism over construction in the settlements,” and thanked Smotrich for advancing the amendment.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich (center) and MK Zvi Sukkot (to his left) dance during a prayer service marking Independence Day in the illegal West Bank outpost of Homesh in the northern West Bank, April 26, 2023.
(Screenshot used in accordance with clause 27a of the Copyright Law)
“This government resolution brings the residents of Judea and Samaria to the regular situation of the entire State of Israel,” said Gantz, using the biblical name for the West Bank region. “This step will turn construction in the settlements into something that is not newsworthy but rather, routine.”
Head of the Samaria Regional Council Yossi Dagan similarly said, “We must stop treating residents of Judea and Samaria as second-class citizens. It’s unthinkable that only residents of Judea and Samaria need approval from the political echelon in order to build a home or a kindergarten.”
“After the last government froze thousands of housing units [in the West Bank], a need was created to restore the pace of work to that of the previous decade,” said Shlomo Ne’eman, the chairman of the Yesha umbrella settlement organization.
Opponents of the settlements issued intense criticism of the move, warning that Smotrich, as a powerful advocate for settlement expansion and a firm opponent of Palestinian statehood, would now be at liberty to massively increase construction in the settlements and legalize illegal outposts. Palestinian demonstrators hurls stones at Israeli forces amid tear gas during clashes, as they protest Israeli Jewish settlements, in the Jordan Valley of the West Bank, Tuesday, Nov. 24, 2020. (AP/Majdi Mohammed)
“Decisions over new [settlement] construction have until now required approval at the political level and by the defense minister, since construction in the territories has security and diplomatic consequences of the highest order,” said Peace Now’s Yoni Mizrachi in a written opinion on the decision.
“Construction in the territories is designed to eliminate the possibility of a two-state solution and this is a political decision,” he continued, adding that such settlement expansion includes very real security considerations, such as where IDF forces need to be deployed in the West Bank, and the size of those forces.
“From a planning point of view, there is [now] no difference between the Tel Aviv district and the Judea and Samaria, except for an initial decision by the political echelon,” protested Mizrachi.
“Israel is moving towards full annexation of the West Bank and does not intend to allow security or diplomatic considerations to stop it,” said Peace Now after the resolution was adopted.
“The government has decided to tie the fate of the residents of Israel to the messianic vision of endless settlements among millions of Palestinians whose rights are being trampled upon every morning. [Control over] planning has passed into Smotrich’s hands but the cost of construction will be borne by us all.”
The left-wing, anti-settlement Yesh Din organization said the amendment “puts the ability to expand and establish settlements into the hands of Smotrich’s people without any oversight.” Israeli security forces in action while Palestinians protest against Israel’s plan to annex parts of the West Bank, in the Palestinian village of Haris, June 26, 2020.
(Nasser Ishtayeh/Flash90)
Earlier on Sunday, Smotrich himself noted that the Higher Planning Committee of the Civil Administration, under his authority, is set to hold deliberations next week on the approval of some 4,560 housing units in the West Bank settlements.
Smotrich said these units, together with other planning projects advanced earlier this year, “make the six months since this government was formed a record for the rate of settlement construction [planning] in the last decade.”
Smotrich, who lives near the northern West Bank settlement of Kedumim, in a home built in violation of that settlement’s master plan, said: “The construction boom in Judea and Samaria and in all parts of our country continues. As we promised, today we are advancing the construction of thousands more new units in Judea and Samaria… We will continue to develop the settlements and strengthen Israel’s hold on the territory.”
Public spaces are public spaces. Public spaces are not private spaces. Public spaces are not majority spaces. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution ensures that all citizens, popular or not, majority or minority, conventional or unconventional, have access to public spaces for public expression….
Plaintiffs Southern Utah Drag Stars, LLC ("Drag Stars") and Mitski Avalōx ("Avalōx") seek their opportunity to speak in the public square through a community drag show which they say conveys messages of diversity, inclusion, and support for individuals with non-traditional gender expression and identities. Drag Stars applied for a special event permit (the "Permit") to hold "Our Allies & Community Drag Show" ("Allies Drag Show") at a public park in St. George, Utah (the "City").
The City denied the Permit based on never-previously-enforced ordinances that prohibit special event advertising until a final event permit is issued. The record shows the use of this prohibition was a pretext for discrimination.
The City also enacted a moratorium barring all new special event permit applications for six months. At the same time the City's two-step blocked Drag Stars from holding the Allies Drag Show for at least six months, the City retroactively exempted the majority of other known violators of the advertising prohibition and exempted major swaths of events from the moratorium….
The court's opinion is long (60 pages) and detailed, so let me focus on the brief section on why the drag show is constitutionally protected speech, and then provide the court's summary of the other matters:
"Speech" [under the First Amendment] includes "expressive conduct" and live entertainment, such as musical and dramatic works …." {Schad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim (1981).} Avalōx and another Drag artist scheduled to be at the Allies Drag show explain that drag "is an art form, a source of entertainment, and a form of activism" and conveys a "valuable political message to convey that individuals with gender presentation and identities outside the majoritarian norm are welcome in public places." Given current political events and discussions, drag shows of a nature like the planned Allies Drag Show are indisputably protected speech and are a medium of expression, containing political and social messages regarding (among other messages) self-expression, gender stereotypes and roles, and LGBTQIA+ identity. Accordingly, Drag Stars' Allies Drag Show is protected speech under the First Amendment. ..
The City's related argument that it has a compelling interest in protecting children from obscene material is wholly unsupported on the record as to Plaintiffs' permit. To be clear: there is no question that governments have a legitimate interest in protecting children from genuine obscenity. But the City has not provided a shred of evidence that would implicate that legitimate interest. Moreover, that legitimate interest "does not include a free-floating power to restrict the ideas to which children may be exposed. Speech that is neither obscene as to youths nor subject to some other legitimate proscription cannot be suppressed solely to protect the young from ideas or images that a legislative body thinks unsuitable for them." Moreover, "speech that is not obscene—which may even be harmful to minors—is a different category from obscenity. Simply put, no majority of the Supreme Court has held that sexually explicit—but not obscene—speech receives less protection than political, artistic, or scientific speech." Critically, the City has presented no evidence that the Allies Drag Show was anticipated to be anywhere close to satisfying even one prong of the Miller standard establishing whether a work is legally obscene….
Note that some cases suggest that display of obscene-as-to-minors speech (sometimes labeled "harmful to minors") might be limited in places where minors can see it, even if the speech isn't obscene as to adults; but the judge's opinion seems to suggest that the speech isn't pornographic enough to be obscene as to minors.
The summary:
The Advertising Prohibition and Moratorium are overbroad. They have blanket effects, though for limited periods of time, with very little protection of vaguely articulated and unproven City interests and are thus impermissible. The policies underlying the Advertising Prohibition and Moratorium are inconsistent with the many exceptions the City has granted, which belies the City's stated interests.
The scope of the Advertising prohibition is vast due to the lack of definition of "advertise" and "promote,"
The Advertising Prohibition is unworkable in practice because of the need for event planners to communicate and solicit support to prepare to apply for a permit and hold an event. The lack of any enforcement history for the Advertising Prohibition before March 2023 demonstrates the slight value of the City's claimed interest. There are many alternative means of protecting genuine interests.
The blanket effect of the Moratorium on all City property and facilities is not supported by empirical evidence related to specific facilities and the variety of their level of use and maintenance. The argument that the Moratorium is less impactful because it only suspends all activities for three more months, six months in all, reflects a failure to properly respect the value of expression.
The Advertising Prohibition employed to deny Plaintiffs' event application is unenforceably vague in many ways. It does not define the prohibited activities in certain terms. "City-sponsored" is also an undefined term. The haphazard exceptions granted and the lack of guidelines for permit decisions and issuance demonstrate the unworkability of the Advertising Prohibition.
The Advertising Prohibition and Moratorium are impermissible prior restraints on speech. To bar all communication about an event until a permit is approved is not just overbroad but an impermissible prior restraint on the exchange of idea. Similarly, to bar all public location events for a six month period is an invalid prior restraint, even though not based on content.
Government does not have the right to halt or suppress general speech.
By applying to all speech regarding public events, the Advertising Prohibition exceeds permissible limits. The Advertising Prohibition is remarkably free of guidelines for granting exceptions, timelines for granting permits, and denial for permits for its violation. It is grounded in slimly defined government interests based on speculation, not on experience. Those interests never required its enforcement until Plaintiffs' permit application. There are much more narrowly tailored options for formulation of an ordinance to protect even the speculative interests.
By imposing a blanket bar on all new public events until mid-September 2023, the Moratorium, as applied to expressive events, is also a prior restraint on speech. The City has legitimate interests at stake but the absolute bar for a six month period failed to distinguish between constitutionally protected events and others, to offer alternative venues, or to distinguish between overused and other facilities. There are alternative methods of protecting the City's interests.
The City's Unprecedented Enforcement of the Advertising Prohibition and the Moratorium Barring was Unconstitutional Discrimination. The Drag Stars planned show is protected speech, applicable to traditional public forums. The City has failed to show that the Advertising Prohibition, with its exception for City-sponsored events, facially passes strict or intermediate scrutiny. It is neither narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest nor narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest and leaving open ample alternative channels of communication. The City's asserted interests in the Advertising Prohibition are speculative. The City has betrayed those interests by granting a wide swath of exceptions. The undefined meaning of "advertise" and "promote" is so inclusive to defy tracing to specific City interests or applicant activities.
And even more compelling, its application against Plaintiffs is demonstrated by the record to be discriminatory based on content and viewpoint. The event timeline could hardly demonstrate discrimination more clearly. Failing to understand the vital nature of the First Amendment right of expression, the City has effectuated the will of vocal objectors at the expense of an unpopular group, with unpopular content and viewpoint. The Advertising Prohibition emerged from years of neglect to become a weapon against Plaintiffs.
The application of the Moratorium to Plaintiffs' permit does not survive intermediate scrutiny. The outright prohibition of new special event permits for all public facilities for a 6- month period substantially restricts speech more than necessary to further the City's stated interests in the Moratorium. Other less restrictive means could meet the City's needs, and specifically and proportionately apply to the facilities needing protection. Because the exemptions and failures to take effective action to prevent overuse have resulted this year on a greater burden on City facilities than last year, the Moratorium is a demonstrated failure….
Plaintiffs are represented by eleven lawyers, with or connected with the ACLU; the lead lawyer appears to be Jeremy Creelan (Jenner & Block).
Cruising to Nome: The first U.S. deep water port for the Arctic to host cruise ships, military
“The Port of Nome is development purely for the sake of development”
This photo provided by the City of Nome shows the inner harbor of the Port of Nome, Alaska, on Aug. 11, 2017, where goods at that arrive at the port are then prepared for shipment to villages throughout the region.
By Mark Thiessen - Associated Press - Sunday, June 18, 2023
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The cruise ship with about 1,000 passengers anchored off Nome, too big to squeeze into the tundra city’s tiny port. Its well-heeled tourists had to shimmy into small boats for another ride to shore.
It was 2016, and at the time, the cruise ship Serenity was the largest vessel ever to sail through the Northwest Passage.
But as the Arctic sea ice relents under the pressures of global warming and opens shipping lanes across the top of the world, more tourists are venturing to Nome — a northwest Alaska destination known better for the Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race and its 1898 gold rush than luxury travel.
The problem remains: There’s no place to park the big boats. While smaller cruise ships are able to dock, officials say that of the dozen arriving this year, half will anchor offshore.
That’s expected to change as a $600 million-plus expansion makes Nome, population 3,500, the nation’s first deep-water Arctic port. The expansion, expected to be operational by the end of the decade, will accommodate not just larger cruise ships of up to 4,000 passengers, but cargo ships to deliver additional goods for the 60 Alaska Native villages in the region, and military vessels to counter the presence of Russian and Chinese ships in the Arctic.
It’s a prospect that excites business owners and officials in Nome, but concerns others who worry about the impact of additional tourists and vessel traffic on the environment and animals Alaska Natives depend on for subsistence.
The expansion will “support our local economy and the local artists here, the Indigenous artists having access to the visitors and teaching and sharing our culture and our language and how we how we make our beautiful art,” said Alice Bioff, an Inupiaq resident of Nome.
Bioff was a tour guide who greeted the Serenity’s passengers when they arrived in 2016. One of the guests admired her cloth kuspuk, a traditional Alaska Native garment similar to a smock, and wanted to know if it was water resistant.
It wasn’t, but the interaction inspired Bioff to create her own line of waterproof jackets styled like kuspuks. She now sells to tourists and locals alike from her own Naataq Gear gift store, a retail spot in the post office building, where about 20 Alaska Native artists offer ivory carvings, beadwork or paintings through consignment.
Studies show that cruise ship passengers typically spend about $100 per day in Nome, city manager Glenn Steckman said.
With the expansion, he’s hoping guests on larger cruise ships will extend their stays to experience more of Nome and the tundra, to view wild musk ox, or to sip a drink at the 123-year-old Board of Trade Saloon. Climate change is making this all possible.
Nome, founded after gold was discovered in 1898, has seen six of its 10 warmest winters on record just in this century. The Bering Strait shipping lanes have gotten only busier since 2009, going from 262 transits that year to 509 in 2022.
“We’re going to be the first deep-draft Arctic port but probably not going to be the last,” Nome Mayor John Handeland said.
The Bering Sea ice on average reaches Nome in late November or December, about two or three weeks later than it did 50 years ago, said Rick Thoman, a climate specialist at the International Arctic Research Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
In 2019, mushers in the Iditarod, who normally drive their dog teams on the Bering Sea ice to the finish line in Nome, were forced onto the beach because of open water. The ice season will only get shorter, Thoman said.
The existing port causeway was completed in the mid-1980s. The expansion will be completed in three phases and effectively double its size. The first part of the project is funded by $250 million in federal infrastructure money with another $175 million from the Alaska Legislature. Field work is expected to begin next year.
Currently three ships can dock at once; the expanded dock will accommodate seven to 10.
Workers will dredge a new basin 40 feet deep, allowing large cruises ships, cargo vessels, and every U.S. military ship except aircraft carriers to dock, Port Director Joy Baker said.
U.S. Rep. Dan Sullivan, an Alaska Republican, said the expanded port will become the centerpiece of U.S. strategic infrastructure in the Arctic. The military is building up resources in Alaska, placing fighter jets at bases in Anchorage and Fairbanks, establishing a new Army airborne division in Alaska, training soldiers for future cold-weather conflicts and has missile defense capabilities.
“The way you have a presence in the Arctic is to be able to have military assets and the infrastructure that supports those assets,” Sullivan said.
The northern seas near Alaska are getting more crowded. A U.S. Coast Guard patrol board encountered seven Chinese and Russian naval vessels cooperating in an exercise last year about 86 miles north of Alaska’s Kiska Island.
Coast guard vessels in 2021 also encountered Chinese ships 50 miles off Alaska’s Aleutian Islands.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg last year warned that Russia and China have pledged to cooperate in the Arctic, “a deepening strategic partnership that challenges our values and interests.”
Still, the prospect of Nome welcoming more tourists and a greater military presence bothers some residents. Austin Ahmasuk, an Inupiaq native, said the port’s original construction displaced an area traditionally used for subsistence hunting or fishing, and the expansion won’t help.
“The Port of Nome is development purely for the sake of development,” Ahmasuk said
Iraq: displays 2800-year-old stone tablet returned by Italy
PublishedShar
IMAGE SOURCE,REUTERS
Image caption,
Iraqi authorities have vowed to try to repatriate all stolen artefacts
By Charlene Anne Rodrigues
BBC News
A 2,800-year-old stone tablet has gone on display in Iraq after being returned by Italy following nearly four decades.
The artefact is inscribed with complete cuneiform text - a system of writing on clay in an ancient Babylonian alphabet.
Italian authorities handed it over to Iraq's President Abdul Latif Rashid in the city of Bologna last week.
It is not clear how the tablet was found - or how it made its way to Italy where it was seized by police in the 1980s.
Iraqi Culture Minister Ahmed Badrani said that it might have been found during archaeological excavations of the Mosul dam, which was built around that time.
Iraq, often described as the "cradle of civilisation", is known, among others, for the world's first writing.
Looting of the country's antiquities intensified following the US-led invasion 20 years ago.
Iraq's president praised the co-operation shown by Italy and said he would work to recover all the archaeological pieces of Iraqi history from abroad.
CONFEDERATE SCOTUS Half the nation’s wetlands just lost federal protection. Their fate is up to states 2023/06/18
The US Supreme Court is seen in Washington DC on May 25, 2023.
- Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images North America/TNS
States’ to-do lists just got a little longer: Decide how — or whether — to oversee building, planting and water quality in some wetland areas.
Last month, a U.S. Supreme Court decision struck down federal protections for wetlands covering tens of millions of acres across the country, leaving no regulation of those areas in nearly half the states.
The court’s narrowing of the Clean Water Act has left some states scrambling to enact their own safeguards and others questioning whether their regulators can handle the workload without their federal partners.
Other states, though, see the loss of federal oversight as an opportunity to roll back corresponding state laws at the behest of developers and farmers, who argue such regulations are overly burdensome.
“State protections are not all the same,” said Jim McElfish, senior research and policy adviser with the Environmental Law Institute. “It’s going to be up to the states to fill the gap, and they might act very quickly. It’s really going to be up to what the legislatures want to do.”
An analysis conducted by the institute found that 24 states have no state-level regulations for the wetlands that now lack federal oversight. Some, including Colorado, are looking to put such protections on the books.
Seven states, the analysis found, provide limited coverage of those waters, although lawmakers in North Carolina are seeking to block state regulators from taking control.
And in the 19 states with broad wetlands protections, environmental regulators worry that they don’t have the capacity to uphold state laws without the federal partnerships that had been crucial to permitting and environmental analyses. ‘States are going to need to step up’
The court’s ruling found that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency improperly claimed authority over an Idaho couple’s effort to build a house on their property. The decision limits the scope of wetlands covered by the Clean Water Act to those with a continuous surface connection to a larger body of water. It also cut protections for “ephemeral” streams that only flow seasonally.
More than half of the country’s 118 million acres of wetlands could be stripped from federal oversight, estimates Earthjustice, an environmental legal group. Advocates say the ruling ignores the fact that water often flows below ground, meaning unregulated wetlands could spread contamination to nearby lakes and rivers that the law does safeguard.
“Where the Supreme Court is tying the hands of the federal government to provide safe, clean water, the states are going to need to step up and act to fill the gap,” said Howard Learner, president and executive director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center, a legal advocacy organization in the Midwest.
In Colorado, state lawmakers and officials say they’re committed to restoring protections. State Sen. Dylan Roberts, a Democrat who chairs the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, said legislators will be analyzing the issue before next year’s legislative session. Meanwhile, regulators with the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment have developed a draft policy to protect waters under state law.
“The fact that we have sources of water that are at risk of being contaminated or eliminated because of this Supreme Court decision should be concerning to all of us, and we should try to find the proper way to protect them,” Roberts said. “In the next couple months, we’ll know whether the state department can do this on their own or if they’re going to be making a legislative ask.”
Environmental advocates say they’re confident the state will ensure that wetlands and streams remain protected.
“We’re hopeful that we can restore protections here in Colorado,” said Ean Tafoya, Colorado state director with GreenLatinos, an environmental justice organization. “The state is considering a policy as a stopgap and we’re likely to see legislation in 2024.”
In New Mexico, the state Environment Department already was pursuing its own surface water permitting program. John Rhoderick, director of the Water Protection Division, said it will take five to seven years to get the program up and running.
“This is going to give us the capability to better protect New Mexico,” he said. “We’re evaluating whether we need to somewhat modify our approach and do an interim rulemaking that addresses wetlands. But we’re on a good course and we’ll adjust as we see what the ripple effects from this ruling are.” Limiting state authority
Other states are attempting to roll back state water laws. North Carolina lawmakers passed a bill this month that would invalidate state wetland protections that go beyond federal regulations.
“The state law should be clear that state jurisdiction ends concurrent with the federal [standard],” said Ray Starling, president of the NC Chamber Legal Institute, the legal strategy arm of the business advocacy group. “The mentality and expectation of the General Assembly is that we don’t regulate more stringently than the federal government.”
Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, has not indicated whether he will sign the bill.
Business, development and agriculture groups cheered the court ruling last month, arguing that confusing regulations and lengthy permit times were stifling economic growth. Now, they’re turning their efforts to the state level.
“We’re very happy with the decision, and we consider it a victory against federal overreach,” said Adam Pugh, environmental policy program manager with the National Association of Home Builders. “We do appreciate that a lot of states will continue to regulate and provide permits for those [waters]. We’re trying to make our state associations aware of any proposal that’s going to make homebuilding easier or more difficult and prepare them for that conversation.”
The group’s North Carolina chapter supported the bill to roll back state wetland protections. But environmental groups say that effort is misguided.
“Our waterways are only as clean as the wetlands that filter our pollution,” said Kelly Moser, senior attorney and leader of the Clean Water Program at the Southern Environmental Law Center. “This opens up millions of acres of wetlands to development and industrial pollution, wetlands that we have as a region relied on to protect our communities from increasing floods.” Capacity issues
Even in states with established wetland laws and permitting programs, the Supreme Court decision is shaking things up. State agencies work closely with federal regulators to conduct analysis, review proposals and process permits. But now, for those wetlands, states largely are on their own.
“We expect there are going to be delays [in issuing permits] if we maintain our current staffing level,” said Lauren Driscoll, manager of the wetlands program at the Washington State Department of Ecology. “To maintain the timelines that we have right now, we’re going to need to bring in additional people.”
The agency would need legislative approval to bring on more staff. Washington estimates that more than 50% of its wetlands have lost federal protection, and it will have to process roughly 50 additional applications each year for projects that no longer fall within federal jurisdiction.
Moser, with the Southern environmental law group, expressed concern that the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality also will struggle to handle the increased workload.
“Even though Virginia has wetland regulations on the books, they simply don’t have the expertise or resources to fill the gap,” she said.
The agency did not make officials available for an interview.
In Colorado and New Mexico, officials have acknowledged that efforts to enact state protections will require a lot more money in order to increase capacity at regulatory agencies. And in Illinois, advocates pushing for a wetlands law say it would be meaningless if state agencies weren’t able to handle the work.
“If you put in a state law that provides specific wetlands protection, that implies a permitting and review system, which is a significant capacity issue,” said Paul Botts, executive director of the Wetlands Initiative, a Chicago-based nonprofit. “There’s no point doing that if the agencies can’t carry it out.”
